# Cousins at WA 3D in Italy????



## schmel_me (Dec 17, 2003)

If its known yardage and the cousins can see the spot good luck to everybody else!


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Unknown same basic makeup as IBO 3D.

Matt


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

I'm sure he can judge yardage.....fita field is known...an unknown.....so I'm sure he will be ok


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Perhaps he is the ONLY American that expressed interest. Hope he does well. He's one helluva solid FITA Field shooter...and yes FITA field is 1/2 known, and 1/2 UNKNOWN, so Dave is in his element, even if the targets are 3-D targets.

At least we have an American presence in this tournament - - be thankful for that.


----------



## kjwhfsd (Sep 10, 2005)

field14 said:


> Perhaps he is the ONLY American that expressed interest. Hope he does well. He's one helluva solid FITA Field shooter...and yes FITA field is 1/2 known, and 1/2 UNKNOWN, so Dave is in his element, even if the targets are 3-D targets.
> 
> At least we have an American presence in this tournament - - be thankful for that.


While they say our unknown your a fool if you think it is. With the bracketing that is used. Dave knows with in 1/2 meter what yardage the target is. Without the bracketing Dave sucks at judging yardage. His words on more than one occasion are I have no desire yo judge yardage. Kind of supposed he is there. Hope he has figured it out.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

kjwhfsd said:


> While they say our unknown your a fool if you think it is. With the bracketing that is used. Dave knows with in 1/2 meter what yardage the target is. Without the bracketing Dave sucks at judging yardage. His words on more than one occasion are I have no desire yo judge yardage. Kind of supposed he is there. Hope he has figured it out.


Dave knows within 1/2 meter of what the true distance is...and so does everyone else in the field!!! Dave just tends to make more PERFECT SHOTS than the others, and that is why he wins so often! Everyone is "Privvy" to the bracketing system and has been for years. Some have even perfected it further, too. 

I've been in the field archery for nearly 50 years and 3-D game since it was really 2-D with cut out animals on dirt piles or bales, so I've obviously known about that bracketing system and other "finders" for years. There are numerous ways to get at this and be "within" the rules and nobody knows the difference, or if they do, they cannot PROVE IT.

You really "think" those top 3-D shooters don't have a "bracketing system" or an aiming/figuring it out system down pat? If you believe they are THAT good at "guessing", then you, too, like Kirk Ethridge says in his book, "have been duped."

Tell me this, are you going to go out and play pool for money on somebody else's "home" pool table? Those top 3-Ders aren't "guessing" they KNOW it, and yes, the make some occasional mistakes, and they miss more often from making poor shots than from "mis-guessing" the yardage.

Of course, in FITA field, the "bracketing" is entirely legal...and even if it wasn't...how can you PROVE that a person is "bracketing" anyways? You can't see through their eyes or see their site picture...so PROVE they are bracketing? Same goes with 3-D. 

I'd guarantee you that if the ASA used any and all of the various 3-D targets available and did NOT tell them exactly which 20 are going to be used for the year in every tournament...that scores would drop like a rock. IF any 20 targets could be used anytime and no two tournaments used the same 20 animals...things would be quite dicey...and "interesting."

Yes, FITA field does "provide the test too, with regard to the target sizes and max/minimum distances they are shot from...which does make it easier; but the Sight adjustment rules, add to the challenge of getting it right the first time, just like 3-D. BUT, in FITA field you gotta get it right the FIRST time..and if you don't, then you have two more shots to "figure it out" but without a sight adjustment. THREE shots per target, not just one.

Seems to me, however that your comments are not about the "game" but more about the PERSON that is the one playing the game...if it was someone else that had more "fan-boys", nothing would be said about it other than praise and glory for them. At least somebody is there representing the United States, and we Americans should be happy about it; not running the person down for being there.


----------



## jmann28 (Nov 22, 2010)

What is 'bracketing' ?


----------



## kjwhfsd (Sep 10, 2005)

jmann28 said:


> What is 'bracketing' ?


Using your scope housing to tell how far a target it. Example put the edge of tote housing on the edge of the target. See where your dot is. 3 line 4 line ect. That tells you how far the target is.


----------



## kjwhfsd (Sep 10, 2005)

field14 said:


> Dave knows within 1/2 meter of what the true distance is...and so does everyone else in the field!!! Dave just tends to make more PERFECT SHOTS than the others, and that is why he wins so often! Everyone is "Privvy" to the bracketing system and has been for years. Some have even perfected it further, too.
> 
> I've been in the field archery for nearly 50 years and 3-D game since it was really 2-D with cut out animals on dirt piles or bales, so I've obviously known about that bracketing system and other "finders" for years. There are numerous ways to get at this and be "within" the rules and nobody knows the difference, or if they do, they cannot PROVE IT.
> 
> ...


My comments are not against Dave being there. I know Dave personally. I'm just surprised he chose to shoot 3D. 
I'm also well aware of the methods to "judge Yardage" in 3D.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

Tom....you are out to lunch on he comments that he top 3D pros can't b that good at yardage without bracketing .

Walk with them on the practice range while they are judging without a bow in their hand.


