# Help settle an argument NFAA related



## "TheBlindArcher"

Was it mentioned in the 'NFAA Agenda Items' thread?


----------



## archer_nm

That was PRO-3 and it never even made to the floor. So it died on the vine. If you will go to the NFAA web site and look in the document section you will find all of the agenda items and then look at the minutes to see what was passed and what didn't. Hope this helps


----------



## nestly

Greg Poole and Pro Chair Chuck Cooley discussed the significant rule changes in the Bowjunky podcast on Aug 9, 2017 (NFAA Rule Changes with Chuck Cooley)
link --> http://bowjunkymedia.libsyn.com/

You can listen for yourself, but it sounds like it was brought to the floor and there was support for the proposal but it was tabled and ultimately withdrawn without a vote because the way it was written may have left the NFAA/Pro division open to legal exposure. According to Cooley, it's still alive and being re-written and could still be implemented as a policy by NFAA leadership. Again, that's my interpretation of what Cooley/Poole said, anyone interested can listen and or decide if Cooley recounted the events accurately for themselves.

Relevant portion is from 44:15 - 51:15


----------



## carlosii

nestly said:


> Greg Poole and Pro Chair Chuck Cooley discussed the significant rule changes in the Bowjunky podcast on Aug 9, 2017 (NFAA Rule Changes with Chuck Cooley)
> link --> http://bowjunkymedia.libsyn.com/
> 
> You can listen for yourself, but it sounds like it was brought to the floor and there was support for the proposal but it was tabled and ultimately withdrawn without a vote because the way it was written may have left the NFAA/Pro division open to legal exposure. According to Cooley, it's still alive and being re-written and could still be implemented as a policy by NFAA leadership. Again, that's my interpretation of what Cooley/Poole said, anyone interested can listen and or decide if Cooley recounted the events accurately for themselves.
> 
> Relevant portion is from 44:15 - 51:15


Off topic but, Greg Poole is doing a great job with Bow Junky....gotta luv those shirts.


----------



## archer_nm

You can look at the minutes and see for yourself no action was taken so it died. There may have been discussion but it was not part of the official minutes, now it will be handled by the council if they decide to do anything at all. IMO it will not pass and will once again be dead.


----------



## Bobmuley

archer_nm said:


> You can look at the minutes and see for yourself no action was taken so it died. There may have been discussion but it was not part of the official minutes, now it will be handled by the council if they decide to do anything at all. IMO it will not pass and will once again be dead.


IMO, it can't pass. 

They just made it to where a pro archer has to qualify based on score...so how can they turn around and make someone wearing a shirt shoot in the pro ranks?


That was my problem with the two motions to begin with. While I understood the reasoning for each one individually to preserve the sanctity of the pro division, I couldn't see them logically being passed in tandem.


----------



## Davik

Thanks...I knew I wasn't hallucinating.. we discuss issues like this periodically at We'd night league because I have two NFAA officials I shoot with...they both said I was incorrect and that this was all in my head! Lol


----------



## archer_nm

I agree with you Bob and since there are more non-Pro's than pro's the NFAA will not try to tell Joe archer what he can and can not wear. Just think of whom the dress code covers this is because the Pro's wanted it.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Bobmuley said:


> .
> They just made it to where a pro archer has to qualify based on score...
> .


Sort of lost here....So a Pro in another association is what? If they have to qualify, how, when, where?


----------



## nestly

SonnyThomas said:


> Sort of lost here....So a Pro in another association is what? If they have to qualify, how, when, where?


To get a NFAA pro card, new archers that want to shoot in the NFAA pro division must qualify on score rather than just being able to buy a pro card. Previously, you didn't even have to own or shoot a bow to get an NFAA pro card, you just sent them a check and they sent you back a pro card. 

