# BHFS Rules



## wolfman_73 (Mar 7, 2005)

Correct. You can pull the other 4 pins out of your sight and shoot it like that.


----------



## Man-n-Pink (Nov 7, 2006)

do they measure from where your stab attaches to the bow, and are back weights legal now, I have heard it thrigh the gra[e vine that they are.


----------



## rock monkey (Dec 28, 2002)

from the good book


i'll just :zip: on the backweight issue.


----------



## wolfman_73 (Mar 7, 2005)

I have no opinion on the back weight issue. If its legal, I will use it. if its not, I wont. I have looked through the NFAA regs and dont see that its been updated yet. Maybe a fellow archer can fill us in?


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

Back weights are now legal because the restriction against counterweights was removed so that the STS would be legal.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

your pin _cannot _be a "circle". your pin or pins can be in a housing, but the "pin" cannot be a circle.

quote from the NFAA rulebook, page 31, F-1. : 

"F. Freestyle Bowhunter:
1. A maximum of (5) five fixed reference points: Points of attachment shall not be considered
reference points. A line running vertically from its top attachment in the pin guard to its
bottom attachment in the pin guard would be legal. *Sighting reference points, string peep
and/or kisser button may not be moved during a round.* Scopes, clickers and draw checks
are not allowed. _A round or oval housing around the points of reference is not considered a
scope as long as no lens is used._ No additional pin guard may be used. A sight pin consisting of a housing with a hole through it, that does not contain a fixed reference point
within the hole, is not allowed." unquote

with regard to "lighted pins", there is an RIC ruling on that in the appendix, ric 2006-5:

"RIC 2006-5
At the Southeast Sectional Indoor Tournament, the Georgia NFAA Director asked the Southeast
Councilman to rule on the legality of a Bowhunter Freestyle lighted sight with the light itself mounted on
top of the round or oval (housing) pin guard.
The Southeast Councilman ruled that nothing other than the five fixed pins and pin guard could be visible
through the sight window of the bow. Since the light housing extends above the scope housing, it was
ruled as not legal in the Bowhunter Freestyle shooting style.
RIC decision: Since the BHFS rules state that only 5 fixed references are allowed, a light mounted on top
or bottom of the pin guard would constitute another reference point, the RIC agrees with the S.E.
councilman's decision."

i know that the thingy about the ric on lighted pins wasn't asked about, but that question comes up time and time and time again; at least in my area it sure does.

field14


----------



## 3B43 (Mar 16, 2006)

Thanks field14, because that is exactly what I was consideing building for a spot sight on a BHFS bow. I guess I'll shelve the idea.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Interesting. Is there a minimum diameter for the pin in the housing?


----------



## Man-n-Pink (Nov 7, 2006)

Thanks for the info guys. I do appreciate it.


----------



## JAVI (Jun 19, 2003)

Hutnicks said:


> Interesting. Is there a minimum diameter for the pin in the housing?


That is currently a source of contention in Texas. It seems that a couple of the top state shooters have built ring pins for indoors with a tiny needle point sticking up from the bottom maybe 0.050 or so. It obviously isn't in the sight picture but it is legal as the rule is written. There was even an attempt to file a belated protest


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

JAVI said:


> That is currently a source of contention in Texas. It seems that a couple of the top state shooters have built ring pins for indoors with a tiny needle point sticking up from the bottom maybe 0.050 or so. It obviously isn't in the sight picture but it is legal as the rule is written. There was even an attempt to file a belated protest


 I figured some keener would catch on to that. Seems to be a little latitude (or should I say loophole) in that wording.


----------



## JAVI (Jun 19, 2003)

Hutnicks said:


> I figured some keener would catch on to that. Seems to be a little latitude (or should I say loophole) in that wording.


Ya' Think???:wink:


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

JAVI said:


> Ya' Think???:wink:


now wait a minute, people....there is a person on here (and it is not field14) that proclaims that all the NFAA rules are written perfectly clear and that all you have to do is read them to be able to completely understand them.

the NFAA rules and guidelines are perfectly clear...no room for interpretation or loopholes is involved......

yepper...perfectly clear and totally understandable all of the time...just read 'em and follow 'em....

funniest part...if those same people in BHFS would spend as much time working on their shooting, shot sequence and form....as they spend trying to bend or break the rules...they'd probably shoot better...but no...they spend their energy being pains in the butts and creating protest and controversy where none should exist anyhow...

makes me, for one, more and more willing to go with the "shoot whatcha bring' and eliminate the divisions all together and go flights, male and female adults, youth, and cub, and that is it.

field14:wink::tongue:


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

field14 said:


> now wait a minute, people....there is a person on here (and it is not field14) that proclaims that all the NFAA rules are written perfectly clear and that all you have to do is read them to be able to completely understand them.
> 
> the NFAA rules and guidelines are perfectly clear...no room for interpretation or loopholes is involved......
> 
> ...


