# ASA going all known distance....



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

What are your thoughts?


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

I have to believe that thought is a long, long ways from actually happening. K50 has exploded over the last 1 year but there are still a ton of folks shooting Open B, Open A, semi-pro and all the old buzzard classes that enjoy yardage guessing. I expect some of the old "true" 3D'ers are likely to have seizures by just reading your post!

:set1_fishing:


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Kstigall said:


> I have to believe that thought is a long, long ways from actually happening. K50 has exploded over the last 1 year but there are still a ton of folks shooting Open B, Open A, semi-pro and all the old buzzard classes that enjoy yardage guessing. I expect some of the old "true" 3D'ers are likely to have seizures by just reading your post!
> 
> :set1_fishing:




The absolute of "ALL" known may be a way out. 

But, what happens to Open pro when Known pro goes live?.... open pro probably dies, right?

What happens when open pro dies?.... amatuer unknown classes become novelties and die (or become irrelevant), right? Why would shooters put in what it takes to develop judging skills if there is no where to go with them?


*** and before you accuse me of fishing too much, remember, I've done the known thing and have spoken for the benefits of known distance in growing the sport..... and I am currently shooting unknown with aspirations to continue developing my game to the pro-level.... what ever that may be.


----------



## PFD42 (Mar 31, 2011)

I enjoy the asa pro/ams so much I would still attend, but believe it would take a fundamental element of archery away . Scores would go way up and you could cut half the classes out. Thinking on it , it would become very boring.


----------



## pointndog (Jul 14, 2005)

tmorelli said:


> The absolute of "ALL" known may be a way out.
> 
> But, what happens to Open pro when Known pro goes live?.... open pro probably dies, right?
> 
> ...


Sounds about right Tony. I have heard some of the biggest names will go Known when the money goes there.


----------



## mhill (Jul 11, 2011)

If the sponsors keep the money in unknown classes they will remain king. If a pro can get paid just as much in the known class as they can in the open class unkown why wouldnt they make it easier to get a pay check. 

Im not in the loop like you guys are with traveling to the shoots and what not but are you guys seeing a lot of the guys that finish in the middle of the pack of the unknown class converting to the K50 so they may get into the payouts? I cant see why the top unknown pros would convert to known distance if they are already winning. 

I think marked targets level the playing field for a lot of guys that are great shots but dont judge distance as well as others and it takes the strategy out of 3d.


----------



## pointndog (Jul 14, 2005)

From what I understand the big names spend a ton of time working on yardages and if money was the same they would have more time to shoot and whatever instead of working on yardages.

I think it would be pretty cool to start seeing people like Reo , Broadwater, Braden and Cousins start going to ASA along with some of the NFAA women. That happens you know money is there now.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

mhill said:


> If the sponsors keep the money in unknown classes they will remain king. If a pro can get paid just as much in the known class as they can in the open class unkown why wouldnt they make it easier to get a pay check.
> 
> Im not in the loop like you guys are with traveling to the shoots and what not but are you guys seeing a lot of the guys that finish in the middle of the pack of the unknown class converting to the K50 so they may get into the payouts? I cant see why the top unknown pros would convert to known distance if they are already winning.
> 
> I think marked targets level the playing field for a lot of guys that are great shots but dont judge distance as well as others and it takes the strategy out of 3d.


The only reason most current open pros would move is if the manufacturer contingency money moves. Some may shift sooner (those who focus on things other than judging 3d targets).


----------



## ThunderEagle (May 11, 2011)

That would be interesting on a ton of levels. First, would Open Pro really dry up? I suppose if money goes to a Known Pro, you get some to switch, then the question is, is there enough money for both pro classes. I believe participation will be higher in a Known Pro class, at least initially, once it is proven (and we all know it to be true) that the same guys are winning, with a couple of the target guys added to the mix, then the average Joe knows he still can't compete...

Regardless of that. If the ASA would move to all known, what happens to IBO? Are they forced to look at known distance classes? Do they get a giant boost from those that don't care for the known classes?

Next, what evolution do the known classes take? Do we start to see more of a Redding style trail shoot, even longer distances that K50? Safari type shoots? Heck, is there room here for Field Archery to make comeback? I'd be really curious to see the ASA run a field shoot, or similar, just to see if that could become popular again.


----------



## mhill (Jul 11, 2011)

tmorelli said:


> The only reason most current open pros would move is if the manufacturer contingency money moves. Some may shift sooner (those who focus on things other than judging 3d targets).


I agree if the money goes K50 the shooters are forced to go K50 if they make a living off the money speaking about the top shooters. But middle of the road guys right now may think coming in 15th in open pro and not getting any money is not as good if i can go to K50 and get on the podium a few times a year. Didnt Griggs moves to K50 this year?


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

I'm not ready to see the death of unknown 3d archery, and I fear this would be it. Judging is a challenge that is practiced and mastered just like any other skill, so why would we want to get rid of it? ASA is getting huge attendance numbers already, and many of the classes still shoot unknown. If you compare Open A/Semi Pro and K45/K50, the unknown still usually outnumber the known classes by a little. So why push known down our throats? There are known classes in the current framework, and everybody seems happy. Why rock the boat?


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

It's a lot closer going all known than what people think. lain:


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

sagecreek said:


> It's a lot closer going all known than what people think. lain:


But what is the advantage to going all known?


----------



## pointndog (Jul 14, 2005)

sagecreek said:


> It's a lot closer going all known than what people think. lain:


All it would take is sponsors to put the money there, they may want to see their big profile shooters out there.


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

shootist said:


> But what is the advantage to going all known?


The ASA is growing by adding known. I just hope they don't put all of their eggs in one basket. I still like the aspect of judging. It's half the fun to me. Some don't do it for fun though, they do it for money.


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

Sponsors will put their money there. Hoyt has a lot of spot shooters. Just an example.


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

ASA's growth has almost peaked. They cannot handle 2000 shooters. If they go all known, they will see a drastic drop in attendance initially, and then it will slowly build back up to its current level. The 600-700 shooters in London last year that shot all unknown classes would have to learn a new game or quit attending. Judging by the tiny numbers on this poll, 1/3 of them will quit showing up. The end result, 5 years later, is that ASA would get back to its current level. Now, if ASA changes their framework to handle more shooters, this might change things a bit.


----------



## ar1220 (May 18, 2014)

I personally would really hate to see asa or any other archery orginazation go to all known classes.I do enjoy enjoy the aspect of judging yardage I'm not good at it as some but I have put Time and effort into learning that part of the game.I shoot a half known class half unknown now and I'm close to winning out hopefully I will in Kentucky.and I have been giving thought to where I will land when I do.and I'm not sure I can compete as well in a all known class as I can in a unknown class.I was around 3d when yardage judging was all there was and the known side adds a new dimension to the game.put I hope there is always a place for yardage guessing in 3d


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

shootist said:


> But what is the advantage to going all known?


ASA could maybe get the shoots over with quicker and reduce the number of classes.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Didn't vote, not yet anyway. In the Pro division unknown where those that do their home work shine. Can't see all unknown at this time.


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

How many K50 guys would drop out if it was named a pro class with entry fee going to 275$ and having to carry a pro card?


----------



## mhill (Jul 11, 2011)

Huntin Hard said:


> How many K50 guys would drop out if it was named a pro class with entry fee going to 275$ and having to carry a pro card?


I think that already happened. But i could be wrong.


----------



## ARCHERYXPERT (Jan 29, 2004)

Bad idea. Part of the challenge is the yardage.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

mhill said:


> I think that already happened. But i could be wrong.


k50 is $125 entry right now. Pro cert optional (just like semi). 

Open/Sr/Women's pro are $275 entry. Pro cert required.