----------



## Rocky44 (Sep 18, 2007)

in fita 3d you can not ''bracketing'' because you have the time limit of 90 seconds and must make two shots on each target. 
the most guys they i know use there binoculars for judge the distance.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Garceau said:


> Tom....you are out to lunch on he comments that he top 3D pros can't b that good at yardage without bracketing .
> 
> Walk with them on the practice range while they are judging without a bow in their hand.


I didn't say all they did was "bracket"...they KNOW their targets; they KNOW how they appear at different distances (the best of the best OWN their own sets of the 20 targets being used, or have lots of access to them), they KNOW what they can see and cannot see with/without binocs, with/without scopes; they know how much each target fills the scope housing, gaps between the dot and bubble, and other "angles" to use the housing to "clean things up." In other words, they KNOW their "system"...AND they can also segment the distances too.
It doesn't come easy and a lot of time and work goes into it. Bracketing won't quite get the job done...so there are many other means/methods & systems involved to ascertain this. If one goes out on the range to shoot with the PROS...and YOU are the one guessing...you might as well hand them your entry fees, cuz they are going to clean your clock!

Of course, in addition to this, they are also well practiced and versed in shot execution and form. They also KNOW that if they can put the arrow right where they want it to go when they've "nailed the distance" by practicing a LOT on shooting known distances at spots. They CAN hit what they want or place that arrow where they want it, too.

It is NOT simply "guessing" or "judging" by any means.

Those "Practice Ranges" they do only with pen and paper are likely setup with the "test targets" being used for the year in all the tournaments.
Let's take them out there on UNFAMILIAR 3-D targets they've not seen in awhile or never seen before; the human eye is NOT that accurate at distances past about 30 yards on unfamiliar things - - our eyes and depth perception are NOT made that way. BUT....give us enough FAMILIARITY with objects we "see all the time" and we will learn to work within that...but change something to what we haven't seen and been familiar with...and things go awry.

Those top end 3-Ders are danged good at the game...but they aren't "gods" or gifted with super powers; they're human just like the rest of us. They learn just like we do...but they've paid their dues and studied the test better than most...just like studying for the tests in school. Those that study the best and learn the materials will most always outperform those that don't.

KJW:
Good that you aren't "after" Dave. I would imagine that since he wasn't at the Worlds in Turkey and the tournament in Italy was "open" that he chose to go there to shoot a tournament rather than sit at home and not shoot any events at all? Of course, I don't know Dave well at all, but...Dave CAN shoot 3-D, and if he put his mind to it, he'd excel at it, too.

Just like if Levi M put his mind to field shooting, he would be exceptionally good at that, too; or even FITA for that matter.

The key is in shot execution and trusting that shot, not having any self-doubts about your capabilities. Confidence goes a heckuva long ways.


----------



## Jame (Feb 16, 2003)

Garceau said:


> Tom....you are out to lunch on he comments that he top 3D pros can't b that good at yardage without bracketing .
> 
> Walk with them on the practice range while they are judging without a bow in their hand.


Wow!
I agree. I don't know of any pro I've ever shot with that uses this so called bracketing. I know some have tried it but learning th target by looking at it with your eyes is more accurate IMO. Using the target size, depth perception, ground and your gut feeling is how I do it and many others. 

I've been on the ranges with the best where all we had were our range finders. No way to use this so called bracketing and you would be surprised how accurate guys like tommy Gomez, darrin christianberry, Levi, Joseph Goza and man others really are. When I was working hard at it I was averaging less than 3/4 a yard off out of 30 targets. Most Of the time around a half yard.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Rocky44 said:


> in fita 3d you can not ''bracketing'' because you have the time limit of 90 seconds and must make two shots on each target.
> the most guys they i know use there binoculars for judge the distance.


Oh, they bracket all right...and quickly too. BUT...the best FITA FIELD shooters don't just use their BINOCULARS for judging the distance...you have really missed something here!!! Read on...and then go out and purchase the book!! It has recently been re-published!

You have obviously not read Kirk Ethridge's book, "Professional Archery Technique)...he gives prime examples of how he got his clock cleaned on FITA FIELD (specifically) in Chapter 7 "Debunking Range Estimation", pp 85-95. He specifically talks FITA Field and also 3-D, and in pretty good detail, too.

To quote Kirk from page 87, 2nd paragraph: "This type of tournament apparently requires the archer to "guess" the distance to the target. This is a myth. The great 3-D and FITA field archers do not "guess" the distance to the target, *they know it*."

He then goes on talking about his education in range estimation beginning in The Netherlands shooting a World Class FITA field event.

He diagrams range estimation in FITA field and then, on page 93 goes into 3-D. He even talks about how a pin shooter can build a complete "range finding system" into his/her sight. PROVE that they aren't using their sights as an "aid" to determining distance?

You would enjoy pages 92-95, too when he speaks about 3-D. He doesn't give ALL the details he knows, either, ha.

Kirk Ethridge "Professional Archery Technique" has been republished recently. I have the original 1st edition.

On page 95 of the FIRST edition, he directly addresses something important: "A final note on my debunking of the yardage estimation myth: Without bow and sight in hand, very few archers can estimate distance well past about 35 yards. (there are of course thoe few exceptions that prove the rule)".

The next paragraph on page 95 of the original edition, he finishes the chapter with, "Remember, you cannot control what another person does in his mind. Unmarked yardage experts will use every advantage allowed them and so should you. An old Tennessee saying is that you have to get off the porch if you want to _run with the big dogs_."