Seems to me its those OUTSIDE of BHFS that worry about the equipment rules msot...


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Bobmuley said:


> Seems to me its those OUTSIDE of BHFS that worry about the equipment rules msot...


Bob,
be careful now, you might just get 'put onto the carpet' for using caps in your posts....you don't mess with the newbies on here....

new man-law must be; no caps allowed or something....

i have honestly gotten to the point that i couldn't care less about the BHFS rules anymore...they change too often to keep up with anyways....just as long as they are complied with at the tournaments i run....those that choose to violate them....it is simple...it is called 'protest' and if uheld...tournament chair and committee dq's 'em...

read 'em and weep, break 'em and weep, break 'em and lose.

still likin' the idea of flights and shoot whatcha bring...makes rules simple...shoot whatcha bring, let your score do the talking and place you against your peers in the flights that shoot the same scores you do.

no where to run...nowhere to hide...shoot your best and go for it.

hahahahaha

field14 (tom d.)


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

field14 said:


> ...they change too often to keep up with anyways...
> 
> field14 (tom d.)


Now *that* I can agree with. I think the constant change is a big part of the *misunderstandings*.


*Bold* used for emphasis only...:wink:


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Bobmuley said:


> Now *that* I can agree with. I think the constant change is a big part of the *misunderstandings*.
> 
> 
> *Bold* used for emphasis only...:wink:


butcha still used some caps in there....shamo, shamo, shamo....

misuderstandings, or just obvious attempts to push the rules to the limit or beyond as a way of saying, "i'll show you."....you know, you don't like a rule so you break it over and over again in hopes they (whomever they is) will change it...the me and now generation demands the me first and now attitude and to heck with anyone and everyone else.

naw, the fieldman didn't see this everyday in the classroom and on the work floor for over 30 years, now did he? naw...:wink::tongue:

i know...deal with it...:darkbeer: i can easily deal with it in archery in tournaments...two letters: dq.

field14


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Thing of it is there, Field is most competition is set up in a manner where pushing the rules is for the most part overlooked. It apparently only becomes an issue when someone starts to win, up until then no one really cares. Archery is not unique in that respect

Personally I have always favoured the run what you brung scenario. In most cases I look at an illegal shooter as a self handicapping system.

Then again I firmly believe arrow velocity limits in competition are foolish


----------



## 3B43 (Mar 16, 2006)

Since I started this post . . . 

I was 'thinking' about changing my sight picture look, in my BHFS bow JUST FOR SPOTS!!!!!!!!!!!!! My 3d rig will stay set up AS MY HUNTING BOW! Spots is another game, so I was thinking about changing the sight picture to something I'm VERY familiar with (highpower/long range). Since the rules say no . . . I guess my 3d bow/spot bow will be the SAME RIG! w/nothing changed!


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Hutnicks said:


> Thing of it is there, Field is most competition is set up in a manner where pushing the rules is for the most part overlooked. It apparently only becomes an issue when someone starts to win, up until then no one really cares. Archery is not unique in that respect
> 
> Personally I have always favoured the run what you brung scenario. In most cases I look at an illegal shooter as a self handicapping system.
> 
> Then again I firmly believe arrow velocity limits in competition are foolish


i agree with that, too. especially in light of the fact that most bows today, are capable of busting the 280 fps speed limit at under 60 pounds, let alone 80 pounds.

i have a friend that is shooting a PSE bow....31" drawlength, and was at only 65 pounds, shooting 2613's with 175 grain points in them...33" long...and had to crank the bow down to below 60 pounds just so he was within the NFAA rules so he could shoot the Presley's shoot with that bow.

i'm only a 28" draw length...and my arrows with 110 grain points in them are shooting 265.....at 52 lbs peak. i had to go to the 110 grain points because the arrows were simply 'too flighty' with lighter points in them (80 grains) that got the FOC down to 7%...they wouldn't shoot for beans..but the 110 grain points tightened those groups right up at all distances.

but back to subject; read the rules, follow the rules...or get caught not following them and have your good day score....dq'd and become all for naught.

i'll tell ya what....if you are in that top group and you are out of spec...those boys have been around the block more than once....they'll spot it in a heartbeat....and will take no mercy on you....again,....dq.

field14:wink::tongue:


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

yeah but the "little guy, wannabees) generally don't see the results of a dq at their levels and it goes on and on. While I have respect for creative rules interpretation, the outright cheat drains my bladder, and they go merrily along their ways. Usually the result is a lot of annoyed guys in the club who just stop attending rather than put up with the cheaters. I have seen this first hand over many years and I hate to see people put off the sport in that manner. Problem is you cannot scrutineer every bow at every shoot or theyd take 12hrs per round. 

