# The Olympics and compounds



## Mr. October (Feb 15, 2003)

After reading a couple threads both on here and on the Bowhunting forum (especially those regarding crossbow/compound/recurve), it got me to thinking about Olympic Archery. I know the subject of compounds in the olympics has been bandied about over the years but nothing has ever happened with it. I don't want to get into the whole crutch argument or even start a flame war (never my intention) but in looking at the olympics overall, at what point do think archery would (or should) follow the evolution of equipment? Nearly every other olympic sport has changed the equiment rules to match technology over time. Things that leap to mind include speed skating (with clap skates), certainly the rest of the shooting sports (rifle and shotgun), Luge & Bobsled (compare the sleds now to 50 years ago and they have changed dramatically and the rules have, apparently, changed to accomodate them).

JimC has mentioned a couple times that he is sad to see so many young archers starting with compounds and never having the opportunity to try Olympic style archery. Interestingly, I started participating in archery about the time compounds were becoming popular and recurves were starting to be difficult to find. Now, there are few pro shops that have recurves (especially Olympic recurves) as evidenced by other threads here. My point is that in the US at any rate it is much easier for kids to obtain compounds and there is far greater opportunity to participate in events designed and run for compounds. Compounds also seem to be getting more accepted worldwide. 

I'll be the first to admit that I think recurves require far better form then compounds to shoot. But compounds are here to stay and are recognized by every major arhcery organization. They are also the most popular division in most competitions in the US and though I haven't competed internationally, based on published results appear to be the most popular divisions internationally as well. Att some point, shouldn't those organizations that serve as the rule making bodies for olympic archery push for more inclusion for compounds? 

Just curious what you folks think?


----------



## doume (Feb 1, 2003)

Seems to be a never ending question whatever archery board you read at ... 



clever_guy said:


> Not going to happen..if you do a search you will find dozen threads that will tell you why...
> 
> -CG


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

As it stands right now, the US may have a significantly higher number of competitive target compound shooters over recurve shooters, but that's not true for the rest of the world. When there are more compound bows FITA shooters around the world than recurve bow FITA shooters, only then should FITA make the compound the bow of choice.


----------



## Daemonspeeding (Jul 3, 2004)

hkim823 said:


> As it stands right now, the US may have a significantly higher number of competitive target compound shooters over recurve shooters, but that's not true for the rest of the world. When there are more compound bows FITA shooters around the world than recurve bow FITA shooters, only then should FITA make the compound the bow of choice.



Maybe thats cause we invented the compound.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

It won't happen for several reasons

1) there are several prominent world wide sports that have far more spectator appeal awaiting to get into the Olympics (golf and Squash are two that come to mind). If archery were to change to compound, it would have to get out and get back in line. If you are organizing an olympic games where $$$$ is paramount, what is going to be your choice-golf or archery  

2). There is no additional skills required in compound archery over recurve archery. The olympics has declared that it wants to end duplicative skills (yes, I know they added synchronized diving but that is chicks in swim suits and trampoline-chicks in leotards) and when I posted this question a year or two ago, one compound shooter admitted that the biggest additional challenge in compound archery is keeping the lens clear in a rainstorm  

3) there is nothing in terms of spectator appeal that a compound bow adds to the games. The OR round-while perhaps allowing some who normally wouldn't win in a double fita-to compete is more exciting than the old format but hardly draws the same fan base as say the gymnastics final or the 100M run final. OR's with recurves or compounds are pretty much the same in terms of spectator appeal

4) countries don't tend to want to ad events that the USA tends to dominate


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Mag-Tek said:


> Its hard to find FITA shoots in some areas. At age 15 I turned Pro for that reason. If FITA allowed compounds,scope and releases I could of shot a lot of NFAA shoots and hit a few FITA shoots too. I have a lot of respect for FITA shooters but would like to see them shooting what the rest of the world is.



the rest of the world shoots recurves. bowhunting is what drove the popularity of compounds in the USA because compounds make bowhunting far more accessible for more people. In many other nations, there is no bowhunting and not the demand for compounds. We are the anomaly here, not the world

besides, if you train hard with a recurve, its rather easy to then go to a compound


----------



## TJ Mason (Mar 25, 2004)

Compounds could make archery less interesting for those who don't participate in the sport. Olympic archers are already able to achieve an extremely high standard of accuracy with recurves. If compounds were introduced, then people would soon get bored of seeing X after X.

Compounds would only work IMHO if the distances were increased, or the format changed from target archery to field archery.

The US could always have its own archery "World Series", of course, using compounds. Where the "world" consists of the US and a bit of southern Canada.


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

TJ Mason said:


> Compounds would only work IMHO if the distances were increased, or the format changed from target archery to field archery.


Although I know this is a terrible analogy, target archery is like bowling, while field archery is like golf. More people enjoy watching golf over bowling (because bowling is a set target over a set distance, where consistency is the most important factor while in golf you can have the best stroke in the game, but there's more factors such as variable wind, distance and terrain judgement, etc. etc.). I'm not a field archer but it's something I've always wanted to get invovled with (but don't have the local resources to get invovled with). Although field isn't as popular around the world as target, I could see field being something that's more spectator friendly.


----------



## farms100 (Jan 16, 2003)

hkim823 said:


> I'm not a field archer but it's something I've always wanted to get invovled with (but don't have the local resources to get invovled with). .



just drop me an PM if you want to do field shoot sometime, there is one in mass just about every sunday morning, outdoor season starts in few months.
In general I find wind to be less a factor than the uphill and downhill. available light can make difference too.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

The one eyed idiot is now the sports dictator. I think the days are numbered for archery in the olympics because of that. Archery is not very interesting to spectators, even other archers. TV is goint to kill it, mark my word.


----------



## Mr. October (Feb 15, 2003)

FS560 said:


> The one eyed idiot is now the sports dictator. I think the days are numbered for archery in the olympics because of that. Archery is not very interesting to spectators, even other archers. TV is goint to kill it, mark my word.


If it really does come down to specator paticipation and viewership on TV then I would predict about 2/3s of current Olympic events will no longer be part of the olympics.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

FS560 said:


> The one eyed idiot is now the sports dictator. I think the days are numbered for archery in the olympics because of that. Archery is not very interesting to spectators, even other archers. TV is goint to kill it, mark my word.



True, most of the sports being added feature babes in leotards or bikinis (trampoline, beach volleyball, synchro diving)


----------



## barico (Nov 21, 2004)

Compound archery is not as international a sport as is recurve archery. Viewing it from the US distorts the picture because compounds are so dominant there.


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*tech*

I think that there have been enough advances in the recurve equipment technology, that there is really no need for compounds to come into the picture for a long time.


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

hkim823 said:


> I'm not a field archer but it's something I've always wanted to get invovled with (but don't have the local resources to get invovled with). Although field isn't as popular around the world as target, I could see field being something that's more spectator friendly.


Consider joining the Lunenburg Sportsman's Club. (IIRC it's $35 year) You get a key to the front gate and can go shoot the field course any time you like. I used to go thursday nights and I'd have the whole course to myself. They leave the targets up so there are usually 14 field targets and 14 animal targets to shoot.

Be forewarned. Once you shoot a field round you will be hooked. The field round is awesome!

Wathcing archery is about as interesting as watching paint dry. What makes archery interesting is you go to participate, not to watch. Even though I'm a crappy archer I can shoot at Nationals or any of the big tournaments.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Wathcing archery is about as interesting as watching paint dry. What makes archery interesting is you go to participate, not to watch.


I don't agree. My kids and I were glued to the set the other day, watching the Bravo channel's Olympic archery coverage that was copied to a DVD by a friend of mine. I thought it was very fascinating to watch. Only had to Mute it during one match too  

My mother (who has never shot a bow in her life, and had never seen me shoot a bow in a tournament before Athens) was so excited during the matches over there, that my wife and I had to calm her down. She was on the edge of her seat through every match. Okay, we were in THE original Olympic stadium, but still... Pretty exciting stuff to watch IMO.

But then, I'll sit and watch 3 hours of golf on a Sunday afternoon too, so...  

John.


----------



## sean (May 31, 2003)

I would venture a guess that for every fita bow made at least 1000 compounds are sold and if you want to see archery become a big deal in the olyimpics maybe more people would show intrest if they could relate to the sport.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Sean,

If the Olympics were simply a U.S. event, then I would agree with you.

John.


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

Why not shoot a recurve?


----------



## sean (May 31, 2003)

i know the world is a big place but how many companies world wide build fita bows and how mutch of the bow market do they represent ? I would think that the manufacturers would be pushing for it . what a great advetisment for their products . Ya know "look at joe blow he just won gold at the games with/place your bow name here/ buy our bow and be good like him . just my thoughts


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

limbwalker said:


> I don't agree. My kids and I were glued to the set the other day, watching the Bravo channel's Olympic archery coverage that was copied to a DVD by a friend of mine. I thought it was very fascinating to watch. Only had to Mute it during one match too
> 
> My mother (who has never shot a bow in her life, and had never seen me shoot a bow in a tournament before Athens) was so excited during the matches over there, that my wife and I had to calm her down. She was on the edge of her seat through every match. Okay, we were in THE original Olympic stadium, but still... Pretty exciting stuff to watch IMO.
> 
> ...



John. You are correct. I thought this years Matchplays were the most exciting and I thought they were video'd the best. 

THe BBC coverage was awsome. Watching the Quarter Finals and the Finals was amazing.

I wanna be there someday.


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

sean said:


> i know the world is a big place but how many companies world wide build fita bows and how mutch of the bow market do they represent ? I would think that the manufacturers would be pushing for it . what a great advetisment for their products . Ya know "look at joe blow he just won gold at the games with/place your bow name here/ buy our bow and be good like him . just my thoughts



Hoyt does that already and so does Mathews and PSE. Maybe more manufactures should get into the recurve Business?

Dylan


----------



## sean (May 31, 2003)

shooting the same target at the same distance from the same piece of dirt for hours dont sound like mutch fun to do and even less fun to watch


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

If you saw matchplay. You might feel differently.


----------



## Dave T (Mar 24, 2004)

> shooting the same target at the same distance from the same piece of dirt for hours dont sound like mutch fun to do and even less fun to watch


Since this is the FITA forum (target shooting) and the Olympics is target competition, your statement is offensive.

