# List of equipment used by the olympic archers!



## lorteti

Thanks for your good work.
But I'm not be able to encode the texts with excel 2000.
Any idea? I'm using PC if that helps.

jx


----------



## [email protected]

Try using this to open it.
OpenOffice.org


----------



## therazor302

Very nice! I was just expecting Riser's and Limbs but it goes all the way to Plungers! If only Archerytalk had a Rep system.


----------



## cc46

hi guys, I'd appreciate if someone could unzip and re-post with another file type..excel or word perhaps...thanks


----------



## peran119

You will have to rename "Beijing 2008 archers.doc" to "Beijing 2008 archers.xls" to be able to open it.

Unfortunately AT doesn't allow .xls files to be attached...


----------



## cc46

good job peran119!

at first look, i'm a bit surprised at the distribution between the manufacturers...no clear dominance, top shooters with just about every major limb and riser supplier. I'd say, and perhaps this is simplistic but at the elite level the equipment is not the deciding factor....

btw, have any info on the arrows? think there were a few using ACEs but any Nanos or MKIIs in the group or was it all x10s? 

big cheer for the work done on this!
thx


----------



## peran119

http://www.eastonarchery.com/olympics

123 of 128 used X10, Khatuna Lorig is using A/C/E, someone else will have to fill in on the rest.


----------



## therazor302

cc46 said:


> good job peran119!
> 
> at first look, i'm a bit surprised at the distribution between the manufacturers...no clear dominance, top shooters with just about every major limb and riser supplier. I'd say, and perhaps this is simplistic but at the elite level the equipment is not the deciding factor....
> 
> btw, have any info on the arrows? think there were a few using ACEs but any Nanos or MKIIs in the group or was it all x10s?
> 
> big cheer for the work done on this!
> thx


Ya it seems that way. I've seen Park Sun Hyun score a 119-120 and she is one of the few people that shoots a Samick Agulla Ultra. It does seem higher up that it is more skill then equipment. I would have love to see one of the top Koreans with a tuned Kap T-Rex and other beginner equipment shoot in the olympics and see how they score.


----------



## Progen

cc46 said:


> ... at the elite level the equipment is not the deciding factor.......


I beg to differ. Well tuned (and high level) equipment will always be a huge factor at any level.

The adage about it's the archer and not the equipment is just as (ok, maybe 60 : 40) valid when reversed. :wink:


----------



## jmvargas

great reference info!!...anyway we can get their draw weights too??....i read somewhere that the ave wt in beijing for men was 48# and 33# for women.......i personally find the women's ave wt on the low side but then i am not sure now where i read that....maybe someone could correct me on this.....


----------



## peran119

jmvargas said:


> great reference info!!...anyway we can get their draw weights too??....i read somewhere that the ave wt in beijing for men was 48# and 33# for women.......i personally find the women's ave wt on the low side but then i am not sure now where i read that....maybe someone could correct me on this.....


Do you realize how hard it would be to find that info for 64 bows? But you are welcome to get going with that project...

My list is as I said compiled by looking at the broadcasts and pictures. Sometimes it's hard to tell even the manufacturer and especially model.


----------



## Bfreeland

*so*

now that we have a list of stuff that most of us cant afford--at least i cant yet-- wheres the list of low end stuff that is good to start with but wont become obsolete after a few months?


----------



## Vittorio

Very good job!

Pls note that probably several of the Samick "EXTREME" limbs are "EXTREME BF" limbs, for sure for the Italians Mauro Nespoli and Marco Galiazzo. 

Top level equipments are presently very close in performacies, so this is the reason of such wide variety on the field. Then, second factor is market presence in each area and sponsorship money (or free equipments). 
Then, of course a top level shooter can use almost everything to shoot at top level. But this is not true for all amateur archers, for sure...


----------



## Vittorio

jmvargas said:


> great reference info!!...anyway we can get their draw weights too??....i read somewhere that the ave wt in beijing for men was 48# and 33# for women.......i personally find the women's ave wt on the low side but then i am not sure now where i read that....maybe someone could correct me on this.....


Impossible. 33# will not allow you to go anywere even if you are a woman. Surely not to the Olympics. 
Italian team was around 39+ average, with Natalia as usual at 38/39 and Lionetti at 40+
Don't think Koreans girls were at less than 43 average

Present average in our national Cadet ladies team is >36 .... just for reference...


----------



## Bfreeland

so what do NON italian football stars use if they shoot archery? hehe inter milan better win with all the $$$ they spent


----------



## Jason22

WOW! Thanks for all of that work!

This is a real eye opener for me, i guess i watched so many Korean clips on nbcolympics.com that I thought there were more Samick Ultra shooters than there actually were.

My quick observations, which could contain errors:

Men's riser Model: Win & Win Inno @ 38%
Women's riser Model: Hoyt Nexus @ 26%
Men's riser Manufacturer: Hoyt @ 38%
Women's riser Manufacturer: Hoyt @ 48%

100% of individual women Finalists used Samick risers - 3 Ultra, 1 Masters
Individual Men Finalists shot 4 different risers.

100% of individual men finalists used Korean limbs, 2 with Hoyt risers

Shibuya sights were used by 47% of men and 85% of women
Of the Shibuha sights used, 85% were Ultimas, 15% Dual Click

Beiter was the dominant plunger

W&W & Beiter dominated stabilizers fairly evenly


----------



## tecshooter05

2222 said:


> W&W & Beiter dominated stabilizers fairly evenly


multirods were not very common at the olympics, single rods like doinker,w&w, apogee, and shibuya were far more common


----------



## engtee

I have looked and thus far been unable to find a source for Apogee stabilizers in the US. Can anyone direct me to supplier(s)?


----------



## strcpy

And the thing that surprises me to this day is that nearly 100% used a shoestring for their bow sling. All the money/value everywhere else and a shoestring (OTOH since that is what I use I was quite happy to see that). After noticing that I have come to wonder *why* as it actually takes some amount of effort and there are some better looking and easy to obtain commercial ones out there. While obviously just a small thing it struck me the number that were doing such.

Eh, I come from the traditional world where I make a lot of my own items and I tend to notice that - it really surprised me the number of little things seen there that were obviously homemade. Especially given that some companies *do* make them. Risers and limbs are interesting but I've felt for a long time that once you get to a certain point they are all good (recurve or compound) and are more about personal feel. I never thought they would use so many small homemade things.

I would think personalization (such as the prints on several of the Korean female's chest guards - I found that *highly* amusing) but it wasn't like they seemed to do more than use a stock plain colored shoe string from walmart. I guess it could still be that - I guess it is for me too - but it still surprised me.

I guess maybe Recurvers are just that regardless of if they hang all sorts of other junk on their bow or not


----------



## jmvargas

peran..that was just wishful thinking on my part..he he he!!....vittorio...thanks for the correction..i knew it was too low...but then again wasn't denise parker only pulling something like 32# when she won her medal??.......oh and another thing--- my equipment is similar to what the olympians use...unfortunately my shooting is NOT!!!.......


----------



## peran119

Some minor updates.

Again, you will have to change the extension from .doc to .xls
(AT doesn't support excel-files to be attached)


----------



## Lloyd

Wow, thanks for sharing all of your hard work.


----------



## Lloyd

You can put Butch Johnson down for a Cavalier Plunger.


----------



## Targetbutt

strcpy said:


> And the thing that surprises me to this day is that nearly 100% used a shoestring for their bow sling. All the money/value everywhere else and a shoestring (OTOH since that is what I use I was quite happy to see that). After noticing that I have come to wonder *why* as it actually takes some amount of effort and there are some better looking and easy to obtain commercial ones out there. While obviously just a small thing it struck me the number that were doing such.