Current minimum standard for Males is 540 on a Field course, or 300/48X on NFAA blue face 5-spot. The score must be shot at a NFAA State, Sectional, or National event. Existing Pros are grandfathered in and do not have to meet the minimum score as long as they don't let their membership lapse. I also believe that you must have an existing Pro that will vouch for you. (ie sponsor/mentor)

Yes, the scores are fairly low for legitimate pros, but they are high enough to deter some of those that have no business having a "pro card"


----------



## nestly

Regarding the use of "Pro" or "Professional" on non-pro apparel, I agree that NFAA is probably not going to be able to force those people to shoot in the pro division especially because of new qualification criteria, but I don't see why they can't make them remove or cover the word "Pro" or "Professional" if they are not card carrying Pros. There is a dress code for Pros at NFAA events, just make a dress code for amateur as well that prohibits non-pros from wearing apparel that portrays them as being "professionals"


----------



## Rattleman

IMHO the majority of shirts you see are BILLBOARDS for a certain bow or accessory manufacture. To ease the problem have the shirt distributors remove any reference to the shooter being a PRO. ie Pro-staffer shooter. (Except where it mentions a bow by name, ie Pro Vantage, Protec, Pro Elite so forth) So then you are a free billboard to advertise their wares.


----------



## TNMAN

Rattleman said:


> IMHO the majority of shirts you see are BILLBOARDS for a certain bow or accessory manufacture. To ease the problem have the shirt distributors remove any reference to the shooter being a PRO. ie Pro-staffer shooter. (Except where it mentions a bow by name, ie Pro Vantage, Protec, Pro Elite so forth) So then you are a free billboard to advertise their wares.


WHAT!! Then people wouldn't think I was a pro shooter.

Actually, a tricky proposition for Chuck....not pissing off sponsoring mfgs and potential sponsoring mfgs...esp. the smaller guys trying to get their name out there. BOD may have done pro div a favor by not taking action.


----------



## ccwilder3

I agree with the requirement of a minimum score to shoot Pro but I think the requirement of getting another Pro to sponsor you is ridiculous. It looks like a way to keep anyone who in not in the cliche from shooting Pro.


----------



## nestly

ccwilder3 said:


> I agree with the requirement of a minimum score to shoot Pro but I think the requirement of getting another Pro to sponsor you is ridiculous. It looks like a way to keep anyone who in not in the cliche from shooting Pro.


I dont imagine there are too many people that "should" be pros that dont know another pro who would vouch for them.

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk


----------



## CHPro

Or possibly mr. ccwilder3 the sponsor/mentor requirement was designed so that the sponsor/mentor would go over the general Pro requirements, responsibilities, etc., with the new pro and be there as a source should the new pro have any questions that are not clear in the NFAA C&B. And fyi, the sponsor/mentor requirement has actually been in the C&B for at least a couple decades now. The new rule just changes the definition to "mentor" from "sponsor" to more clearly outline the relationship between the probationary pro and the current pro.

Just to clarify.............. 

JB >>----->


----------



## ccwilder3

CHPro said:


> Or possibly mr. ccwilder3 the sponsor/mentor requirement was designed so that the sponsor/mentor would go over the general Pro requirements, responsibilities, etc., with the new pro and be there as a source should the new pro have any questions that are not clear in the NFAA C&B. And fyi, the sponsor/mentor requirement has actually been in the C&B for at least a couple decades now. The new rule just changes the definition to "mentor" from "sponsor" to more clearly outline the relationship between the probationary pro and the current pro.
> 
> Just to clarify..............
> 
> JB >>----->


I am aware that it has been that way for awhile. The idea was that Pro's would use good judgment and only sponsor shooters who had the skill to compete at that level. Instead they sponsored their friends regardless of skill level. So now we have a required skill level so we no longer need the sponsor thing. As I said before, if you are not buddies with a Pro, you cannot shoot in the class as it stands now.


----------



## Pete53

ccwilder3 said:


> I agree with the requirement of a minimum score to shoot Pro but I think the requirement of getting another Pro to sponsor you is ridiculous. It looks like a way to keep anyone who in not in the cliche from shooting Pro.


agree x2, kiss butt thing ?