I have one for you...take your engineering marvel that has little to do with real archery and play somewhere else.

I bet you don't like that any more that I like your comment above.

Dave


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> I don't agree. My kids and I were glued to the set the other day, watching the Bravo channel's Olympic archery coverage that was copied to a DVD by a friend of mine. I thought it was very fascinating to watch. Only had to Mute it during one match too
> 
> My mother (who has never shot a bow in her life, and had never seen me shoot a bow in a tournament before Athens) was so excited during the matches over there, that my wife and I had to calm her down. She was on the edge of her seat through every match. Okay, we were in THE original Olympic stadium, but still... Pretty exciting stuff to watch IMO.


That was the point for the "New Olympic Round". To make archery interesting enough to watch. But to tag along and watch a field round, or worse, a 3D round. Yawn...

Having said that, one afternoon while flipping through channels I came across the "Great Outdoor Games" or something like that. It was some 3D guys shooting a novelty shoot competition. Knocking targets over, hitting moving targets, etc. My wife sneered at it and said, "No, we're not watching this. Yuck!" But after a few minutes she really got into it and was Oooooing amd Awwwwing when they guys missed and cheering when they hit. She really enjoyed it.

No one in my family has seen "daddy" compete in a tournament yet.  Too boring.

So, the Olympic Round, and cetain novelty shoots, may be fun to watch, but I still contend that archery is a participation sport rather than a specatator sport. To me, that is a good thing.

I also have to admit that I have not seen the match play competition from the Olympics. (Any chance I can get a copy of that DVD?  )



limbwalker said:


> But then, I'll sit and watch 3 hours of golf on a Sunday afternoon too, so...


Me too. Drives my wife nuts.


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

sean said:


> I would venture a guess that for every fita bow made at least 1000 compounds are sold and if you want to see archery become a big deal in the olyimpics maybe more people would show intrest if they could relate to the sport.


How well do most people relate to womens gymnastics? Figureskating? Luge?!?!? Relating has nothing to do with it.

Scroll back and re-read Jim C's four reasons. I think he's right.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> shooting the same target at the same distance from the same piece of dirt for hours dont sound like mutch fun to do and even less fun to watch


Sean, I think you're missing the point. 

The countries of the world have decided that this IS the pinnacle of archery competition, that's why it is included in the Olympic games. If some other form of archery were considered a higher form, then IT would have been included in the Olympic games, I'm sure. The rounds have changed quite a lot since '72, and certainly since the earlier Olympic games, and my guess is that there will be more changes in the future. But in this game, the U.S. compound manufacturers aren't making the rules, which is as it should be.

Dave T, well said.

Baldmountain, I agree. Matchplay is much more exciting and interesting to watch than following a group of guys around and adding up scores at the end. Why do you think they pair up the leaders in the last round of a golf tournament? To make it as much like match play as possible.

John.


----------



## Guest (Feb 19, 2005)

Having watched, participated, judged match play I still feel it is the most boreing thing ever devised, to me watching Field or 3-d isn't any different. I have seen the Olympic coverage and how anyone gets this as being exciting is beyond me. That being said adding compounds will only make watching even worse as things will happen faster as to arrow speed and much slower on the line. With the round only leaving the audience asking questions you will continue to have a boreing round. Archery will starve to death trying to get that carrot the IOC has hanging there. Archery was forced to alter their game to fit a media system and to what real benifite to archers as a whole.

Until we are shooting at each other , archery will continue to be a "paint drying, grass growing sport" exciting to archers and their parents and a yawn to joe public


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I have seen the Olympic coverage and how anyone gets this as being exciting is beyond me.


Guess you had to be there...

Sean, your attitude is positively depressing. If you don't love this sport, how 'bout taking up another?

John.


----------



## Guest (Feb 19, 2005)

Who said I didn't love it?????. I have to totally agree with the staus quo to love it?? is that some sort of Fita law some place. I have never, seen, heard or spoken to an individual that thought archery was exciting to watch that hadn't had some sort of archery background. The media doesn't need to play to the archery comunity, they already have them no matter what they do. It's joe public they need.


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

Sean McKenty said:


> Who said I didn't love it?????. I have to totally agree with the staus quo to love it?? is that some sort of Fita law some place. I have never, seen, heard or spoken to an individual that thought archery was exciting to watch that hadn't had some sort of archery background. The media doesn't need to play to the archery comunity, they already have them no matter what they do. It's joe public they need.


THe thing that I REALLY love about archery is that you go to an event to participate, not to watch. In fact everyone is expected to shoot. Organizers would rather everyone who shows up to shoot. If a 1000 people show up everyone gets to play. 

On the other hand if you go to a baseball game only the 9 players on each team get to play. Everyone else is stuck watching. I went to one baseball game last year. (Go Sox!) Mainly because my daughter was finally old enough and I wanted to take her to at least one game as a kid. Otherwise I'd never go. When I go see a sport, I want to play! Not watch.


----------



## Dave T (Mar 24, 2004)

geoff,

I'm with you. I'm just not a spectator. Then too, having the millionair participants in the "spectator sports" go out on strike for more millions kind of turns me off too (LOL).

I like archery because it's me against the target, not the person standing next to me. Oh, and I love to watch the flight of the arrow too.

Guess I am just a bit of a spectator as I even love watching someone elses arrow arc to the X-ring. Love to see a recurve or even a longbow at full draw too. It's a thing of beauty. OK I admit it, I'm an archery spectator.

Dave


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

hkim823 said:


> As it stands right now, the US may have a significantly higher number of competitive target compound shooters over recurve shooters, but that's not true for the rest of the world. When there are more compound bows FITA shooters around the world than recurve bow FITA shooters, only then should FITA make the compound the bow of choice.


Bull. (sorry, Han Su, have to disagree  )

one of the critical facets of Olympic competition depends on the human body's efforts. 

Compared to recurve archery the compound bow is just too damn easy relative to the results. The scores of the Oly medalists show that you don't need to have pully wheels that grant huge let-offs in draw resistance, mechanical releases that eliminate the human element of letting go of the string and paradox, magnifying lenses that expand the size of the bullseye/xring, nor peep sites that assist in creating a consistent triangulation (eye, anchor, and sight pin) in order to drill the xring at 70 meters time and again.

When it is time to kill something, a compound bow is the weapon of choice. 

But when it is time to exemplify citus, altius, fortius in the case of archery, you do NOT need nor want to cast off the human element that recurve archery demands. 

Frankly, I think a barebow would be even better at showing the human potential than recurve, but the notion of having a sight is not going to go away. I think that it is more likely that archery itself would be expurgated (removed, for yew ********) from the olympics than that it would switch from recurve to training wheels. 
I could be wrong of course, and if past performance is any indication, I am here as well


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

regarding another part of this thread - the notion that archery is not interesting to watch. 

While in Athens during the Paralympics, a coach from rifle shooting sat next to Lindsey and myself in the stands and expressed a GREAT deal of interest in how impressive the archery match play was, compared to his own beloved sport's competitions. 

He was actually making notes on what to take back and recommend to their sport, in the hopes of increasing TV coverage and interest. How about that?  

Now, can you imagine the level of tension that would be created by several compound archers shooting? here's George Tech: "Well, we've gotten through THREE shootoffs of perfect scores, and the judges are going to have to get the calipers out for the 10th time this week to determine which archer is closes to the theoretical pure center of the target and will win the gold medal, what with their HUGE obscenely FAT LINECUTTING ARROWS. Please stand by while they measure those fat guppies....." Just not the same thing as watching the field of swimmers reaching for the wall in thousandths of a second differences, somehow...

Some of my best archer friends are compound archers, but the ones I admire the most are those with no wheels. (aside from Mary Zorn, who shot a 283 this weekend with her recurve, then picked up her compound and shot 30s after 30s in a rather bored fashion. She had more fun "tatting" than shooting that compound bow, I think.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> When it is time to kill something, a compound bow is the weapon of choice.


Ron, I do just fine without them, thank you.  73 lbs. of venison in my freezer proves you STILL don't need compounds to do your work for you  

John.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Ron, I do just fine without them, thank you.  73 lbs. of venison in my freezer proves you STILL don't need compounds to do your work for you  John.


You are entirely right but you already know you are not the everyday archer, but when talking about the bulk of American archers, so am I right. 

How many compound archers in general are able to deliver the arrow at 20 - 30 meters into the kill zone without a compound bow and acoutrements?


----------



## Archon (Jul 14, 2004)

> Where the "world" consists of the US and a bit of southern Canada.


Come on dont be so insular. The relationship between recurve and compound is the same all over the world. Excepting maybee Korea.


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

sean said:


> I would venture a guess that for every fita bow made at least 1000 compounds are sold and if you want to see archery become a big deal in the olyimpics maybe more people would show intrest if they could relate to the sport.


You don't have a clue do you?
Recurve is huge in many of the asian countries with their major manufacturers all producing pretty much just recurve bows (with the exception of KAP who now have 1 compound)

How many bowhunters would watch the Olympics if compound was involved? No more than watch it now. 

Canadian Sean: I know of a large business that had 140 employees all crammed around the TV's watching the finals of the archery at the Olympics this year. They were cheering and on teh edge of their seats. According to the guy I know who works there it was the only event that stopped the entire building. 



> I have a lot of respect for FITA shooters but would like to see them shooting what the rest of the world is.


They do, the WORLD shoots FITA.


----------



## Guest (Feb 20, 2005)

Archon said:


> Come on dont be so insular. The relationship between recurve and compound is the same all over the world. Excepting maybee Korea.




This kind of snobery was common in the 70-80's here as well, looks like their trying to make a come back. Makes them feel above the rest looking down their pointy nose on the lowly compound


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

Who said anything about lowly compound. The way I see it. Compound shooters have made recurve shooters look like the snobs. I hunt with a compound, I started out shooting 3-D with a compound. When I first started archery I was shooting a little piece of red fiberglass. 

I made the choice as did others. That if you want to go to the Olympics or even have a hopeful dream at it. Start shooting a recurve. 

Whats so difficult about that? 

Pretty simple. 

Dylan


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> but when talking about the bulk of American archers, so am I right.


Ron, let's not forget that archery deer seasons were very popular before the advent of the compound.