Those "big dogs" aren't leaving anything to chance! They KNOW their system and they KNOW what they are doing. The also KNOW how to shoot, too.
I don't think human genetics or evolution of "super-human eyes and judging" has adapted quite this quickly...it doesn't work that way! Improved methodology, and of course faster bows have reduced the effects of these "errors" and made getting a solid and nearly fool-proof system a lot easier than in the past.

Here's the link for the 3rd edition published in 2010: http://www.amazon.com/Professional-Archery-Technique-Kirk-Ethridge/dp/0982147120

What I quote above is from the FIRST Edition. I don't have the 3rd Edition, but I'm told that it doesn't differ significantly from the First Edition. The FIRST Edition opened the eyes of a lot of "duped shooters."

I must add that Kirk Ethridge is also an expert marksman with a rifle and regularly shoots less than minute of angle groups with rifles of varying calibers...at long distances, and also holds some "Group" records with regard to 3 and 5-shot groups with center-fire rifles. He has taken up archery again, and given time, he's likely to be right back up at the top.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Jame said:


> Wow!
> I agree. I don't know of any pro I've ever shot with that uses this so called bracketing. I know some have tried it but learning th target by looking at it with your eyes is more accurate IMO. Using the target size, depth perception, ground and your gut feeling is how I do it and many others.
> 
> I've been on the ranges with the best where all we had were our range finders. No way to use this so called bracketing and you would be surprised how accurate guys like tommy Gomez, darrin christianberry, Levi, Joseph Goza and man others really are. When I was working hard at it I was averaging less than 3/4 a yard off out of 30 targets. Most Of the time around a half yard.


What you are saying you are using is....a SYSTEM, you aren't "Guessing" you are learning to KNOW it. Your 'averages' that you state are BETTER than the laser rangefinders' capabilities. Or are they? What if you have to do all this with totally new targets you've never seen before, and had no exposure to them...or if they weren't targets at all, but varying sizes of this or that that are 3-dimensional, but not trees, etc...??

Kirk's book will "open your eyes" (pun intended). 

Since you are so good, then why do you all care so much if others are allowed to use rangefinders...their units only are good to plus or minus 1/2 yard on a fresh set of batteries...and your naked, unaided eyes are BETTER than that, so you still have the advantage and can "judge" better than an electronic rangefinder can fire a laser at the target and back again to get the distance.

I'm not at all saying those guys are NOT that good...what I am saying is that they have a well-honed and well developed SYSTEM that incorporates different checks and balances - - all of which have been practiced and also by MEMORIZING the "standard 20 targets" being used for all the tournaments during the season. New targets for next year? Buy 'em and memorize them too.

Read Kirk's Book..

field14 (tom D.)


----------



## Jame (Feb 16, 2003)

I'm not here to get in a passing match. Just stating the facts. Before u accuse the top pros of cheating by using ths bracketing system you need to shoot with them. I never said I or the others can out do a range finder. Show me where I put that. I'm just telling you to practice with them. I have. 

Knowing the targets, knowing your tendencies in certain situations, depth perceptions, ground, judging to trees etc are ways of judging distance. The top pros do this and do it awesome. 

Like I've stated, don't make assumptions until you have been out with the best.


----------



## Jame (Feb 16, 2003)

Using your binoculars to judge can be done but IMO its easier to learn how to judge legally than to learn how to with binos on every target. To many size variances on animal Targets. Plus you have to rhinehart and mckenzie. 

The ibo you are not supposed to adjust your sight once you have looked through your binos.

If a person spent half the time learning the animals, situations, tendencies etc opposed to learning how to cheat with there binos etch they would get good at judging distance.

Everything you do when competing in something has a system or at least it should. Having a system is not bracketing or cheating.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Jame said:


> I'm not here to get in a passing match. Just stating the facts. Before u accuse the top pros of cheating by using ths bracketing system you need to shoot with them. I never said I or the others can out do a range finder. Show me where I put that. I'm just telling you to practice with them. I have.
> 
> Knowing the targets, knowing your tendencies in certain situations, depth perceptions, ground, judging to trees etc are ways of judging distance. The top pros do this and do it awesome.
> 
> Like I've stated, don't make assumptions until you have been out with the best.


Whoah...you all wait just a minute...I NEVER EVER ACCUSED THEM OF CHEATING...I NEVER USED THAT WORD PERIOD>

Don't you DARE accuse me of calling those top shooters that! YOU are the one interpreting me completely WRONG...and I'm offended greatly by that accusation!

The second you say you are averaging over 30 targets LESS than 1 yard (plus or minus) you ARE stating that you are better than a laser rangefinder...since the best of them advertise plus or minus 1/2 Yard...which is a "range limitation" of a full yard...they could be "hot" or they could be "cold" by 1/2 yard...PER TARGET....so if they are only 1/2 yard off on 30 targets, the sum of the error is...15 yards.

Now you turn right around at the end of your statement and repeat basically what I'm saying concerning visual cues and learing targets, and gapping the ground.. I NEVER EVER USED THE WORD "CHEAT"...I simply stated they have a SYSTEM. YOU put the word "Cheat" into this!