----------



## CHPro

Still completely do not understand the role of the "mentor"?! First, it was never designed and still is not the intent of the rule to keep potential pros out of the division. Was never about only sponsoring someone who could already shoot the scores for starters and still isn't. The rule is in place so that, if done correctly, the new pro has someone they can go to for questions about tournaments, NFAA pro rules like dress code, payout schedules, etc.. Its never been about keeping the division closed and a clique. I've personally "sponsored" several people over the years, many of whom I hardly knew when they first started out. But I was there to offer up pros/cons on pro membership for their situation and when they did opt to join I went over the basic pro rules with them and was there when they had questions. Many of these people have grown to be friends over the years including those who chose to later return to the non-pro divisions.

Many of you try to make it sound like black helicopter, secret initiation, midnight gatherings in little clearings in the woods sort of things. You do realize most of us "pros" are just like you? Only difference is we opted to try our hand a higher level of competition. Most of us still work 8+ hours a day doing same things you guys do and then we just choose to hit the practice range whenever possible between family obligations and everything else that needs attention outside of work. I can't imagine most of the people frequenting AT wouldn't lend a fellow archer a hand, shoot a round with them at the range, share a beverage and hunting stories, etc. Most Pros I know are the same sort of people. Hence why the mentor requirement is not about keeping people out but making sure they have the information they need to compete within the rules and know what their additional responsibilities are once they decide to shoot in the pro division.

My $0.02 worth - twist it how you will. I'm late for my secret pro meeting and need to catch the black copter waiting outside so I'm out of here :wink:


----------



## Arcus

CHPro - Thank you for keeping the explanation professional.


----------



## ccwilder3

CHPro said:


> Still completely do not understand the role of the "mentor"?! First, it was never designed and still is not the intent of the rule to keep potential pros out of the division. Was never about only sponsoring someone who could already shoot the scores for starters and still isn't. The rule is in place so that, if done correctly, the new pro has someone they can go to for questions about tournaments, NFAA pro rules like dress code, payout schedules, etc.. Its never been about keeping the division closed and a clique. I've personally "sponsored" several people over the years, many of whom I hardly knew when they first started out. But I was there to offer up pros/cons on pro membership for their situation and when they did opt to join I went over the basic pro rules with them and was there when they had questions. Many of these people have grown to be friends over the years including those who chose to later return to the non-pro divisions.
> 
> Many of you try to make it sound like black helicopter, secret initiation, midnight gatherings in little clearings in the woods sort of things. You do realize most of us "pros" are just like you? Only difference is we opted to try our hand a higher level of competition. Most of us still work 8+ hours a day doing same things you guys do and then we just choose to hit the practice range whenever possible between family obligations and everything else that needs attention outside of work. I can't imagine most of the people frequenting AT wouldn't lend a fellow archer a hand, shoot a round with them at the range, share a beverage and hunting stories, etc. Most Pros I know are the same sort of people. Hence why the mentor requirement is not about keeping people out but making sure they have the information they need to compete within the rules and know what their additional responsibilities are once they decide to shoot in the pro division.
> 
> My $0.02 worth - twist it how you will. I'm late for my secret pro meeting and need to catch the black copter waiting outside so I'm out of here :wink:


Please keep that black copter handy. The way Irma is looking, I may need a ride out of here.


----------



## blueglide1

CHPro said:


> Still completely do not understand the role of the "mentor"?! First, it was never designed and still is not the intent of the rule to keep potential pros out of the division. Was never about only sponsoring someone who could already shoot the scores for starters and still isn't. The rule is in place so that, if done correctly, the new pro has someone they can go to for questions about tournaments, NFAA pro rules like dress code, payout schedules, etc.. Its never been about keeping the division closed and a clique. I've personally "sponsored" several people over the years, many of whom I hardly knew when they first started out. But I was there to offer up pros/cons on pro membership for their situation and when they did opt to join I went over the basic pro rules with them and was there when they had questions. Many of these people have grown to be friends over the years including those who chose to later return to the non-pro divisions.
> 
> Many of you try to make it sound like black helicopter, secret initiation, midnight gatherings in little clearings in the woods sort of things. You do realize most of us "pros" are just like you? Only difference is we opted to try our hand a higher level of competition. Most of us still work 8+ hours a day doing same things you guys do and then we just choose to hit the practice range whenever possible between family obligations and everything else that needs attention outside of work. I can't imagine most of the people frequenting AT wouldn't lend a fellow archer a hand, shoot a round with them at the range, share a beverage and hunting stories, etc. Most Pros I know are the same sort of people. Hence why the mentor requirement is not about keeping people out but making sure they have the information they need to compete within the rules and know what their additional responsibilities are once they decide to shoot in the pro division.
> 
> My $0.02 worth - twist it how you will. I'm late for my secret pro meeting and need to catch the black copter waiting outside so I'm out of here :wink:


Good thing you didn't mention the DECODER RING,and the secret messages sewn into Greg Pooles flowers on his shirt.Oh S&!t, well I guess it's all out now dang it.


----------



## ccwilder3

blueglide1 said:


> Good thing you didn't mention the DECODER RING,and the secret messages sewn into Greg Pooles flowers on his shirt.Oh S&!t, well I guess it's all out now dang it.


Aha!!! I knew there was more to it!


----------



## carlosii

blueglide1 said:


> Good thing you didn't mention the DECODER RING,and the secret messages sewn into Greg Pooles flowers on his shirt.Oh S&!t, well I guess it's all out now dang it.


I luv those shirts...where does he get them?


----------



## adam0321

Is that a 540 on a 720 score? Here is my situation, I currently shoot an average of 660-680 on a 720 round and the lowest I have shot on a 5 spot in a long time is a 300/53x. Also, there is only one "pro" who shoots at my shop and we are not on good terms. I was amazed when I first learned that you did not have to qualify to be a pro. 

I am split because I want to force myself to compete at a higher level but I know I am simple not in the same world as the top pros. The shop I shoot for has been very good to me and I want to represent them as best as I can. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## nestly

adam0321 said:


> Is that a 540 on a 720 score? Here is my situation, I currently shoot an average of 660-680 on a 720 round and the lowest I have shot on a 5 spot in a long time is a 300/53x.


540 for NFAA 28 target Field round.
Minimum Qualifying score will be established as 3.5% of the winning score (average for the last 6 years)
In Field the winning score is probably going to be 560 (using 5-4-3 scoring) for Mens Pro. 560-3.5%=540.4
As of now, there is no qualifying score for 720 round, but using the 3.5% formula, if 705/720 is the average winning score for a 72 arrow outdoor target round, the minimum qualifying score would be 680. (705-3.5%=680.3)


----------



## Pete53

glad there is a pro class and hope it continues.i do have one small beef the rules for the pro class should be decided 100% by the people that shoot this class not by any other archers or club directors that don`t shoot as a pro.


----------



## adam0321

Pete53 said:


> glad there is a pro class and hope it continues.i do have one small beef the rules for the pro class should be decided 100% by the people that shoot this class not by any other archers or club directors that don`t shoot as a pro.


[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Arcus

Pete53 said:


> glad there is a pro class and hope it continues.i do have one small beef the rules for the pro class should be decided 100% by the people that shoot this class not by any other archers or club directors that don`t shoot as a pro.


I don't necessarily disagree. The same logic could be used to state that national tournament rules should be decided by those people who actually shoot in the national tournaments.


----------



## archer_nm

Boy that would be something and leave out about 90% of the folks on AT. Once again that is why you elect these people and if YOU don't like what they are doing then replace them. The agenda item for the SS pro's came from the Pro Division.


----------



## Pete53

Arcus said:


> I don't necessarily disagree. The same logic could be used to state that national tournament rules should be decided by those people who actually shoot in the national tournaments.


 when you are shooting as a pro there is a lot of money involved,if you don`t shoot in that class you have know real understanding of the time to have this ability or the money it cost, many archers will never be as good as these pro archers, why should any non-pros make any rules for these pro archers.also just because you shoot in a poorer class and stumble thru and pick up a couple of bucks does not give any right to tell a pro how to shoot period.people like larry wise that once were a pro should give their thoughts but not someone in a amateur class or a class that does not shoot perfect scores.

here in Minnesota the NFAA shoots held in our state have a whole different problem and that`s just a sad story.