> How many compound archers in general are able to deliver the arrow at 20 - 30 meters into the kill zone without a compound bow and acoutrements?


Heck, I haven't seen that many that can do this WITH a compound and all the bells and whistles.

Again, not a problem for many archers, pre-compound. The level of shooting today with the compound is, in my opinion, not much better than that seen by the recurve archers of the 1960's. And sadly, most "traditional" bowhunters today can't hit squat because they don't learn how to shoot properly. What compounders today see is, in most cases, a poor example of shooting by guys worried more about looking like Fred Bear than shooting well.

IMO, the compound machine has simply "dumbed down" archery. Look at the attendance at the NFAA or NAA national events before the compounds. In the thousands... It (archery) was the fastest growing sport in the U.S. before compounds came along. You know the saying... easy come, easy go. 

Obviously, I'm biased. I admit it. Some would call my lack of use for the compound "snobbery." Hey, whatever. To each their own. We all challenge ourselves in different ways.

John.


----------



## TJ Mason (Mar 25, 2004)

Archon said:


> Come on dont be so insular. The relationship between recurve and compound is the same all over the world. Excepting maybee Korea.


I was taking a little dig at the baseball "World" Series, and suggesting that the compund guys could have their own "World" series.  

(I love baseball BTW. And shoot a compound now & then.)


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

limbwalker said:


> Ron, let's not forget that archery deer seasons were very popular before the advent of the compound.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


this is an interesting and thought provoking comment that should be examined closely since there is alot of wisdom in it.

when I was a kid, indoor archery was popular-lots of lanes even had automatic target retrieval systems so you didn't have to wait to pull arrows. I have heard more than a few old NAA or NFAA shooters say the same thing John does.

was it the easy come easy go compound bow? hard to say. Lots more hunters who buy the bows just to hunt but not any higher numbers of ARCHERS-that is for sure.

TV, video games, DVD's, lots of other forms of entertainment. organized soccer, gymnastics, karate, all stuff that wasn't around in much numbers 35 years ago.

I also think trad bows are a dumping ground for compound shooters who develop form flaws such as target panic and they end up in a form of archery where some think they don't have to aim (and aiming is what causes lots of problems  )


----------



## BILL B (Jun 21, 2003)

*Bow hunters vs archers*

Jim C
Here in Pennsylvania we have about 250,000 bow hunters and about 300 - 400 archers.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I also think trad bows are a dumping ground for compound shooters who develop form flaws such as target panic and they end up in a form of archery where some think they don't have to aim


Jim, that is true for some. However, most traditional guys these days are in it for a number of reasons. Many just want to get away from the "gadgets" and tools associated with the compound. Others want to see if they can challenge themselves after having taken many animals with compounds. Most, however, are trying to emulate Howard Hill or Fred Bear. Only problem with that is they start out with a bow that is 20# (or more) too heavy for them, and never learn to shoot properly. They also don't realize that Howard and Fred were both accomplished target archers, and that tournament archery turned them into very good shots on game. I'd say that 90% of traditional bowhunters today miss that point, and shun archery tournaments with paper faces as a "waste of time." 

That's the real shame. I guess I'll never understand why they think it's okay for compound shooters to participate in "target" archery, but not them. I think very few of the "neo-trad's" really know archery history.

John.


----------



## Dave T (Mar 24, 2004)

> ...we have about 250,000 bow hunters and about 300 - 400 archers.


This is so true, and I suspect it is everywhere. Can't remember how many guys I've run into in gunshops who have a compound so they can hunt another season. They take it out of the closet a week or so before the season starts to check the pin settings.

Went to a fairly new archery shop in a neighboring town. There were two walls of camo/wheeled bows hanging on display. There were exactly two recurves there. One a solid fiberglass kid's bow and the other the bottom, entry level take-down (think it was a PSE Optima). 



> ...they end up in a form of archery where some think they don't have to aim...


One day last week I was shooting the field course (NFAA - 28 targets) and met a "trad" shooter/bow hunter. He was shooting from about 20 yards or less at each target and shooting so fast (snap shooter?) he caught up to me. He stood by while I shot a 40 yard Hunter face. When I had finished my 4 arrows, he said, "You hold a long time. You must be aiming. That's not traditional."

Dave


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Dave T said:


> This is so true, and I suspect it is everywhere. Can't remember how many guys I've run into in gunshops who have a compound so they can hunt another season. They take it out of the closet a week or so before the season starts to check the pin settings.
> 
> Went to a fairly new archery shop in a neighboring town. There were two walls of camo/wheeled bows hanging on display. There were exactly two recurves there. One a solid fiberglass kid's bow and the other the bottom, entry level take-down (think it was a PSE Optima).
> 
> ...


I love listening to the "aiming is uncool" clowns. THese are the people who pss and moan over crossbows in hunting season and look down on my wife (who just won another Fita BB title t his weekend) since she clearly aims. MOst of the ones who actually can hit something do aim btw.

many of them claim not to aim so as to create a built in excuse when they MISS


----------



## Jorge Oliveira (Aug 13, 2004)

Jim C said:


> ...and they end up in a form of archery where some think they don't have to aim


Arrow suppliers just love them...


----------



## thearcher (Jul 23, 2003)

just to stir the pot a bit...

This attached shot is from the 2004 Athens Olympics Ranking Round / Training field. It was taken during a 12 arrow match between one of the organizers who is a compound shooter and myself.

So the question is are we seeing the future? Or is this just a big tease... :>

Cheers and happy shooting whichever bow type you enjoy!

>>---Jonathan--->


----------



## Jorge Oliveira (Aug 13, 2004)

OK, a compound.

But why a release


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> are we seeing the future?


No Jonathan, just a friendly match between archers 

Maybe compounds could find a spot in the X-games? Those seem to be quite popular these days.

John.


----------



## erk (Jan 2, 2003)

*archery*

Why is it that people don't support both kinds of archery just because you have a recurve in your hand it does not make you ant better than my compound. The advancement of archery is what many people are going for and when you have people downing one form that is not good.One of my friends Kevin Stone shoots on are compound league he is on the parapalegic olympic archery team man he can shoot that recurve it is nice to see him shoot. Sometimes he trys to show us how to shoot that thing but I will never be able to the point I am trying to make it lets promote archery not kill it so no matter what you shoot are what type lets keep the arrow flying.


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

So you are trying to say is, a person with no use of their legs. With no lower body stability can shoot a recurve and you don't feel you could ever do the same?


----------



## erk (Jan 2, 2003)

No what I am saying is that the skill it takes to shoot a recurve is outstanding no matter if you have use of legs or not. That was a pretty pitiful statment on your behalf . A compound also takes skill just a different kind.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> The advancement of archery is what many people are going for


But how can you "advance" the simple form of pulling a bowstring and loosing an arrow? With added technology? I don't think so.

Archery, in it's purest form, still involves pulling a string, bending limbs, and loosing an arrow. That's what it will always be for me.

Motorboats replaced rowboats and sailboats, but you don't see motorboats in the Olympics, do you? 

John.


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

erk said:


> No what I am saying is that the skill it takes to shoot a recurve is outstanding no matter if you have use of legs or not. That was a pretty pitiful statment on your behalf . A compound also takes skill just a different kind.


How was that a Pitiful statment? This person you speak of has a handicap over most other able bodied archer's. A wheelchair archer doesn't have the ability to use legs for stability and sometimes they don't have alot of use in their lower abdomin. So in order to shoot an Olympic recurve it takes alot more effort from a handi capped archer over an able bodied archer. 

When I hear statements like. " I don't feel I have the ability or could never have the ability to shoot Olympic style recurve". Think about a person in a wheelchair. They probably have to work at least twice as hard as an able bodied archer in order to be skillful or go to the Olympics. 

Pitiful? I don't think so. Honest.. maybe I'm too honest with my ideas at times and people can't handle it.

Dylan


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

limbwalker said:


> But how can you "advance" the simple form of pulling a bowstring and loosing an arrow? With added technology? I don't think so.
> 
> Archery, in it's purest form, still involves pulling a string, bending limbs, and loosing an arrow. That's what it will always be for me.
> 
> ...



This type of thread crops up every once in a while and the wheel bow advocates make all sorts of claims that are wanting in fact-such as replacing compounds with recurves will increase spectator interest which is not true. I asked them to list what skills a compound archer needs beyond those employed by a recurve archer

only answer I got was "when its raining, you have to learn how to shoot with your scope lens fogged up"


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

Well when I started archery I wanted to shoot compound because that's what all the guys in the bowhunting mags and Terry Ragsdale shot. My dad wanted me to shoot recurve, but I was 12 and it was 55m for me to shoot comps with one. In the end I won and got my compound. 
I was told "You will never get into the Olympics with one of those". And I accepted that fact. I don't complain about it because it's not anyone's fault but my own that I don't shoot the Olympic style bow. 
Now that I am older in a way I am glad I didn't go recurve because I would never had received the correct coaching for it so would not have gotten there anyway. If I was 12 now I would go recurve because there are other opportunities that are around I didn't have. 
Jim C is right, there is no skill that a compounder has that a recurver doesn't, however you could get to the World Champs with a compound without coaching while it is unlikely that you will in most countries with a recurve (notice I didn't say impossible, that's for you John.  ). 
It's far more demanding on technique and strength than a compound and far more time consuming to train with and develop. I know archers who shoot compound once a week and shoot 1360+. Try that with a recurve. 

It seems that the only arguement people have for compound in the olympics is "But bowhunters in America shoot compound....."


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

It seems that the only arguement people have for compound in the olympics is "But bowhunters in America shoot compound
__________________________

yet when Dave Cousins or Dee Wilde or Matt Cleland were shooting off in the US Open at Canton-in the heart of bowhunting USA, none of those guys showed up to watch

I suspect that when some countries, such as Korea, decide to put the same emphasis on FORM into compound archery, the scores and records will really rise. After all, if a Korean woman with a compound can shoot a higher FITA than any compound woman in history, it stands to reason that a woman who trains as hard, and has survived the same brutal selection process as Ms Park but who trains in compound should shoot 20 points higher than the current record


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Now that I am older in a way I am glad I didn't go recurve because I would never had received the correct coaching for it so would not have gotten there anyway.