Why on earth are you guys so sensitive about a "myth" that has been debunked for years? I'll guarantee you that they also use their sights, dots in their scopes, scope housings, clarity of what they can see and cannot at a given distance on a given animal...and all sorts of LEGAL visual cues to get the distance to the target...AND...then, they are also able to execute a strong shot, too.

So NEVER accuse me of calling them CHEATERS...you are WAY OUT OF LINE with that accusation.

field14 (tom D.)


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Jame said:


> Using your binoculars to judge can be done but IMO its easier to learn how to judge legally than to learn how to with binos on every target. To many size variances on animal Targets. Plus you have to rhinehart and mckenzie.
> 
> The ibo you are not supposed to adjust your sight once you have looked through your binos.
> 
> ...


Darned right anyone competing does have a SYSTEM, part of which is "technically" bracketing. Some have worked at it harder than others, and have their system honed much better than the the others as well.
If a person isn't using the scope housing, pin gaps, dot, bubble, etc as additional visual cues to "clean up" if they've "mis-judged", then they're missing the boat. You can't see the other person's sight picture, now can you? You gotta learn what those targets look like at ALL distances that they are shot from during competitions. If you don't, then you are giving points away to your competition that does the homework.

I agree with the statement in red...but... WIth a FEW exceptions you don't see the WINNERS using their binos exclusively or using them to cheat with. The person that did that (actually a rangefinding set of binoculars) was nailed to the cross when caught.

What is in blue above is true, too. Again, I NEVER USED THE WORD CHEATING for any of what I said...people are putting words in my mouth...and those accusations are NOT appreciated.

Of course, if you can't execute a good, solid shot, then nailing the distance ain't helpin' you much; you'll still miss left or right, or mess up the shot in some other direction away from where you want the arrow to go. That is where knowing that the arrow is going to go where you point it (if you've nailed the yardage), and if that arrow doesn't, then you 1) messed up the yardage; 2) aimed in the wrong place; 3) shot a poorly executed shot; or 4) you have a bad arrow or the equipment is going to pot on you.

You DO need to read Kirk's book, however...Obviously you haven't, and likely haven't heard about it either. He "debunked" a lot of this "myth" way back in 1995...and back then, the 3-D "gurus" were not at all "Happy" about the exposure. Just like you apparently aren't happy with what I'm saying either. Things haven't changed when it comes to "exposure" of the "systems", and likely never will.

I guess using the word "bracketing" when talking 3-D is like dropping the "F-bomb" in conversation or something. Anytime you use any parts of the sight to help the visual cues..."That" is "bracketing" (or framing, another dirty word in 3-D), but, if you shoot often enough and long enough at those 20 targets that are part of the "Test" each year...how can you NOT eventually learn your "gaps" and positioning, what you can see and cannot see? How can you not learn the other visual cues out there about how it looks with the naked eye, what detail you can pick out and can't pick out, and other details of this nature? 

Good heavens, folks...that gap between your bubble and dot, or spacing the animal between the pins on a pin site, or bending the ends of the pins to get the "spacing" but the main part of the pins look "normal" 

Using that sort of stuff is "bracketing", even if "bracketing" is a dirty word in 3-D.


----------



## Jame (Feb 16, 2003)

No you didnt but you did say using binos to judge distance. That's cheating. I apologize. I shouldn't have stated that way.


The averages I stated are accurate. Accurate with comparing it with our own range finder. I have and many others have kept records from our own courses to the practice courses at the pro ams. That's where our judging averages have derived from. There are pros out there that average less than a half yard off. I'm not just coming up with hear numbers.


----------



## Jame (Feb 16, 2003)

I know better than to even get on here


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Oh, you wouldn't believe the 'conversations' and 'accusations' when Kirk first published his book...and the H$$) that was raised over the Myth exposure in Chapter 7! OMG...you would have thought that the Earth went out of orbit!

Same ole tripe today whenever "system", "bracketing", "framing", or other such things are brought up with regard to 3-D. Fact is...that the bow sight is there to be used...and properly using it requires you pay attention to details. Plain and simple, but not so simple to "MASTER" to a high degree of "accuracy".

How many of the top 3-D shooters that place in the top 5 or even top 10...do NOT own or have access to the full set of 3-D targets to practice on day after day, hour after hour? There is not only an investment of TIME...but of MONEY too. You cannot LEARN THE TEST, without studying for it. The ASA has given you the answers by telling you exactly which targets are going to be used for the year...you just need to LEARN 'em better than the next guy!


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Jame said:


> No you didnt but you did say using binos to judge distance. That's cheating. I apologize. I shouldn't have stated that way.
> 
> 
> The averages I stated are accurate. Accurate with comparing it with our own range finder. I have and many others have kept records from our own courses to the practice courses at the pro ams. That's where our judging averages have derived from. There are pros out there that average less than a half yard off. I'm not just coming up with hear numbers.