This made me go back and watch the videos again. I came across the gold medalist Victor Ruban. I'm looking at his fingers, and wrist, I can't seem to find any signs of any sling. Is he not using any sort of sling?


----------



## Lloyd

None of the Ukraine Men used a sling.


----------



## TheShadowEnigma

Really? Why wouldn't they?


----------



## archer982

Is it because of their "style"?


----------



## jmvargas

i have just received info that denise parker was only using 27# limbs and 1614 aluminum arrows when she shot the first 1300 by a woman sometime in 1987 or 88.....she was also using not much more than that when she shot the highest fita by an american woman of 1361 or 1363 during the 1993 worlds using aces and 110 gn pts....this is an inspiration to all of us low draw weight users who strive to shoot world class scores one of these days....at least up to 70m which is also the olympic distance........


----------



## worthipa

jmvargas said:


> great reference info!!...anyway we can get their draw weights too??....i read somewhere that the ave wt in beijing for men was 48# and 33# for women.......i personally find the women's ave wt on the low side but then i am not sure now where i read that....maybe someone could correct me on this.....


You can make a useful estimate by looking at how far down the sight rail the pin is set and whether the sight rail has been moved down from the central position.


----------



## worthipa

engtee said:


> I have looked and thus far been unable to find a source for Apogee stabilizers in the US. Can anyone direct me to supplier(s)?


Fred used to sell them at K1 Archery but not any more. Drop him an email he might be able to hook you up.


----------



## Gatorkountry

The most important equipment you left out is "bowstring material".


----------



## yegDavid

Gatorkountry said:


> The most important equipment you left out is "bowstring material".


Considering this thread is 8 years old, there's probably other things to take into consideration.


----------



## Azzurri

strcpy said:


> And the thing that surprises me to this day is that nearly 100% used a shoestring for their bow sling. All the money/value everywhere else and a shoestring (OTOH since that is what I use I was quite happy to see that). After noticing that I have come to wonder *why* as it actually takes some amount of effort and there are some better looking and easy to obtain commercial ones out there. While obviously just a small thing it struck me the number that were doing such.
> 
> Eh, I come from the traditional world where I make a lot of my own items and I tend to notice that - it really surprised me the number of little things seen there that were obviously homemade. Especially given that some companies *do* make them. Risers and limbs are interesting but I've felt for a long time that once you get to a certain point they are all good (recurve or compound) and are more about personal feel. I never thought they would use so many small homemade things.
> 
> I would think personalization (such as the prints on several of the Korean female's chest guards - I found that *highly* amusing) but it wasn't like they seemed to do more than use a stock plain colored shoe string from walmart. I guess it could still be that - I guess it is for me too - but it still surprised me.
> 
> I guess maybe Recurvers are just that regardless of if they hang all sorts of other junk on their bow or not


My sling didn't make it to Az last year and I used a shoestring not even taken for the purpose (which I'd brought to tie some things together in my pack). I made my homemade thing and used it for official practice, considered buying something at the LAS "bus" and even stood in line for a minute, and I think I got upset when Lorig walked right past a couple of us to the counter and got service. After seeing that I was like eff it sticking with the shoestring and did fine by me, PR for the first 36 (probably not a great score for most of you but good for me).

Comfortable and did the job.


----------



## StarDog

Besides, shoestrings come in many decorator colors including sparkley an fluorescent.


----------



## Azzurri

StarDog said:


> Besides, shoestrings come in many decorator colors including sparkley an fluorescent.


I've seen people use drapey ribbons also, but that sort of thing, in a projectile shooting sport, I worry about ribbon gets caught and you launch the projectile down range with ribbon and god knows what stays with it.


----------



## collider

My boots decided to explode during the last snowstorm, so now I have 2 perfectly good slings... trying to figure out what I can do with the rest of the boot, seems such a waste to just throw them away. When I tried to get them repaired, the guy literally laughed in my face and wouldn't touch them...


----------



## StarDog

Azzurri said:


> I've seen people use drapey ribbons also, but that sort of thing, in a projectile shooting sport, I worry about ribbon gets caught and you launch the projectile down range with ribbon and god knows what stays with it.


Yeah, I see some dangley bits as well but no, actually stuff doesn't get caught in the string. That said, I did once have my hat on with the lace you'd use to keep it from blowing off you head around my throat. Well, that did get caught in the string. I don't do that any more. I tuck it up under the hat.


----------



## leleok

can anyone provide the 2016 information for reference?


----------



## limbwalker

Looks like both the gold medalists were shooting W&W, Lisa Unruh was shooting a Hoyt GMX and "ILF" Quattro limbs while Ki Bo-Bae shot W&W.

On the boys side, Ku shot W&W, JC and Brady were shooting Hoyt Formula bows.


----------



## droy

Fivics made a showing - Titan Risers? and Limbs for Italy (Nespoli) and Sweden.


----------



## limbwalker

Curious what other companies besides W&W and Hoyt sponsor full-time professional archers. Sounds like Fivics (Nespoli). Any others? MK Korea? Samick used to dominate the Olympics (particularly the Korean women). Pity they fell apart.


----------



## cekkmt

I think the Kim Woo Jin setup (MK Veracities + GMX) was the most common MK Korea gear. Some of the Russians were using the MK Alphas, but those are the only MK risers I remember seeing. I have a spreadsheet for this Olympics but it isn't complete.


----------



## GoldArcher403

limbwalker said:


> Curious what other companies besides W&W and Hoyt sponsor full-time professional archers. Sounds like Fivics (Nespoli). Any others? MK Korea? Samick used to dominate the Olympics (particularly the Korean women). Pity they fell apart.


Uukha is up and coming a finally sponsoring some athletes. Not very many and they are not pro shooters but I know a young lady on JDT is sponsored by them. I met a bowman at SoCal this year who was as well. 12 years old and they send him free stuff


----------



## >--gt-->

Ki Bo Bae used a Hoyt GMX riser.

All of the medal winners, both team and individual, used Easton X10 arrows.


----------



## huckduck

I think i saw a couple of MK Alpha risers


----------



## Vittorio

Not made a real survey about risers/limbs in Rio, but outside Hoyt/Hoyt, Hoyt/W&W, W&W/W&W domination, I have seen at least 4 Fivics/Fivics, 2 PSE/PSE, 2 Hoyt/MK, one MK/W&W and of course 1 Gillo/W&W :wink:
May be I missed some few other combinations. But surely no Uukka, no Fiberbow, no Best, no Spigarelli, no Smartriser, no Dynamic Sign, no Border, no KG, no SF, and definetly no more Samick.


----------



## limbwalker

>--gt--> said:


> Ki Bo Bae used a Hoyt GMX riser.


Good catch. That GMX/W&W limb combo just won't die...



> All of the medal winners, both team and individual, used Easton X10 arrows.


We knew that was coming.


----------



## Zombie_Feynman

limbwalker said:


> Good catch. That GMX/W&W limb combo just won't die...


One interesting thing about that combo is that the people using it are unlikely to be sponsored by either Hoyt or w&w, which means they are using it because they like it. And at least ki Bo bae is using it since around 2011, which is not the case with sponsored archers that have to used the latest and greatest. I remember Brady going back to the formula Rx a few times, so I wonder what he's would be using it he wasn't sponsored.

The only change I saw in Ki Bo Bae is that she changed from a hoyt rest to a shibuya. Not bad for four years.