Marcus,

Of course that logic is lost on me... 

You never know what you're capable of until you try. But I'm sure you know that now.  



> yet when Dave Cousins or Dee Wilde or Matt Cleland were shooting off in the US Open at Canton-in the heart of bowhunting USA, none of those guys showed up to watch


Jim, exactly.

John.


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

Jim C said:


> yet when Dave Cousins or Dee Wilde or Matt Cleland were shooting off in the US Open at Canton-in the heart of bowhunting USA, none of those guys showed up to watch


But if I remember correctly the World Championships held in New York City were pretty well attended.  AT least for a tournament in the US. 



Jim C said:


> I suspect that when some countries, such as Korea, decide to put the same emphasis on FORM into compound archery, the scores and records will really rise. After all, if a Korean woman with a compound can shoot a higher FITA than any compound woman in history, it stands to reason that a woman who trains as hard, and has survived the same brutal selection process as Ms Park but who trains in compound should shoot 20 points higher than the current record


But they never will because compound is not as "pure" a sport as recurve.

Yes, I'm being a recurve snob. You have to keep in mind that recurve archery is a matter of National pride to the people of Korea. They take their archery SERIOUSLY. Even folks who are not into archery have a lot of pride in their archery team.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

baldmountain said:


> But if I remember correctly the World Championships held in New York City were pretty well attended.  AT least for a tournament in the US.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



the people watching in NYC were non archers-not compound bowhunters


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

Jim C said:


> the people watching in NYC were non archers-not compound bowhunters


I was just supporting your point that compound bowhunters don't go to watch tournaments but members of the general populace who enjoy a good sports competition will.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Jim, 

I think most compound bowhunters, or just bowhunters in general, simply are not big fans of target archery. I know this is a generalization, and most 3-D archers would not admit that the version of 3-D tournaments they compete in these days is little more than a field archery tournament. It's certainly not the "practical hunting practice" that I took part in during the mid to late 1980's. Back in those days, folks used real hunting bows to shoot 3-D. 

My opinion is that there are a lot of people who use bows to hunt in the U.S., but there are very few archers, regardless of dicipline. 

John.


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

limbwalker said:


> Marcus,
> 
> Of course that logic is lost on me...
> 
> You never know what you're capable of until you try. But I'm sure you know that now.


When I look back at my compound career I am certain I would have been a competetent recurve archer, however I doubt I would have been great as we did not have the coaching that we have now. I would have fumbled my way through it and made lots and lots of mistakes. I made those mistakes with teh compound, but it ddn't cost me as many points. 

If I took it up today I am confident I would do it well. 

Jim C, excellent point, where are these hoards of compound fans that will carry archery to the promise land if we get compound to the olympics? 

I suspect that the bowhunters on here want compound in the olympics so they can say totheir mates "I could go to the olympics, but I'ld rather bowhunt"


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Marcus said:


> I would have fumbled my way through it and made lots and lots of mistakes.


Marcus - even in modern times like these, most recurve archers STILL lack routine access to a good reliable coach and end up fumbling through things, and making avoidable mistakes....


----------



## palmer (Sep 23, 2003)

TexARC said:


> Marcus - even in modern times like these, most recurve archers STILL lack routine access to a good reliable coach and end up fumbling through things, and making avoidable mistakes....


I resemble that remark! Thank goodness for the internet. It's hard sorting out the good info from the bad at times, but it can be done.  

When it comes to the discussion at hand, I think I'm as well rounded as anybody (not skilled mind you, just experienced  ). I've hunted with stickbows, compounds, and recurves. I used to compete in 3d with a compound about 10 years ago, and now am shooting recurve competitively. I also agree that compounds in the olympics will not bring out hoards of spectators. Why? because they're not shooting at a deer or an apple, or an exploding target. It has nothing to do with the type of bow. I live in an area that compound 3d is the overwhelming favorite. Talk to them about target archery and they have no idea what you're talking about and have no desire to shoot it, let alone watch it. I honestly feel that the number of people that would be intrigued with archery enough to watch it has more to do with what's on the receiving end of the arrow rather than the type of bow shooting it. People want to "see stuff blow up". America is getting harder and harder to entertain. 

That said, the matches from both NYC last year and this year at the olympics were awesome. I don't know what more you could do at this point to make it more dramatic. That's what people want, drama, suspense, and of course to see stuff blow up (I think we should refrain from that just yet in archery  ). Don't tell me it wasn't suspenseful either; we showed this footage at our last JOAD meeting which was right after the public shoot at the club. I was amazed with how many adults stayed and were on the edge of their seats watching the matches. One guy stood there for almost an hour with his coat on and bow in hand wanting to believe he was leaving any second, but he couldn't.  So, don't tell me that it's not drama.


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

TexARC said:


> Marcus - even in modern times like these, most recurve archers STILL lack routine access to a good reliable coach and end up fumbling through things, and making avoidable mistakes....


I know, it's not the ideal situation. Hopefully this will change in years to come. Everyone should get access to good sound knowledge from day one and all our scores will be higher. 

Well put palmer, matchplay is awesome to watch.


----------



## Footsteps (Jan 20, 2003)

*You all frustrate the crap out of me*

I just spent a good deal of time reading this entire post and just have to say that the polarization you all show to other disciplines in archery is just plain stupid. 

Limbwalker and Jim C - you have your favorite form of archery and support it with passion. Recurve archery is also my favorite form of archery so I can relate. That doesn't mean that I still compete with a recurve though. To hear you guys talk about how low and easy shooting a compound is, I believe you both are missing something. The way you make it sound anyone who has skill with a recurve could just pick up a compound and be great. Yes, they could shoot well perhaps but they would have to work just as hard as they did with a recurve to attain high levels. Look at Rod White, has he had the same success with a compound as he did with a recurve? Not yet. Now on the other hand, Butch did but I bet you could say he practiced just as hard with a compound as he does with a recurve. The top levels of compound archery demand everyday practice and great skill to achieve them. If you were at Vegas and saw the thousand or so spectators watching the shootoff at the end you would relalize there is a group of people out there who would watch a compound. Trust me when I say that Reo Wilde and Dave Cousins and the rest of the top pro's including myself practice hours per day to achieve the levels we are at just as you do.

By the way Limbwalker, you thought the x games would be a good place for compound archery. You forget that it is already in ESPN's Great Outdoor Games and if I am not mistaken there was a survey done of Great Outdoor Games fans and the archery was the fan favorite. 

For all of you that think the "boring" sport of archery cannot get good TV covereage. Well, Curling must be a ton more exciting to get coverage. I don't think so.

Compound archers - Compounds will never be in the olympics just like other sports and disciplines will not be. Let's all face it, $$ talks. I remember when you could watch Wide World of Sports on Saturdays and get to see the "other" sports. Now it is snowboarding, short track speedskating, beach volleyball, etc. Support the recurve shooters and encourage more young folks to give it a try. It really is awesome to shoot and is the discipline of choice for most of the world and the olympic games which I feel it should be.

Unless we all stop bashing each other and support each other, archery in the games will be dead. Let's face it, the most money supporting the olympics comes from US TV and its sponsors. 

I am participating in the NAA Nationals this weekend for the first time since around 1992. I am very alarmed at the participation level. Back then, the range was full of archers. Now it looks like a local shoot at a local range. Every year the NAA competions are smaller and the NAA is having to do fundraisers to support any team. It is dying unless we all bring more archers to these shoots. When I talk to compound archers about why they are not going, they tell me it is because the attitude shown to them by recurve archers that they are second class. When I talk to recurve archers about their hate of compound archers, they just can't do anything but bash them just as I see in this post. The compound and recurve rift is ******ed. All of your attitudes are what is going to kill our sport. You all sound like a couple of countries out there who continue to blame the other for all the problems and will never get along to the detriment of both. Everyone needs to get off their high horse.



Compound archers out there -


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

no one was bashing compounds. We just point out that compound archery doesn't bring anything to the table for the olympics that has been neglected by recurve archery. Not better to watch, and certainly it doesn't bring ADDITIONAL skills or discipline but actually less physically demanding requirements.

nothing more nothing less

I do admit that bashing each other is stupid. My main problem with SOME compound archers has NOTHING TO DO WITH TARGET ARCHERY but compound release shooters who WHINE about crossbow hunters claiming crossbows are TOO Easy.

mentally, compound target archery is as demanding as or even more nerve wracking than recurve archery. Its like 16 yard trap versus olympic bunker

In b unker its harder to hit the targets but you can win the olympics even if you miss a target. 16 yard trap,one miss and you are done. 

I just get tired of the claims that getting rid of recurves and adding compounds will ADD spectators to the olympics. we all know that is nonsense.

good luck with your compound


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Footsteps,

Yours is a typical, defensive reply that I hear all the time from guys who shoot compounds and for some reason feel inadequate, or feel they have to defend their choice of bows.

I don't know why this is. Must be the Olympic status of recurve archery. That's the only thing I can figure. I have nothing wrong with those who choose to shoot a compound, hell, I bought one for my father for Christmas, and my son hunts with one! And I never said that attaining the top level with a compound is any easier than attaining the top level with a recurve. That would be ridiculous. I KNOW that the top compound shooters work just as hard as the top recurvers do. I fully expect that to get to their level with a compound, I would have to work just as hard as I do with my recurve. That's pretty simple to understand, if you really think about it.

We are talking about apples and oranges here. When I said compounds "dumbed down" archery, that was a reference to the average guy who walks into Wal-Mart, plunks down $150 and thinks he's an archer after that. THAT is ridiculous. The changes I see going on in field and 3-D archery, in relation to the recurve distances, is also ridiculous. For some reason, these compound-dominated classes think that the lowly recurve isn't capable of being accurate at 80 yards anymore, even though it was shot at that distance, and farther for many, many years.

bub, it goes both ways. How many times have I been in a range shooting my hunting recurve (which is all of 52# these days) and had some newbie compound bowhunter come and ask me (seriously too) "do you actually HUNT with that thing?" Like it's totally inadequate for taking game or incapable of being accurate. I get pretty tired of that, but I always patiently explain my choice of hunting gear whenever they will listen. And I always offer to let them try it. I have put my recurve (even olympic bow) in the hands of more folks than I can remember. 