----------



## archer_nm

Ttt


----------



## lane preston

From my understanding it wasn’t if you wear a “pro staff” shirt you need to shoot the professional class. The professional division wanted manufacturers to stop giving out pro staff shirts unless they were a pro card holders. They wanted non pros to have a “field staff”, “advisory staff”, or something non pro staff. By wearing a “pro staff” label it can be misleading.
There is a place for us all. At the shop level there are a lot of great knowledgeable folks who promote and help out that are not professional class shooters, but still great people to help and promote the sport very well.
I think a lot of the score minimum is based on public perception. A “professional” class that has no requirements holds little value in the public’s eye. Mr Chuck Cooley has worked hard to try to make the pro division a more Prestigious division.
No, the mentorship is not a Uppidy thing. The biggest thing I notice years ago about the pros is they are a more relaxed group. They don’t tend to hold back Secret tips. We should be close on skill, it’s the mental side that decides who wins.
The upper amateur class generally have the Clicky groups that can display attitudes and not help each other in fear of giving up an edge.
But as a whole archery has had the best group of people. I have been around many other sports where it’s more cut throat and clicky.
I can’t count how many times a person forgot or lost some equipment and archers that never met offer to loan equipment or even backup bows.
Hope this helps. Please forgive me if I made mistakes typing this, been up most of the night.
Have fun and enjoy safely


----------



## brtesite

Pete53 said:


> when you are shooting as a pro there is a lot of money involved,if you don`t shoot in that class you have know real understanding of the time to have this ability or the money it cost, many archers will never be as good as these pro archers, why should any non-pros make any rules for these pro archers.also just because you shoot in a poorer class and stumble thru and pick up a couple of bucks does not give any right to tell a pro how to shoot period.people like larry wise that once were a pro should give their thoughts but not someone in a amateur class or a class that does not shoot perfect scores.
> 
> here in Minnesota the NFAA shoots held in our state have a whole different problem and that`s just a sad story.


 Pete, The pro division of the NFAA is exactly that . A division of the NFAA, hence under the rule of the directors & the pro Chair. Until you get rid of the pro division & run the org. like Vegas that is controlled by a few rather than 51 nothing can really happen . I also doubt that the directors will ever relinquish control . just my $.02


----------



## boilerfarmer12

Sorry to bring this up, but how does this work for 3D pros who just show up to an event? They are allowed to shoot amateur? I saw Tommy Gomez shot in the bowhunter freestyle class at indoor nationals this year.


----------



## brtesite

boilerfarmer12 said:


> Sorry to bring this up, but how does this work for 3D pros who just show up to an event? They are allowed to shoot amateur? I saw Tommy Gomez shot in the bowhunter freestyle class at indoor nationals this year.


As far as I know, a pro in one org. is a pro in the other . check with your director or councilman


----------



## archer_nm

The Tomas Gomez you saw was from NY and not Kentucky. Not the same person and let me tell you the NFAA would have caught that in a heart beat.


----------



## boilerfarmer12

archer_nm said:


> The Tomas Gomez you saw was from NY and not Kentucky. Not the same person and let me tell you the NFAA would have caught that in a heart beat.


If that's that case i apologize. i saw NY and figured with him working for scott, he had moved to NY. i know he has shot bhfs in vegas since shooting pro as well.


----------



## nestly

Your question is still valid.... A long time pro shot (and won) BHFS in Vegas then shot ASA Open Pro then shot BHFS again at NFAA Indoor Nationals.

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk


----------



## archer_nm

Who and which year??


----------



## nestly

archer_nm said:


> Who and which year??


This year....just look to see who won BHFS at Vegas this year.....alternately go to Gearheads website to find out who it is

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk


----------



## archer_nm

First Off Vegas is not an NFAA shoot and anyone can shoot in the Championship open and NFAA Pros are the only ones required to shoot the Open Division, which was prior to Foley. the Pro requirements for being a NFAA Pro
has changed, if you are a New NFAA Pro you must shoot a qualifying score to show you can compete at that level. (Field-Hunter or NFAA Blue face) In Nov 2017 if you were an NFAA Pro you were Grandfathered in all others have to shoot the qualifying score. Until Foley he had not shot as an ASA Pro since 2016. But once again he has to qualify and apply (this I don't know he has) But instead of sitting on the side lines contact the NFAA Pro chair and as him WHY. side note he did not win any $$ at Foley.