----------



## bobnikon

Zombie_Feynman said:


> One interesting thing about that combo is that the people using it are unlikely to be sponsored by either Hoyt or w&w, which means they are using it because they like it. And at least ki Bo bae is using it since around 2011, which is not the case with sponsored archers that have to used the latest and greatest. *I remember Brady going back to the formula Rx a few times, so I wonder what he's would be using it he wasn't sponsored.*
> 
> The only change I saw in Ki Bo Bae is that she changed from a hoyt rest to a shibuya. Not bad for four years.


I don't think his prodigy is too far off that with some of the mods he has made. Solid tiller bolts for sure, and I didn't note it this time, but looked like he had fiddled with the dowel in the past as well. So, basically the vera-tune plate, which I think is a good piece of gear, but all the rest may have been reverted at various times.


----------



## GoldArcher403

Vittorio said:


> no Fiberbow.


I know Fiberbow has made appearances with para-shooters. I couldn't tell you her name but I saw a woman in the para Olympic matches using fiberbow and she shot pretty well. Correct me if 'm wrong but I think Fiberbow designed their products with disabled shooters in mind.


----------



## limbwalker

> I remember Brady going back to the formula Rx a few times, so I wonder what he's would be using it he wasn't sponsored.


He'd be using a Mathews TR-7, that's what.



> One interesting thing about that combo is that the people using it are unlikely to be sponsored by either Hoyt or w&w, which means they are using it because they like it.


What's not to like? That GMX is one of the all-time best risers ever made, and the W&W limbs are as good as it gets. I'd say she's a smart young lady.


----------



## Mark Talley

Cool thread - puts high-end gear in perspective.


----------



## droy

Vittorio,

You looked to be having a nice time (lots of smiles) when you were in the Coaches box on that one match last week.

Keep up the good work.

Best Regards!


----------



## John_K

rjbishop said:


> I know Fiberbow has made appearances with para-shooters. I couldn't tell you her name but I saw a woman in the para Olympic matches using fiberbow and she shot pretty well. Correct me if 'm wrong but I think Fiberbow designed their products with disabled shooters in mind.


That would be Kate Murray of Team GB. Last I saw a couple of years ago, she was shooting a Fibrebow riser with Border limbs, custom painted with a Scottish flag design.

I heard a rumour that she'd been deselected after changes to the classification rules for Paralympic archers. I hope it's not true.


----------



## Vittorio

Fiberbow 6.3 riser has won the individual Gold medal in London 2012 Paralympic Games with Oscar De Pellegrin and other para-archers were also using it in London. 

Fiberbow 6.9 riser is around in competitions in Italy since some months already and for sure some members of the Italian team will use it during Rio Paralympic Games.
Fiberbow risers remain unchallenged if there is a need or a preference for extreme lightness. New 6.9 TX mass weight is down to 620 grams only, for instance, and as of the difficulty of para archers to rise the bow arm keeping a reasonable balance on the wheelchair, a light riser helps them a lot. Technical and practical choice, mainly.


----------



## Vittorio

Zombie_Feynman said:


> One interesting thing about that combo is that the people using it are unlikely to be sponsored by either Hoyt or w&w, which means they are using it because they like it.


Not exactly, sometime archers are sponsored by different companies for limbs and for riser. My archer, Renè Kouassi, got two pairs of W&W limbs in sponsorship even if he was using a "different" riser.


----------



## >--gt-->

Perhaps someone can start a thread on Paralympic equipment. This is about Olympic Games equipment.


----------



## limbwalker

>--gt--> said:


> Perhaps someone can start a thread on Paralympic equipment. This is about Olympic Games equipment.


Ouch. That's kinda insensitive even for you, don't you think?


----------



## >--gt-->

limbwalker said:


> Ouch. That's kinda insensitive even for you, don't you think?


Pretty sure I've done a lot more to personally help various Paralympians than you, sparky.

Now, do try to stay on topic.


----------



## limbwalker

>--gt--> said:


> Pretty sure I've done a lot more to personally help various Paralympians than you, sparky.
> 
> Now, do try to stay on topic.


Personally? As in, out of your own pocket? LOL. Doing your job to send equipment that doesn't cost you a dime to para-athletes... oh the sacrifice. 

Oh well. Believe what you will. You're a gold medalist at that event.


----------



## theminoritydude

Every, single, time.......

Someone needs to come to terms with facts, and stop the finger pointing before every well-meaning post descends into some kind of verbal slugfest.

Especially when the individual in question needs the forum more than the forum needs him.


----------



## theminoritydude

That's right. No one is indispensable to a forum. But it may not be the same vice-versa.


----------



## limbwalker

theminoritydude said:


> Every, single, time.......
> 
> Someone needs to come to terms with facts, and stop the finger pointing before every well-meaning post descends into some kind of verbal slugfest.
> 
> Especially when the individual in question needs the forum more than the forum needs him.


I agree. Let's stick with the facts. Both Gold medalists used W&W bows - aka antiquated "ILF" technology.


----------



## limbwalker

So this topic leaves me wondering "what's next?" 

This Olympics saw two golds going to a relatively old technology in ILF risers, but they were also all-carbon risers. Do we see Hoyt finally come out with a carbon riser for Tokyo?

Since by now the "formula" theory has not proven itself to be measurably superior, what then is the next attempt to woo the market? Back to the old Variable concept? Back to the basics?

Is there anything new under the sun to be found?

My guess is full-carbon limbs are the next area of exploration. But that's just a guess.


----------



## AR720

limbwalker said:


> So this topic leaves me wondering "what's next?"
> 
> This Olympics saw two golds going to a relatively old technology in ILF risers, but they were also all-carbon risers. Do we see Hoyt finally come out with a carbon riser for Tokyo?
> 
> Since by now the "formula" theory has not proven itself to be measurably superior, what then is the next attempt to woo the market? Back to the old Variable concept? Back to the basics?
> 
> Is there anything new under the sun to be found?
> 
> My guess is full-carbon limbs are the next area of exploration. But that's just a guess.


Among the six members of the Korean team...

Only Choi Misun used a carbon riser - W&W Inno CXT

Ki Bo Bae, Kim Woojin, Lee Seungyun all used Hoyt GMX risers - Aluminum.

The two gold medal winners - Chang Hyejin and Ku Bonchan - used W&W Inno AXT risers - Aluminum.

Among the individual medalists - none of them used a carbon riser.


----------



## mdyan

I love the fact that Ki Bo Bae used almost the exact same bow as she did four years ago (unsure about draw weight though).


----------



## MartinOttosson

I think the lesson is once again: 

1. You can use any of the top level gear as long as you feel confident in what you shoot with. 
2. If you find a a good, proven tune and a bow that gives you the amount and type of shot feedback that you like, you can stay with that bow. 
3. If you are no gear explorer, just get a GMX and a set of W&W Innos and work with that. 

Nothing have changed in the last four years 

Carbon or Alu is a matter of personal preference and not about performance. Many carbon risers reduce the direct feel of the shot quite a bit, which some like and some don´t. It would be interesting to see a carbon offering from Hoyt. Since they have the technology available on the compound side, the step can´t be huge atleast technically.


----------



## Vittorio

First carbon riser ever made was a TD4 copy made in URSS and used by Vladimir Esheev for some years in the 80's. Then other tentives came to the market during the years, but basic problem for (real) carbon risers is that they need a lot of manual work by skilleld workers to be made properly. It means added cost. And at the end, between a 1.3 kg Carbon riser and 1.3 kg aluminium riser, choice is based on personal feeling (and cosmetic) rather than on performance. Different matter if Carbon means also ultra light , as already mentioned.
ILF, I think is time to define a real standard for it. I have had some interesting discussion about this in Rio, and for sure something will come out in near future, at least from Italian makers.


