# X scores 6 points outdoors



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

That is just down right ******ed....PERIOD

Count it as a 6 and the same person is still going to win.....Jesse isn't shooting them on the edge :wink:

Kendall you shall have an e-mail shortly :wink:


----------



## rock monkey (Dec 28, 2002)

while changing things up for the pros is a novel and possibly needed idea, it's not so good for the bill paying population.

if it changes for the pros, *KEEP IT* in the pro classes.

yes, you'll hear reams of dislike of the scoring change in '77, but lets be honest and real.....the game is what it is today. the field shooters under the age of 30 have no freakin clue nor do they care of what happened then. stop beating that dead horse.

we all like watching the top guns shoot it out. the ASA creates a show amongst the top 3 or 5. the IBO, not sure. the NFAA only forces a shoot off when the scores are identical in placing positions.

who doesnt like watchin the 2 biggest kids on the block whoop on each other?


----------



## frank_jones (Mar 2, 2006)

*x coumt*

I agree with b. h. but, I would rather see the dot taken out of the nfaa animal round and have the ties settled by a shoot off, like in the old days.


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

******ed or not, don't be surprised if this thing passes...:mg:


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

rock monkey said:


> while changing things up for the pros is a novel and possibly needed idea, it's not so good for the bill paying population.
> 
> if it changes for the pros, *KEEP IT* in the pro classes.
> 
> ...


I am 35 and have no clue......but I do know that scoring was EASIER back then.


----------



## willieM (Nov 18, 2007)

The pros need to shoot a different target than the rest of us, so change it for them if they want to, BUT LEAvE IT ALONE FOR THE REST OF US. If they make this target any harder than it is now it will run off more of the shooters we have now. And geting new people to try feild archery will be that much more difficult.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Unclegus said:


> ******ed or not, don't be surprised if this thing passes...:mg:


it can pass and Jesse will still win.....or whoever would have won.

The people complaining are the ones that would have ZERO shot even if he shot a 559 or 558. Seriously....the only 3 people that had a shot were Reo Dave and Rodger.

Reo dropped ONE on the field round and dropped two more animal dots then Jesse.....that's one more 4 then Jesse shot and he lost by 3....guess what he didn't deserve to win.

Dave had a Hornet moment and forgot to move his sight and shot a 3 the first day to shoot a 558....and then did it again the 2nd day and shot a 559....I was one of the first people to talk to Dave both days after words and I don't know which day is was more pissed of.....actually I do :wink: He told me Sat morning his goal was to set his sight correctly....he dropped 2 more then Jesse on the animal round.....guess what he didn't deserve to win and he will tell you that....even if he did shoot more Xs then Jesse.

Rodger dropped 3 total on the field and hunter combined....but he missed 5 more animal dots.....he didn't shoot as good as the Top 3 shooters. 

Sorry but the rest were 11 points or more back from Jesse....and if anyone thinks that they are going to make up that gap by shooting Xs to gain an "extra point" they are on crack......

You make a mistake or MISS....guess what you don't deserve a chance to make it up or "catch up".....this isn't 3D:wink:

Tell the Chewies to leave field alone

do golfers ask for a mulligan because they just hit one in the rough....or the water....or a bunker or sliced one.....no they move on.....the PROs are supposed to be the best....Jesse won because he was better and didn't make the mistake that others did......

first every kid needs a trophy for playing now PROs want to make it fair.....guess what it is fair....you all shoot the same target from the same stake in the same conditions.....stop missing and you will win just like the guys in the top 3....

there is NO WAY a guy that shoots a 559 should loose to a guy shooting a 557 or lower because you got a "bonus" for shooting 3 more Xs then he did.....because you also missed 2 more times.....

that's like saying that you only get ONE point for that layup because yours touched the backboard or rim :zip:


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

frank_jones said:


> I agree with b. h. but, I would rather see the dot taken out of the nfaa animal round and have the ties settled by a shoot off, like in the old days.


and in the PRO class there still wouldn't have been a shootoff :wink:

but the AMFS champion would have been different


----------



## Hammer X (May 20, 2008)

Why change a perfect target and a perfect scoring system? Because one guy shoots a perfect field and a perfect hunter round? I say if your going to do anything, go back to a 5 day event. Stamina both physically and mentally would be a factor. Not to mention everybody else will just have to STEP UP if you wan't to win pro class.