Thats why I say its a self imposed handicap, folks just stop competing with em and essentially leave them with NO CLASS.

The speed thing puzzles me because bows certainly aren't getting any slower and arrows are not gaining weight. Seems we are standing in the way of evolution there, and history tells us thats a bad thing


----------



## rudeman (Jan 25, 2006)

I'm a relative newbie compared to a lot of you, but why doesn't a combination of a "shoot what you bring" and the handicap system work? (You can chalk up my naivete to newbie-ness!)

But seriously, if you had a GOOD handicapping system (best 5 of last 10, or even 20, for example), you could really eliminate a lot of classes, couldn't you??


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

rudeman said:


> I'm a relative newbie compared to a lot of you, but why doesn't a combination of a "shoot what you bring" and the handicap system work? (You can chalk up my naivete to newbie-ness!)
> 
> But seriously, if you had a GOOD handicapping system (best 5 of last 10, or even 20, for example), you could really eliminate a lot of classes, couldn't you??


has been done in the past...and sandbagging is a huge issue...especially with the 5 out of last ten or twenty...too easy to 'stack' your scores prior to a tournament so you are capable of bigger scores...but your 'handicap' says you aren't...then you go to the shoot and turn it loose. i see sandbagging as cheating, but many others see it as 'playing the game.'

some will do anything just to win a two-bit trophy or award....and sandbagging is a problem and not only in archery.

field14:tongue::wink:


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Tom,

I always see you say "flighty"....what do you mean by that?:noidea: I have been wondering for the longest time.:embara:


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Brown Hornet said:


> Tom,
> 
> I always see you say "flighty"....what do you mean by that?:noidea: I have been wondering for the longest time.:embara:



Hornet,
by 'flighty' i mean that the arrow offers little if any forgiveness, and even on a slight mistake takes off seemingly on its own...on a big mistake they are outta there with a flight all of their own, or 'flighty.'

i've found that for me flightiness comes from an arrow that hasn't enough point weight to keep it driving the line or from the arrow being either way too sluggish, or way too fast for any sort of control.

with my intentional tremor, any error is really magnified, so i have to work on combinations that offer me the best forgiveness and get the arrows to hold the line a lot better than someone with more solid fine motor control. they can 'punch it' and get away with it, while i can shoot a solid shot, but if the arrow combination is too heavy or too light, i don't stand a chance of the arrow holding line.

as cousin dave says and he is absolutely correct....an arrow that is way too stiff (or heavy) stands no chance of hitting the x unless the shot is perfect...since most of my shots are really less than perfect.....well...you see what i'm driving at....fat shafts, apparently for me, are a huge liability...cuz they are the most 'flighty' of all...for me.

also included in the 'flighty' thing are the width and stiffness of a steel launcher blade as well. it is impossible for me to shoot a narrow blade, especially with a fat shaft...cuz i'll get 'skidders' off of it due to the shake, and then those too...become 'flighty'. i must have a lot of arrow guidance for better control until the movement is settled as good as i can get it.

takes a handicap such as this to really make you aware of just how critical things such as spine, point weight (FOC), and arrow rests are on a setup, in addition to that drawlength being perfect...not close, but perfect....and all this just to shoot better than 296 NFAA, with some 300's strewn about once in a while. never used to be a problem to shoot 300...but now...well i gotta make sure i get rid of flightyness....haahaha...or at least as much as i can, anyways.

field14


----------



## rudeman (Jan 25, 2006)

> i see sandbagging as cheating


I agree 110% and can't, for the life of me, understand how anyone could argue otherwise.

Anyhow, obviously there are no perfect answers in a world filled with imperfect people. I just thought something like TOP 5 of the last 20 (the USGA uses top 10 of the last 20) means you'd have to sandbag 20 NFAA rounds to keep your top 5 low. Jeesh. If someone wants a trophy that bad, why don't we just buy them one, give it to them and tell them to stay home?

Wouldn't it be nice if we could put the sport back in sportsmanship?


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

field14 said:


> Hornet,
> by 'flighty' i mean that the arrow offers little if any forgiveness, and even on a slight mistake takes off seemingly on its own...on a big mistake they are outta there with a flight all of their own, or 'flighty.'
> 
> i've found that for me flightiness comes from an arrow that hasn't enough point weight to keep it driving the line or from the arrow being either way too sluggish, or way too fast for any sort of control.
> ...


Gottcha :thumb:

I don't have luck with SUPER STIFF logs either. I try and keep them close as far as spine goes.:wink: Outside I notice the low FOC problem as well..but since I don't have the "shake" it isn't as bad but I do know what you mean.


----------

