# OlympicTrials, after Day 1



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Women's trials at Peterborough, ON today to select the one female team member.

I won't rehash the points system - it's on the other thread and on the FCA website.

72 arrow qualifier:

Marie-Pier started off strongly, with Kateri and Racheal slow off the mark. But after a couple of ends, K picked up momentum, and both ended the first 36 with good scores, and R not too far behind. R picked it up a bit with some good ends and after 9 ends all 3 were within 3 points of each other. Then R shot a string of blacks/blues, and after that was basically out of it. K finished strongly with a PB 326 for her second half.

Kateri 315/326 = 641 - 20 Trials points
Marie-Pier 317/314 = 631 - 12 Trials points
Racheal 308/305 = 613 - 6 Trials points

Round Robin: 

Each archer faces the other 2 archers 2 times each. Total of 6 matches.

2 archers shoot a match, the 3rd archer has a bye but shoots it. The winner of the match gets 2 Trials points, the highest score of the 3 gets 4 bonus points, the next gets 3 and the lowest gets 2. Ties on the match score split points.

After a long lunch break, they started half-hour practice session. Both M and K shot well in practice, but R seemed to feel the heat and never seemed to get on track.

When the matches started, M turned up the pressure and put together a string of excellent rounds, scoring 328 for her 1st 36 and 651 overall. She actually won all 4 of her matches and scored 31 of a possible 32 Trials points.

Kateri couldn't get it going and slumped badly, totalling only 609. R never got back in the game.

1 - M def K 110-96, R 102
2 - K def R 103-100, M 107
3 - M def R 111-106, K 101
4 - M def R 105 - 99, K 106
5 - R def K 99 (9) - 99 (8), M 108
6 - M def K 110-104, R 96

M - 31 Trials points
K - 18.5 Trials points
R - 16.5 Trials points

Total after 1st day:

M - 43
K - 38.5
R - 22.5

Sunday is a double elimination. Each archer must lose 2 matches to be eliminated.

Since there is a 5 Trials points difference between each placing, and Marie-Pier is only 4.5 points ahead of Kateri, they are in actuallity tied at this moment.

It all boils down to who loses 2 matches first. Their overall placing doesn't matter. 

Racheal is mathematically eliminated from 1st or 2nd, but can influence the outcome by beating either of the 2 archers and hastening their elimination.


Should be exciting to watch. Pity I won't be there to see and report. :wink:


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Racheal, Kateri, Marie-Pier


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Kateri's arrows


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Marie-Pier


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Racheal


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Excellent Stash, thanks for posting that up and great pics. Hope we can get some info from tomorrow.


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Nobody there from CHEX! :wink:


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Stash said:


> Nobody there from CHEX! :wink:


That does not surprise me, somehow. I have a feeling it was the pimply faced kid from "The Simpsons" that took the info. Probably fell out of his head on the way to his night job at Burger King


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Well, if they had been there around 2:00 they would have had themselves a helluva story... :zip:


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Stash said:


> Well, if they had been there around 2:00 they would have had themselves a helluva story... :zip:


Apparently so. Darn Papparazzi, probably off covering the David Lee Roth impostor in Brantford:wink:


----------



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

Stash said:


> Racheal


great pic's Stash and thanks for the update :thumb:

good luck tomorrow ladies


----------



## Miss Pink (Nov 5, 2007)

Thanks Stash. 

Good luck ladies.


----------



## JDoupe (Dec 9, 2006)

Whats going on now? Is it raining there? We need to know.


----------



## Xs24-7 (Aug 1, 2002)

MP won, dont know any details


----------



## Reed (Jun 18, 2002)

Xs24-7 said:


> MP won, dont know any details


well that is not the person I was hoping for.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Reed said:


> well that is not the person I was hoping for.


I somehow do not think you are alone in that sentiment. I'm hoping some lessons have been learned here, and some solid policy will be put in place so the whole thing never recurs.

Congrats to MP on the spot. But that is going to put her under a rather big magnifying glass for Beijing, and I hope Canada comes out with some good showings, all round.


----------



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

does anyone have final stats etc ..... would love to know the days happenings


----------



## bigdawg (Feb 26, 2003)

Kateri has proven how she can handle the rest of the world by getting a 12th and a 6th place in her only two world cups. Everybody will be watching Marie and hoping she can do the same during the Olympics. As Jay stated the last World Cup was the hardest, and will be harder then the Olympics. Lets hope she can perform.


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

I stuck my camera up to my spotting scope and got this shot of MP at about 80 meters...


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Stash said:


> I stuck my camera up to my spotting scope and got this shot of MP at about 80 meters...


Thats a really neat shot. Do you have the scope adapter or was that freehand? Oh, and what scope if I may ask?







And Pinto, I dare ya:becky:


----------



## vyrtual (Feb 12, 2008)

Stash said:


> Marie-Pier


I think I'm in love :embara:


----------



## Miss Pink (Nov 5, 2007)

Stash that is one sweet pic!

Thanks for the reporting this weekend. It was appreciated.