----------



## TNMAN (Oct 6, 2009)

*6's*

If changed, won't be anybody squaring the x or shooting a little loose at 15 yds to save arrows.


----------



## Hammer X (May 20, 2008)

TNMAN said:


> If changed, won't be anybody squaring the x or shooting a little loose at 15 yds to save arrows.


Pro's don't shoot loose to save arrows and neither do top shooters in any class. At least not the smart ones or the ones who win. Top shooters have a different mindset, Shoot my best shot EVERY shot.


----------



## X Hunter (Jan 11, 2007)

Brown Hornet said:


> and in the PRO class there still wouldn't have been a shootoff :wink:
> 
> but the AMFS champion would have been different


Well ONE thing is for certian it sure as HELL WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN YOU... Were you in the lead groups any day to see who would have more X's?? HELL NO...

So outright the B.S. Comments need to STOP...

Hell I could count the X as 5 and shoot the scores you shoot... So until you can put up shut up!!!!


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

X Hunter said:


> Well ONE thing is for certian it sure as HELL WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN YOU... Were you in the lead groups any day to see who would have more X's?? HELL NO...
> 
> So outright the B.S. Comments need to STOP...
> 
> Hell I could count the X as 5 and shoot the scores you shoot... So until you can put up shut up!!!!


What the HELL are you talking about.....I am talking about dropping the animal dot.....

Which you shattered the record on....:clap:

but if like Frank said we did away with the dot on the animal and went to a shootoff to break ties instead of using the animal dots....which is what I was commenting on.....

you would have lost by TWO

1 BRAD BAKER JR VA 552 555 585 1692
2 MARK EAVES OR 556 553 581 1690

So no my comments aren't BS....they are true....nobody is trying to take anything away from you and you F ing know it.....I was one of the first people to congratulate you....got the side bet going because I had faith IN YOU.....and called your win the day that Hinky turned PRO.....

Read the comments first before you go spewing off at the mouth.

and you would have to shoot clean and shoot about 85Xs with no 4s to pull that off


----------



## scepter4 (May 4, 2009)

*Wow*



X Hunter said:


> Well ONE thing is for certian it sure as HELL WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN YOU... Were you in the lead groups any day to see who would have more X's?? HELL NO...
> 
> So outright the B.S. Comments need to STOP...
> 
> ...


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

scepter4 said:


> about time someone put mr. know it all in his place thanks X HUNTER


actually he didn't.....you want a turn?


----------



## scepter4 (May 4, 2009)

*not much use*

no use to argue with you youre allways right and know everything have a nice day!


----------



## X Hunter (Jan 11, 2007)

Brown Hornet said:


> What the HELL are you talking about.....I am talking about dropping the animal dot.....
> 
> Which you shattered the record on....:clap:
> 
> ...




I know you thought I could win but the shoulda woulda coulda game dont count now does it??? hell I could have misset my sight and shot a zero but i didnt.... We could have counted all 5 days and I would have won by 7 instead of 2 (my lowes were a 547F 554H marks was a 543F 553H).... So if we're gonna dream dream big...


And 533 is you PB not your average my average X count was in the 70's

:darkbeer:


----------



## damnyankee (Oct 4, 2002)

I have no dog in this fight...if it changes Jesse will just win by more:teeth:


----------



## scepter4 (May 4, 2009)

*score*

X HUNTER 2

brown hornet 0


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

X Hunter said:


> I know you thought I could win but the shoulda woulda coulda game dont count now does it??? hell I could have misset my sight and shot a zero but i didnt.... We could have counted all 5 days and I would have won by 7 instead of 2 (my lowes were a 547F 554H marks was a 543F 553H).... So if we're gonna dream dream big...
> 
> 
> And 533 is you PB not your average my average X count was in the 70's
> ...