----------



## limbwalker

AR720 said:


> The two gold medal winners - Chang Hyejin and Ku Bonchan - used W&W Inno AXT risers - Aluminum.


Thanks for the correction. Looked like their carbon risers from what I could see but I've not kept track of W&W's risers of late.



> If you are no gear explorer, just get a GMX and a set of W&W Innos and work with that.
> 
> Nothing have changed in the last four years


I think more than four. Esp. in the riser dept. Hoyt's limbs have obviously gotten better since the unfortunate G3's (about when we started to notice the Hoyt riser/W&W limb phenomenon). 

I'm guessing the most potential for advancement is in the full-carbon limbs, mostly due to the shapes they can create within the limb cross section. I saw what O.L. Adcock's "ACS" limb cross section did for his longbows first hand, and now his former business partner John Havard has worked with the boys at Dryad to put that cross section into a recurve limb. I'm thinking it would be even easier to create with an all-carbon limb. Surely one of the major manufacturers has to at least try that.

Vittorio, it would be great if a true standard arose for ILF. Finally.


----------



## John_K

All carbon limbs - that is limbs with only carbon laminates to power them, and no glass - have been around for a while. It'll be interesting to see whether a major manufacturer follows where a small-scale bowyer led the way. Again.


----------



## limbwalker

John_K said:


> All carbon limbs - that is limbs with only carbon laminates to power them, and no glass - have been around for a while. It'll be interesting to see whether a major manufacturer follows where a small-scale bowyer led the way. Again.


So far, it appears Ukka is the only company that's been able to make them work on a larger scale. Many small-scale bowyers have been laying up all-carbon limbs for quite some time now.


----------



## Vittorio

Limbs with no Glass fiber outside are around since some years from different makers (first was W&W) already. Full carbon (no other materials even for the core) are from UUkka only at present, in my knowledge.


----------



## limbwalker

Commercially, yes probably W&W. But small-scale - many bowyers have made limbs without fiberglass since the 90's.


----------



## zal

Vittorio said:


> Limbs with no Glass fiber outside are around since some years from different makers (first was W&W) already. Full carbon (no other materials even for the core) are from UUkka only at present, in my knowledge.


We are getting well off-topic but do you, or anyone else, remember if Yamaha molded glass limbs (the ones with the very deep groove) had only single material? I was told, by a fairly unreliable source, that Uukha's molding process is fairly similar to what Yamaha copied from their motorcycle (iirc) division. I think type-H limbs that came with some trade some years back were molded glass, but they were so short and heavy that I gave them to a friend, who subsequently broke and discarded them, so can't check.


----------



## taz00

Vittorio said:


> ILF, I think is time to define a real standard for it. I have had some interesting discussion about this in Rio, and for sure something will come out in near future, at least from Italian makers.


This is really interesting.
So let's say I buy now a Gillo G1 riser before this standard is in force. Could the riser become up to date with that new standard (in case it is not already) with the use of a set of new dovetail pockets and/or tiller bolts?


----------



## Vittorio

taz00 said:


> This is really interesting.
> So let's say I buy now a Gillo G1 riser before this standard is in force. Could the riser become up to date with that new standard (in case it is not already) with the use of a set of new dovetail pockets and/or tiller bolts?


This i really out of topic now ... and too early to comment about ...


----------



## Azzurri

I thought the predominant limb set I saw in the later rounds was the Hoyt Quattros, some W&W, sprinkling of Fivics and MK. I have been interested in trying an Uukha set but noticed no one used any, not even the higher end stuff. I'm gonna be me but I did wonder if when 128 top archers don't go that direction if it reflects something.

I don't have a strong ability to tell apart the "forged-style" risers with cutouts, but it looked to me like that was the predominant style. I didn't see a ton of the Hoyt ones with the buttresses. I don't know which ones are carbon or aluminum. I have a Fiberbow and did notice zip of those. It was telling enough I took out my Forged Plus for a week of indoor practice on a "128 Olympians can't all be wrong" theory. But I found I still prefer the Fiberbow indoors (and prefer the Forged outside). I know FB's lightness makes it a tougher thing to weight down enough to not leave it twitchy.

I have a Dual Click and found it interesting it looked like the gold medal RW had one. Most everyone else had the enclosed Ultima or similar style sights. But if you can win a gold medal with a Dual Click then all you really need is a slide sight.

I will probably try Unruh's "string in the stab weight" windfinder if/when I go back outdoors. Wind feel is important but I think an actual indicator would be helpful, just like you could tell wind from the sail action on my Laser but it helped to have a wind arrow on the mast. I was getting fooled sometimes last year when it was a shifty tail or head wind cutting across perpendicular.


----------



## chrstphr

Azzurri said:


> I will probably try Unruh's "string in the stab weight" windfinder if/when I go back outdoors. Wind feel is important but I think an actual indicator would be helpful, just like you could tell wind from the sail action on my Laser but it helped to have a wind arrow on the mast. I was getting fooled sometimes last year when it was a shifty tail or head wind cutting across perpendicular.


makes no differene what the wind is doing at the end of your stab. The bow has shot the strongest there and the arrow is at its fastest. What is more important is what is the wind doing at the top of the arc, and what is the wind doing at the target as the arrow is losing momentum and speed and starting to fall. 

I would agree that i think that started as a joke, and people copied it. 

Chris


----------



## midwayarcherywi

Yarn at the end of the stab has been around a loooooong time. Unruh did not start it, she copied it. Whether it is useful is up for debate, but anything that makes one mindful of a potential wind shift isn't a bad thing.


----------



## toj

I think we're a long way from the next big thing that sees a jump in score, not that some won't try to claim it differently. 

All of the top end stuff is capable of Olympic titles in the right hands.

Whilst Vittorio insists no archer would take a sponsorship deal that costs them points i'd be willing to bet several took deals knowing it would make no difference to anything other than their bank account. 

Their only preference being the thing that keeps them shooting for longest.

There maybe differences between the latest formula hoyt (complete with game changing stelth shots) and the ageing win win/fivics/mk etc wood cored ilf offering but i doubt it's enough for anybody to notice.

Even carbon risers and foam cored limbs haven't rocked the world away from what is now the decades old favourite set up of a takedown bow.

Buy what floats your boat because i recon just liking the colour is as much of an advantage as anything else, and all the evidence supports it.


----------



## limbwalker

> Whilst Vittorio insists no archer would take a sponsorship deal that costs them points i'd be willing to bet several took deals knowing it would make no difference to anything other than their bank account.
> 
> Their only preference being the thing that keeps them shooting for longest.


This.


----------



## zal

In basic terms bow sponsorship goes like this (feel free to correct me if you see it otherwise):

- If you are very good, or at their target market, you have a chance to do a deal with Hoyt, which can sometimes have more than just bows thrown into it. You pretty much have to use their newest stuff.
- Or, if not, you nudge the W&W rep at any major event and present your case, which might mean a two bows / year deal (pretty much latest models, or from very few options), plus rarely some contingency stuff.
- Or, your national association / training group has struck a blanket deal with the two above, which might mean anything from two bows / year for best archers in target markets down to some money off from your purchases from those specific manufacturers, and often their reps presenting new stuff to try at training camps etc. (most minor European/Far-Eastern associations).
- Or your national association buys stuff in bulk, and you pick from a pool of equipment (pretty much the Korean model).
- Or you luck out and meet the right person who deals and represents Fivics / any other (non-W&W or Hoyt), usually far-eastern manufacturer in Europe / major events and you get some kind of a deal.
- Or you meet someone at events who works for any accessory manufacturer and you pick up bits from here to there.
- Finally, in many cases, archers who do not compete constantly or only target Olympics pay for most of their stuff.