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Hutnicks said:


> Thats a really neat shot. Do you have the scope adapter or was that freehand? Oh, and what scope if I may ask?


My 30 year old Bushnell Sentry II with 20X eyepiece. I just put the camera up to the eyepiece and moved it around until something came up on the screen. Here's a nice one of Judge Randy's butt for ya...:wink:


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Good results for freehand digiscoping Better save that one, I have a feeling it might come in handy in the future


----------



## vyrtual (Feb 12, 2008)

did you use a digital camera for that or could you use a film camera to see through the scope?


----------



## hoody123 (Aug 11, 2004)

You'd probably require a fair amount of trial and error with a film camera and that could get costly. If you look around on nature photography pages and particularly birdwatching pages, digiscoping is pretty common and there are lots of DIY pages out there in helping you assemble a digiscope.

The results can be pretty amazing. Definitely makes you think about the cost of a good long lens being worth the price (for a camera I mean)


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

hoody123 said:


> You'd probably require a fair amount of trial and error with a film camera and that could get costly. If you look around on nature photography pages and particularly birdwatching pages, digiscoping is pretty common and there are lots of DIY pages out there in helping you assemble a digiscope.
> 
> The results can be pretty amazing. Definitely makes you think about the cost of a good long lens being worth the price (for a camera I mean)


Excellent point. For the price of a good long lens you can get a top grade scope with adapter and have something with multiple uses. In a pinch binos work quite well too. I keep and old Nikon coolpix 990 around for the simple reason that the lens is threaded to fit a wide variety of binos.


----------



## Pete731 (Aug 9, 2002)

Very happy for Marie-Pier! Best of luck in Beijing!


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

*?????*

Why is it such a long drawn out process for the team pick... can`t just do it the simple and most effective way... If you shoot well over so many designated tournaments your in... total score...That usually shows the best general average for the person and shows consistency as well .. Happy for the winner and sad for the 2nd place here... wow what a friggin mess this was...Hope Marie has her game face on all the time now , Now make us proud young lady,...


----------



## hoody123 (Aug 11, 2004)

CBC Coverage...
http://www.cbc.ca/olympics/archery/story/2008/07/20/archery-final.html


----------



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

thanks for the link Hoody


----------



## dutchy (Mar 21, 2004)

Stash said:


> Well, if they had been there around 2:00 they would have had themselves a helluva story... :zip:


something about half a centimeter and a block of wood........


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

*?????????????*

What is this 1/2 centimeter and block of wood story here lets hear the nitty gritty thanks


----------



## dutchy (Mar 21, 2004)

I dont know all the nitty gritty of it but I was told Kateri has always shot standing on a small block of wood under her back leg. A protest was raised about this piece of wood by Marie Pierre and after alot of discussing and checking the rules it was deemed to be 1/2 cm to high and she was told she couldnt use it

this seems alittle odd as shes shot a couple world cup events with it im sure. But it appeared in the scores anyways that she seemed out of it after lunch and the protest.

im sure someone who was there could elaborate more or correct me at all but her scores seemed to drop alot after this especially since she is know for her matchplay scores and she came off a 641 first half which is awesome!!!

can someone elaborate a bit more.......


----------



## hoody123 (Aug 11, 2004)

Wow... This has got to be pretty upsetting for Kateri. Gotta say she got a pretty raw deal through all of this... (or at least from an outsiders perspective).


----------



## Reed (Jun 18, 2002)

hoody123 said:


> Wow... This has got to be pretty upsetting for Kateri. Gotta say she got a pretty raw deal through all of this... (or at least from an outsiders perspective).


no from most peoples perspective.


----------



## Reed (Jun 18, 2002)

dutchy said:


> I dont know all the nitty gritty of it but I was told Kateri has always shot standing on a small block of wood under her back leg. A protest was raised about this piece of wood by Marie Pierre and after alot of discussing and checking the rules it was deemed to be 1/2 cm to high and she was told she couldnt use it
> 
> this seems alittle odd as shes shot a couple world cup events with it im sure. But it appeared in the scores anyways that she seemed out of it after lunch and the protest.
> 
> ...


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

*tut tut*

I don`t know if I personally want this Marie-pier representing me, or the rest of Canada in the games . This girl wins on sysc not shooting ability here ... Sorry my own personal opinion.. To bad kateri did not have here shoe built up instead of the wood piece then there would probably could not have lodged a protest, As I`m sure there is no way that a pair of orthotic shoes could be illegal .... I would be not surprised that this little starlet crashes big times in the games... Also seems strange that this piece of wood has probably been around for a while and not be an factor before, also timeing was just right half way through the day when it would shake the competitor up and change their game...I say this with tongue in cheek is there not a dress code I find Marie`s clothing quite reveling here, to some I`m sure a fashion statement.......


----------



## Pete731 (Aug 9, 2002)

:moviecorn


----------



## news (Jul 18, 2008)

:darkbeer:


----------



## vyrtual (Feb 12, 2008)

Well I kinda see it both ways. I mean if someone said to me that you're garantee'd a spot in the shootout and this particular tourney should be looked at as some practice for it and not be taken too seriously and then when it was over someone came up to you and said, "oh yeah, just so you know. There's been a change and since you didn't win you're not going" then I'd be pissed as well. There are levels of concentration you have to achieve for specific things and yes, you do need to save it for when it counts. 