Whoah...what I said about using binoculars to judge distance...was with FITA FIELD shooting...and the BEST FITA field shooters DO NOT rely on their binoculars to judge the distance. Again, you need to read Kirk's book!
Apology accepted. PLEASE never accuse me of saying the best of the best 3-D shooters "cheat". That is completely out of line.
I,too, have thousands of sightings comparing my rangefinder to what I "estimated" and at some distances and conditions, I'm nearly dead on. But at other distances and conditions, I have a "Correction factor" that I need to apply, based upon my own tendencies under those conditions/estimated distances. I have these on an extensive Excel spreadsheet and run standard deviations on the results. Over the years, things really haven't changed much. I have certain tendencies, and my "correction factors" remain pretty much the same. 
For example,I know that in a "tunnel situation" that if I "estimate" the distance to be 33 yards, that I should be setting the bow sight for 30 or 31 yards. I might not hit the "12" ring every time, but I'll get at least an "8"...unless I muff the shot...but even then, at least I'll hit foam, ha.

IF the 3-D gurus average less than 1/2 yard off from whatever...they are still BETTER than their range finder, since the rangefinders at their best are PLUS or MINUS 1/2 yard...giving a "range" of one full yard with regard to accuracy and repeatability. In addition, they likely know their tendencies based upon lighting conditions, tunnel shots, person in the trees, target in the open, target in the trees, person in the open; broken ground, and other such things that infringe upon distance estimation of the human binocular vision system.

Using binocs to judge distance on 3-D while technically is "Cheating" still doesn't stop you from LEARNING that when you are properly focused an a given animal at a given range of distance, certain details can be seen and if the distance is beyond that limit, then those details can't we clearly seen. LEGAL or not...any person is going to learn this sooner or later! Same with the scope, too, if you keep the same power scope long enough, that is.
You can't see through each others' eyes, you can't see each other's site picture. Even if you could, what is clear for ME may not be the same for you!
Sight extension? Danged straight that that can be used to help too! PROVE that it is illegal for me to use a 4" extension because things appear better that if I was to u se a 6" or 9" extension?

Yes, these "systems" are mastered, and mastered well. Just do NOT EVER accuse me of saying the top 3-D shooters "Cheat"...I never said that, and I never will, either!

They are danged good at their COMPLETE SYSTEM; whatever that may incorporate! They are even better at shot execution, too.

If people would spend more time on SHOT EXECUTION instead of praising the Top echelon 3-D shooters and thinking 3-D is ALL about "judging yardage" those people's scores would go way up!
I laugh my butt off when people shoot an arrow 6" to the left or right and the first words out of their mouths are "Wow, I "mis-judged" the yardage on that sucker." ROFLMAO.


----------



## Jame (Feb 16, 2003)

What's crazy is I never pay attention to what targets are posted on the website. I should but I don't. I look at as many ranges, targets and situations/scenarios as I can to get ready for a tournament. That's not often the past few yrs." I thought going in business for myself would allow me more time to practice. Boy was I wrong." 

I guarantee you it caused a lot stink. Makes a feel like ya are getting discredited for tons of hard work the rt way.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Jame said:


> What's crazy is I never pay attention to what targets are posted on the website. I should but I don't. I look at as many ranges, targets and situations/scenarios as I can to get ready for a tournament. That's not often the past few yrs." I thought going in business for myself would allow me more time to practice. Boy was I wrong."
> 
> I guarantee you it caused a lot stink. Makes a feel like ya are getting discredited for tons of hard work the rt way.


Absolutely would make you feel that you are getting discredited. BUT...don't put words in people's mouths. That "mess" a couple of years ago over the rangefinding binoculars did a LOT of damage to the credibility of the top shooters. That guy likely will be a pariah for years to come.

Target shooting indoors has a similar situation from a person knowingly cheating and taking a score for arrows shot into the wrong target and basically bullying his bale partners into initially not reporting it. He, too, will be a pariah for years to come.

All it takes is one or two. 

I could never put down these top echelon 3-D shooters for their work ethic, hard work and intelligence for working out a system for themselves that incorporates as many visual cues as they can utilize. It isn't easy, and it is likely not so easy to commit to memory either! Taking the time to memorize those targets at all distances from which they are shot takes an enormous commitment, and costs a lot of money, too. If you want to compete at that high of a level, you gotta do what you gotta do. Then you watch their shot execution and concentration on the SHOT...and it is amazing!

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## Jame (Feb 16, 2003)

I have journals to show my averages and so do a lot of the others. Talk with Dan hart. Awesome coach that has helped numerous archers to learn how to judge accurately.
Think about it. You make it sound impossible. 30 targets. You get 15 perfect and the other 15 you are a yard off. That's a half yard average or you get 15 perfect, 5 2yards off 5 yard off and 5 a half yard off that's a half yard average. Now that's possible.


----------



## Jame (Feb 16, 2003)

I said apologize. Some of the methods you described s cheating and u did say some of the archers used those methods. That's why I said it. I take offense when it gets said we have to be doing something other than judging because no one can be that accurate. makes it sound like we are cheating instead of working our tails off.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Jame said:


> I said apologize. Some of the methods you described s cheating and u did say some of the archers used those methods. That's why I said it. I take offense when it gets said we have to be doing something other than judging because no one can be that accurate. makes it sound like we are cheating instead of working our tails off.


Yes you did...but you "read into" things and I never once said it was cheating...I said the "system" was well developed and also that it isn't ALL judging with the naked eye without other visual cues/references. "Cleaning up" on 3-D "judging" is the same methodology used by FITA FIELD people when they "clean up" once they draw down on the target and "see" that they "mis-judged" when they set the sight...so, they make adjustments from there.