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

If they went all unknown, do you think it would open the door for another organization to come about offering unknown classes?


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

sagecreek said:


> If they went all unknown, do you think it would open the door for another organization to come about offering unknown classes?


Could be...maybe that's where regions comes into play.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

sagecreek said:


> If they went all unknown, do you think it would open the door for another organization to come about offering unknown classes?


Assuming you meant, KNOWN...

Probably....and I say that with an unfortunate tone. For the sport to ever really grow beyond it's current bounds, unity and uniformity are needed.... not more orgs, not more versions of rules, etc...


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

Sorry, I meant all Known and I agree. 

I hope they give everyone the choice to shoot the way they want to according to yardage guessing. I really don't see a way they can contain the growth except to add more ranges or go to a 3 day shoot.

Thoughts?


----------



## mhill (Jul 11, 2011)

tmorelli said:


> k50 is $125 entry right now. Pro cert optional (just like semi).
> 
> Open/Sr/Women's pro are $275 entry. Pro cert required.


Thanks for the clarification Tony.


----------



## mhill (Jul 11, 2011)

tmorelli said:


> Assuming you meant, KNOWN...
> 
> Probably....and I say that with an unfortunate tone. For the sport to ever really grow beyond it's current bounds, unity and uniformity are needed.... not more orgs, not more versions of rules, etc...


What wrong with having ASA and IBO? I understand the uniformity but why not have 2 orgs?


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

mhill said:


> What wrong with having ASA and IBO? I understand the uniformity but why not have 2 orgs?


I don't know that two is a problem.... but more than one where no spirit of cooperation exists is not good for the sport overall.

Right now we have ASA, IBO, NFAA, 191 state/local orgs/ranges....and Regions?..... that are collectively making crap up as they go. It is every man for himself.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I hope that they simply add a pro known class and give it the same pay outs as the open pro class, this will of course thin out the open pro class a little but if the money is the same in known as unknown then there will be really good shooters who choose to be in both of them. 

All I know is you had better pay attention to what class Levi decides to shoot because he will win that class so the other one you might have a chance.


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

Well, the ASA is well ran and dynamic. I do hope they keep unknown yardage classes so I can be a satisfied shooter in their org.


----------



## ScottyE (Apr 17, 2008)

All Known would certainly be helpful for the aspiring pro archer. They wouldn't have to invest in their own range to judge on and they would only have to focus on shooting. 

I do think the distances would need to be stretched in the pro division if it became all known though. 

As for amateurs I can't tell you how many really good shooters I've met that don't shoot 3D because they have trouble judging yardage. I don't think it will be a big deal for the amateurs because most of us don't have that much time to practice anyway. Not having to judge would be a load of work off my schedule. 

It would remove a fun element of 3D though so I'm kind of torn.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Padgett said:


> I hope that they simply add a pro known class and give it the same pay outs as the open pro class, this will of course thin out the open pro class a little but if the money is the same in known as unknown....


This is exactly what I think won't (and shouldn't happen). 

From the first perspective, I don't think any manufacturer is prepared to double their contigency payouts to a more diluted pool.

Second, I think "too many champions" is a real problem with archery today. I think the goal of an elite tournament should be to crown one true champion.


----------



## mhill (Jul 11, 2011)

tmorelli said:


> This is exactly what I think won't (and shouldn't happen).
> 
> From the first perspective, I don't think any manufacturer is prepared to double their contigency payouts to a more diluted pool.
> 
> Second, I think "too many champions" is a real problem with archery today. I think the goal of an elite tournament should be to crown one true champion.


The open pro class is the only class that contingencies are paid to the shooters from Mfgs? if not what classes do the mfg pay contingencies currently? So what you mean is that if they pay K50 pro winner and the open pro unknown winner one Mfg could wind up paying 2 of their shooters in one tournament thus doubling their payouts? So if Chance moved to K50 and Levi stayed in Unknown open pro and they both won the same tournament then Elite would be paying them both the same contingency. Sorry im a noob trying to understand the structure more than at the basic level.


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

I heard a rumor that tmorelli gets paid by AT for this thread. He gets .05 cents for page views and .25 cents for comments.


----------



## shootstraight (Apr 28, 2005)

I personally don't care what the pros do, I go to shoot and hopefully be competitive. If they hang on to classes with few shooters I can't imagine they would end unknown all together. Bottom line is what makes the most money, they want to cater to the most people they can and that means having as many classes as possible.


----------



## trumankayak (Dec 28, 2011)

Tagging for later


----------



## badams2s (Jun 26, 2012)

I shoot Open A right now and shot Open B last year. I like the challenge of judging yardage but I really liked shooting Open B and shooting half and half. Two totally different ball games made it really fun. Lots of fluctuations in the standings on the two days. I'd be all for Open Pro being a half and half class. I know there is no chance of that though but I just liked the half and half game.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

mhill said:


> The open pro class is the only class that contingencies are paid to the shooters from Mfgs? if not what classes do the mfg pay contingencies currently? So what you mean is that if they pay K50 pro winner and the open pro unknown winner one Mfg could wind up paying 2 of their shooters in one tournament thus doubling their payouts? So if Chance moved to K50 and Levi stayed in Unknown open pro and they both won the same tournament then Elite would be paying them both the same contingency. Sorry im a noob trying to understand the structure more than at the basic level.


Open Pro is the elite of the elite and the manufacturers offer the most contingency there (where their pros shoot). Senior Pro and Women's Pro also get more contingency than any amateur class is offered. Some manufacturers do have contingencies that they offer to amateur classes but they are fractions of what the pros can win.


----------



## shootstraight (Apr 28, 2005)

tmorelli said:


> Open Pro is the elite of the elite and the manufacturers offer the most contingency there (where their pros shoot). Senior Pro and Women's Pro also get more contingency than any amateur class is offered. Some manufacturers do have contingencies that they offer to amateur classes but they are fractions of what the pros can win.


True, no where near the payout but we don't put into shooting what the pros do, it's not my life's ambition. However $1000 for an amateur win makes for a nice ride home.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

shootstraight said:


> True, no where near the payout but we don't put into shooting what the pros do, it's not my life's ambition. However $1000 for an amateur win makes for a nice ride home.


I wasn't complaining.


----------



## ncsurveyor (May 12, 2009)

It's just a reflection of the society we live in today. Everyone isn't skilled at judging yardage so let's take that out of the equation to make it an equal playing field. Let's lower the skill required because some people can't do it. Let's give everyone a trophy. Why don't we take the skill of running fast out of football or the skill of throwing a football out of the sport since everyone doesn't have that skill, that way people who don't exercise and eat mcdonalds everyday can have a chance at playing in the NFL. Hey I know, let's take physical fitness tests out of the military and even shooting skills out of the military sniper schools since not everyone has the same level of shooting skill, everyone should have an equal chance to participate. Instead of working harder and encouraging improvement in judging yardage, let's lower the skill required. Let's lower the people on top instead of raising the people on the bottom. Just a sad reality of the liberal politically correct, everyone wins world we live in. Makes me sick. If you can't judge yardage then too bad, you probably won't win open pro. If you can't throw a football like Aaron Rodgers, then you probably won't play in the NFL, live with it.


----------



## shootstraight (Apr 28, 2005)

Yeah but Tebow just signed with the Eagles and he can't throw :wink:



ncsurveyor said:


> It's just a reflection of the society we live in today. Everyone isn't skilled at judging yardage so let's take that out of the equation to make it an equal playing field. Let's lower the skill required because some people can't do it. Let's give everyone a trophy. Why don't we take the skill of running fast out of football or the skill of throwing a football out of the sport since everyone doesn't have that skill, that way people who don't exercise and eat mcdonalds everyday can have a chance at playing in the NFL. Hey I know, let's take physical fitness tests out of the military and even shooting skills out of the military sniper schools since not everyone has the same level of shooting skill, everyone should have an equal chance to participate. Instead of working harder and encouraging improvement in judging yardage, let's lower the skill required. Let's lower the people on top instead of raising the people on the bottom. Just a sad reality of the liberal politically correct, everyone wins world we live in. Makes me sick. If you can't judge yardage then too bad, you probably won't win open pro. If you can't throw a football like Aaron Rodgers, then you probably won't play in the NFL, live with it.