Arrow deals are a bit different, as there is great value for Easton to have a natural monopoly.

There isn't much room for minor manufacturers to stand out. You either have to have a network of people representing you, or deal with in bulk, or really back someone and hope he comes good.


----------



## RMBX10

toj said:


> Buy what floats your boat because i recon just liking the colour is as much of an advantage as anything else, and all the evidence supports it.


This X 1000!

In the cycling community the common response to, "how do I make my bike lighter?" is "lose weight." Similarly, the response to "how do I get faster?" is "ride more." The same concept applies to archery. Practice will improve the scores of 98% of us more than any marginal improvement in equipment.


----------



## Zombie_Feynman

The standardization of ILF that Vittorio mentioned could really be the next great thing, not in term of scores but in convenience. It would be great if it included not only the Italian manufacturers but also the Koreans. 

I hope this is a first step. There are other things which would benefit from a standard. Grips, for example.


----------



## theminoritydude

Zombie_Feynman said:


> There are other things which would benefit from a standard. Grips, for example.


That's never going to happen.


----------



## huckduck

Zombie_Feynman said:


> The standardization of ILF that Vittorio mentioned could really be the next great thing, not in term of scores but in convenience. It would be great if it included not only the Italian manufacturers but also the Koreans.
> 
> I hope this is a first step. There are other things which would benefit from a standard. Grips, for example.


i hope you're either referring to a riser standard for grip mounts, and not actual grips


----------



## caspian

toj said:


> Whilst Vittorio insists no archer would take a sponsorship deal that costs them points i'd be willing to bet several took deals knowing it would make no difference to anything other than their bank account.


sure, why not? I don't know we would expect a professional athlete to behave any different to anyone else. I changed employers, in the same role, a few years ago for more money too. nobody would blink at the idea.


----------



## toj

The point isn't that they shouldn't, it's simply an example of how little performance difference exsists it equipment these days.


----------



## Zombie_Feynman

huckduck said:


> i hope you're either referring to a riser standard for grip mounts, and not actual grips


Of course. Just as ILF is an standard for limb fittings, not for limbs.


----------



## taz00

I found this table on the web. It shows all the equipment used in Rio 2016. May contain a few errors but is interesting nonetheless.

http://rio2016.arcz.fr/


----------



## Mark Talley

This is super. Thanks.


----------



## midwayarcherywi

Interesting to note the sometimes maligned on this forum, Shibuya rest, was by far the most popular choice of Olympians. And despite a bunch of new entrants into the Mylar vane market, Spin Wings were still dominant. On a bit of a nostalgic note, Axcel and Shibuya were the dominant sights, with Sureloc barely present.


----------



## RMBX10

midwayarcherywi said:


> Interesting to note the sometimes maligned on this forum, Shibuya rest, was by far the most popular choice of Olympians. And despite a bunch of new entrants into the Mylar vane market, Spin Wings were still dominant. On a bit of a nostalgic note, Axcel and Shibuya were the dominant sights, with Sureloc barely present.


The Sure-Loc was and still is a great site. In the years after Steve passed away (he was a great guy, I shared a rental house with him at NFAA nationals once) Sure Loc was eventually sold to another company and the marketing seems to have taken a down turn.


----------



## limbwalker

Still use my 13 year-old Sure-Loc "Athens" edition sights that Steve presented to me before the games. They still work perfectly. Steve is dearly missed.


----------



## Mengtian

The only thing that list for me is to reaffirm that the equipment does not make a great archer, (since I have the same set up as Ki Bo Bae minus the X10's and limbs...and here cute smile) it is the ability and dedication by the individual that makes them great. As a hockey coach parents wanted to bu their 7 year old kids 200 dollar sticks because they thought it would make them the next Wayne Gretsky....it does not. 

It is a good reference for what to look at.


----------



## limbwalker

Remarkable that there are no Samicks on that list. My how times have changed. 

I'm a bit suspicious of that many rests being labeled as "Shibuya." Perhaps that many were indeed the Shibuya rest, but I wonder if there were a number of magnetic "flipper" arm style rests that were counted as Shibuya by mistake. If not, that's pretty dominant. I'm still not a big fan of that rest (had too many issues with the ones I had, and had to repair too many for students) but apparently they are working well for these Olympians. Always nice to see a few $2.50 Hoyt Super Rests in there for good measure.


----------



## limbwalker

Mengtian said:


> The only thing that list for me is to reaffirm that the equipment does not make a great archer, (since I have the same set up as Ki Bo Bae minus the X10's and limbs...and here cute smile) it is the ability and dedication by the individual that makes them great. As a hockey coach parents wanted to bu their 7 year old kids 200 dollar sticks because they thought it would make them the next Wayne Gretsky....it does not.
> 
> It is a good reference for what to look at.


With all due respect to hockey fans, equipment plays a little big bigger role in archery than it does in hockey. But your point is still valid - lots of ways to shoot world class scores. That much is obvious.


----------



## zal

IMO (and quite few seem to agree with me) quality of Sure-Loc lately hasn't been what it used to be. So if you want an aluminium, U.S. made sight, you choose between it and Axcel, if you don't, you go with Shibuya.

Shibuya rest doesn't surprise me one bit, top archers use what works and after few early hiccups, I think it really is the benchmark. Plus you can't get the old Ukrainian "Igor" rests anymore, so alternatives are pretty limited unless you go with Super rest.


----------



## >--gt-->

RMBX10 said:


> The Sure-Loc was and still is a great site. In the years after Steve passed away (he was a great guy, I shared a rental house with him at NFAA nationals once) Sure Loc was eventually sold to another company and the marketing seems to have taken a down turn.


Steve was a stubborn perfectionist who hated to see people "improve" on his products unless he thoroughly tested the improvements first. I machined the first isogrid extension on a Sureloc for Jay Barrs in 1992 and I recall Steve was so angry that his wife had to calm him down. A few hours later we were trading drawings and ideas for further improvement.

Of course they were producing their own a few months later- after he was satisfied it worked well enough. He was a good friend and a great asset to the sport.

I disagree that today's Sureloc meets the standards that Steve set when he popularized the product, and I believe that is actually the real reason the product has faded from the top level scene in recurve.


----------



## kshet26

I'm interested in the pretty clean split of men using Axcel Achieve vs the women using Shibuya Ultima.


----------



## Mengtian

limbwalker said:


> With all due respect to hockey fans, equipment plays a little big bigger role in archery than it does in hockey. But your point is still valid - lots of ways to shoot world class scores. That much is obvious.


The example of the sticks was that (for those that do not play hockey) is that a 6 year old does not have the strength to flex a composite stick which is one of the reasons for them (increase torque and puck speed). Simply put: A wooden stick does the same thing as a 300 dollar stick for a 6 year old.

I thought you would like this image since he has it flexed enough to be used as a long bow!


----------



## Vittorio

limbwalker said:


> Remarkable that there are no Samicks on that list. My how times have changed.
> 
> I'm a bit suspicious of that many rests being labeled as "Shibuya." Perhaps that many were indeed the Shibuya rest, but I wonder if there were a number of magnetic "flipper" arm style rests that were counted as Shibuya by mistake. If not, that's pretty dominant. I'm still not a big fan of that rest (had too many issues with the ones I had, and had to repair too many for students) but apparently they are working well for these Olympians. Always nice to see a few $2.50 Hoyt Super Rests in there for good measure.