Of course, the FITA field shooters can get by with "buying" the targets quite cheaply. There are 4 sizes, and each of those four sizes are shot from a certain "range" of distances for each target size. Of course, FITA field is in Meters and not yards, too.


field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## stoz (Aug 23, 2002)

I've shot with and against all the top guys years ago and tried gapping. Spent a whole summer on it and the best you're going to do is keep from making a big mistake. If you think you can get to a half yard you're smoking something good. If you ha ve the targets and judge them daily you can do better than that. I guarantee it.. I've won two indoor and two outdoor wc and not wasted my time on either bim os or gapping. And I dare you to call me a liar.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

Jame, you have proven yourself so there is really no need to defend your opinions. 

Thanks for posting. We have so few pros posting on AT anymore because of the public bashing they find themselves being subjected to. Frankly, I don't blame them.

I would also say you've proven yourself a gentleman and a positive representative of the sport.

Best wishes for your future success.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

Tom, please respect the man for his accomplishments.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

I thought the discussion was about Dave C.

That he is there, good luck, Dave.


----------



## gjstudt (Nov 14, 2005)

Jame said:


> I have journals to show my averages and so do a lot of the others. Talk with Dan hart. Awesome coach that has helped numerous archers to learn how to judge accurately.
> Think about it. You make it sound impossible. 30 targets. You get 15 perfect and the other 15 you are a yard off. That's a half yard average or you get 15 perfect, 5 2yards off 5 yard off and 5 a half yard off that's a half yard average. Now that's possible.


I'm right there with you Jame. My journals have many days with the average of 0.5 yds or less. My best on 30 targets was around a 0.2 average of the actual (not often). 

Using the scope or bracketing now that we shoot 50 yds or less just isn't worth much. Back in the Kirk days of just hitting a 60 yard Javelina was a good thing, it was valuable. Today the winners do not use this method at all. Keep in mind the top guys like Jame and others change there set ups and sights to often to want to waste time with bracketing....lol

Knowing the targets, your tendencies in the situations, and the sound judging methods are ways of today. #1 being.....knowing the targets.


----------



## XMAN (Jul 2, 2003)

Just got my snickers bar.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

XMAN said:


> Just got my snickers bar.


share


----------



## ldoch (Dec 12, 2006)

Good luck to Dave and hopefully we will see the results posted somewhere when the tourney is over.


----------



## Dr.Dorite (Oct 27, 2008)

gjstudt said:


> I'm right there with you Jame. My journals have many days with the average of 0.5 yds or less. My best on 30 targets was around a 0.2 average of the actual (not often).
> 
> Using the scope or bracketing now that we shoot 50 yds or less just isn't worth much. Back in the Kirk days of just hitting a 60 yard Javelina was a good thing, it was valuable. Today the winners do not use this method at all. Keep in mind the top guys like Jame and others change there set ups and sights to often to want to waste time with bracketing....lol
> 
> Knowing the targets, your tendencies in the situations, and the sound judging methods are ways of today. #1 being.....knowing the targets.


Just a word to express my thoughts, and it's only my thoughts, concerning the real professional archers who are doing the same. Yes, we can make pretty good conversations, and assume that in order for a person to perform at a certain level that they have to be doing something that lesser scoring competitors are not doing, especially if we have a tendency to be of the idealistic nature and go with all of the theoretical ideas laid on us by those thinking that because it sounds good, and under ideal conditions it is possible, that it's the only way a person can perform at that level. Only thing is we seem to form our opinions based on not what those who have tried most of those different shortcuts that under ideal conditions should have worked, but have found that having to be realistic required their hard work and time consuming practice. This is (imo) why that the lessor scoring competitors are being told that all those theories will work simply because someone read it somewhere and assumed it to be true, while the top performing competitors are doing what works, and are still have trouble convincing those who preach their theories that under realistic conditions they practice what works. 
Me, I'll listen to those pros who are top performers, and am glad they will share their knowledge, while also reading for entertainment only, the continuous stream of theoretical solutions and opinions directed to anyone willing to listen. Thanks to all the top performers for the help you provide.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

Dr.Dorite said:


> Just a word to express my thoughts, and it's only my thoughts, concerning the real professional archers who are doing the same. Yes, we can make pretty good conversations, and assume that in order for a person to perform at a certain level that they have to be doing something that lesser scoring competitors are not doing, especially if we have a tendency to be of the idealistic nature and go with all of the theoretical ideas laid on us by those thinking that because it sounds good, and under ideal conditions it is possible, that it's the only way a person can perform at that level. Only thing is we seem to form our opinions based on not what those who have tried most of those different shortcuts that under ideal conditions should have worked, but have found that having to be realistic required their hard work and time consuming practice. This is (imo) why that the lessor scoring competitors are being told that all those theories will work simply because someone read it somewhere and assumed it to be true, while the top performing competitors are doing what works, and are still have trouble convincing those who preach their theories that under realistic conditions they practice what works.
> Me, I'll listen to those pros who are top performers, and am glad they will share their knowledge, while also reading for entertainment only, the continuous stream of theoretical solutions and opinions directed to anyone willing to listen. *Thanks to all the top performers for the help you provide.*


don't mention it, Doc...always glad to help you out.