Likely the people that can't understand this have never competed on an Olympic level, or even a professional one. Could you imagine losing your spot on the olympic team from somehting like that? Would you sit back and take it when there's something you can do about it? Of course not. Does that make it bad, no. Unfortunate and awkward, yes. 

Is the complaining about some piece of wood nessesary? NO, and it was in bad taste. But if it was against the rules its against the rules. 
I love how the ethics police shows up and gets all bent out of shape about someone breaking the rules and then when a situation like this comes up that they don't agree with, then it's somehow ok. 

This sucks bigtime for Kateri, no doubt. And it's just a sad situation. But obviously MP is the better shooter, and prooved it, so shouldn't that mean she should be the one to go?

And please people don't think being the national champion has squat to do with who those idiots on the Olympic commitee choose to represent our country. My older brother has been screwed out of the Olympics TWICE for boxing because of ridiculous "rule changes" and the second time for litterally "no official reason" at all. Example.. You know who's going to the Olympics for Canada for boxing? Adam Trupish. Did he even FIGHT in the Nationals this year? NO. Did he fight in the Olympic boxoffs this year? NO. Is he going to the Olympics? Yup. What did they tell the guy that actually won? Tough, sucks to be you. 

Not saying this situation is a happy one, but it is what it is. Just try not to take the "high road" too quick and see it from everyones point of view. Mind games and all that garbage are part of EVERY competition. So anyone saying that "OMG i so toooootally wouldn't want her representing meeeee, and my UBER high morals", has no clue about I'm sure EVERY ONE of their sports heroes have done. Think about some sportsman you know and love... Do you think that while on the court/rink/field/ring etc etc, they've never played mind games with people. THAT"S competition. Even LOOKING at your competitors at the right moment can be used. What do you think the staredown is for?? Get over yourself.


----------



## vyrtual (Feb 12, 2008)

lain: <---- miiiiiind games!! 


:tongue:


----------



## russ (Jul 29, 2002)

I think you've just underlined what a few people have been saying all along. Politics have no place in sport.


----------



## vyrtual (Feb 12, 2008)

russ said:


> I think you've just underlined what a few people have been saying all along. Politics have no place in sport.


agree 100%

But amateur sports, especially on the Olympic stage, is just as bad as any professional arena when it comes to politics messing everything up. It's just as easy to buy your way in to an olympic spot now as it is to buy a win for your pro team or keep your athlete on top of the pile regardless of standings. 

It's pretty sad. And for me and a lot of professional athletes I know, the olympics are basically a joke anyway. Everybody knows who the real best are, at least within the sporting community. Politics have sullied them too much. And with the ridiculously small support canada gives it's own athletes (save a few), we can't really expect to be in the ballgame. That's just the way it is. (Unless of course you're on the East coast  )


----------



## RT56 (Jun 24, 2005)

*Its not over yet*

Did anyone hear of the most recent appeal?


----------



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

okay ..... I'll bite :fish2:




RT56 said:


> Did anyone hear of the most recent appeal?


----------



## hoody123 (Aug 11, 2004)

:secret: Let's hear it!


----------



## vyrtual (Feb 12, 2008)

I have a feeling we're about to hear a "how to keep an idiot in suspense" joke... LOL


----------



## RT56 (Jun 24, 2005)

*Wooden block*

"I dont know all the nitty gritty of it but I was told Kateri has always shot standing on a small block of wood under her back leg. A protest was raised about this piece of wood by Marie Pierre and after alot of discussing and checking the rules it was deemed to be 1/2 cm to high and she was told she couldnt use it"

Does anyone know what rule was being broken or contravened by using the block? Can they quote it? It would be interesting to know. Perhaps she should have scraped up some dirt and stood on it. I've seen many archers kick away the soil or crushed rock on the shooting line for a better stance.

I understand that the FCA is dealing with a further appeal at this very moment. We may hear more details soon.


----------



## Canuck (Jan 30, 2003)

Wow, a lot of people bashing someone when they can't possibly know all the facts or what went on with the womens olympic trials.

What I do know is that the FCA messed this up royaly and someone was bound to be screwed be it MP or VK.

I do know that the 3 women went to Boe with the intentions of trying to earn a spot for Canada at the Olymipcs. It was also clear that not all the women were privy to the possibility that they may not have the option of shooting in the qualifying tournament and that the "support" staff made the decision not to tell all 3 based on the fact that the Netherlands withdrawing was only a rumor and not a fact. All three athletes should have been told up front that the possibility existed as it could have and did effect how they would have shot in the OR rounds. To her credit MP shot her match against the Netherlands and shot to the best of her ability winning the match and effectively her chances of going to the Olympics without an appeal. She was told of the situation moments before having to shoot the match and could easily have thrown the match or not shot. 

Apparently it was not stated clearly enough that the winner of the trials would represent Canada if a spot where to come open. An independant arbitrator agreed with MP's assertion and overturned the FCA's (non-independant) assessment.