----------



## boilerfarmer12

archer_nm said:


> The Tomas Gomez you saw was from NY and not Kentucky. Not the same person and let me tell you the NFAA would have caught that in a heart beat.


I talked to my friend that shot BHFS at Indoor Nats and he confirmed that it was in fact Tommy G that he talked to and shot with on the BHFS bails. So yes it was an open pro shooting Indoor nats in BHFS. So my problem exists.


----------



## archer_nm

What do you mean Your problem exists, are you an NFAA Pro or are you the person in question. Like I stated in a prior post Contact The NFAA Pro Chairman (Chuck Cooley @ 607 343-8990) and bring this up to him or are the type that likes to complain and stir the pot but not go to the person in charge to try and resolve the issue.


----------



## FV Chuck

For the record....

Not one soul has contacted me about this. - and I've been monitoring this thread for months now. 

Chuck Cooley
NFAA Pro Chairman


----------



## Davik

FV Chuck said:


> For the record....
> 
> Not one soul has contacted me about this. - and I've been monitoring this thread for months now.
> 
> Chuck Cooley
> NFAA Pro Chairman


You COULD look at the results and clear this up in short order for the poster...just sayin


----------



## FV Chuck

Davik said:


> You COULD look at the results and clear this up in short order for the poster...just sayin


Or they could follow protocol and ask a question through the proper channels. 
From what I can gather
... it seems like someone already looked up some results. 
... it seems like a guy someone knows, said a guy that someone else knows thinks a Pro shot in BHFS at a tournament 3 months ago? So double hearsay? Am I really responding to that?? 
... Are you calling Tommy a cheater or what? 
... Put names to it, send me an e-mail, lodge a complaint and I'll look into it. 

It's not my inclination to add anything to ArcheryTalk at anytime ever unless positively unavoidable. 
I responded finally because Bob included me a couple times in the thread.


----------



## FV Chuck

CHPro said:


> Still completely do not understand the role of the "mentor"?! First, it was never designed and still is not the intent of the rule to keep potential pros out of the division. Was never about only sponsoring someone who could already shoot the scores for starters and still isn't. The rule is in place so that, if done correctly, the new pro has someone they can go to for questions about tournaments, NFAA pro rules like dress code, payout schedules, etc.. Its never been about keeping the division closed and a clique. I've personally "sponsored" several people over the years, many of whom I hardly knew when they first started out. But I was there to offer up pros/cons on pro membership for their situation and when they did opt to join I went over the basic pro rules with them and was there when they had questions. Many of these people have grown to be friends over the years including those who chose to later return to the non-pro divisions.
> 
> Many of you try to make it sound like black helicopter, secret initiation, midnight gatherings in little clearings in the woods sort of things. You do realize most of us "pros" are just like you? Only difference is we opted to try our hand a higher level of competition. Most of us still work 8+ hours a day doing same things you guys do and then we just choose to hit the practice range whenever possible between family obligations and everything else that needs attention outside of work. I can't imagine most of the people frequenting AT wouldn't lend a fellow archer a hand, shoot a round with them at the range, share a beverage and hunting stories, etc. Most Pros I know are the same sort of people. Hence why the mentor requirement is not about keeping people out but making sure they have the information they need to compete within the rules and know what their additional responsibilities are once they decide to shoot in the pro division.
> 
> My $0.02 worth - twist it how you will. I'm late for my secret pro meeting and need to catch the black copter waiting outside so I'm out of here :wink:


BTW - This and other replies are so completely on point that I didnt need to add a thing. Hence why I was just monitoring this thread all along. ChPro, Bob, Blueglide all had appropriate and accurate answers so there was no need for me to jump in.