----------



## jimb (Feb 17, 2003)

ncsurveyor said:


> It's just a reflection of the society we live in today. Everyone isn't skilled at judging yardage so let's take that out of the equation to make it an equal playing field. Let's lower the skill required because some people can't do it. Let's give everyone a trophy. Why don't we take the skill of running fast out of football or the skill of throwing a football out of the sport since everyone doesn't have that skill, that way people who don't exercise and eat mcdonalds everyday can have a chance at playing in the NFL. Hey I know, let's take physical fitness tests out of the military and even shooting skills out of the military sniper schools since not everyone has the same level of shooting skill, everyone should have an equal chance to participate. Instead of working harder and encouraging improvement in judging yardage, let's lower the skill required. Let's lower the people on top instead of raising the people on the bottom. Just a sad reality of the liberal politically correct, everyone wins world we live in. Makes me sick. If you can't judge yardage then too bad, you probably won't win open pro. If you can't throw a football like Aaron Rodgers, then you probably won't play in the NFL, live with it.


Hey, I didn't win before we had known yardage, I just don't lose as many arrows now. Footballs are easier to throw and catch if you let some air out of them.


----------



## ncsurveyor (May 12, 2009)

I think ASA should go all crossbow since everyone doesn't have the skill to win pro class with a compound. It's only fair....


----------



## ncsurveyor (May 12, 2009)

I think we should have a maximum outfield fence distance in Major League Baseball of 100 feet and have a speed limit on pitching of 50 mph since everyone doesn't have the skill to hit a 98 mph fastball 300+ feet.......it's only fair


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

T-Mo......you all in trouble if it all goes known, cuz I'm coming out swinging.


But then again I'm drunk right now ,........carry on


----------



## Pruno (Sep 4, 2011)

Best comment I've read on AT for a year.



ncsurveyor said:


> It's just a reflection of the society we live in today. Everyone isn't skilled at judging yardage so let's take that out of the equation to make it an equal playing field. Let's lower the skill required because some people can't do it. Let's give everyone a trophy. Why don't we take the skill of running fast out of football or the skill of throwing a football out of the sport since everyone doesn't have that skill, that way people who don't exercise and eat mcdonalds everyday can have a chance at playing in the NFL. Hey I know, let's take physical fitness tests out of the military and even shooting skills out of the military sniper schools since not everyone has the same level of shooting skill, everyone should have an equal chance to participate. Instead of working harder and encouraging improvement in judging yardage, let's lower the skill required. Let's lower the people on top instead of raising the people on the bottom. Just a sad reality of the liberal politically correct, everyone wins world we live in. Makes me sick. If you can't judge yardage then too bad, you probably won't win open pro. If you can't throw a football like Aaron Rodgers, then you probably won't play in the NFL, live with it.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

shootstraight said:


> Yeah but Tebow just signed with the Eagles and he can't throw :wink:


Yeah, but he's workin' on it. :thumbs_up


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

jimb said:


> Hey, I didn't win before we had known yardage, I just don't lose as many arrows now. Footballs are easier to throw and catch if you let some air out of them.


Lovin' it, jimb. :cheers:


----------



## Ned250 (Aug 10, 2009)

I'm in IBO land and a life long field shooter that's just now learning the 3D game. I'd be super disappointed if they went to all known and probably would just go back to field. I'm really enjoying learning how to judge, even though I suck at it.


----------



## NateUK (Dec 4, 2008)

ncsurveyor said:


> It's just a reflection of the society we live in today. Everyone isn't skilled at judging yardage so let's take that out of the equation to make it an equal playing field. Let's lower the skill required because some people can't do it. Let's give everyone a trophy. Why don't we take the skill of running fast out of football or the skill of throwing a football out of the sport since everyone doesn't have that skill, that way people who don't exercise and eat mcdonalds everyday can have a chance at playing in the NFL. Hey I know, let's take physical fitness tests out of the military and even shooting skills out of the military sniper schools since not everyone has the same level of shooting skill, everyone should have an equal chance to participate. Instead of working harder and encouraging improvement in judging yardage, let's lower the skill required. Let's lower the people on top instead of raising the people on the bottom. Just a sad reality of the liberal politically correct, everyone wins world we live in. Makes me sick. If you can't judge yardage then too bad, you probably won't win open pro. If you can't throw a football like Aaron Rodgers, then you probably won't play in the NFL, live with it.


Amen to this!


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

ncsurveyor said:


> It's just a reflection of the society we live in today. Everyone isn't skilled at judging yardage so let's take that out of the equation to make it an equal playing field. Let's lower the skill required because some people can't do it. Let's give everyone a trophy. Why don't we take the skill of running fast out of football or the skill of throwing a football out of the sport since everyone doesn't have that skill, that way people who don't exercise and eat mcdonalds everyday can have a chance at playing in the NFL. Hey I know, let's take physical fitness tests out of the military and even shooting skills out of the military sniper schools since not everyone has the same level of shooting skill, everyone should have an equal chance to participate. Instead of working harder and encouraging improvement in judging yardage, let's lower the skill required. Let's lower the people on top instead of raising the people on the bottom. Just a sad reality of the liberal politically correct, everyone wins world we live in. Makes me sick. If you can't judge yardage then too bad, you probably won't win open pro. If you can't throw a football like Aaron Rodgers, then you probably won't play in the NFL, live with it.





ncsurveyor said:


> I think ASA should go all crossbow since everyone doesn't have the skill to win pro class with a compound. It's only fair....





ncsurveyor said:


> I think we should have a maximum outfield fence distance in Major League Baseball of 100 feet and have a speed limit on pitching of 50 mph since everyone doesn't have the skill to hit a 98 mph fastball 300+ feet.......it's only fair


You simply don't get it do you? The ASA is not some social welfare program in any way shape or form. The ASA does NOT have different sets of rules so some folks can appear to be on the same level as other folks. The ASA does not do any of what you say and in fact does just the opposite! 

The ASA is a business that sells a "product". Contrary to your strain analysis the product is NOT making people feel warm and fuzzy. It is NOT about making people feel "special". Their product is tournament archery, pro competition, amateur archery competition and a "social environment". What MUST any business do to survive? It must maintain a customer base. To do so the business must keep it's ear to the ground and be PROACTIVE to not only grow but to simply survive. The ASA can NOT force anyone to do anything!!! However, it MUST be prepared to make changes to it's product if the market calls for it. The ASA "tested" known distance classes with K45 and K50 and found K45 to be immediately more successful than some long pre-existing classes and very popular. K50 has been very successful. So this year there is a Senior Known and it has been immediately very successful. 

There are many more archery games being played in this country and around the world than just unknown distance 3D. The ASA at this time happens to provide 2 games, Known and Unknown distance 3D. If known distance 3D one day shows signs of out growing Known 3D I expect the ASA will react appropriately to that situation. But right now the market is calling for Known distance 3D and the ASA has reacted appropriately and I expect will continue to do so.