Not sure where the CBC gets their facts either; MP is the reigning FCA National Champion as she won both the FITA and OR rounds in 2007 and the 2008 championships have yet to be held.

I think the FCA is finally being held accountable. Unfortunately it is at VK's expense as I know she worked hard this year and definately deserved the opportunity.

I would imagine that VK is appealing the ruling against her for using the block of wood. I would guess that the ruling was made based on the piece of wood protruding more than 1cm above the ground.

_*7.3.2.1.8* ....... Foot markers may not protrude more than 1cm from the ground._

I wish all the best to whoever ends up going as I'm sure this is not over. Hopefully the FCA becomes a bit more dilligent in ensuring a level field of play for all concerned.


----------



## JDoupe (Dec 9, 2006)

CLASSICHUNTER said:


> I don`t know if I personally want this Marie-pier representing me, or the rest of Canada in the games . This girl wins on sysc not shooting ability here ... Sorry my own personal opinion.. To bad kateri did not have here shoe built up instead of the wood piece then there would probably could not have lodged a protest, As I`m sure there is no way that a pair of orthotic shoes could be illegal .... I would be not surprised that this little starlet crashes big times in the games... Also seems strange that this piece of wood has probably been around for a while and not be an factor before, also timeing was just right half way through the day when it would shake the competitor up and change their game...I say this with tongue in cheek is there not a dress code I find Marie`s clothing quite reveling here, to some I`m sure a fashion statement.......



...So it's o.k. if it's against the rules as long as it's been going on a while? THis is just like when you ask for a stick measurement in the last couple of minutes in the period. It's against the rules all the time...it's just when you bring it up. As for her clothes being too reveling.....if there is a dress code, I'm sure she will comply, as such she has not broke any rules.

Good Luck M.P.....Hope you do us proud!

...to the other girls.....I only wish we could send three there so all of you could go.


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

*rules jd coupe*

jd coupe I never said that she did not break the rules what I said was she should have had her shoe built up and it would have been legal.... I know the syc game quite well as I was in snowmobile racing for years and a aa champion for years... The point being I tried to make is she should have just out shot her to win the event and left good enough alone ... I know she is a excellent archer and is quite capable of representing canada, sometimes less is better and in this case this might have been better...I wish her all the best but now she has turned the lights and media on herself ........ hope she can hold up...


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

CLASSICHUNTER said:


> jd coupe I never said that she did not break the rules what I said was she should have had her shoe built up and it would have been legal.... I know the syc game quite well as I was in snowmobile racing for years and a aa champion for years... The point being I tried to make is she should have just out shot her to win the event and left good enough alone ... I know she is a excellent archer and is quite capable of representing canada, sometimes less is better and in this case this might have been better...I wish her all the best but now she has turned the lights and media on herself ........ hope she can hold up...


I am just going to posit this for the sake of argument. Please do not take it as a direct response or criticism of any post here.

How would anyone feel if it had gone off without any protest BUT upon being in contention for a medal in Beijing, our woman got eliminated because some other International coach protested the foot wedge? 

This is the Olympics and please don't think national pride or rivalries ended with the fall of the Soviet Union.

The manner in which it was done may be questionable, or not. But the basis is a piece of equipment out of compliance, could have been a sight mark or an arrow rest protruding too far back.


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

*??????*

Like I said she should have been on top of it but my rebutle here is how was it measured on the ground or a solid surface I weigh 250 and when I stand on something it either is top edge level with the ground or below the surface... How was this wedge measured hard or soft surface and in the rule book does it say how it is measured or just give dementions only sorry but rules as I said can and have been misinterpreted right from the very beginning here... was it measured when it was in the area of where she was shooting or on a table top... rule 7312 whatever quoted as 1 cm above the groung then was it measured on all 4 sides as it may have been sitting uneven petty but true and good enough in a court of law to pay someone out millions of dollars right????? Man this fun just like a day in court but but but your honor lol the glove doesn`t fit lol


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

CLASSICHUNTER said:


> Like I said she should have been on top of it but my rebutle here is how was it measured on the ground or a solid surface I weigh 250 and when I stand on something it either is top edge level with the ground or below the surface... How was this wedge measured hard or soft surface and in the rule book does it say how it is measured or just give dementions only sorry but rules as I said can and have been misinterpreted right from the very beginning here... was it measured when it was in the area of where she was shooting or on a table top... rule 7312 whatever quoted as 1 cm above the groung then was it measured on all 4 sides as it may have been sitting uneven petty but true and good enough in a court of law to pay someone out millions of dollars right????? Man this fun just like a day in court but but but your honor lol the glove doesn`t fit lol


And you have not even touched on the accuracy of the measuring device:becky: Who made it, when was it last calibrated, was it read at 90 degrees or did the viewing angle throw the reading out? What material was it? It was hot and it could have expanded out of spec:wink:


----------



## JDoupe (Dec 9, 2006)

CLASSICHUNTER said:


> jd coupe I never said that she did not break the rules what I said was she should have had her shoe built up and it would have been legal.... I know the syc game quite well as I was in snowmobile racing for years and a aa champion for years... The point being I tried to make is she should have just out shot her to win the event and left good enough alone ... I know she is a excellent archer and is quite capable of representing canada, sometimes less is better and in this case this might have been better...I wish her all the best but now she has turned the lights and media on herself ........ hope she can hold up...