John, nowdays Samick ---> MK, don't forget ... But also Kaya has disappeared from London to Rio .... 

For rests, for sure the Shibuya was dominant, but author admits that some minor mistakes are possible in the list. I have also to add that all archers had 2 bows, and several times the second bow had different accessories or was totally different from the first one. For instance, I know that Rene' Kouassi had a Beiter plunger on his bow used in the Sambodoromo, not a W&W plunger, but the W&W plunger was anyway on his second bow, and also stabilizers were different on it. And the boy from Lybia has used a W&W bow in competiton, but second bow was an Hoyt . Anyhow, I think it was inpossible to make a perfect survey, what has been done and published is already great.


----------



## Vittorio

For those that can read French, this is the link to the discussion that first linked the tables.

http://www.integralsport.com/viewtopic.php?t=31330&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0


----------



## Azzurri

Mengtian said:


> The only thing that list for me is to reaffirm that the equipment does not make a great archer, (since I have the same set up as Ki Bo Bae minus the X10's and limbs...and here cute smile) it is the ability and dedication by the individual that makes them great. As a hockey coach parents wanted to bu their 7 year old kids 200 dollar sticks because they thought it would make them the next Wayne Gretsky....it does not.
> 
> It is a good reference for what to look at.


The winning RW had a dual click, I noticed that just watching.

My re-write of this would be that once you achieve a decent level of quality it's the archer more than the equipment. My first year I had a trampoliney SF stock rest and an SF sight with a hand tightened set screw and would shoot a NFAA 3 that I thought was solid and notice the aperture was drooping. But once you get past a quality threshold to reliability, an expert may be able to tweak more out of it but the equipment's not costing you points.

And there is plenty of stuff like the Hoyt rest that is solid and cheap.


----------



## limbwalker

That "cheap" Shibuya dual-click, like the Hoyt Super Rest, just keeps on winning at the world level. Pretty interesting to see how much people are willing to spend on equipment that isn't necessarily proven to be better.


----------



## zal

limbwalker said:


> That "cheap" Shibuya dual-click, like the Hoyt Super Rest, just keeps on winning at the world level. Pretty interesting to see how much people are willing to spend on equipment that isn't necessarily proven to be better.


Some bored stat guy could take a look into how many medals has dual-click in all its variations (AR's, RX's etc.) won. I think it's pretty up there, probably with Beiter Plunger, X10 arrows and Spin Wings, as the most successful equipment on Olympic bows.

My mates have still loads of AR-10's, original dual clicks etc., and I don't really remember seeing even one broken from use (misuse, yes). Even my spare sight has seen some very respectable mileage, considering I got it 2nd hand around 2005.


----------



## >--gt-->

Vittorio said:


> For those that can read French, this is the link to the discussion that first linked the tables.
> 
> http://www.integralsport.com/viewtopic.php?t=31330&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0


I wouldn't advise taking it (the spreadsheet) too seriously. It's not horrible, but there are glaring errors throughout.


----------



## bobnikon

>--gt--> said:


> I wouldn't advise taking it (the spreadsheet) too seriously. It's not horrible, but there are glaring errors throughout.


What would be really cool would be if you could elucidate your point. That would be a helpful and interesting contribution.


----------



## Mark Talley

One of the guys in Vittorio's link to the French site pointed out that the predominance of a couple of brands was likely due to sponsorship and not necessarily indicative of individual preferences.


----------



## Rylando

Mark Talley said:


> One of the guys in Vittorio's link to the French site pointed out that the predominance of a couple of brands was likely due to sponsorship and not necessarily indicative of individual preferences.


That almost goes without saying, at least to me. You're sponsored by Hoyt, I'd assume you'd be shooting a Hoyt riser. 
However to me it seems like you're not gonna shoot the Hoyt super rest over another option just because Hoyt gives you a free $2.50 rest. It has to perform well. Same with the Shibuya rest, it obviously performs well.


----------



## Mark Talley

I guess I was reflecting on the advice not to take the list too seriously, as in taking it at face value.


----------



## >--gt-->

I imagine many of you would be shocked to learn just how few Olympic archers are actually sponsored by equipment manufacturers.


----------



## bobnikon

>--gt--> said:


> I imagine many of you would be shocked to learn just how few Olympic archers are actually sponsored by equipment manufacturers.


See post 109.

You and TMD must have been separated at birth man.


----------



## Vittorio

Simple consideration based on equipments at Olympic games:

The disappearnce of the 4 distance FITA round (now 1440 round) and all archers shooting at one distance only, has clearly generated a stop in development of archery equipments. 
- risers, basic design of the winning ones is approximately 30 years old 
- limbs winning, around 12 years for the no fiber technology 
- arrows, around 20 years
- plunger, around 25 years
- sight, 25 years
- vanes, >30 Years? 

As the challenge is now to hit center at a distance that everyone can reach down to much less than 30#, real developments in bows and arrows has stopped since years. More or less, since 1995 when it become forecastable that 90 mt was going to die.
Challenge before was to get to 90 mt as fast as possible and more precisily as possible, then the developmnt of fasetr limbs, lighter arrows, and so on. 
Now there is no need anymore for that, so everything is more back to the human side than to the equipments side. 
An example over all: sights. They do not need anymore to have a real vertical bar extremely precise in parallelism to the string and in micro adjutments over the entire lenght, as distances are 2 only, one for indoor and one for outdoor, and you only need very small adjustments at each distance. Vertical bar as intended up to now is still needed in these days by field archers only. 
All items are influenced and flattened in performancies since years by the lack of need of technological development. In a natural situation, now the Olympic Games distance had to be 90 mt, and the compound distance 100 mt, to really see in the market new really more advanced products than in the past. 
If situation remains stable in rules, we can easily forecast the disappearance of many small (and today big too) manufacturers and the market taken over by some China giant in very few years. No need for new technologies only means that production cost wil be the dominating factor, only. IMHO.


----------



## toj

>--gt--> said:


> I imagine many of you would be shocked to learn just how few Olympic archers are actually sponsored by equipment manufacturers.


You don't need an actual sponsorship contract to be given free stuff, and I'd be surprised (and disappointed ) to learn an Olympic archer paid for any of their gear.
Especially in an Olympic year.


----------



## Vittorio

toj said:


> You don't need an actual sponsorship contract to be given free stuff, and I'd be surprised (and disappointed ) to learn an Olympic archer paid for any of their gear.
> Especially in an Olympic year.


I know some of them that paid using their own money, and majority of federations paid shooting gear for their archers. Then of course all archers are begging around to get free materials, and some of them can get some, not all. Real sponsorship, "A" grade (continegncy money from manufacturers + full updated equipments) is really very very limited in number to the really top of the world ranking. It is still a very poor sport, very poor....


----------



## zal

I'll just lift this up. I've seen people go to Olympics with borrowed equipment, so it's not all so rosy people think. I've only been involved in couple of rungs in the hierarchy below (mostly on the begging side), but what I have seen, true sponsorship deals are pretty rare. Free bow or two is far yet from a deal that could give an archer a living.



zal said:


> - If you are very good, or at their target market, you have a chance to do a deal with Hoyt, which can sometimes have more than just bows thrown into it. You pretty much have to use their newest stuff.
> - Or, if not, you nudge the W&W rep at any major event and present your case, which might mean a two bows / year deal (pretty much latest models, or from very few options), plus rarely some contingency stuff.
> - Or, your national association / training group has struck a blanket deal with the two above, which might mean anything from two bows / year for best archers in target markets down to some money off from your purchases from those specific manufacturers, and often their reps presenting new stuff to try at training camps etc. (most minor European/Far-Eastern associations).
> - Or your national association buys stuff in bulk, and you pick from a pool of equipment (pretty much the Korean model).
> - Or you luck out and meet the right person who deals and represents Fivics / any other (non-W&W or Hoyt), usually far-eastern manufacturer in Europe / major events and you get some kind of a deal.
> - Or you meet someone at events who works for any accessory manufacturer and you pick up bits from here to there.
> - Finally, in many cases, archers who do not compete constantly or only target Olympics pay for most of their stuff.