Please explain why the ASA should behave like the now almost non-existent NFAA and completely ignore the writing on the wall? Why should the ASA behave like the stick-in-the-mud IBO and basically stall out? The IBO has it's head buried in the sand. The ASA has been hugely successful but yet you are saying they should stick to an old stale product and ignore the writing on the wall? Back in the '80's the NFAA chose to NOT promote 3D. They chose to ignore the writing on the wall and left the emerging 3D market wide open for the IBO and then the ASA to be born and then eventually blow them away. The ASA ignoring Known distance 3D would be similar. Ignoring known distance 3D hasn't helped the IBO grow in any way shape or form. 


:embara: that is entirely too much typing for one day let alone one morning!!! :zip:


----------



## ThunderEagle (May 11, 2011)

ncsurveyor said:


> It's just a reflection of the society we live in today. Everyone isn't skilled at judging yardage so let's take that out of the equation to make it an equal playing field. Let's lower the skill required because some people can't do it. Let's give everyone a trophy. Why don't we take the skill of running fast out of football or the skill of throwing a football out of the sport since everyone doesn't have that skill, that way people who don't exercise and eat mcdonalds everyday can have a chance at playing in the NFL. Hey I know, let's take physical fitness tests out of the military and even shooting skills out of the military sniper schools since not everyone has the same level of shooting skill, everyone should have an equal chance to participate. Instead of working harder and encouraging improvement in judging yardage, let's lower the skill required. Let's lower the people on top instead of raising the people on the bottom. Just a sad reality of the liberal politically correct, everyone wins world we live in. Makes me sick. If you can't judge yardage then too bad, you probably won't win open pro. If you can't throw a football like Aaron Rodgers, then you probably won't play in the NFL, live with it.


Except this isn't true at all. Look, I agree with your general premise about society, it just doesn't apply here. 

This is about money, pure and simple. The NFL makes money from people paying to watch the teams play, either in person or via TV commercial revenues. Nobody would pay to watch less than the very best play the game. They don't need more players in the NFL, there are already way more that want to play than there are roster spots.

An archery tournament isn't turning people away typically. They make their money by having as many people pay an entry fee as possible, maybe a small amount from a sponsorship agreement, but the vast majority is from entry fees. So, for an archery organization that is a for profit business, they want to encourage as many people to attend as possible. The ASA added several known distance classes in an effort to attract more shooters, and it worked, and it is one of the biggest reasons for the growth of the ASA over the last few years, to the point where people are discussing a pro known class.

This isn't about purity of competition or about everyone getting a trophy. This is a business that found a way to increase participation from their customers and I would hope their revenue.

Now, the OP was about what happens if (when?) all of the unknown classes go away. I don't think that will happen personally, as I think they are just slightly different games that are mostly the same, an there will still be people who want the unknown distance as part of the game. Will that continue to be the main focus? That is really what this is exploring.


----------



## mhill (Jul 11, 2011)

So ASA's "product" is evolving and growing in attendance, how has the ASA adapted their service to provide a timely shoot? If they keep growing and growing how can they get the "field" of shooters thorough the course(s) in a timely manner?


----------



## Ned250 (Aug 10, 2009)

ThunderEagle said:


> Except this isn't true at all. Look, I agree with your general premise about society, it just doesn't apply here.
> 
> This is about money, pure and simple. The NFL makes money from people paying to watch the teams play, either in person or via TV commercial revenues. Nobody would pay to watch less than the very best play the game. They don't need more players in the NFL, there are already way more that want to play than there are roster spots.
> 
> ...


ASA = American Sissification Association

amirite?


----------



## shawn_in_MA (Dec 11, 2002)

Considering going known distance is very forward thinking by the ASA. The marked distance 3-D at Redding is one of if not the largest outdoor shoot every year. People are just drawn to that format. If ASA doesn't step up and take the bull by the horns I believe either the NFAA or a new organization will. They will offer a tour of Redding type shoots and I believe it would be very popular. Heck, Chance said in an interview before about how it's a good thing there isn't a tour of just Redding type shoots because that would be all he would do...and I know he isn't the only one to think like that. Anyone ever think about how many shooters would attend a truly nationwide series of 4 or 5 or 6 set up like Redding if they spread them out across the country like the red dots in the map below!


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

shawn_in_MA said:


> Considering going known distance is very forward thinking by the ASA. The marked distance 3-D at Redding is one of if not the largest outdoor shoot every year. People are just drawn to that format. If ASA doesn't step up and take the bull by the horns I believe either the NFAA or a new organization will. They will offer a tour of Redding type shoots and I believe it would be very popular. Heck, Chance said in an interview before about how it's a good thing there isn't a tour of just Redding type shoots because that would be all he would do...and I know he isn't the only one to think like that. Anyone ever think about how many shooters would attend a truly nationwide series of 4 or 5 or 6 set up like Redding if they spread them out across the country like the red dots in the map below!


If NFAA does it, it will flop... because they won't pay the amatuers. Amatuers do it once/year now with a willingness to write it off for the experience, the northern CA scenery. I doubt they'll do it 3-4-5-6 times per year just for the heck of it.


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

Likely scenario:
ASA starts a Known Pro class next year. Within 2 years, it overtakes the Open Pro class as the largest main pro class (Senior Pro is larger, but since there is an age restriction, most contingency stays in the Open Pro class). When it gets bigger, companies will decide to put their contingency money there instead of the Open Pro class. When that happens, everybody that shoots pro and thinks they can compete in Known will leave Open Pro and shoot KPro. Eventually the Open Pro class withers away much like the Pro Fingers class did. At that point, the main ASA Pro Class is KPro, so how many unknown amateur classes will remain? I hate the thought of shooting known distance, but when the main class of pros is known, unknown becomes a novelty. 

This is why there is resistance by some to offer a K Pro class. Because the moment it is offered, Open Pro as we know it today starts to dissolve. To me, 3d archery has always consisted of 3 major components. 
1) shooting form 
2) ability to judge distance 
3) course management

If you take away the distance judging component, you are left with:
1) shooting form
Course management is still somewhat important, but many of the factors of course management involve the fact that the target is at an unknown distance, so it will be less important than before. I think there are tons of venues that offer competition to test shooting form, so I hate to see the one venue that offers more turned into a novelty.

I can actually see the SIMS known distance shoot turned into the SIMS unknown distance shoot.

So, after I say all this, I'll also say that once K Pro is the most important pro class, I'll reluctantly switch to a known class too.


----------



## n2bows (May 21, 2002)

Kstigall said:


> You simply don't get it do you? The ASA is not some social welfare program in any way shape or form. The ASA does NOT have different sets of rules so some folks can appear to be on the same level as other folks. The ASA does not do any of what you say and in fact does just the opposite!
> 
> The ASA is a business that sells a "product". Contrary to your strain analysis the product is NOT making people feel warm and fuzzy. It is NOT about making people feel "special". Their product is tournament archery, pro competition, amateur archery competition and a "social environment". What MUST any business do to survive? It must maintain a customer base. To do so the business must keep it's ear to the ground and be PROACTIVE to not only grow but to simply survive. The ASA can NOT force anyone to do anything!!! However, it MUST be prepared to make changes to it's product if the market calls for it. The ASA "tested" known distance classes with K45 and K50 and found K45 to be immediately more successful than some long pre-existing classes and very popular. K50 has been very successful. So this year there is a Senior Known and it has been immediately very successful.
> 
> ...



Ken, Very Well Said! I agree with you 100%


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

shootist said:


> Likely scenario:
> ASA starts a Known Pro class next year. Within 2 years, it overtakes the Open Pro class as the largest main pro class (Senior Pro is larger, but since there is an age restriction, most contingency stays in the Open Pro class). When it gets bigger, companies will decide to put their contingency money there instead of the Open Pro class. When that happens, everybody that shoots pro and thinks they can compete in Known will leave Open Pro and shoot KPro. Eventually the Open Pro class withers away much like the Pro Fingers class did. At that point, the main ASA Pro Class is KPro, so how many unknown amateur classes will remain? I hate the thought of shooting known distance, but when the main class of pros is known, unknown becomes a novelty.
> 
> This is why there is resistance by some to offer a K Pro class. Because the moment it is offered, Open Pro as we know it today starts to dissolve. To me, 3d archery has always consisted of 3 major components.
> ...