All right...I see where you are coming from. I must have missinterpreted the way I read it.


----------



## Miss Pink (Nov 5, 2007)

Hmmm well if I remember correctly from last winter at a shoot at Caledon the piece of wood in question is actually a 2X4 about 2 inches long. But my memory could be faulty... thought I had a pic... not sure


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

*ok ok*

Miss pink are you kidding a 2x4 really or a piece of plywood say a 1/2 inch thick if a 2x4 then I would have been a little concerned but guys I`m trying to say something here, built up shoes thicker sole remember interpretation of the rule. this is clothing here oh oh I said that out loud so now the rule book will probably have to be rewritten sorry guys lol lol again


----------



## Reed (Jun 18, 2002)

did VK use the wood at the first trials? If so why did MP not protest then? Has VK been using the brace for awhile? Does she have a imparment that requires the use of said hunk of wood??


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2008)

Reed said:


> did VK use the wood at the first trials? If so why did MP not protest then? Has VK been using the brace for awhile? Does she have a imparment that requires the use of said hunk of wood??


doesn't matter, it was to high and got caught and had to change it to the rules, why she didn't just put it in her shoe or split the difference between them, don't know but her coach should have caught it


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Sean McKenty said:


> doesn't matter, it was to high and got caught and had to change it to the rules, why she didn't just put it in her shoe or split the difference between them, don't know but her coach should have caught it


Agreed!


----------



## vyrtual (Feb 12, 2008)

Hutnicks said:


> And you have not even touched on the accuracy of the measuring device:becky: Who made it, when was it last calibrated, was it read at 90 degrees or did the viewing angle throw the reading out? What material was it? It was hot and it could have expanded out of spec:wink:


Somebody call Johnny Cochrane!! :wink:

Man, the whole situation sucks. If there was an issue with the standing block thing, it should have been brought up right away or checked by the officials at the beginning. I mean, it's not technically illigal to wait to bring it up, but it's certainly dirty pool to wait until halfway before you say something. Maybe they should have some sort of checklist beforehand where each competitor gets to look over what the others are doing and you have to make a claim then and there or you lose your right to protest from that point on about it. 

Maybe that would stop it from happening again? 


Classichunter:

Would something like a lift in your shoe be legal? Maybe if she needs a bit of lift in one foot she could wear some of those nikes with that bouncy thing in the heel. Sounds dumb, but they do lift your heel up about an inch or so. Anyone know if that'd be allowed?


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

vyrtual said:


> Somebody call Johnny Cochrane!! :wink:
> 
> Man, the whole situation sucks. If there was an issue with the standing block thing, it should have been brought up right away or checked by the officials at the beginning. I mean, it's not technically illigal to wait to bring it up, but it's certainly dirty pool to wait until halfway before you say something. Maybe they should have some sort of checklist beforehand where each competitor gets to look over what the others are doing and you have to make a claim then and there or you lose your right to protest from that point on about it.
> 
> ...


Well I believe that scrutineering cannot be far off with TOTAL equipment inspection becoming the rule. Declare everything have it inspected and signed off.

Looking through the FITA book (briefly as a lawyer I am not) I think the tournament officials actually are charged with the compliance issue. Sean would be the authority on that one though.

I really do not think their is a restriction on the actual construction of the shoe, I mean you could wear hiking boots if you wished, Lift or orthotics are not even on the radar as they are essentially a component of the shoe. Most footwear has slide in inserts these days.

I *think *this is more about adjusting the grounds to optimize your stance. A doorstop has been an old field archers trick for ages when it comes to an uphill or downhill cut shot.


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

I guess I'd better speak up, as this incident happened right in front of me.

As I mentioned, I was at the Saturday part of the shoot, appointed as Chairman of the Appeals Jury. My job would have been to select 2 other impartial jurors and have us decide, based on the rules, any appeals or protests submitted by archers in the competition. As it happened, no protest or appeal was filed, so I had no official duties, but I tried to remain impartial during all this.

What happened was this:

Following the morning qualification round, lunch, and half an hour of practice, and while the organizers were changing the target faces immediately prior to the scoring of the match play, MP's mother approached Randy (the judge) regarding this piece of wood. Following discussion with MP's mother, and Kateri's coach Maciej Karlowski, Randy meaured the thickness of this piece of wood and informed Maciej that it was about 1.5 cm and therefore illegal.

There is no penalty for using an illegal piece of equipment like this - unlike in golf, for example, where a person can be DQed retroactively. The archer simply has to make it legel when so informed in order to continue. So Maciej took out a knife and whittled it down in front of everybody, making a sarcastic joke of making sure it was .9 cm. He showed it to Randy who remeasured it, declared it legal, and Kateri replaced it.