But I wasn't playing the coulda woulda game.....

actually 533 isn't my PB :wink: and after I got all my marks and actually dialed in tuning wise....you know I tune at shoots at the start of the season....heck I didn't have good marks and my chit straight until after the Hill actually hadn't shot but twice till then.

my avg was actually closer to that 533 :wink:

112 arrows.....75Xs.....that gives you 37....

37 minus 560........523.....

drop any points and BowGod is gonna get you.....well maybe I better say Sticky


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

scepter4 said:


> X HUNTER 2
> 
> brown hornet 0


and your about the only one keeping score.....:doh:


----------



## scepter4 (May 4, 2009)

*sorry*

I guess its hard to keep score when youre getting thumped!


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

heavy crack fumes in your home I see.......


----------



## scepter4 (May 4, 2009)

*fumes*

X HUNTER said his lows were 547f & 554h and youre talking about a 533pb what are you on?


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

scepter4 said:


> X HUNTER said his lows were 547f & 554h and youre talking about a 533pb what are you on?


reading must not be fundamental in your house....either that or it's like ladies listening....selective :zip:


----------



## scepter4 (May 4, 2009)

*533*

you said it wasent your personal best,but your high scores at national outdoor 2009 was ??? 533 perhaps


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

scepter4 said:


> you said it wasent your personal best,but your high scores at national outdoor 2009 was ??? 533 perhaps


I think you missed a post or two in there......WE.....key word there is WE......were talking about something that you either missed or is over your head......


----------



## scepter4 (May 4, 2009)

*who?*

who is we ? members of AT? or members of the NFAA? I really dont think that you are the last word in who posts what or where. I just wish I had half the talent and knowledge that you think you have, Jessie wouledent stand a chance!


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

scepter4 said:


> who is we ? members of AT? or members of the NFAA? I really dont think that you are the last word in who posts what or where. I just wish I had half the talent and knowledge that you think you have, Jessie wouledent stand a chance!


are you serious.....people like you are the only ones that seem to think that I think that I am the best 

We is me and X Hunter.....the two that were talking about our scores.....thought that was pretty obvious :embara








if your gonna use an alter....at least make it a good one


----------



## scepter4 (May 4, 2009)

*your #1 fan*



scepter4 said:


> X HUNTER said his lows were 547f & 554h and youre talking about a 533pb what are you on?


Has to be yourself, I really dont think I missed anything or any of it was above my head and yes I knew who we were I just think it was kinda funny that you were ragging on XHUNTER about his scores at nationals and what was yours again???


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

scepter4 said:


> Has to be yourself, I really dont think I missed anything or any of it was above my head and yes I knew who we were I just think it was kinda funny that you were ragging on XHUNTER about his scores at nationals and what was yours again???


get over it dude.....what you seem to be missing is that I wasn't ragging on X Hunter.....

and you did miss it obviously.....

Thought you said over two hours ago you were going to have a nice day? :zip:


----------



## scepter4 (May 4, 2009)

*nice day!*

Ill leave you alone now ,you really dont think making the x worth 6 will change anything in pro class??


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

scepter4 said:


> Ill leave you alone now ,you really dont think making the x worth 6 will change anything in pro class??


Nope not at all.....If you avg in the 558+ range....your not shooting low X count....

Not that you are if your avg in the 555 range but Jesse, Reo and Dave aren't gonna loose on Xs to a guy shooting a 554. 

this isn't 3D either with risk reward either....12/14..... People thought the 14 would slow down Levi, Dan and Jeff.....guess what....it didn't.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

I do not think this will pass and may not make it out of committee, however someone will bring it to the floor anyway.