----------



## Elivanes

taz00 said:


> I found this table on the web. It shows all the equipment used in Rio 2016. May contain a few errors but is interesting nonetheless.
> 
> http://rio2016.arcz.fr/


Goodmorning to everyone,
My name is Maurizio and I'm the producer of Elivanes - I wrote to Maxime Zopfmann and pointed out that there are some errors regarding the vanes; in my case the athletes who used to Elivanes in Rio2016 were 17 and some others have joined the Elivanes family immediately after the Olympic Games.
Unfortunately in this Olympics we don’t have reported prestigious medals like those of London 2012 (Gold Michele Frangilli and Mauro Nespoli Team, Silver individual Aida Roman) but for a small company like ours the participation numbers are very important and that's the reason why I asked to update the file information on the materials used by the archers.
These were our ProStaff in Rio2016
1-Nespoli Mauro 
2-Thamwong Wittaya 
3-Oliveira Bernardo 
4-Plihon Pierre 
5-Rezende Xavier Daniel 
6-Daniel Lucas 
7-Pila Andres 
8-Piippo Samuli 
9-Elder Robert 
10-Balaz Boris 
11-Dos Santos Ane Marcelle 
12-Mandia Claudia 
13-Sanchez Natalia 
14-Kuoppa Taru 
15-Rendon Ana Maria 
16-Canetta Marina 
17-Aguirre Carolina 

This is only just for correct information – thanks and have nice day to all

Maurizio


----------



## taz00

Thank you for providing this information.


----------



## limbwalker

>--gt--> said:


> I imagine many of you would be shocked to learn just how few Olympic archers are actually sponsored by equipment manufacturers.


Yet another generous contribution. 

As if even you know the %. LOL. Fact is, nobody knows how many archers are "actually sponsored" George because it's a term whose definition is different to everyone.


----------



## theminoritydude

"Equipment Manufacturers."


----------



## theminoritydude

Vittorio said:


> I know some of them that paid using their own money, and majority of federations paid shooting gear for their archers. Then of course all archers are begging around to get free materials, and some of them can get some, not all. Real sponsorship, "A" grade (continegncy money from manufacturers + full updated equipments) is really very very limited in number to the really top of the world ranking. It is still a very poor sport, very poor....


It's nice to know that in spite of the lack of big sponsorships, so many still go to great lengths to attempt to defeat each other.


----------



## Mark Talley

>--gt--> said:


> I imagine many of you would be shocked to learn just how few Olympic archers are actually sponsored by equipment manufacturers.


I defer completely to your knowledge of the archery world and I'm not spinning that in the least, so of the top 10 finishers of men and women, what percentage would you think bought their own equipment out of pocket vs those who had the bulk of their equipment provided by either commercial interests or government supported sports organizations? If archers at this level can attain the same scores with a wide variety of brands, is the dominance of a couple of brands the result of qualitative superiority or disproportionate marketing budgets?


----------



## Azzurri

When you have people from Tonga and Fiji and other developing countries shooting Quattro limbs and X10 arrows (as well as other expensive equipment, thousands to compose one bow), I wonder if certain NOC/WA paid for it or vendors gave them out. I know X10s are a popular arrow choice but that Quattros were so ubiquitous at their price point even for competitors from poorer countries I had to wonder whether they were offered out.

I am sure people have competed and could compete well with personal/borrowed stuff. It would actually make more sense to me to show up with your "old shoe" and not be de-bugging new stuff at a huge event. But I am also sure that they were handing out goodie bags to the athletes with smartphones and that when I would watch track you'd see people dotted up and down the lanes with similar shoes in the same colors from the big shoe companies. So with just 64 archers in each sex and some already probably with their equipment, I wouldn't be surprised if they went down the list of non-sponsored, non-already-bought archers and offered equipment. It's a big audience and you can see from this thread that for good or ill we watched what they used.

FWIW in some of the sailing events they don't bring their whole boat, Laser for example lends everyone in the field a new hull and mast and a few other things, they bring sails and ropes and rigging. It would actually be interesting to see an Olympics where everyone had identical kit. Here's your equipment, tune it, we shoot for score in 3 days.


----------



## Rylando

Azzurri said:


> It would actually be interesting to see an Olympics where everyone had identical kit. Here's your equipment, tune it, we shoot for score in 3 days.


That's a really interesting idea!


----------



## limbwalker

Mark Talley said:


> If archers at this level can attain the same scores with a wide variety of brands, is the dominance of a couple of brands the result of qualitative superiority or disproportionate marketing budgets?


Answer is, it's some of both. All things being equal (and in many cases, they are with risers and limbs, sights, and even arrows now) the full time archers will choose whichever one their coach hands them (did anyone realize we have coaches who are "sponsored"? We do) or whichever one they think will provide the greatest long-term income stream. They gotta pay the bills somehow.


----------



## limbwalker

And I understand the fascination with trying to figure out who is "sponsored" and who is not, how much are they getting, how biased are they because of what they are getting, etc...

But at the end of the day, this topic is discussed far too much. Why? Because we're not talking about $100K pieces of equipment that are prohibitively expensive without a sponsor. We're talking about gear that pretty much anyone with a decent job can afford, esp. if they are already making the kind of commitment to the sport that is in line with the quality of equipment they are buying. So, IMO it really doesn't matter that much who is or who isn't "sponsored." It doesn't make them better archers. But in some cases, it could make them worse. 

Most people, including a lot of full time professional archers, are better off without sponsors. But you sure couldn't tell that by the amount of time most folks spend talking about sponsorships.


----------



## Mark Talley

I think it's great archers are supported and I understand the mechanics of sponsorship. I'm just guessing but I would think sponsorship at that level amounted to more than just bow and arrows.

I do wonder whether Hoyt and, to a lesser extent, W&W are able to marginalize other equally good or possibly better or more innovative companies by stacking the podiums/podia. Studying these equipment lists skews people's thinking whether they think the archers are shooting what they prefer or just carrying the sponsor's flag. The fact that the archers placed with the equipment listed is inarguable. That there's no Uukha on the list will impact their sales, just as having 6 out of the top 10 holding Hoyts will affect theirs. In any event, it's an interesting discussion.


----------



## zal

You need to have certain market position and volume to benefit from sponsorships, or take a huge gamble, which usually doesn't pay off. Just as any revenue generation model in marketing strategy of any company. Hoyt and W&W are big enough so it doesn't matter if they throw couple of dozen free bows around and offer some other rewards, but like Vittorio said earlier, that would pretty much kill the profits of small-scale manufacturers, which pretty much every other company is.

Would be a bit different if you had Samick and Yamaha still around, and the financial power of those chaebol's and keiretsu's backing them, but archery business isn't really that much of a business, so its fairly easy to maintain oligopolistic position once it manifests.