She has been using this same piece of wood for a couple of years, including World Championships and World Cups, with no issue. MP had been well aware of it.

I did not speak to Kateri after this. She was clearly upset, though. I did sit near Maciej, and he was quite angry.

As for the result - in the morning, Kateri had shot extremely well. Except for her first 2 ends which were weak, she shot only 1 end under 53 the whole rest of the morning, ending with a PB of 326 for her second half.

In the afternoon matches, she only shot one end over 52. Clearly she was affected by this.

MP, on the other hand, did shoot extremely well, especially in the afternoon. She won all 4 of her matches handily and had the high score on every round but one, where she was 1 point off. Her afternoon 72 arrows scored 651 which was 10 points higher than Kateri's morning score. I seriously believe that even if Kateri had shot at the same level as her morning PB, MP would still have beaten her.

Sunday, of course, MP outshot Kateri again.

The rule issue was, stricly speaking, all correct and legal, but obviously pretty unsportsmanlike in the timing and method. The proper course of action, if MP had sincerely believed that the wood block was illegal, would have been to simply suggest to Kateri that she check the rules and do whatever was necessary to comply. Like someone mentioned, this was exactly the same as having a hockey player's stick checked in order to try to get a penalty imposed at a crucial moment.

Whatever the reason, the fact is that MP was the stronger archer that weekend and probably would have won the event without this incident. 

Kateri was under a lot of stress on this whole thing. Imagine being in her place, having been named and confirmed to the team, and than having it taken away (unjustly, by her belief). 

While to some it might seem trivial, but this was more than an issue about a 1/2 cm sliver of wood causing an archer completely break down. It was a completely unneccesary incident, and was just the one last nudge to topple her over after a very stressful couple of weeks.

There is one thing I feel is necessary to point out. I really want to say it, and I know many of you will disagree vehemently.

Being named to the Team is a great honour and accomplishment but it is not and end in itself to simply make the Team. The point of selecting a Team not to simply reward a tournament winner with a free trip and a great experience - it is to send the strongest athlete to the Olympics, the one with the best chance to win, the archer with the greatest mental toughness. Rightly or wrongly, it does appear that the stronger archer _at this time _will be representing Canada at the Olympics.

We'll never know how it would have turned out. The FCA will be bruised for years. There will be animosity between archers from Quebec and the rest of Canada. The scars to Kateri will last a lifetime.

I know from personal experience, probably more than anyone else here on this forum, what something like this can do to a person's mental well-being. I hope Kateri can get it together and try again.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Thanks for posting that Stash. It's great to have the first hand account.

I cannot disagree with your analysis that the strongest athlete won here. We tend to forget that there is a boatload more to winning in competition than being able to shoot a decent score. I am sure there have been athletes at the top levels of sports who have never experienced a brutal heartbreak of some kind, but I will bet they are few and far between when it comes to an Olympic podium.


----------



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

Hutnicks said:


> Thanks for posting that Stash. It's great to have the first hand account.


+1 :thumb:


----------



## Reed (Jun 18, 2002)

Hutnicks said:


> Thanks for posting that Stash. It's great to have the first hand account.
> 
> I cannot disagree with your analysis that the strongest athlete won here. We tend to forget that there is a boatload more to winning in competition than being able to shoot a decent score. I am sure there have been athletes at the top levels of sports who have never experienced a brutal heartbreak of some kind, but I will bet they are few and far between when it comes to an Olympic podium.



that true, well they are one for one now. AS I see it the only way to decide this is at nationals in wpg. Jello wresling on sat.:tongue: winner takes all.:wink:


----------



## coptor doctor (Aug 25, 2003)

*trials*

You know guys all this talk about right or wrong Marie right Kateri right? really in the big picture refer back to the FCA last year Barrie . Major controversy over a target. Officials met Decision was made. Out come maybe not what some Liked . Done deal right or wrong. I see this as no different. The mediator was brought in a decision was made. Get behind our girl who ever it may be. The nit picking crap about the 2cm piece of wood being illegal or not. It obviously was judged on and was deemed to be wrong. No differnet than a Pro at the IBO's a few years ago carried a small shovel to make better footing. Most people kick the ground to me Both are wrong. One was just a little more inventive than the other. The rule state foot must touch the peg. nothing more nothing less. You can't break branches without a judge so why can you alter footing? Once a ruling is made and desided on Move on!! Go Marie I am behind you 100% the judes said you were right so be it..:darkbeer:


----------



## coptor doctor (Aug 25, 2003)

*trials*

You know guys all this talk about right or wrong Marie right Kateri right? really in the big picture refer back to the FCA last year Barrie . Major controversy over a target. Officials met Decision was made. Out come maybe not what some Liked . Done deal right or wrong. I see this as no different. The mediator was brought in a decision was made. Get behind our girl who ever it may be. The nit picking crap about the 2cm piece of wood being illegal or not. It obviously was judged on and was deemed to be wrong. No differnet than a Pro at the IBO's a few years ago carried a small shovel to make better footing. Most people kick the ground to me Both are wrong. One was just a little more inventive than the other. The rule state foot must touch the peg. nothing more nothing less. You can't break branches without a judge so why can you alter footing? Once a ruling is made and desided on Move on!! Go Marie I am behind you 100% the judges said you were right so be it..:darkbeer:


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

*thanks*

thanks stash great report and all mentioned is true ... I wish mp the best and go canada go ....