The pros should NOT be shooting a different target and scoring the X as a 6 is the same as shooting a different target.

There should be enough people still around that can remember the cluster that happened in 1977 with the target change precipitated by the pros. I should know because I was a pro then and up to my eyeballs in the target change.

I can say that I will not vote for it and will argue against it on the floor.


----------



## mag41vance (Mar 13, 2008)

I don't think the x should be scored a 6. 
The bullseye is what it is, a 5
With the x counting as a 6 you could have a guy shoot a perfect round, and lose to a guy with 6 more x's that dropped 5 dots.
Leave it alone. The record books from this point back would be just a footnote in Archery History.

Leave the x as tiebreakers and something for the 2nd place back guys to brag about.


----------



## psargeant (Aug 1, 2004)

My thinking on it is to make the X go away, and make the big dogs shoot it out at the end of the tournament. Look at all the big shoots, there is some kind of shootout to decide the winner (Vegas, NFAA, indoor Nats., ASA's) it adds some excitement to what is otherwise a pretty dull spectator sport. 

More and more shooters are approaching the level where we could conceivably see a 3-6 way shoot out at outdoor nationals (especially if we also killed the bonus dot)...Maybe by creating more "ties" we could generate some more "Buzz" around the Field Archery Game...Look at how many folks hang around to see the shoot out in Vegas...how could that not be good for field archery...???


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

Hammer X said:


> Why change a perfect target and a perfect scoring system? *Because one guy shoots a perfect field* and a perfect hunter round?


Last year when the scores were coming in from the Nationals, I made a post on a thread in this forum asking how long it would be before the NFAA changed something since a perfect score had been shot. I was pretty much ridiculed by some on here for even suggesting the NFAA would make a change. 

Wonder how much side-stepping will be done if I can find that thread/posts? :mg:


----------



## mag41vance (Mar 13, 2008)

pragmatic_lee said:


> Last year when the scores were coming in from the Nationals, I made a post on a thread in this forum asking how long it would be before the NFAA changed something since a perfect score had been shot. I was pretty much ridiculed by some on here for even suggesting the NFAA would make a change.
> 
> Wonder how much side-stepping will be done if I can find that thread/posts? :mg:


Do it Prag. We can take it!

I just Love a good, "I told you so" :wink:


----------



## Spoon13 (Feb 20, 2007)

psargeant said:


> My thinking on it is to make the X go away, and make the big dogs shoot it out at the end of the tournament. Look at all the big shoots, there is some kind of shootout to decide the winner (Vegas, NFAA, indoor Nats., ASA's) it adds some excitement to what is otherwise a pretty dull spectator sport.
> 
> More and more shooters are approaching the level where we could conceivably see a 3-6 way shoot out at outdoor nationals (especially if we also killed the bonus dot)...Maybe by creating more "ties" we could generate some more "Buzz" around the Field Archery Game...Look at how many folks hang around to see the shoot out in Vegas...how could that not be good for field archery...???


ASA takes the top 5 shooters in the Pro class and has a Shootdown. Starting in Columbus next month, they are also going to take the top 3 in 2 of the amateur classes and do the same with them. 

What would happen if NFAA did the same?? Take the top 5 shooters from the Pro classes and let them have at it. It would definitely create the "buzz" that the NFAA desperately needs and would make it a blast to watch. Make the Daves and Reos and Jesses of the World fight it out. Not just the ties. Make them make the shots when the title is on the line.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

pragmatic_lee said:


> Last year when the scores were coming in from the Nationals, I made a post on a thread in this forum asking how long it would be before the NFAA changed something since a perfect score had been shot. I was pretty much ridiculed by some on here for even suggesting the NFAA would make a change.
> 
> Wonder how much side-stepping will be done if I can find that thread/posts? :mg:


That agenda item for the NFAA board of directors is just that, ONE agenda item submitted by ONE director. Any director can submit anything they want for an agenda item.