I think too many folks under estimate the value of course management and that includes those shooting known distance 3D. For example, you hear too often folks saying they shoot unknown BETTER than known. A lot of that is the archer has head issues with knowing the distance but a major part of it is "course management" (they are misjudging their ability). A lot of archers simply don't know "how" to shoot a target based on their personal experience and abilities. In K45 when the 14 was in play I watched many guys shoot at 14's they shouldn't while others guys refused to shoot at ANY 14's. Both are errors in "course management" which to me means "maximizing your score" based on the moment. 

I found Known distance MUCH more fun when the 14 was an option on every target! Those that really don't find more competition stress and a greater challenge fun don't care for 14's. Those that struggle to "manage a course" don't like 14's.


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

Kstigall said:


> I think too many folks under estimate the value of course management and that includes those shooting known distance 3D. For example, you hear too often folks saying they shoot unknown BETTER than known. A lot of that is the archer has head issues with knowing the distance but a major part of it is "course management" (they are misjudging their ability). A lot of archers simply don't know "how" to shoot a target based on their personal experience and abilities. In K45 when the 14 was in play I watched many guys shoot at 14's they shouldn't while others guys refused to shoot at ANY 14's. Both are errors in "course management" which to me means "maximizing your score" based on the moment.
> 
> I found Known distance MUCH more fun when the 14 was an option on every target! Those that really don't find more competition stress and a greater challenge fun don't care for 14's. Those that struggle to "manage a course" don't like 14's.


I agree that the 14 needs to be in play in known distance and that certainly satisfies the course management I'm talking about. I also agree that course mgt is present in known distance (even without a 14), but I don't believe it is as important as it is in unknown distance. My only experience shooting known is when I shoot the SIMS range for what it is worth.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Kstigall said:


> I found Known distance MUCH more fun when the 14 was an option on every target!


Amen to that.

I also agree that course management gets down played, especially in known yardage discussions.


----------



## enabear722 (Oct 10, 2005)

I hope this never happens. But from what I am seeing I see myself shooting more than judging. Judging makes the game interesting.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

mhill said:


> So ASA's "product" is evolving and growing in attendance, how has the ASA adapted their service to provide a timely shoot? If they keep growing and growing how can they get the "field" of shooters thorough the course(s) in a timely manner?


Does the ASA have things to work on? Absolutely. Are some of the "problems" due to an increase in customers? Obviously, yes. Can one business model work for X number of customers but not for x+Y? Yes, so the model must evolve or the customer count capped. 



shawn_in_MA said:


> Considering going known distance is very forward thinking by the ASA. The marked distance 3-D at Redding is one of if not the largest outdoor shoot every year. People are just drawn to that format. If ASA doesn't step up and take the bull by the horns I believe either the NFAA or a new organization will. They will offer a tour of Redding type shoots and I believe it would be very popular. Heck, Chance said in an interview before about how it's a good thing there isn't a tour of just Redding type shoots because that would be all he would do...and I know he isn't the only one to think like that. Anyone ever think about how many shooters would attend a truly nationwide series of 4 or 5 or 6 set up like Redding if they spread them out across the country like the red dots in the map below!
> View attachment 2226126


The NFAA can't handle what they have. The NFAA is light years behind the ASA in managing archery tournaments! I can't imagine them having to set up a venue for 1800 archers once a month for 6 months. Organizing a tournament that would be even some what comparable to what the ASA currently provides would require the NFAA out sourcing EVERY component whether it be physical or intellectual!!!


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

shootist said:


> I agree that the 14 needs to be in play in known distance and that certainly satisfies the course management I'm talking about. I also agree that course mgt is present in known distance (even without a 14), but I don't believe it is as important as it is in unknown distance. My only experience shooting known is when I shoot the SIMS range for what it is worth.


I have only played and/or experimented on the SIMS range like I do most local tournaments. I've never "worked" it. 

If someone buries their pin in the 12 ring on targets when they would have a much higher total score by aiming .75" higher on those targets then that person's course management is lacking. Whether they are shooting known or unknown isn't relevant. Shooting _unknown_ you must also take into account how you have been judging a certain target but in the end it's about "where should I aim on _this_ target" based on your current performance and current situation.

I know my last year in K45 there were guys scoring significantly higher without the 14 in play than when the 14 was in play. Obviously, these guys had been shooting at 14's when they should not have been.


----------



## Ned250 (Aug 10, 2009)

Kstigall said:


> I think too many folks under estimate the value of course management and that includes those shooting known distance 3D. For example, you hear too often folks saying they shoot unknown BETTER than known. A lot of that is the archer has head issues with knowing the distance but a major part of it is "course management" (they are misjudging their ability). A lot of archers simply don't know "how" to shoot a target based on their personal experience and abilities. In K45 when the 14 was in play I watched many guys shoot at 14's they shouldn't while others guys refused to shoot at ANY 14's. Both are errors in "course management" which to me means "maximizing your score" based on the moment.
> 
> I found Known distance MUCH more fun when the 14 was an option on every target! Those that really don't find more competition stress and a greater challenge fun don't care for 14's. Those that struggle to "manage a course" don't like 14's.


I am super envious of the ASA format. We use it for our indoor shoots over the winter and it is a ton of fun with all of the strategy of going for 12s or 14s. I'd LOVE to see that come into our neck of the woods (IBO land).


----------



## mhill (Jul 11, 2011)

Kstigall said:


> Does the ASA have things to work on? Absolutely. Are some of the "problems" due to an increase in customers? Obviously, yes. Can one business model work for X number of customers but not for x+Y? Yes, so the model must evolve or the customer count capped.


I think if they want the sport to continue to grow they cant turn customers away unless it becomes a safety concern. Rapid growth always causes issue with service. controlled growth is always best but not always obtainable especially in a service industry. I am uneducated to the way the ASA sets up their events as i have never shot a major tournament, but can i assume that they set up multiple ranges currently? so the growth of known classes and the growth of the events in all would require more courses to be set up. 

Currently do Pro shooters shoot at the same time on the same course as amateurs? Would it be beneficial to have "heats" on each course to get people on the and off the range in a timely manner? (assuming it does not happen already)


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

Kstigall said:


> I have only played and/or experimented on the SIMS range like I do most local tournaments. I've never "worked" it.
> 
> If someone buries their pin in the 12 ring on targets when they would have a much higher total score by aiming .75" higher on those targets then that person's course management is lacking. Whether they are shooting known or unknown isn't relevant. Shooting _unknown_ you must also take into account how you have been judging a certain target but in the end it's about "where should I aim on _this_ target" based on your current performance and current situation.
> 
> I know my last year in K45 there were guys scoring significantly higher without the 14 in play than when the 14 was in play. Obviously, these guys had been shooting at 14's when they should not have been.


Certainly aiming habits play into course mgt, but once you figure out your optimal aiming location to maximize your score, you simply must execute. When you are judging distances, each target presents multiple issues above and beyond the best place to aim. Knowing that you tend to over judge or under judge tunnels or open fields, or knowing that you usually over judge or under judge particular targets. One of my challenges is that I know that I tend to over judge the mt lion, but now that I'm aware of the tendency, I have begun to correct the problem, so now I really don't know how to shoot the darn thing, lol. Again, I agree course mgt is important, but it is much more critical in unknown in my opinion until they reinstate the 14.