Recurves and longbows are simply my choice. I have no intent or ability to make anyone else feel inadequate because of the choice of bow I use. If they feel inadequate, then that's their choice.

My opinion is that the compound is not a bow. It is a machine that shoots arrows. Does that upset you? I don't know why it should. It's just my opinion. I define bows in the traditional sense of the word. One string, flexible limbs that move the arrow. If that offends anyone, then I'm sorry for that.

John.


----------



## Guest (Mar 13, 2005)

I stand by my premiss that archery is quite boring and interesting only to those who have some archery background, wife, mother father etc. I agree with JimC that compounds will do little if anything at the oylmpics that isn't there now. Until we are shooting at each other archery will remain were its at, how many times have we been told that real media coverage is just around the corner. Having spoken to a few TV reporters in my time they pretty much say the same thing, "it's a boring sport". The sport needs a sunset age like gymnastics, must appeal to joe public, and have a legitamate stradigy in it's game, archery has none of this and by it's very nature will never have. I personally feel that if archery was out of the olympics it would have little effect on the sport as a whole, just like the media coverage, we have next to nothing now and survive quite well.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Here's a part of a post I just read on the Leatherwall in a thread asking why archery isn't as popular as golf, and I thought it applied very well to this discussion...



> Archery is a really lowbrow sport these days, all gutpiles and bloodtrails. It is one of the few sports that by and large has gone downhill, and where the challenge level also appears to have declined. The fact is that as much fun as 3D is it is an easier form of shooting than target face archery. It muddles together imnportant field craft, but it is at the cost of a 6 hour course of fire for 40 shots. I really enjoy it by the way. By why would the average non-hunter want to get all dirty and mosquito bitten in order to shoot and foam bambis, when the target face is more challenging. Of course they have sorta put the target face on the foam, rather than the odd shaped zones.
> 
> I could never bring up the fact that I am a dedicated archer in any of the social situations I have found myself in from top to bottom, for 45 years. For me it is a romantic and beautiful thing, but that just ins't the way others see it. Build a sport that is fundamentaly pretty ugly in the modern world, and people aren't goin to beat a path to your door. Hitching archery to the declining demographic of hunting slamed the door in people's faces who weren't interested in hunting. I remember when the the main archery mags did not have the word Bowhunting in their titles. Bow and Arrow, and Archery World.


I can't sum it up much better than that.



> The sport needs a sunset age like gymnastics, must appeal to joe public, and have a legitamate stradigy in it's game, archery has none of this and by it's very nature will never have


Sean, those are some good points. I mean, part of the "WOW" factor with many Olympic sports is that we watch these teenage kids do things that seem impossible to do. How interesting is it for the general public to watch a out of shape, middle aged man make the same exact shot over and over and over again? Strategy? We could have that, but it would require a new round. Some risk/reward should be included in the Olympic event. Make archers choose which target to shoot. I hear that's what makes the ESPN event spectator friendly (sorry, never seen it...as I don't have cable or dish).

John.


----------



## FEN TIGER (Mar 13, 2005)

*olimpic archery*

i suppose archery could be made more xciting, how about basing it on something like biathelon,  .
archer runs around a 20km course and shoots 3 arrows at a target every 5km, and for every point less than 10 they have time added on  
frankly that would kill me and i would prefer archery to stay as it is.
i shoot recurve and quite often there is a compound archer on the same target, we don't ridicule each other and if i score better they say well done.
as for compounds in the olimpics i car'nt see what the problem is, it should be its own class plus some exceptions
1; only finger release
2; no optics
3; no peep


----------



## FEN TIGER (Mar 13, 2005)

*olimpic archery*

oh and they should take the bows down and reasemble between shoots, all equitment to be carried using a large negrini bow case or a sack barrow, just to make things a bit more realistic, bivvy tent and spotting scope optonal


----------



## sailorman126 (Mar 4, 2005)

I didnt read every post but from the ones i did read it looked like and either or event. Why not different events. YOu could have recuve team and indiviual and you could have compound team and indidvual. After all you have softabll and baseball, downhill and xcountry skiing ect. Hell you could make compound an indoor winter event and recurve a summer event. Lots of options not just either or.


----------



## ptcrad24 (Jan 7, 2005)

*What if?*

What if the archery touraments were to change into this following format?


Individual and Team Competition. 

1. Competitors run into his pre-set archery equipment. 
2. Load all his supplies(putting all his stabilizers, strings and quiver together)
3. Run into the shooting line 
4. Shoot 12 arrows 
5 unload his equipments 
6. The fastest and most accurate shooter will win. 


Do you think people would love to see this kind of events?


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

ptcrad24 said:


> What if the archery touraments were to change into this following format?
> 
> 
> Individual and Team Competition.
> ...


Nope. What could be more boring than watching people put their bow together?


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

sailorman126 said:


> I didnt read every post but from the ones i did read it looked like and either or event. Why not different events. YOu could have recuve team and indiviual and you could have compound team and indidvual. After all you have softabll and baseball, downhill and xcountry skiing ect. Hell you could make compound an indoor winter event and recurve a summer event. Lots of options not just either or.


It is either/or. The reasons why are in this thread, and all the other threads about this topic.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

My equipment was recurve/fingers until 1971. For 1971, 1972,1973 it was recurve/release. For 1974 to now it has been compound/release.

Since I shoot a compound, I guess I can bash compounds if I want to do so.

There are many that say the compound has brought more archers into the sport and more bowhunters into the woods. And further that there are more bow manufacturers starting up daily.

Do these people think archerty and bowhunting only began with the invention of the compound bow? Well probably not, but it seems like it sometimes.

Relative to the population of the US, there were more tournament archers actively participating in field or target archery during the BC years. The bowhunters of those years were more serious and dedicated to their craft because it was more difficult than yanking back a high weight, holding a girly weight at full draw, and punching a trigger at a deer.

I do not think the compound bow and the release, although that is what I shoot, have really done anything to advance archery unless we include an increase of the number of unskilled archers purporting to be bowhunters or the relatively new sport of shooting rubber deer.

Compounds and releases are a United States thing naturally because our nature is to improve the mechanical functioning of devices or tools. It is our nature and part of who and what we are.

Other sports in the Olympics make use of the latest technology but not archery because the other countrys have not been as actively involved in the mechanical technology of the archery equipment and view equipment advances as a sure way for US victory. Also there is bowhunting.

Unless and until the United States gains full control of the Olympics, compound bows will not be in the Olympics. Anyone crazy enough to think that will happen?

To the other countries involved with the Olympics other than the US, if you mention compounds in the Olympics, the first thing they think of is that we want to put bowhunting in the Olympics.

Anybody care to guess what the world view of a US bowhunter might be?

Besides all that, the tenure of archery in the Olympics is tenuous because of other sports wanting to get in. Remember that TV wants to show nubile young women in tight leotards. As JimC said, we cannot make any changes or additions anyway for the risk of loosing the Olympic game we have now.

So we will just have to be content with a fragmented sport.


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*well*

I agree with Limbwalker, I do think that recurve and traditional is a different way to do things. In all honestly, I made a commitment to try to shoot well, and no metter how badly I've done, I've stuck with recurve. Its one thing to just stand on the range and shoot X's all day, and with a compound you can do that. But with a recurve... you never stop improving and you never thing you are good enough that you've "made it." That's the challenge of life. 

Compounds are easier to shoot because they are exactly that... machines that shoot arrows. Now in all fairness, I believe that if a beginner comes out and starts shooting with a recurve and doesn't so well (which happens a lot) then he/she will be tempted to put the thing down never to hear from it again. Compounds are a good way to get people into archery and keep them there. Kinda like training wheels on a bike. So there is something to be said about the process and mental page each shooter is on. I did well in recurve, because I wanted to learn old school archery.


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*yes*

I think most compound bowhunters, or just bowhunters in general, simply are not big fans of target archery. I know this is a generalization, and most 3-D archers would not admit that the version of 3-D tournaments they compete in these days is little more than a field archery tournament. It's certainly not the "practical hunting practice" that I took part in during the mid to late 1980's. Back in those days, folks used real hunting bows to shoot 3-D. 

As a matter of fact you're right. I shoot a recurve and I'm strictly target shooting. I'm the only guy in the league who does it. Its sad because I actually shoot well when compared to them, in fact beating them sometimes. But its strange because with compounds, there are so many of them out there that people who see an x-factor are thinking "what on earth is that?" Its sad because I should be asking them the same question. LOL. I'm not considered seriously because I don't have what it take to hunt or want to hunt actually. So its weird. I don't like it.


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

I vote bsu_beginner's post quite possibly the most ill-informed of the year. 

Shooting X's all day is easy? Go and win some compound tournaments and then come back and claim that. 
A well coached recurver from day one will shoot similar scores to a compounder in a year. 

Why do we think to make archery interesting we have to make the archer's rush? American football has ALOT of stopping and starting and yet people watch it because it is well presented. (and cause the hits are huge)
I've watched pro basketball that was slow and boring, yet went back the following game. 

It's all about presentation. Matchplay is the key, we just gotta go with it more.


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

I have to say. The matchplay from this Olympics. The camera angles and camera movement used by the BBC internet broadcast was awsome. I enjoyed every single OR I watched.


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*well*

We shoot the same scores because we have to train just as hard. Enough of the criticisms like you just gave will make anyone mentally tougher.


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

> I just spent a good deal of time reading this entire post and just have to say that the polarization you all show to other disciplines in archery is just plain stupid.


Soooo, naturally, in order to decrease the polarization, you felt the need to drag the reeking corpse of this thread from its well-deserved burial 14 pages down ? 


As for the proponents of this tired old argument, I can say this about the pro-Compound/OG minions...

"birds do not peck at green persimmions... they wait until the fruit is ripe."


----------



## Footsteps (Jan 20, 2003)

*Gt*

George, good pt. Feel free to smack me in the head next time you see me. I guess getting up at 4am with the flu and deciding to check out AT prior to driving 3 hrs to shoot the second day of the nationals was a bad idea. Posting here and bringing it once again to the top, will actually show that I am an idiot and still suffer from the flu. Since I have no brain, I think I will share some more of my feverish wisdom.