----------



## Davik

FV Chuck said:


> Or they could follow protocol and ask a question through the proper channels.
> From what I can gather
> ... it seems like someone already looked up some results.
> ... it seems like a guy someone knows, said a guy that someone else knows thinks a Pro shot in BHFS at a tournament 3 months ago? So double hearsay? Am I really responding to that??
> ... Are you calling Tommy a cheater or what?
> ... Put names to it, send me an e-mail, lodge a complaint and I'll look into it.
> 
> It's not my inclination to add anything to ArcheryTalk at anytime ever unless positively unavoidable.
> I responded finally because Bob included me a couple times in the thread.


I find this interesting...the original thread ( started by me) was a question that I posed to Lee Gregory about some rumors over prostate shirts...interesting...


----------



## FV Chuck

Davik said:


> I find this interesting...the original thread ( started by me) was a question that I posed to Lee Gregory about some rumors over prostate shirts...interesting...


Yeah I found that odd myself. 
The original Q was actually answered pretty well so I stayed out.


----------



## Davik

Hahaha that's even funnier! It was supposed to say Pro Staff shirts!&#55358;&#56611;&#55358;&#56611;


----------



## archer_nm

Thank you for responding Chuck.


----------



## boilerfarmer12

archer_nm said:


> What do you mean Your problem exists, are you an NFAA Pro or are you the person in question. Like I stated in a prior post Contact The NFAA Pro Chairman (Chuck Cooley @ 607 343-8990) and bring this up to him or are the type that likes to complain and stir the pot but not go to the person in charge to try and resolve the issue.


I guess problem wasn't the correct word. My question still exists, if an ASA pro shows up to any NFAA event are they required to shoot in the pro class? 

Chuck, I am not calling anyone a cheater. I was simply asking a question. If no protest was filed then, its a non-issue.


----------



## FV Chuck

boilerfarmer12 said:


> I guess problem wasn't the correct word. My question still exists, if an ASA pro shows up to any NFAA event are they required to shoot in the pro class?
> 
> Chuck, I am not calling anyone a cheater. I was simply asking a question. If no protest was filed then, its a non-issue.


The official answer can be found in the NFAA CBL as can 99% of all the rules questions asked in many of these types of forums. This one happens to be on page 35 .

There is no provision that demands an archer competing in another Org's Professional Division that mandates they compete in Professional for NFAA. If I recall correctly there was some kind of proposed rule some time ago by another Pro Chair and defeated at the annual meeting by the State Directors. It does not suggest however that it will not be revisited sometime in the future.

On a personal note, I believe a Pro should always compete as a Pro. Unless there is no division for the class they want to shoot. In this particular instance I don't believe there is a perceptible advantage to being a Pro member to be gained. It is a restrictive equipment class and not the normal equipment he shoots in competition. ( Freestyle or Open ) ... and if a company is going to thow 30K on the line, well that becomes fair game and takes me down a whole other path on payouts.
Further, one would have to know if his Pro membership was actually active at the time of the event to even indulge in the conversation to begin with.
and finally, if it's Vegas (not that is was in this case) but Vegas is NOT an NFAA Event and therefore "Pro" does not exist.
Hell you don't even have to be an NFAA member to shoot it. You can walk in off the street, pay your entry fee... win the whole damn thing and walk back out into the desert like Clint at the end of a western.


----------



## TNMAN

Interesting that ASA has rules to "protect" non-pro classes from NFAA or other orgs pro shooters. NFAA addresses semi-pro shooters, but remains silent on other pro's.


----------



## brtesite

my $.02 would be that it would be understood that if they address the 1/2 pros to define them different from the pro div, that it would mean that a pro in one org is a pro with the NFAA. That is the way it was deemed when I was involved with the rules . If you want an answer , the only place you can get it is from the rules interpretation committee . Call Dave Hyrn , i do believe that he is still the chair.


----------



## archer_nm

Mike unfortunately the PRO is a PRO is a PRO was taken out by the State Directors a few years back. I can no longer find it in the CB??


----------



## iam911812

Thats absurd


----------



## Bigallyoutdoors

Why do people hate the old way of pay to play.If Joe 6pack wants to throw his money in the game let him.


----------