----------



## southgaboy (Jan 28, 2007)

carlosii said:


> Jame, you have proven yourself so there is really no need to defend your opinions.
> 
> Thanks for posting. We have so few pros posting on AT anymore because of the public bashing they find themselves being subjected to. Frankly, I don't blame them.
> 
> ...


^^^...well said. Shoot the team shoot with the Pro's at an ASA and watch them judge. Amazing!!!


----------



## RickT (Mar 14, 2009)

Dave shot a 521 on the first day of competition. 48 targets, 41 11's, 7 10's and no 8's. That's 41 up on day 1. Scores are on World Archery.


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

first days scores......lone USA shooter leading by impressive amount.

http://www.ianseo.net/TourData/2013/317/IQCM.php


----------



## MBT-IT (Oct 5, 2013)

I haven't read all the discussion. I apologize for this.
I'd like just to say my 2 cents.
I'm not a pro-archer. It's more or less one year that I use a bow, but I'm interested in 3D tournaments and I asked a lot of infos to my fellows.
in 3D tournament (and also in Hunter and Field) you cannot use sights with multiple pins.
It's supposed you have to "guess" the distance between you and the targets
but in facts, it doesn't happens...
each one has his own method and technique for "measure" the distance and generally speaking they use some parts of the bow
Binoculars are, as far as I know, more or less useless.
They can evaluate the distance, but they will "refine" the evalutation making a comparison in several ways

Regarding the tournament...
this is the official website of FITArco (the Italian Federation for Bow competition)
http://www.fitarco-italia.org/index.php
Special focus on the tournament
http://www.fitarco-italia.org/eventi/dettaglioEvento.php?id=200

website dedicated to the tournament
http://www.sassari2013.it/

Collection of picture
http://fitarco.smugmug.com/Eventi-Internazionali-/2013/Sassari-2013

the Fitarco Channel on yuotube
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...op_uri=/playlist?list=PLe_Dn-FBfDDNrIrT9RXQD3

enjoy... and could win the best !


----------



## targetzone (May 27, 2013)

Way to go Dave and Prime One!!! Keep it up!


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

targetzone said:


> Way to go Dave and Prime One!!! Keep it up!


Ditto!..........


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Just checked. Day 2. Dave has increased his lead. Was 13 and now 20. 
Just awesome.


----------



## 442fps (Dec 23, 2003)

SonnyThomas said:


> Just checked. Day 2. Dave has increased his lead. Was 13 and now 20.
> Just awesome.


Sonny , that's NO surprise ....

There's a full time Pro ( Dave ) shooting against amateurs , practicing once or twice a week , having full time jobs 
with daily work of 10/12 hours 6 days a week .....


----------



## Praeger (Jan 7, 2011)

442fps said:


> Sonny , that's NO surprise ....
> 
> There's a full time Pro ( Dave ) shooting against amateurs , practicing once or twice a week , having full time jobs
> with daily work of 10/12 hours 6 days a week .....


Slavko Tursic is an *amateur*? Sounds like sour grapes to me.

http://europroarchery.com/cgi-bin/htmlos.cgi/events/2012/pas122.htm
http://mathewsinc.com/prostaffer/prostaff-slavko-tursic/


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Not forgettng Dave's status, just that I can remember him being called the "old hand Pro" when he and Jeff Hopkins were in the shoot off at Vegas many years ago - Jeff won.
Dave's list of accomplishments so long as it was back then, growing over the years, his down fall from grace (not mine), kept shooting though no real paycheck coming in, new bow company and still adding to his list.
And this thread did go on about Dave not being the 3D shooter as our other Pros.


----------



## XMAN (Jul 2, 2003)

What bow is he shooting now?


----------



## ibo73503 (Nov 26, 2009)

Dave shoots the Prime ONE.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

442fps said:


> Sonny , that's NO surprise ....
> 
> There's a full time Pro ( Dave ) shooting against amateurs , practicing once or twice a week , having full time jobs
> with daily work of 10/12 hours 6 days a week .....


wow, 10 to 12 hours a day? man they sure work 'em hard over there...its a wonder they even have time to reproduce.


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

Praeger said:


> Slavko Tursic is an *amateur*? Sounds like sour grapes to me.
> 
> http://europroarchery.com/cgi-bin/htmlos.cgi/events/2012/pas122.htm
> http://mathewsinc.com/prostaffer/prostaff-slavko-tursic/


He doesn't know.....just another euro....upset that americans come there and win their field and now 3d tournaments (LOL)


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

bhtr3d said:


> He doesn't know.....just another euro....upset that americans come there and win their field and now 3d tournaments (LOL)


Yep, and Dave Cousins isn't renowned for his 3-D shooting....Imagine how they'd squirm and hollar if Levi Morgan, Tim Gillingham (who, by the way, does shoot FITA, FITA field, and any venue quite well indeed), Jeff Hopkins, Danny Evans, Dan MacArthey, Darrin Christenberry and the 3-D shooters of that caliber came over to shoot European 3-D's. That could indeed happen, you know. ROFLMAO.


----------



## 442fps (Dec 23, 2003)

bhtr3d said:


> He doesn't know.....just another euro....upset that americans come there and win their field and now 3d tournaments (LOL)


Upset ?

No .

I don't care about who's winning whatever .....