To each there own I guess but I do wish that more compound archers would support the recurve archers and their style of shooting because IT is the Olympic style of choice and personally I don't want to see that changed. When you see someone shooting a recurve, encourage them and ask that they shoot with you in the leagues. Heck, we have a few longbow shooters participating in our field archery league and they have a great time. Who cares what their scores are as long as they enjoy shooting ARCHERY. Stop whining about compounds not being in the Olympics and instead try to encourage more to support shoots with recurve classes and encourage youngsters to try shooting a recurve and maybe make the Olympics their dream. 

Recurve shooters, STOP talking down to compound archers as not really shooting archery. Take your carbon foam limbs and super high tech arrows and vanes and realize that you are not as pure yourself. Stop whining about "training wheels". You may find that others may try a recurve instead of just being turned off by the attitudes being shown to them by some in your discipline. You may actually reverse the trend and once again begin to expand recurve archery.

Quote: "How interesting is it for the general public to watch a out of shape, middle aged man make the same exact shot over and over and over again?"

Or 

Quote: "Yours is a typical, defensive reply that I hear all the time from guys who shoot compounds and for some reason feel inadequate"

I like the last one best. These don't help your cause. 

Limbwalker, you did an awesome thing making the Olympic team and I wish you the best next time around. It is the dream of many but only a few ever realize it. However, saying that I feel inadequate because I don't shoot a recurve. I have a international GOLD medal from when I shot on the US Archery Team with a recurve. I was an All America Archer in college with a recurve. I am a current team member on the US World Indoor Team (yes with a compound). Don't insult me!


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Footsteps said:


> George, good pt. Feel free to smack me in the head next time you see me. I guess getting up at 4am with the flu and deciding to check out AT prior to driving 3 hrs to shoot the second day of the nationals was a bad idea. Posting here and bringing it once again to the top, will actually show that I am an idiot and still suffer from the flu. Since I have no brain, I think I will share some more of my feverish wisdom.
> 
> To each there own I guess but I do wish that more compound archers would support the recurve archers and their style of shooting because IT is the Olympic style of choice and personally I don't want to see that changed. When you see someone shooting a recurve, encourage them and ask that they shoot with you in the leagues. Heck, we have a few longbow shooters participating in our field archery league and they have a great time. Who cares what their scores are as long as they enjoy shooting ARCHERY. Stop whining about compounds not being in the Olympics and instead try to encourage more to support shoots with recurve classes and encourage youngsters to try shooting a recurve and maybe make the Olympics their dream.
> 
> ...



good points. Have a couple questions

why did you switch to a compound despite having a strong background in recurve archery? I get criticized because at my joad club I always start NEW archers with recurve bows (I won't turn away compound kids and my first two olympians and silver olympians were compound archers as was my wife before she decided to go to Fita BB). I think Jim Quarles and John Magera are correct in noting that with the advent of compounds the level of serious tournament shooters declined but that could be coincidence as well. I do remember going to Charlie Pierson's indoor range in the early 70's on saturday afternoons and the place always had at least 14-20 people shooting (not leagues-open shooting) and there was another equally popular range within 25 miles while now our range is the only one in a 30 mile radius and there are alot less people shooting now even though there are far more places SELLING bows


----------



## Footsteps (Jan 20, 2003)

Hi Jim, 

I actually stopped shooting a recurve back in 1992 while I lived in California. My career was taking off which was demanding more and more of my time and the nearest place to practice was 1.5hrs one way. Actually, I stopped shooting altogether at this time. At the end of 1999 I was fortunate enough to be able to move back home to Wisconsin. There are a few ranges near me and I decided to begin shooting again. (I actually began shooting when I was a kid with a compound and didn't pick up the recurve until college). Since I no longer had an Olympic dream, I decided to shoot a compound because there were a lot of local shoots available. At the time, I had no desire to compete at the higher level shoots. Well, one thing let to another and...

I also like to have kids start out with a recurve. Actually, both my girls began shooting with a recurve. Unfortunately, they lost interest and stopped shooting. Actually my oldest has recently asked if she could get a compound bow and try shooting it. 

I currently coach a girl who won the JOAD National Outdoor. I also assist with kids archery classes and try to showcase her and get other kids interested in recurves. My clubs JOAD program has half the kids shooting recurves. We all try to encourage kids to at least begin shooting them.

There is no question Archery was a bigger sport back in the day. I love seeing all the pictures of "old timers" shooting. The women in dresses and the men in suits. Pretty cool. Unfortunately those days are gone. However, our leages over the past several years are growing. This was not always the case. When I first joined the club, there was some polarization in the styles of shooting and types of leagues and the target leagues were suffering. What the bowhunters would tell me is that they didn't want to shoot the target league because of the attitude of the shooters. "win or die" type attitude. They just wanted to have fun and didn't see that league as having fun. A few of the guys and I have been trying to change that and continue to encourage others with great success. This year at Vegas, they set an attendance record. Unfortunately this does not seem to be the norm. 

I really think the popularity of the sport has suffered along with other aspects of our lives because of TV and the media. Let's face it, we all love football, basketball, Nascar, etc. But we also like things easy. Remote controls, big screen TV's, fast food, pizza delivery, etc. When it comes to sports the media proclaims the "high flying, hard hitting" aspects of sports to get viewers. We all like the adrenaline of it all. Archery, just doesn't cut it for most in the sporting world of today. I don't think this has to do with the advent of the compound. Just the change in society as a whole. 

Keep getting those kids to try recurves and get them to travel to shoots. As many as possible. They are our future. We need to continue to find more ways to excite kids and keep their attention on archery. This means getting creative in our JOAD programs and making sure the kids have fun first and foremost.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

thanks for the thoughtful reply. Congrats on your student winning the title. I had a boy win National Outdoor back in 1999 though another coach had grounded him in solid fundamentals and deserves as much or more of the "credit". Makes sense to me. I wish the IBO had not dropped recurve aided because a bunch of my kids wanted to try 3D along with recurve fita and even in what was once the recurve target capital of the world (Ohio-at one time the USA world team was basically made up of ohio or near Ohio guys-Pace Mckinney, Brothers, Baston, and Bednar-and the PAA had lots of Ohio winners-Robinson, Berger etc) there are big 3D shoots each weekend while FITA/NAA tournaments are maybe one a month.

anyway I agree that archery is archery and I try to support all sorts of archery and contrary to popular belief by a few people here, I own several compound bows and have actually shot in dozens of 3D league or local tournament shoots


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

From where I am, I don't see the whole "compound/recurve", "target/hunter", or "naa/nfaa" deathmatch that some people are seeing. I'm not old enough to remember the PAA heyday, and this year's NAA Indoor Nationals had less adults than I remembered the last time I shot it 4 years ago, but archery as a sport is far from dead in this country or around the world. I've dedicated myself to competitive archery, and right now it's target FITA style recurve archery but that doesn't mean that I'm going to shoot a recurve until the day I die. The same way that I don't hunt right now, but that doesn't mean that I won't want to pick it up in the future. 

Are there recurve snobs out there? Absolutely. But I don't think that it's any larger of a group than compound snobs who think they're high and mighty with their high tech optics and killer accuracy, hunter snobs who believe that killing just paper is a waste of time, and just in general elitests out there that think they're better than other people.


----------



## Footsteps (Jan 20, 2003)

*Ohio hot bed*

Ohio as the hot bed...you can say that again. I remember when I was shooting recurve and traveling what seemed like almost every weekend to shoots in Ohio, Michigan and Indiana. I loved the "Oxford" Nationals. I spent many a night looking at Mr Pace's scrap books and watching some of his home movies of him shooting at his house. I am still awe struck at his accomplishments. Truly the best competition archer of all time and a heck of a guy. (I remember one night at the Olympic Training Center when it was in Colorado Springs, Pace and I went over to a bar across the street and played pool until close. At one point, I remember him rolling off one liners as fast as he could for 30 minutes straight. My stomach still hurts. Dang, great memories!!!!!!! I miss those days.) 

Good luck with the kids. See you around.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Footsteps said:


> Ohio as the hot bed...you can say that again. I remember when I was shooting recurve and traveling what seemed like almost every weekend to shoots in Ohio, Michigan and Indiana. I loved the "Oxford" Nationals. I spent many a night looking at Mr Pace's scrap books and watching some of his home movies of him shooting at his house. I am still awe struck at his accomplishments. Truly the best competition archer of all time and a heck of a guy. (I remember one night at the Olympic Training Center when it was in Colorado Springs, Pace and I went over to a bar across the street and played pool until close. At one point, I remember him rolling off one liners as fast as he could for 30 minutes straight. My stomach still hurts. Dang, great memories!!!!!!! I miss those days.)
> 
> Good luck with the kids. See you around.


good luck at the WIC. bring back some hardware. I work with DP running the CJOlympians. His son Doug is getting to be a pretty good archer as well.


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

> However, saying that I feel inadequate because I don't shoot a recurve. I have a international GOLD medal from when I shot on the US Archery Team with a recurve. I was an All America Archer in college with a recurve. I am a current team member on the US World Indoor Team (yes with a compound). Don't insult me!


Rod, ya gotta cut John some slack... he wasn't around when you were the big dog on campus. I'm sure it wasn't meant to be disrespectful.

Heck, he's the same guy who, last August, complained that a "nobody" like Denise Parker shouldn't have been making comments about his form on NBC... 

Ya just gotta cut the newbie some slack, that's all...  

Now with that said, Rod, you are living proof that shooting a recurve does good things for your compound-ness. All those NFAA guys were shell-shocked at what you did to them last summer, after all... but then again, there's another bunch that didn't know who they were dealing with...


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Rod, GT is correct. It wasn't meant to be disrespectful. Typically, the reaction I see from compounders who want to bash recurves is simply due to their own feelings of inadequacy, usually caused by an unwillingness to challenge themselves. Obviously that isn't the case with you. So I apologize for not knowing the archery credentials of a person called "Footsteps." 

However, GT is NOT correct when he claims that I referred to Denise as a "nobody" that made comments about my form. 

Are we going to do this again George? Stick to the facts, will you? She never, in fact, made comments about my form. That would have been more appropriate than the things she did say. Go review the tape if you have to. I was annoyed by her comments, and I said that those comments were likely due to her inexperience as a commentator. Apparently quite a few other folks agreed with me, since many folks I know - and many more I've never met sent me PM's and e-mails telling me to ignore her thoughtless, unsupportive (and other, more colorful descriptives) remarks. For Denise to place the blame on a single team member and say things like "all would be forgiven" is just irresponsible. And she of all folks should know after the things that were written and said about her after Sydney (yes, George, I do my homework). 