----------



## coptor doctor (Aug 25, 2003)

*Protest*

1 more thing On the funnier side. I don't want to see you protesting any Soccer Frames at the Championships in Peterborough Ontario Moose!!:darkbeer::wink:


----------



## dutchy (Mar 21, 2004)

coptor doctor said:


> 1 more thing On the funnier side. I don't want to see you protesting any Soccer Frames at the Championships in Peterborough Ontario Moose!!:darkbeer::wink:




gotta love it... even when everyone is starting to forget about said incident it is brought to the forefront in a thread not even remotly close in topic but it has to be the funniest post thus far!!!

im thinkin we should make a permanent place for a this topic and incident in the Canadain mutantville....:wink:

LMFAO!!!!:tongue:


----------



## coptor doctor (Aug 25, 2003)

*Moose!*

You know Dutchy That is a piece of Art the Giles should post there himself!! Being that was my first ever Fita tournament. It added alot I must say. Even after I mentioned to Giles as he drew his trusty bow for the shot. I said Hey Moose your arrow has got to be really close to that Soccer net. Na was the reply there is tons of room. The resounding WANG!! was heard around Peterborough I am sure!..I stood in Awe as He dead centered the frame! I only laughed a little bit. :wink:The funniest thing is if you saw his arrow after It still looked like an Arrow but was half the length. The Front was driven to the back Still intact!! I immediately thought Hey Chris could shoot that!! LOL take care.. Sorry to get off topic on this post. It just seemed to need a little Humor. As I say again I have never met Marie or Kateri Or Rachel. I wish them all the best and Hope you all get a chance down the road to represent Canada at an Oylimpic trials. I am sure you all deserve it!


----------



## dutchy (Mar 21, 2004)

coptor doctor said:


> You know Dutchy That is a piece of Art the Giles should post there himself!! Being that was my first ever Fita tournament. It added alot I must say. Even after I mentioned to Giles as he drew his trusty bow for the shot. I said Hey Moose your arrow has got to be really close to that Soccer net. Na was the reply there is tons of room. The resounding WANG!! was heard around Peterborough I am sure!..I stood in Awe as He dead centered the frame! I only laughed a little bit. :wink:The funniest thing is if you saw his arrow after It still looked like an Arrow but was half the length. The Front was driven to the back Still intact!! I immediately thought Hey Chris could shoot that!! LOL take care.. Sorry to get off topic on this post. It just seemed to need a little Humor. As I say again I have never met Marie or Kateri Or Rachel. I wish them all the best and Hope you all get a chance down the road to represent Canada at an Oylimpic trials. I am sure you all deserve it!


im all for the humor coptor!!! i like reading some of the lighter posts sometimes anyways......:tongue:


----------



## araz2114 (Jan 13, 2003)

*Set the record straight*

For the record.... I heard CopDoc tell Moose that "looks like it will clear" after Moose asked if he was good.... 

Some people have memories that need adjusting 

Still funny thou.... Remember... It can't funny for everyone!


----------



## coptor doctor (Aug 25, 2003)

*Moose*

@50 years of age Moose should have guessed what My eyesite was like. Whether it was my Judgment or his. I don't care who you are that there was funny!!:darkbeer:


----------



## ontario moose (Aug 8, 2003)

*I'm scared to go back now..*



coptor doctor said:


> @50 years of age Moose should have guessed what My eyesite was like. Whether it was my Judgment or his. I don't care who you are that there was funny!!:darkbeer:


Hey C.P. the OAA fields are in Petersbeerho. so hopefully no steel in the practise area.. 

that was a great day even with the goal post.. I broke 2 FCA records that day.. Araz and I still laugh about it.. and he's right.. you're the one that said it was ok..!

Giles


----------



## coptor doctor (Aug 25, 2003)

*Lol*

I said you were Ok so did your therapist!! Guess we were both wrong. :wink:


----------



## matrixg3 (Jul 22, 2008)

I am new to this controversy but I was just wondering somethings. I noticed the other day on the FCA website that a female archer in Ont. shot 1243 or something around there, that score looked like a worthy score to qualify her for these trials. Atleast it made her look more qualified then the 3rd who was at the trials. 

Wouldn't having more archers shoot the trials make a more fair trial? Like, it would spread the points out a little more anyways. It just seemed odd to me.

From what I hear, the appeal of the first trials was due to a misunderstanding and the person was unaware that the "Ontario Sping Classic, and OLYMPIC TRIALS" was the Olympic Trials. I think it was a callow act due to being a sore loser that the protest was made to hold another trials, don't you think? I feel that image only worsened at the trials. Just my opinion though. 

These acts sort of make archery or atleast certain archers look bad in Canada. 

Aside from that, those 2 shot AMAZING match scores there hey? 114 for both. 