Just because ONE director submits an agenda item, does not mean that NFAA is thinking about making such a change. It is not a done deal as some contributors on AT may think.


----------



## White Nock (Feb 27, 2008)

Can I count my Xs as 10s? :teeth:


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

FS560 said:


> That agenda item for the NFAA board of directors is just that, ONE agenda item submitted by ONE director. Any director can submit anything they want for an agenda item.
> 
> Just because ONE director submits an agenda item, does not mean that NFAA is thinking about making such a change. It is not a done deal as some contributors on AT may think.


Fully understand Jim - just kinda humorous that it took less than 6 months for it to get on the agenda. :shade:


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

White Nock said:


> Can I count my Xs as 10s? :teeth:


Hmmm, shoot one "first", then we'll discuss it.


----------



## Scott.Barrett (Oct 26, 2008)

pragmatic_lee said:


> Hmmm, shoot one "first", then we'll discuss it.


I don't see the need for this in the Pro class at all....just makes addition more difficult!

But where I would like to see it is in the Amateur ranks! Then lets do a shootoff between the pros and amateurs with that scoring system. Let the meat and potatoes of archery get a chance for the overall win as well!!!!

SB


----------



## mdbowhunter (Oct 22, 2002)

FS560 said:


> That agenda item for the NFAA board of directors is just that, ONE agenda item submitted by ONE director. Any director can submit anything they want for an agenda item.
> 
> Just because ONE director submits an agenda item, does not mean that NFAA is thinking about making such a change. It is not a done deal as some contributors on AT may think.


Good point Jim. No need to condemn the NFAA for the actions of ONE Director. Just makes me wonder if these individuals think of the impact on the *ENTIRE* membership.


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

TNMAN said:


> Just saw an Unclegus post in Gen Pop about Pro agenda items for Las Vegas directors meeting calling for changing scoring of X ring to 6 points for field and hunter. See link below. If adapted by pros, likely to soon change for everyone else too. Who makes a good fat field arrow?
> 
> http://members.localnet.com/~archery1/2010 NFAA Annual Meeting Agenda Items.pdf


Can anyone whose actually read the agenda items for the 2010 meeting point out the the agenda item number being referenced here?

http://www.nfaa-archery.org/depot/news/75-News_28.pdf


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

TNMAN said:


> Just saw an Unclegus post in Gen Pop about Pro agenda items for Las Vegas directors meeting calling for changing scoring of X ring to 6 points for field and hunter. See link below. If adapted by pros, likely to soon change for everyone else too. Who makes a good fat field arrow?
> 
> http://members.localnet.com/~archery1/2010 NFAA Annual Meeting Agenda Items.pdf


Duplicate post


----------



## frank_jones (Mar 2, 2006)

*shoot off*



psargeant said:


> My thinking on it is to make the X go away, and make the big dogs shoot it out at the end of the tournament. Look at all the big shoots, there is some kind of shootout to decide the winner (Vegas, NFAA, indoor Nats., ASA's) it adds some excitement to what is otherwise a pretty dull spectator sport.
> 
> More and more shooters are approaching the level where we could conceivably see a 3-6 way shoot out at outdoor nationals (especially if we also killed the bonus dot)...Maybe by creating more "ties" we could generate some more "Buzz" around the Field Archery Game...Look at how many folks hang around to see the shoot out in Vegas...how could that not be good for field archery...???


that is what I was trying to say. I was showed this years ago by a really good archer. he stated that the tournament was the shoot off, the field round was the " qualifier". people stayed to watch! why did america get in such a hurry? the really good archer is rsw!