----------



## mhill (Jul 11, 2011)

shootist said:


> Certainly aiming habits play into course mgt, but once you figure out your optimal aiming location to maximize your score, you simply must execute. When you are judging distances, each target presents multiple issues above and beyond the best place to aim. Knowing that you tend to over judge or under judge tunnels or open fields, or knowing that you usually over judge or under judge particular targets. One of my challenges is that I know that I tend to over judge the mt lion, but now that I'm aware of the tendency, I have begun to correct the problem, so now I really don't know how to shoot the darn thing, lol. Again, I agree course mgt is important, but it is much more critical in unknown in my opinion until they reinstate the 14.


Do you think if Kpro is made that you will see more target and field guys shoot the Known pro 3d class?


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

mhill said:


> Do you think if Kpro is made that you will see more target and field guys shoot the Known pro 3d class?


Yes, at least I hope so. To me, that is one of the biggest arguments for it.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

mhill said:


> I think if they want the sport to continue to grow they cant turn customers away unless it becomes a safety concern. Rapid growth always causes issue with service. controlled growth is always best but not always obtainable especially in a service industry. I am uneducated to the way the ASA sets up their events as i have never shot a major tournament, but can i assume that they set up multiple ranges currently? so the growth of known classes and the growth of the events in all would require more courses to be set up.
> 
> Currently do Pro shooters shoot at the same time on the same course as amateurs? Would it be beneficial to have "heats" on each course to get people on the and off the range in a timely manner? (assuming it does not happen already)


There are MANY ranges set up (2 dozen?) depending on venue. The catch is that every person in a class MUST shoot the same course(s). A course has 20 targets so with 5 people per stake a course handles 100 archers and 6 archers a stake gets you to 120 but 6 is cumbersome and increases the time it takes to finish a course. Many classes shoot the same distances so there can be more than one class on a course at one time. Classes are grouped so that a course is full and everyone is either shooting known or unknown if at all possible. 

The best answer to support more archers is to set more courses. BUT that means more folks for administration, more folks setting courses, more targets, more lanes cut, more range officials and finally more real estate to accommodate the ranges AND parking. Let's not forget there is a need for more hotel rooms.


----------



## pointndog (Jul 14, 2005)

For Known Pro the contingency money has to be there like Open Pro. If that happens I think there will be more big name spot shooters come.

I have shot Open C at Florida and Texas this year and it has been crazy. Florida we had 2 sit out groups on each end of the course, initially my stake we had 8 guys standing at before they took people from the groups. So we had 20 minutes on each end of sit down time and we were still shooting 5 in a group. And then you have the group that takes forever and we ended up for awhile having an empty target because of it.

Texas wasn't quite that bad but we shot with 6 in a group and it took forever once again to get done.

This is one reason I am not happy about having to shoot all 40 targets in 1 day. It has taken close to 4 hours each time to shoot 20 targets. So figure 8 hours on the course Saturday. That SUCKS.


----------



## mhill (Jul 11, 2011)

shootist said:


> Yes, at least I hope so. To me, that is one of the biggest arguments for it.


Keeping money contingencies out of it, i support a known class for that reason that it would get new target driven archers into the known classes and most of the successful unknown class shooters would stay put i think. I dont think Levi, Dan McCarthy, Tommy Gomez, Tim Gillingham, Chance, ect would be making the move to known unless the money is better. I think guys like jesse broadwater, reo wilde that are more target driven with known distances would make the switch. This is just my observation based off their success at known tounaments, Reo(FITA) and Jesse (redding champ 3 yrs running)


----------



## mhill (Jul 11, 2011)

Kstigall said:


> There are MANY ranges set up (2 dozen?) depending on venue. The catch is that every person in a class MUST shoot the same course(s). A course has 20 targets so with 5 people per stake a course handles 100 archers and 6 archers a stake gets you to 120 but 6 is cumbersome and increases the time it takes to finish a course. Many classes shoot the same distances so there can be more than one class on a course at one time. Classes are grouped so that a course is full and everyone is either shooting known or unknown if at all possible.
> 
> The best answer to support more archers is to set more courses. BUT that means more folks for administration, more folks setting courses, more targets, more lanes cut, more range officials and finally more real estate to accommodate the ranges AND parking. Let's not forget there is a need for more hotel rooms.


Thanks for laying it out for me  about the course layout. The only thing i can see a major problem is lodging parking and real estate. More staff and targets can be offset by the additional admission fees they would be getting. In that case maybe a Cap is needed more so than open arms saying come one come all. If the venues cant handle it there should be a Cap and a pre registration.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

A different thought....

Do you think any sponsors have a reason to be for or against known distance?

It has been said that Mathews has been vocal against Kpro.

If I ran McKenzie, I wouldn't like it one bit.... If it goes all known, I'm going to sell about 20 targets. I won't need them anymore.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

mhill said:


> Keeping money contingencies out of it, i support a known class for that reason that it would get new target driven archers into the known classes and most of the successful unknown class shooters would stay put i think. I dont think Levi, Dan McCarthy, Tommy Gomez, Tim Gillingham, Chance, ect would be making the move to known unless the money is better. I think guys like jesse broadwater, reo wilde that are more target driven with known distances would make the switch. This is just my observation based off their success at known tounaments, Reo(FITA) and Jesse (redding champ 3 yrs running)


I shot with Chance in a team shoot last year - he said flat out if the contingency was there. He would be there in a hear beat!


----------



## shawn_in_MA (Dec 11, 2002)

tmorelli said:


> If NFAA does it, it will flop... because they won't pay the amatuers. Amatuers do it once/year now with a willingness to write it off for the experience, the northern CA scenery. I doubt they'll do it 3-4-5-6 times per year just for the heck of it.


Didn't think of that! Very true.


----------



## ThunderEagle (May 11, 2011)

tmorelli said:


> A different thought....
> 
> Do you think any sponsors have a reason to be for or against known distance?
> 
> ...


Who knows, maybe with more and more known drifting down into local clubs, there may be an overall increase in 3d target sales.

Does Hoyt have more "Target" shooters than 3d Guys? At least in terms of how they balance against Mathews shooters? That would be the only reason I could see for them being against it, to not have a sea of Red associated with 3D Archery, but I honestly don't know that breakdown.


----------



## ThunderEagle (May 11, 2011)

Garceau said:


> I shot with Chance in a team shoot last year - he said flat out if the contingency was there. He would be there in a hear beat!


I could see that, I don't know if the bigger World Archery guys would commit fully? Wilde, Cousins, Deaton, etc. I don't know if they would give up the WA circuit for it or not?


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

I don't think full time they would - besides the payout money there are other benefits to those circuits

Or so I have been told...


----------



## Labs (Jun 3, 2004)

mhill said:


> Thanks for laying it out for me  about the course layout. The only thing i can see a major problem is lodging parking and real estate. More staff and targets can be offset by the additional admission fees they would be getting. In that case maybe a Cap is needed more so than open arms saying come one come all. If the venues cant handle it there should be a Cap and a pre registration.


I think there are only about 12 ranges per tournament (A thru K at London per the Range Assignments on the website). More ranges would certainly help but as someone mentioned, my help, more lanes, more space, more admin...ETC...and this is on site only...the town has to be able to support the event (hotels etc)


----------



## Tallcatt (Jul 27, 2003)

Labs said:


> I think there are only about 12 ranges per tournament (A thru K at London per the Range Assignments on the website). More ranges would certainly help but as someone mentioned, my help, more lanes, more space, more admin...ETC...and this is on site only...the town has to be able to support the event (hotels etc)


This is correct. 12 ranges at London. Previous Pro/Ams had 11 ranges. A thru K.

Here is the text of an email conversation I had with Mike Tyrell last week. "By the way, we did add a range in Kentucky this year (to get to 12) and we still needed to use this new schedule just to meet last year’s numbers. Our biggest obstacle is the that we can’t just “add ranges” at most of our sites."