Oh well, ce la vie I suppose.


----------



## Canuck (Jan 30, 2003)

Notice

An appeal was received from a member of the FCA regarding issues that arose during the Women's Olympic trials held in Peterborough, ON, July 19-20, 2008. Upon review of the documentary evidence available to the Tribunal, the Appeal was denied. 



Jeff Gunter, Appeal Tribunal Chair

Panel Members

Susan Lemke

David Lech, LLB

2008-07-22


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

*ok ok ok*

lets at least here what the appeal was... and I`m guessing only here that the wood piece appeal was by the parent of mp and not the coach or the archer herself which if I`m misinformed would have been a spectator... lets hear now that the can of worms is opened and yes we are behind mp all the way again make us proud ... Oh and I know coptor doctor you guys believe anything he says wow .... scarey thought ... lol :darkbeer: whos going to the second leg ????


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

CLASSICHUNTER said:


> lets at least here what the appeal was... and I`m guessing only here that the wood piece appeal was by the parent of mp and not the coach or the archer herself which if I`m misinformed would have been a spectator... lets hear now that the can of worms is opened and yes we are behind mp all the way again make us proud ... Oh and I know coptor doctor you guys believe anything he says wow .... scarey thought ... lol :darkbeer: whos going to the second leg ????


Actually I pretty much don' believe anything anyone has to say on the issue, unless they were there of post up documentation (like an appeal form )

But I'd be interested to know what the last one was about. In reality though it's just me being an archery gossip hound as it has no bearing now it has been denied. It's kinda like those endless "whos suing Elite Now" threads over in genpop, often hilarious reading material, but most mean absolutely nothing:


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

*Ya*

hutnicks that is what i mean, some one appealed the appeal as maybe not lodged to conforming rules of how it was done ...same as you just curious here as this is a book in the making lol lol


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

CLASSICHUNTER said:


> hutnicks that is what i mean, some one appealed the appeal as maybe not lodged to conforming rules of how it was done ...same as you just curious here as this is a book in the making lol lol


Problem here Classic is we as a nation are rubes at this kind of thing. If it was the Yanks someone would have already called it FootWedgeGate or some equally catching phrase.

As for a book, maybe a footnote in CanOly history behind Myriam Bedard's refusal to disclose her coach or Tewksbury's ill fated attempt to get collective athlete representation going.


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

*oh ya*

hutnicks
the book in the making here COULD BE THE NEW RULE BOOK LOL LOL LOL


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

CLASSICHUNTER said:


> hutnicks
> the book in the making here COULD BE THE NEW RULE BOOK LOL LOL LOL


I had dreams.........................once:becky:


----------



## dutchy (Mar 21, 2004)

matrixg3 said:


> I am new to this controversy but I was just wondering somethings. I noticed the other day on the FCA website that a female archer in Ont. shot 1243 or something around there, that score looked like a worthy score to qualify her for these trials. Atleast it made her look more qualified then the 3rd who was at the trials.
> 
> Wouldn't having more archers shoot the trials make a more fair trial? Like, it would spread the points out a little more anyways. It just seemed odd to me.
> 
> ...


the archer who shot the 1243 was Alana Macdougal. she finished 4th at the trials and also travelled to boe to compete for a spot for canada i believe

i shot caledon on that weekend and a few of the girls there felt that it should have been all nine girls (amount who qualified originally to compete for the right ot travel to boe) competing for the spot not just the top three but due to a lack of time it was brought down to the top 3. 

Puting a trials together in just a few days is alot of work

congrats to MP, go canada go!!!

on a lighter note Vanessa lee also shot very well on the weekend with a 1242!! maybe in 4 years well be seeing her and Alana represent canada!!!


----------



## cc46 (Jan 22, 2005)

wow, this is a sad thread...

I wouldn't have thought it necessary to call out a competitor on such an obscure rule...


----------



## JDoupe (Dec 9, 2006)

cc46 said:


> wow, this is a sad thread...
> 
> I wouldn't have thought it necessary to call out a competitor on such an obscure rule...




I bet you are only saying this because you too use the wood on your feet! That is why you pic is from the waste up no doubt!



Plase know I am J/K around.....


----------



## not dead yet (May 28, 2008)

which ladies shooting for usa.

gb scores are up around 1320 average for ladies i think.

india are the ones to look out for.....


----------



## XTRMN8R (Mar 26, 2004)

Rube's:wink: That's a good one.


----------



## suwat (Feb 1, 2008)

*Little piece of wood*

I have known "K" for some years and she has used this small piece of wood to level her stance often. Not as a crutch or some esoteric assist to her great shooting. It could have been in her shoe and no one would have been the wiser. The fact that it was so open demonstartes that no advantage was sought by her.. What if the shooting field were uneven and a competitor was standing on a rock or heaven forebid in a depression. What would the complaint then be. Politics and whining in our sport and nothing more. I have been shooting for more years than I want to think about and and though I don't compete in Olympic archery when I do compete I try my best and even in practic I try to judge my form and for each and evey shot not just when I am qualifying.
Not one who I want representing me in the Olympics


----------