----------



## Spoon13 (Feb 20, 2007)

pragmatic_lee said:


> Can anyone whose actually read the agenda items for the 2010 meeting point out the the agenda item number being referenced here?
> 
> http://www.nfaa-archery.org/depot/news/75-News_28.pdf


The By-Laws in question are:

Page 50, Article VI, Section A, Paragraphs 5 & 6

Agenda items PRO1-4. Each item is a different wording of the basically the same idea. PRO1 changes Items 5.1 in scoring and removes 5.3 and 6. PRO2 changes 5.3 and rewrites 6. PRO3 rewrites all of 5 and 6, and PRO4 rewrites all of 5 and does nothing to 6.


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

Spoon13 said:


> The By-Laws in question are:
> 
> Page 50, Article VI, Section A, Paragraphs 5 & 6
> 
> Agenda items PRO1-4. Each item is a different wording of the basically the same idea. PRO1 changes Items 5.1 in scoring and removes 5.3 and 6. PRO2 changes 5.3 and rewrites 6. PRO3 rewrites all of 5 and 6, and PRO4 rewrites all of 5 and does nothing to 6.


But where is it listed in the agenda I linked to?


----------



## Spoon13 (Feb 20, 2007)

pragmatic_lee said:


> But where is it listed in the agenda I linked to?


It's not. The PRO items and the RIC rulings are NOT included on the NFAA website. You would have to go to the NY site and get them from there. Mike posted everything he got in the Directors packet and NFAA only posted the items that would pertain to the rank and file.


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

spoon13 said:


> it's not. The pro items and the ric rulings are not included on the nfaa website. You would have to go to the ny site and get them from there. Mike posted everything he got in the directors packet and nfaa only posted the items that would pertain to the rank and file.


10-4


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

The subject agenda item is in the competition section after the RIC issues. I have not looked on the website, I just refer to the meeting book.

I stand corrected. It was not presented by a director, but was presented by the pro division chairperson. That is why it is labeled Pro-1.


----------



## Jbird (May 21, 2002)

*Bad Idea*

This would only serve to widen the gap between the Pros and the Joes just like the smaller target change did back in the 70's. It served to discourage the average shooters back then and would have the same effect today. I don't see so many 560's being shot that X's can't settle any level of competition in Field shooting. Certainly should two or three tie it could be quickly settled with a 4 arrow end at 70 yards. Just my .02
Jbird


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

As I said before, as an original member of the NFAA pro division at the time and the shooter of the first 560 field round on the old target at the outdoor nationals in 1972, I was up to my eyeballs, among many others, in getting that target change done for 1977.

We wanted to eliminate all the 560 scores and we did accomplish that, until now. but we also caused the rank and file to be slapped in the face about the difference between their scores and the pros.

Some years later, I realized how misguided that target change was and have regretted it ever since.

Now, I am not saying that the target would not be like it is today, but to allow the pros to influence a target for the whole association is wrong. It is highly unlikely that that old target would have been still in use, but a change would have been better thought out and not a knee jerk reaction as it was back then.

Prior to that target change, there were shooters that could shoot 560 but maybe not the number of spots as the top shooters. This average shooter could shoot his 560 and get in the shootoff. So he goes home and his wife asks him how he did. He says that he tied for the win but lost the shootoff and his wife and kids think that he is great.

After the target change, this same shooter may have shot a 525 and the hot shooter shot 545. He has to say to his wife that he was beat by 20 points and she says, how come you shot so bad and his kids laugh and say "you suck, dad".

And, so, he stopped going to shoots, and the NFAA lost another member, maybe later on to 3D.

And then we wondered how 3D was able to attract so many shooters. In the beginning, local 3D shoots were set up more for fun for the average shooter or hunter. But then the 3D shooters got serious and local shoots started setting the targets excessively hard and tricky. That is why 3D has fallen off at local level in recent years.

We cannot go back to the old NFAA target because most of our current shooters only know the current target. However, the score difference between the average shooter and the top shooters is still quite obvious on the scoreboard. That is a fact of the current field archery situation but the last thing we need to do is make it worse.

Sorry Tom (F14), I did not intend to try to outdo you with this long winded diatribe.


----------