----------



## taz00

limbwalker said:


> And I understand the fascination with trying to figure out who is "sponsored" and who is not, how much are they getting, how biased are they because of what they are getting, etc...
> 
> But at the end of the day, this topic is discussed far too much. Why? Because we're not talking about $100K pieces of equipment that are prohibitively expensive without a sponsor. We're talking about gear that pretty much anyone with a decent job can afford, esp. if they are already making the kind of commitment to the sport that is in line with the quality of equipment they are buying. So, IMO it really doesn't matter that much who is or who isn't "sponsored." It doesn't make them better archers. But in some cases, it could make them worse.
> 
> Most people, including a lot of full time professional archers, are better off without sponsors. But you sure couldn't tell that by the amount of time most folks spend talking about sponsorships.


Sometimes I wish there was a like button for some posts and this is one of them.
There are times I have been given free items by shops with the condition I will have to use them during competition. Most of the times I have politely refused. Why should I compromise my results or even feel for a piece of equipment that costs a few hundred euro at the most when I have spent thousands to get there?


----------



## limbwalker

I think a fair number of people who talk about sponsorships are in love with the idea of being a "sponsored" archer, as if it's some kind of accomplishment in itself. Heck, I know a lot of shooters who would say that is an actual goal of theirs - to secure a sponsorship - even if it's just a local bow shop or discounted gear. It's not about the money, but they will tell you it is. It's more about getting to tell people you're "sponsored" and wearing the shirt at shoots. IMO all that does is put extra pressure on an archer that they don't need.

I suppose some people need that motivation though. Different strokes...


----------



## limbwalker

> if you had Samick and Yamaha still around, and the financial power of those chaebol's and keiretsu's backing them, but archery business isn't really that much of a business, so its fairly easy to maintain oligopolistic position once it manifests.


Indeed. I would love to know what % of Hoyt/Easton is archery products these days. I think it would surprise most archers to find out how little that is, but it's also why they can afford to buy/tease up all the talent and publicity. And that's why they appear to those new to the sport that everything they produce is the best, and on it goes...

Don't get me wrong. Hoyt makes some great products that could compete on a level playing field with all the other major brands. But all other things being equal, I suspect we'd see a much more even distribution of equipment at the Olympic games than we do now, with products from Border, Ukka, SKY, PSE, Fivics, Kaya and Gillo being more common.


----------



## InKYfromSD

limbwalker said:


> IMO all that does is put extra pressure on an archer that they don't need.


No such thing as a free lunch.


----------



## John_K

limbwalker said:


> Don't get me wrong. Hoyt makes some great products that could compete on a level playing field with all the other major brands. But all other things being equal, I suspect we'd see a much more even distribution of equipment at the Olympic games than we do now, with products from Border, Ukka, SKY, PSE, Fivics, Kaya and Gillo being more common.


I've been saying this for years  You see a greater spread of brands in field archery, where there's less sponsorship. You also see some very competent field archers just hanging onto their faithful old bows, and beating the pants off archers shooting the latest and greatest rigs 

Of course, you do get some sponsorship even here at a lower level; a few sets of free limbs here and there for top field archers. There are still some brands who prefer not to buy exposure or opinions with free kit, but they are few and far between.


----------



## Vittorio

Equipment used by Olympic archers:

Have a look the 1992 Barcelona final match between Sebastien Flute and Jae Hun Chung and list what is really changed in 24 years apart from the names that in Rio have been Jean Charles Valladont and Bo Chan Ku ...

https://www.facebook.com/michael.nayrole/videos/1127750837291196/


----------



## taz00

Rylando said:


> That's a really interesting idea!


Actually I think it is a horrible idea.
a. Archery equipment is not that expensive compared to other sports so there is no need to level the playing field because some have access to equipment that gives them an edge.
b. Archery equipment is highly personalized. What suits you may not suit me and vice versa.
c. It would mean the death of small manufacturers since everybody would want to train with the same equipment as used in the Olympics.


----------



## theminoritydude

Indeed.


----------



## limbwalker

taz00 said:


> Actually I think it is a horrible idea.
> a. *Archery equipment is not that expensive compared to other sports* so there is no need to level the playing field because some have access to equipment that gives them an edge.
> b. Archery equipment is highly personalized. What suits you may not suit me and vice versa.
> c. It would mean the death of small manufacturers since everybody would want to train with the same equipment as used in the Olympics.


Which sports are you thinking of?


----------



## taz00

Motorsports, sailing, cycling and other equipment based sports. I am obviously not talking about running or basketball. 
Even in target shooting, although the cost of the equipment is comparable to archery, ammunition (unless we are talking about air pistol or rifle ) adds up really fast.
I can spend no more than 3000€ and buy a top of the line Olympic recurve bow, incl arrows etc
In road cycling this will barely get you a good frameset.
Not only that but archery equipment will be usable for years without significant wear and tear (not talking arrows) unlike other sports.


----------



## Mengtian

limbwalker said:


> Which sports are you thinking of?


I was thinking of hockey myself. It coulld easily cost 2500.00 if a parent wanted to buy the newest, latest and greatest. Sticks break, 200 bucks each so factor that in. Travel time and money for a Tier 1 player is crazy. My son and I travelled every other weekend for games and many times we had to stay in a hotel.

The recurring cost is expensive as well. Kids grow. New sticks as they grow and new skates. Pads you can usually last a bit longer.

Like many of you here have said: get a good riser and sight and those will last a lifetime. Can't say that for most of the hockey gear.


----------



## limbwalker

Fair enough. 

We have trouble in our sport IMO because of the cost and individuality of the equipment. Recruitment suffers because of this. It's hard to get parents to spend that kind of money on their kid's activities when they don't know if the kid will stick with it. The parents also don't usually know enough to make an informed decision on the equipment. Add to that the lack of scholarships or a real pro career to return some of that investment, and the fact that their kid can participate in a multitude of school activities/sports for a fraction of the cost, and well, it's tough to recruit in a sport like archery that really only has - in the minds of most non-archers - one significant event every four years. 

Then there's the individual, isolated nature of the sport... not appealing to most teens. Anyway, I get your point but the ROI for archery is one of the lowest of all sports I can think of.


----------



## Mark Talley

Plus, when you start trying to standardize the equipment which can be used to create some kind of a "Production" class, you end up with a rule book the size of War and Peace, technical inspections, cheating, challenges by one competitor against another. I know in motorcycle racing that to be competitive, a production bike has to be "cleaned up" and is not what you would roll off the showroom floor and ends up costing a great deal more. The intent is not to limit performance, but to make racing more broadly accessible and level the playing field but the pressures to win have a way of upending that.


----------



## lksseven

The magic pill is college scholarships. The much wider availability of college scholarships will pull interest and motivation up through the K-12 schools, who will then want to implement archery teams/programs in school so that their students are more attractive to the colleges who are looking for 'archery' on the student's resume. By the time kids are 11 or 12 years old, parents are spending a lot of mental energy thinking/considering $$$ issues regarding "my kid will be driving in 4 years! (car and insurance expenses coming up!), and then 2 years after that college expenses kick in!" "College scholarship possibilities/options" becomes a 'honey pot' phrase at that point for parents. 

And John is right, a LOT of interested potential archers are dissuaded from the sport because of even several hundred$$ of lessons and $800-$1000 investment in equipment. They just can't see spending the money on a 'non scholarship possible' activity/sport.


----------



## lksseven

Mark Talley said:


> Plus, when you start trying to standardize the equipment which can be used to create some kind of a "Production" class, you end up with a rule book the size of War and Peace, technical inspections, cheating, challenges by one competitor against another. I know in motorcycle racing that to be competitive, a production bike has to be "cleaned up" and is not what you would roll off the showroom floor and ends up costing a great deal more. The intent is not to limit performance, but to make racing more broadly accessible and level the playing field but the pressures to win have a way of upending that.


Completely agree. It's a good idea that quickly degenerates into a big mess.


----------