Just finding it strange that Pro's are competing in the same category with amateurs .....


----------



## northshorewolf (Mar 16, 2009)

field14 said:


> Yep, and Dave Cousins isn't renowned for his 3-D shooting....Imagine how they'd squirm and hollar if Levi Morgan, Tim Gillingham (who, by the way, does shoot FITA, FITA field, and any venue quite well indeed), Jeff Hopkins, Danny Evans, Dan MacArthey, Darrin Christenberry and the 3-D shooters of that caliber came over to shoot European 3-D's. That could indeed happen, you know. ROFLMAO.


Why not? That could be very interresting and an awesome tournament: A *3D-Continental Challenge*! Teams of 10 archers per continent, 4 days of competition (each day one shooting by rules of IBO, ASA, WA, IFAA). After all days we have team- and individual champions.
Yes, it is utopic, but sounds cool. Let us collect sponsors 

All the best, northshorewolf


----------



## cath8r (Jan 17, 2003)

Put Field 14 on 'ignore', and AT and the 3D section becomes bearable again.... Dave has done the podium in 3D venues before he hit it big. Remember, maybe, 6-7 years ago, OBT dared him to shoot a pro ASA and he missed the shoot down in Open Pro by a couple points by shooting an 8 on the last target? He has the skills...


----------



## Praeger (Jan 7, 2011)

442fps said:


> Upset ?
> 
> No .
> 
> ...


Sounds like that's what you meant. Most Europeans work 6 10-12 hour days a week, really? Still sounds like sour grapes to me, call it what you want.


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

cath8r said:


> Put Field 14 on 'ignore', and AT and the 3D section becomes bearable again.... Dave has done the podium in 3D venues before he hit it big. Remember, maybe, 6-7 years ago, OBT dared him to shoot a pro ASA and he missed the shoot down in Open Pro by a couple points by shooting an 8 on the last target? He has the skills...


yes, the man does know what hes doing when it comes to shooting the bow...no denying that in any regards....


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

I didn't mean to start some xxxxxx match. But then I didn't note the World's 3D Championships being amateur. Finland, Mexico, Canada.... Long ways for amateurs. Who's footing the travel bill?

Hours and days of work? Nothing that I haven't done. Most all my hours and days of work well matched that given. I was 1 of 3 fully qualified for the machines, many times required to work 12 days straight, 29 days straight, 12 hours a day when someone was off work (vacation, medical). My work schedule was of such for from 1998 thru 2003. Regulated to 2nd shift to cover both day shaft and 3rd shift if necessary. Job paid well enough there was no turning it down. Not only did I find time to practice, but my 2nd shift status allowed me to compete at club 3Ds early in the mornings. If doing 3rd shift hours I went from work straight to the club to compete. 

Okay, I'm asking, not trying to start trouble...
World's 3D Championships? Link does not show anything of class, Amateur, Pro.... Not high ranking enough our U.S. bow manufacturers to send our Aces, whether our Amateurs or Pros?


----------



## kjwhfsd (Sep 10, 2005)

SonnyThomas said:


> I didn't mean to start some xxxxxx match. But then I didn't note the World's 3D Championships being amateur. Finland, Mexico, Canada.... Long ways for amateurs. Who's footing the travel bill?
> 
> Hours and days of work? Nothing that I haven't done. Most all my hours and days of work well matched that given. I was 1 of 3 fully qualified for the machines, many times required to work 12 days straight, 29 days straight, 12 hours a day when someone was off work (vacation, medical). My work schedule was of such for from 1998 thru 2003. Regulated to 2nd shift to cover both day shaft and 3rd shift if necessary. Job paid well enough there was no turning it down. Not only did I find time to practice, but my 2nd shift status allowed me to compete at club 3Ds early in the mornings. If doing 3rd shift hours I went from work straight to the club to compete.
> 
> ...


It's a WA event no Pro class


----------



## kjwhfsd (Sep 10, 2005)

442fps said:


> Upset ?
> 
> No .
> 
> ...


It's a WA event there is no Pro class. Just like any Fita event. It happens all the time. Any World Cup qualifier is that way nothing new here


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

442fps said:


> Upset ?
> 
> No .
> 
> ...


So, you think the WA events on the World Cup tour are shot by amateurs? Not hardly!

WA does NOT have a "Pro" setup. Thus, you see the likes of Reo Wilde, Braden Gillenthein, Rodger Willett, Jesse Broadwater, Jamie Van Natta, Erika Jones, and from Europe, Martin Damsbo, Chris White, and the list goes on..>American or otherwise that are "Pros"...but shoot WA events.
Nothing new and earth-shattering.

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

Dave's in the gold medal match.

http://www.ianseo.net/Spot/ViewInd....=0&Event=CM&Phase=0&MatchNo=0&command=Display


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

Dave took it. 44 to 38 in the Gold Medal match.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Clicked the link. Shows Dave the winner. Congrats, Dave!


----------



## UniGram (Dec 11, 2010)

Damn, looks like he took out both of my countrymen, but silver and bronze must do for a country with 6 million Citizens ;-).


----------



## wpk (Jan 31, 2009)

Congrats Dave great shooting


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

He's the man.


----------



## MBT-IT (Oct 5, 2013)

congratulations to the Winner !


----------