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Tallcatt said:


> This is correct. 12 ranges at London. Previous Pro/Ams had 11 ranges. A thru K.
> 
> Here is the text of an email conversation I had with Mike Tyrell last week. "By the way, we did add a range in Kentucky this year (to get to 12) and we still needed to use this new schedule just to meet last year’s numbers. Our biggest obstacle is the that we can’t just “add ranges” at most of our sites."


I haven't put a pencil to it but it seems that adding ranges, even where possible, isn't providing much relief. The real issue is when any given class gets too large, right? 

Currently, anything over about 100 causes pain in the system. 120 max per range (approx). I could see that a class could "own" and occupy two ranges simultaneously which ups the potential class size to 200-240ish.

Personally, I don't think the staggered Saturday start times or shooting 40/day are good solutions.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

I can only speculate but I'm guessing that the creation of K-Pro dominates this discussion.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

tmorelli said:


> I can only speculate but I'm guessing that the creation of K-Pro dominates this discussion.


Is BowJunky testing the waters for ASA? Can't imagine ASA officials don't have some interest in this. Be interesting to see the reaction of the sponsors.

If they, the sponsors, have to provide contingency for a Pro 50 class I suspect they'll have to pull money out of the contingencies currently going to the amateurs. Another pro class will suck the air out of the current system of awarding contingencies on a broad front.

Maybe.


----------



## Acefoxtrot (Aug 10, 2007)

To me judging the distance is the core of the sport and given that this sport was founded on a hunting culture, I would hate to see the top class be anything but unknown. It would be like Nascar (founded on stock cars) going open wheel.

But………I think K50 should also be promoted if the people want to shoot it…that is just good business……those entry fees can help keep the overall sport of 3d growing.

Also, if we go known…..I won't have as many excuses as to why i missed.


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

I see a couple pros are switching over for KY...I can see a known pro class coming


----------



## txcookie (Feb 17, 2007)

Why I still wonder around shooting bowhunter.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

carlosii said:


> Is BowJunky testing the waters for ASA? Can't imagine ASA officials don't have some interest in this. Be interesting to see the reaction of the sponsors.
> 
> If they, the sponsors, have to provide contingency for a Pro 50 class I suspect they'll have to pull money out of the contingencies currently going to the amateurs. Another pro class will suck the air out of the current system of awarding contingencies on a broad front.
> 
> Maybe.


I took it that Corley was just making an announcement for ASA. Surely he isn't running the meeting....


----------



## Powellj1 (May 6, 2012)

I'm not a big fan for the known class but if it's to bring in more target shooters that great but make them work more for there scores. I would love to see someone shooting for the 10 or 12 ring on a turkey at 80-90 yards :teeth: and besides I don't under stand having open c and k45 they are both known and only 10fps and 5 yards difference


----------



## ba3darcher (Jan 13, 2005)

If wanting to go to a pro k50known, increase the entry fee to $275.00 like all other pro classes and see how many shooters decide to shoot. I don't think there would be half of the k50 shooters now that would sign up. Would be interesting to see what happens


----------



## jimb (Feb 17, 2003)

Powellj1 said:


> I'm not a big fan for the known class but if it's to bring in more target shooters that great but make them work more for there scores. I would love to see someone shooting for the 10 or 12 ring on a turkey at 80-90 yards :teeth: and besides I don't under stand having open c and k45 they are both known and only 10fps and 5 yards difference


because their to large to combine.


----------



## jimb (Feb 17, 2003)

3d may have started with hunters but I think it is quickly becoming a target sport. I would like to know what percentage of the shooters at London are die hard hunters, how many are casual hunters and how many don't hunt at all.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

ba3darcher said:


> If wanting to go to a pro k50known, increase the entry fee to $275.00 like all other pro classes and see how many shooters decide to shoot. I don't think there would be half of the k50 shooters now that would sign up. Would be interesting to see what happens


I suspect that i s what the meeting is about. And it is why I've been saying you can't have pro-known without semi-pro-known.


----------



## Okie101 (Nov 1, 2009)

tmorelli said:


> I took it that Corley was just making an announcement for ASA. Surely he isn't running the meeting....


I sure hope not.....


----------



## PJ_WI (Feb 5, 2003)

Might as well add an orange dot to the 14 ring to.


----------



## slowtech63 (Feb 5, 2014)

If wanting to go to a pro k50known, increase the entry fee to $275.00 like all other pro classes and see how many shooters decide to shoot. I don't think there would be half of the k50 shooters now that would sign up. Would be interesting to see what happens

Exactly! Kpro would have to be a new class seperate from k50 and if the money happens it will happen. But k50 will stay an amateur class because there are too many shooters to just drop. I personally like unknown. I think Tmorelli made the best point, are the sponsors wanting this, is Mckensie wanting this?


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

PJ_WI said:


> Might as well add an orange dot to the 14 ring to.


Next year, different org.


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

slowtech63 said:


> Exactly! Kpro would have to be a new class seperate from k50 and if the money happens it will happen. But k50 will stay an amateur class because there are too many shooters to just drop. I personally like unknown. I think Tmorelli made the best point, are the sponsors wanting this, is Mckensie wanting this?


That's the only way I see it working myself. I think you'd get more in the known pro over k50 myself.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

Powellj1 said:


> I'm not a big fan for the known class but if it's to bring in more target shooters that great but make them work more for there scores. I would love to see someone shooting for the 10 or 12 ring on a turkey at 80-90 yards :teeth: and besides I don't under stand having open c and k45 they are both known and only 10fps and 5 yards difference


Although the max distance is only 5 yards.....the avg in K45 is considerably more than 5 yards difference


----------



## schmel_me (Dec 17, 2003)

Mens classes should be k40,k45,k50,kpro. Open b, open a, semipro, openpro. Really simple right?! Money won't be in kpro right away but it's a start.


----------



## n2bows (May 21, 2002)

tmorelli said:


> A different thought....
> 
> Do you think any sponsors have a reason to be for or against known distance?
> 
> ...



Tony,

I disagree with you on this point. Having targets at home is more than just learning to judge their yardage. It helps with knowing where and how to aim at a certain target. I think they sell just as many targets. And they would sell more cores than they do now. Just because shooting known distance concentrates more arrows in the twelve. Thus more damage to the core.

As far as sponsors. We all know that Mathews will be against it. But if the Known Pro class and ASA as a whole was marketed properly. ASA would not have to worry about loosing Mathews. They would gain many more and bigger sponsors.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

tmorelli said:


> I haven't put a pencil to it but it seems that adding ranges, even where possible, isn't providing much relief. The real issue is when any given class gets too large, right?
> 
> Currently, anything over about 100 causes pain in the system. 120 max per range (approx). I could see that a class could "own" and occupy two ranges simultaneously which ups the potential class size to 200-240ish.
> 
> Personally, I don't think the staggered Saturday start times or shooting 40/day are good solutions.


Maybe need to spread tournaments over two weekends...:jksign:


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

carlosii said:


> Maybe need to spread tournaments over two weekends...:jksign:


Spitballing without thinking these out fully....

What if there were a revolving Friday schedule?... Meaning each class shot Friday PM and Saturday AM a couple times per year. 

What if the ranges were broken into units of 10 targets and everyone shot 30 on Saturday? And 10 on Sunday (maybe with two start times....like 7:30 and 10)?


----------



## pointndog (Jul 14, 2005)

Garceau said:


> Although the max distance is only 5 yards.....the avg in K45 is considerably more than 5 yards difference


Kevin, I dont think you are right there. Tonight I will average out what C is shooting. C has been getting stretched out also. We have had a lot of 37-40 yard shots. I think you will be surprised.