Was I pissed? You bet I was. I still feel the commentary was unfair and inappropriate. When she had an opportunity to support a member of the U.S. Olympic team (and their coach), she simply called into question my nerves and Frank Thomas' decisions instead. But then, I guess that's what the media does best these days, even if it is to their own. So perhaps she was coached or led down this road? I don't know. She seems like a wonderful woman, who I have since spoken with several times. I'm frankly surprised that someone so nice would have chosen her words so carelessly. I guess I expected her to be more supportive, especially considering some of the things the media said about her following the Sydney games (that were also grossly unfair IMO).

I may be new to Olympic style archery, but I'm no "newbie" in archery, or in life. I can only hope you were joking.



> However, saying that I feel inadequate because I don't shoot a recurve. I have a international GOLD medal from when I shot on the US Archery Team with a recurve. I was an All America Archer in college with a recurve. I am a current team member on the US World Indoor Team (yes with a compound). Don't insult me!


Rod, It's things like this that lead me to believe a break from this forum is overdue for me. I don't always choose the right words at the right time either.

John.


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Rod, It's things like this that lead me to believe a break from this forum is overdue for me. I don't always choose the right words at the right time either.


Actually John, considering some of the crap I've seen people write as responses to you and the gentlemanly way you respond to that crap shows just how good a person you are. About the only other person I've seen who responds as well on AT as you is Jim Rodtka aka Jungle. (See his posts on the Full Moon bows in the manufacture's area.)

Actually, these forums REALLY need folks like you and Rod and George. (I wish George would post more.) To me AT serves three purposes. One is as virtual community where folks like Leighton and I can argue about stuff we don't really understand.  Second as a forum that manufactures to use to announce new products and to provide a first level of support to their customers. And third as a place for dopes like me to learn a few things from folks who do know what they are talking about like your and Rod and George... (I just which there was a lot less 1 and a lot more 3.  )

I know I should stop there but I can't help myself...

The majority of respondents on this board are from the US. Americans don't like hearing stories of people working for years on end to be successful. People still ask Lance Armstrong how he became so successful because they don't like his answer. IIRC it goes something like: "I busted my ***** for 8 hours a day on my bike." We like instant gratification and we like our choices to be justified. Most americans shoot compound because it is relatively easy to shoot decent scores quickly. We expect our choice to be justified by other people and therefore have a tendency to be a little indignant when they choose recurve instead. (I get razzed a lot because I sold all my compound stuff and bought a recurve.)

I don't want to take anything away from the compound archers who win at Vegas or World Championships, or even state and sectional championships. They work hard to win those tournaments. As hard as the recurve archers who go to the Olympics.

I'm just describing the mass psychological attitude of Americans to succeed quickly and have others agree with their decisions. And if you don't like it we'll kick your *****.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

good posts Geoff and John. I note for the record that gt and Limbwalker are two of the brightest and most honorable people I have had the pleasure to meet in archery and in all sports(I shot on the USST circuit in Skeet and was a ranked Squash player and coach for many years). I too thought DP's comments were a little over the line given that the USA had already pulled a major upsets finishing higher than the Swedish Team and the team that featured three guys who held the three major archery titles (Olympic, Indoor and Outdoor)-Italy.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Whew! 

I just re-read my post, and sometimes I just think I need to take a step back and wait a day or so before typing a response. I can be a pretty emotional guy at times, and I admit that I need to temper that with some patience and perspective. 

I certainly didn't mean to re-direct this thread and criticize Denise. That's not like me. I have the utmost respect for her accomplishments and earlier this year was in awe of her ability to pull off an event like the ATA show. At her age, I doubt I would have the courage to take on an event of those proportions. My hat is off to her.

In fact, when I learned that she would be providing color commentary for the NBC Olympic archery coverage, I was very pleased that they chose someone who might actually know something about Olympic archery. She has never been anything but pleasant to me, and I'm embarassed if I have led anyone to believe otherwise.

Geoff and Jim. Thanks.

Rod, I'm curious why you say you no longer have "an Olympic dream." What led to that decision? 

John.


----------



## Dave T (Mar 24, 2004)

John,

Please don't give up on these boards. I always check any post you have responded to because I've always find your comments to be wise and helpful. It does my ego good to find I agree with you frequently. It makes me think I am on the right path and at my age that path is too short to waste a lot of time going in the wrong direction.

Keep sharing your experience and wisdom!

Dave


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*woah*

I heard the commentary John, and honestly. If I were you I wouldn't worry about getting emotionally riled up. She's a reporter and sometimes reporters are stupid enough to comment out of context. Sometimes I believe they make stupid comments just to add the shock value (and here I am with a job in DC lined up after this commenting on how stupid the media can be), and if you didn't notice, there were many other Olympians who were asked stupid questions and had dumb things said about them. The problem with her commentary is that she made absolutely no sense.

On the lighter side of compounds. I have to get this out of my system:
1. I find it amusing that I shoot a recurve and everyone's like "ooohhh." You ask them "do you wanna try this out?" And most of the time they look intimidated and refused cuz its too hard. 

2. I had a bad shot the other day and honestly, I think they were being a little insulting. I wasn't hitting any X's and... this kid who was like 4 years old just got his first compound and was hitting a few X's and the guys were like "he shoots better than you." (I was shooting 20yards and this kid was maybe 7 yards out). I think that's taking it over the top slightly. It is insulting, it is unsportsmanlike and its very rude and ignorant. But sadly, its easy for compound shooters to be in awe of that fact you shoot... you ask them to shoot and they get all vexed. You shoot bad and they make comments like "sure you don't wanna go to compound?" 

Sadly, I use to respect compound shooters as archers and gentlemen/ladies (I could care less about how they shoot cuz nobody's perfect)... but now I cannot. 

To the compound shooters out there I have one thing to say: DO YOU THINK THIS LOOKS AS EASY AS WHAT YOU'RE DOING? CUZ ITS NOT.


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

Dude your just in the wrong club / range. I'm sure they're only ribbing you and not really being serious about it ... just shrug it off. You need to hang out with people who understand both, or at least respect both. 

Many people want results, they want to be able to hit the middle as quickly as possible and do it with minimal effort. Most people are going to get to that level shooting a compound, peep, and release than you would shooting recurve, no peep and fingers.


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*hkim*

thanks for the comment. But sadily... I'm honestly the only one of two archers in the club who don't shoot compound  My partner shoots barebow... and ironically... we are like 9th in the league of 15 teams.


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

> Sadly, I use to respect compound shooters as archers and gentlemen/ladies (I could care less about how they shoot cuz nobody's perfect)... but now I cannot.
> 
> To the compound shooters out there I have one thing to say: DO YOU THINK THIS LOOKS AS EASY AS WHAT YOU'RE DOING? CUZ ITS NOT.


Yep, you need to get out more. 
This is a forum accessed world wide and not just Indiana. There are some very very impressive compounders here and many would spank you with a recurve. The only thing that would hold many back is that their backs are stronger in different areas. (I know plenty of recurvers who struggle to pull back my 60lb compound, yet are shooting 40+lbs on the fingers)

Examples: My wife shot a little recurve for fun indoor only but shot mainly compound (and is the current National Indoor champ) when a spot on the Olympic team came up she took the bow outside and shot 592 for an Olympic (double 70m round) despite having not shot a recurve outside in almost 10 years. She made the trials and finished 4th, beating the eventual winner in one of their matches.
One of the kids at my club is a multiple National champion compounder. He's 14 and picked up a recurve at the club and first round broke an Australian U14 indoor record. 

Then you have the compounders on here who have competed internationally with recurve before. 

Sorry dude but there are lots of compounders out there who are very serious archers. We joke around at our club too if a kid blasts in 3X's. Did it occur to you that by playing along it would have encouraged the 4 year more? Have fun with it, don't take it as an attack on your ego. 

Not all compounders are trigger punching, camo wearers.


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*civility*

that was a strange way of telling me to lighten up. Being anagonistic and telling me to lighten up and get out. Kinda hypocritical huh? 

I'm not speaking out against compounders who can shoot recurve. Some compounders shoot because they have health problems... back...etc. In fact, I'd say with the difference in shooting... most compound shooters shoot recurve well in spite of shooting compounds. Most compound shooters freak out when they see a recurve. I just find it really disturbing when you show up with a recurve and people who shoot compound are thinking "what the heck is that?"


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

bsu_beginner said:


> I'm not speaking out against compounders who can shoot recurve. Some compounders shoot because they have health problems... back...etc. In fact, I'd say with the difference in shooting... most compound shooters shoot recurve well in spite of shooting compounds. Most compound shooters freak out when they see a recurve. I just find it really disturbing when you show up with a recurve and people who shoot compound are thinking "what the heck is that?"


Most "hunter compound" shooters who aren't serious about drilling paper instead of dear freak out when they see a target recurve. I've worked in hunting outfit shops before and when I whip out my shiny non camo recurve target bow with v-bars and such while the other guys are getting ready for deer season, most of the guys I was teaching first reaction was, "You can't bag a deer with that!" so what's the point? 

If it's a bunch of target guys, I'm sure they're just ragging on you more than anything else, maybe it's just a matter of miscommunication more than anything else. I'm not sure Marcus had any intention of being antagonistic to be honest. 

Or the 3rd options, they're just a bunch of donkeys.

But either way you know what you like to shoot, you can't let other people bother you about that. Many of us have been in that scenario at one point or another, where we walk into a primarily hunting range where people look at your bow as impractical or just plain silly.


----------



## Mr. October (Feb 15, 2003)

Wow . . . . has this thread ever taken a winding road since I started it. 

I'd like to offer a few thoughts . . . . 

1. Hunters vs. competitors. Whether we are discussing archery, shotguns, or rifles, there are very, very few hunters who participate in competition activities. Further, they typically know very little about them. Most duck hunters don't know the first thing about skeet, trap, or sporting clays. Most rifle hunters know nothing about bench rest shooting. It's the way it is. That is why when a bowhunter turns on the olympics and sees the archery competition they wonder where the compound shooters are . . . they have no earthly idea about archery the non-hunting sport. That will NEVER change unless that bowhunter also happens to be a target archer. 