I have been to Florida and Paris this year and Open C had something like 145 @ Florida and 115 @ Paris. It sucks shooting 6 to a stake, really 5 also especially if you shoot last on the target and you have no shot at a 12.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

Maybe.....


----------



## ScottyE (Apr 17, 2008)

tmorelli said:


> Spitballing without thinking these out fully....
> 
> What if there were a revolving Friday schedule?... Meaning each class shot Friday PM and Saturday AM a couple times per year.
> 
> What if the ranges were broken into units of 10 targets and everyone shot 30 on Saturday? And 10 on Sunday (maybe with two start times....like 7:30 and 10)?


I like the idea of 30 on Saturday and ten on Sunday.


----------



## okarcher (Jul 21, 2002)

ba3darcher said:


> If wanting to go to a pro k50known, increase the entry fee to $275.00 like all other pro classes and see how many shooters decide to shoot. I don't think there would be half of the k50 shooters now that would sign up. Would be interesting to see what happens


The question isn't how many K50 guys would move up. Its how many Open Pro's would move over as long as the contingency was there too. The high entry in the Open Pro class is what keeps its numbers down and people moving out of that class back to semi or K50 now. Drop the Open Pro entry to $150 and that class probably grows to the point where the payout would be about the same any ways. And we all know the contingency is the real payday.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

You absolutely can NOT simply change K50 to a Pro class! That would be, speaking politely, really not smart! That would be like dissolving Open A AND Semi-Pro such that an archer would move from Open B to Pro. Does anyone think all the Open A guys and semi-pro guys would immediately turn Pro? Does anyone think for a moment that the majority of archers winning out of Open B would go Pro? The answer is "no". I know there are many current K50 archers that would like their class to be labeled a "Pro" class but as it stands right now that is a ridiculous idea. Should a K50-Pro class be created? Yes, but ONLY if it's legitimate.

The way things are going we will soon see MORE Known distance classes _added_. As the skill gap widens between K50 and K45 there will need to be a K50-A (amateur) class. As the popularity of the current K50 Semi-Pro class increases the ASA and archery sponsors will realize they need to create and _support _a Known Pro class. Is it time to add K50-A and K Pro right now? I feel very comfortable saying that the ASA leadership are the only ones capable of making good decisions on a time table.

Putting the cart before the horse has never increased productivity..............

Simply renaming K50 a Pro class in no way shape or form forces anyone to pay a contingency!


----------



## slowtech63 (Feb 5, 2014)

What he said!!!!!


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

tmorelli said:


> Spitballing without thinking these out fully....
> 
> What if there were a revolving Friday schedule?... Meaning each class shot Friday PM and Saturday AM a couple times per year.
> 
> What if the ranges were broken into units of 10 targets and everyone shot 30 on Saturday? And 10 on Sunday (maybe with two start times....like 7:30 and 10)?


Hey, I said I was kidding...sheesh.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

ScottyE said:


> I like the idea of 30 on Saturday and ten on Sunday.


I've done that at IBO shoots.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

carlosii said:


> Hey, I said I was kidding...sheesh.


I knew you were kidding, I was just throwing out some ideas without claiming to have thought them through completely.


----------



## 3-D Quest (Jan 26, 2007)

After years of struggling with UK and not having the time to judge or have access to targets, I think shooting all K would be a refreshing change of pace. My shooting buddy and I have been kicking the idea around here lately and will probably pull the trigger on the idea before long.
I enjoyed the half K and half UK Senior Open format that was in play for a couple of years, until the ASA gave in to all the whining. I think it leveled the playing field and since K was on Sunday it gave everyone a chance to hit the road before noon. It should have been offered again instead of two different classes for the Seniors, since the number of participants in either class is almost even. Just sayin. 
However, shooting dots and shooting animals are so much different for me. You don't shoot dots in 3-D so why would you concentrate all your efforts on dots? I think it will still be important to have some access to targets in order to be good enough to compete. 
I wish someone would offer neoprene large scale target faces that are exact and true to scale of all of the ASA animals. Morrell makes some that are close, not exact, still better than dots for me anyway.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)




----------



## trumankayak (Dec 28, 2011)

And big Dave is shooting london 
Love him or hate him the guy is crazy good


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

On the targets for practice thing....when I shot known, I didn't own any targets (which is why I shot known). I kept my bag targets painted brown and black, or covered in burlap. I spent my days shooting at arrow holes, shadows, creases, aiming off other marks, holding in a "zone" etc. 

I have little doubt that known yardage will decrease target sales. I bet 2/3+ of the privately owned targets in OK would not be replaced when worn out.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

If all the classes went unknown the same people winning now would most likely continue to win. Distance judging is only part of the equation.


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

I would like to see some of the unknown pro guys shoot the k50 class and see the scores


----------



## jimb (Feb 17, 2003)

Huntin Hard said:


> I would like to see some of the unknown pro guys shoot the k50 class and see the scores


A few of them are, Eric Griggs and a few others have moved over. Check the scores in a couple of weeks and see how they do.


----------



## schmel_me (Dec 17, 2003)

KY should be a good k50 class. Last year it had a bunch of nfaa pros in it. I would expect one of largest turnouts yet.


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

With k50 getting contingency next year, I expect a lot more shooting it.


----------



## bsharkey (Apr 27, 2009)

tmorelli said:


> What are your thoughts?


I would never shoot another ASA if they went to known yardage on all of them.JMO but known yardage is not real 3d to me


----------



## Supermag1 (Jun 11, 2009)

Just had an idea that might solve a couple of problems for both ASA and IBO. What if they split up the known and unknown classes into two weekends? Have the unknown shooters go first and the next weekend have the known shooters shoot. This would help with the over crowding the ASA has at their shoots and it would allow the IBO to keep their trail setup without having to set a bunch more ranges. It would also completely eliminate the risk of known shooters giving yardages to unknown shooters. In ASA, Open B is the only stumbling block because of the half/half setup.

If the money came in for a Known Pro type class, I can see at least a few pros shooting both weekends.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

Supermag1 said:


> Just had an idea that might solve a couple of problems for both ASA and IBO. What if they split up the known and unknown classes into two weekends? Have the unknown shooters go first and the next weekend have the known shooters shoot. This would help with the over crowding the ASA has at their shoots and it would allow the IBO to keep their trail setup without having to set a bunch more ranges. It would also completely eliminate the risk of known shooters giving yardages to unknown shooters. In ASA, Open B is the only stumbling block because of the half/half setup.
> 
> If the money came in for a Known Pro type class, I can see at least a few pros shooting both weekends.


Don't tell BubbaDean1 about that idea...he's close enough to the edge as it is...two weekends a month??

:BangHead::BangHead::no::no:


----------



## w8indq (Dec 9, 2013)

tmorelli said:


> A different thought....
> 
> If I ran McKenzie, I wouldn't like it one bit.... If it goes all known, I'm going to sell about 20 targets. I won't need them anymore.


I don't know I can see a whole lot more inserts being sold haha


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

w8indq said:


> I don't know I can see a whole lot more inserts being sold haha


But if more archers shoot 3D because it is Known distance target sales would increase. More archers equals more clubs and more clubs mean more ranges. Bigger 3D clubs mean target get replaced sooner. 

I'm sure the number of targets bought by clubs is much greater than the quantity bought by people to practice distance judging.


----------



## n2bows (May 21, 2002)

kstigall said:


> but if more archers shoot 3d because it is known distance target sales would increase. More archers equals more clubs and more clubs mean more ranges. Bigger 3d clubs mean target get replaced sooner.
> 
> I'm sure the number of targets bought by clubs is much greater than the quantity bought by people to practice distance judging.


Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------