2. Bowhunting/compound mentality of the US vs. the world. The _only_ reason I started this thread is because, though I don't get the chance to travel worldwide to shoots, I do pay attention to shoot results from around the world and you see more and more compound archers OUTSIDE the US. The shoots in the Netherlands are good examples. I also noticed the recently-posted German indoor championships had a fair number of compound shooters as well as the big shoot in Paris. So there are indeed more and more compound target archers world-wide.

3. On this very thread, people are talking about archery participation dropping in a lot of traditional disciplines and events. Perhaps if they had compound divisions there would be more interest. While compound archery may not be "pure" archery it still takes every bit as much work to be at the top of the heap shooting a compound as it does with a recurve. A talented archer is NOT going to waffle between the two disciplines and be mediocre at both. By supporting all disciplines within a field of archery, the membership of that field grows as does participation. 

4. Finally, if you don't believe there is a rift between target recurve shooters, and target compound shooters go back and re-read this thread. Archery will never survive with some of the attitudes on either side of the debate. Fortunately, there were quite a few level heads in between. Hopefully, these smart folks can pull the others together.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Mr. October said:


> Wow . . . . has this thread ever taken a winding road since I started it.
> 
> I'd like to offer a few thoughts . . . .
> 
> ...


interest isn't going to be increased by adding compounds and eliminating recurves. What about compounds is more exciting to watch?

I shot the canton nationals the last three years it was there. I shot the 99 Oxford nationals. Ohio and Michigan-two of the biggest bowhunting states going and I sure didn't see any bowhunters show up to watch Dee Wilde or Dave Cousins in the compound OR rounds even though the Miami U nationals were on the front page of the Cincinnati Enquirer and on the news every night


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Finally, if you don't believe there is a rift between target recurve shooters, and target compound shooters go back and re-read this thread.


I guess that depends on how you want to define "rift". Personally, I don't think it's the big deal that some folks want to make it. At every major shoot I've been to, including the international tournament in Turkey, I have never seen a problem between compound and recurve shooters. I mean the actual competitors. But I tend to hear more from the onlookers, especially here on the boards.

At the highest levels, I think archers of each dicipline respect one another's skills. And from what I've seen, they treat each other with the respect that one serious athlete gives another. If there is a significant "rift" then I guess I'm missing it. Even if a small percentage of folks think there is a problem, I guess I haven't seen it really affect anything.

No matter what kind of competitions, categories or classes you come up with, someone is going to feel left out or get their feelings hurt. You can't please everyone all the time and there has to be some standards. Heck, I would prefer to see folks shoot BAREBOW in the Olympics. I don't really understand why they don't, but I don't get my feelings hurt. I was a barebow shooter before I took up the O.R., but I wanted to play along, so I played by the "new" rules. No whining, no big deal. I took more crap from the "traditional" crowd for putting sights, a clicker and stabilizers on my bow than I ever did from the compound shooters. How's that for a reality check?

At NFAA indoor nationals in Louisville last year (for example), I was the only recurve shooter in the Pro-Am shoot on Saturday evening. I know a lot of compound shooters remember this. M.J. Rogers pointed this out to the crowd as he called the event, and then came over and introduced himself to me, and was very, very supportive. So was Reo Wilde, who I partnered with for the Pro-Am. And so were all of the compound shooters in our group. I never felt anyone look down on me for shooting my recurve in the Pro-Am, even though everyone knew full well (including me) that I had no chance of winning any money in that event. But that was not the point. I just thought it would be good if SOMEBODY shot a recurve in the Pro-Am. And I plan to do it again this year. If just one person picks up the recurve and starts shooting it because they saw me in the Pro-Am, then it was worth it to me, regardless of where I finish.

Recurve and compound are like downhill and cross country skiing to me. Apples and oranges. One requires a little more physical endurance and committment, while the other is much more mentally demanding. They appeal to two different types of shooters. Just like barebow appeals to a certain group, as does more primitive gear. To each their own.

John.


----------



## Mr. October (Feb 15, 2003)

Jim C said:


> interest isn't going to be increased by adding compounds and eliminating recurves. What about compounds is more exciting to watch?
> 
> I shot the canton nationals the last three years it was there. I shot the 99 Oxford nationals. Ohio and Michigan-two of the biggest bowhunting states going and I sure didn't see any bowhunters show up to watch Dee Wilde or Dave Cousins in the compound OR rounds even though the Miami U nationals were on the front page of the Cincinnati Enquirer and on the news every night


Sorry . . . I didn't mean interest as far as watching. I meant interest as in more people being interested in being involved. 

I agree bowhunters are never going to show up to watch tournament. In fact, chances are they won't even know it is occurring and would probably find it quite boring recurve or compound. I doubt they would even know who Dee Wilde and Dave Cousins are. 

As far as what does a compound add to the competition that isn't already there . . . well what did Skeleton add to the Olympics that wasn't already covered by Luge? Or for that matter Bobslef? Why have both 2 and 4 man bobsled and single and 2 man luge? Rowing has a "boatload" :teeth: of different classes, weights, etc. all of which look the same to the casual viewer. How 'bout swimming . . . why have medal matches for all the different distances for the same stroke, all the different strokes, relays, etc. These questions could be applied to any sport. The answer to all these questions is it gives more people the chance to compete. That is truly what sport is all about.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Mr. October said:


> Sorry . . . I didn't mean interest as far as watching. I meant interest as in more people being interested in being involved.
> 
> I agree bowhunters are never going to show up to watch tournament. In fact, chances are they won't even know it is occurring and would probably find it quite boring recurve or compound. I doubt they would even know who Dee Wilde and Dave Cousins are.
> 
> As far as what does a compound add to the competition that isn't already there . . . well what did Skeleton add to the Olympics that wasn't already covered by Luge? Or for that matter Bobslef? Why have both 2 and 4 man bobsled and single and 2 man luge? Rowing has a "boatload" :teeth: of different classes, weights, etc. all of which look the same to the casual viewer. How 'bout swimming . . . why have medal matches for all the different distances for the same stroke, all the different strokes, relays, etc. These questions could be applied to any sport. The answer to all these questions is it gives more people the chance to compete. That is truly what sport is all about.



the issue isn't about adding compounds to recurves-its replacing recurves with compounds. I agree that there are too many duplicative sports. The issue is getting rid of recurves or limiting recurve archers so the compounds can play.

I can't think of a single argument that would claim that compounds add some additional skill or physical prowess to the sport of archery


----------



## FEN TIGER (Mar 13, 2005)

*olympics*

i think the olympics is getting too big and exspensive and currupt(drugs)
do we need team sports like soccer, basketball, hockey, baseball, vollyball, beach vollyball.thats just a bunch of near naked girls reajusting thier bikinis every 5 seconds, as for the rest they are highly paid professional sportmen who argue with the ref, fight amongst themselves and live very high profile lifestyles.
getting rid of that lot might just bring the olympics back to who they belong to
but i guess the tv people rule


----------



## barico (Nov 21, 2004)

I attended an international beach volleyball competition back in 02 as a spectator. It is actually a very serious competitive sport. The fact that half of the people playing are not ugly women wearing bikini's is really just a bonus. It is probably too hot to do that sport in tracks


----------



## InKYfromSD (Feb 6, 2004)

This thread has more tangents than my 9th grade geometry book. At least we have a fairly civil dialogue going here.

One of my complaints regarding the Olympics is that if there is to be a medal winner in a particular sport, then there should be a concrete and objective way of determining said medal winner. Take the judges out of it. If you can't have a clear winner then why give medals/have a winner at all? 

As for viewing and gaining a bigger audience share, I don't have the answer. I enjoy watching golf on tv when I have the chance. So do a lot of other people. Why do we watch? Because we play the game. Same ball, same clubs. And it's on tv every week and there's even a GOLF CHANNEL. I think that people will watch a particular sport out of curiosity or to gain a better understanding of it. Probably won't make many curling fans just because the saw it on tv once. I also think it's constant exposure that creates fans more than participation. How many baseball fans would there be if it weren't on tv? How many fans played as kids? Want to grow archery as a whole, then get it in front of people and get them paticipating. Get moving and get involved in the local Archery in the Schools program. Help the local 4H club. DO SOMETHING. Your local cable company has to offer you time and equipment and most will even help you produce the show. I don't think you're going to attract more archers simply because the Olympic round is made more exciting (to the masses) or because you can use a compound.

I am a reforming compound/fingers shooter. :wink: Can you see grinning? Just writing it that way probably set someone off. I like shooting a FITA-style recurve I have many friends among the competition and hunting ranks of compound shooters. I'm meeting new friends in the recurve world every time I shoot. To call the difference of opinions about equipment used a rift is overstating it. I have a saying about opinions but I won't post it here. Any elite archer gotten there through a lot of hard work, regardless of the bow he/she shoots. I fail to see how anyone can fail to see that. 

I've never felt unwelcome shooting with any crowd. Archers are archers. Period. There's been a lot of "ragging" on folks but I can't recall it ever being anything other than done in jest. I've seen more dispute between Chevy and Ford drivers. If one is really looking for a fight, one can always be found no matter the issue. 

There, now I feel better.


----------



## FEN TIGER (Mar 13, 2005)

*olympics and judges*

talking of judges, do you remember the compeditor who lost a medal because of a judges error??
all them years of hard work and training flushed down the karzy.
because the organizers could not be compasionate. heck he did not break any rule, why punish him.
yes english is the olympic language, but when mistakes are made by judges why take it out on the compeditor?


----------



## skybowman (Jan 31, 2004)

*everything beyond a spear's a machine--who cares?*

My buddy who throws a spear always complains about the guys using Atlatls. After all, they are a lever and by definition are a machine which potentially reduces the skill involved. The guys (and women) using atlatls complain about the longbowmen who are using a more sophisticated machine, who complain about the recurve archers, who complain about the archers using sights, who complain about the pulley guys, etc., etc., etc. It's dark outside or I would be watching grass grow. I like all of those things. If I stuck to any one of them, I might be accomplished. Incidentally, you can make a great spear our of three 2315s put together.


----------

