# Barebow Today



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Great post. Very timely too.

So long as there are so many variations of "barebow" there will always be asterisks and question marks next to "champions" and "records." 

We as a community need to take this by the horns. If we ourselves accept the standard, then we don't have to wait on the governing bodies.

John Demmer is a great example of this. He chose to shoot a WA Barebow-legal bow in Vegas this year, and very, very nearly finished in the top 3 of a division that, while called "barebow", is one that most people would have a hard time identifying as such.

I am as guilty of this as anyone, and I admit it. Last year, I went after the TFAA state indoor record in the "Traditional" division. It was the first year that the division allowed 12" stabilizers, and predictably, I broke Mike Frizzell's old record by 10 points with the help of that stabilizer. I can tell you it was worth at LEAST 10 points/round to me. And I'll be the first to admit my record should have an "*" next to it, explaining it was shot under the new rules that allowed stabilizers, so that Mike can continue to hold his record under the old rules. It's led to some interesting and fun exchanges between Mike and I, but we're friends so it's all in good fun. 

If we all agreed to one set of rules, then just held each other to them, peer pressure alone would take care of this.

Right now, like it or not, the WA rules are the most universal when it comes to equipment. Whether or not to string walk makes no difference to me, nor does it to many of the archers I know. Demmer did not string walk to set his many new national records, but he would be the first to tell you he has no issue at all with anyone who does. I feel the same way. Shoot the bow how you like, but shoot the same bow. 

Great idea.

John


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Yup I agree with all of this.

Pete


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Seems like a good plan. Maybe bring in the iBO RU class shooters too. Get a voluntary removal of stabilizers and clickers. I'd prefer that to forcing a change on guys.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

I've been shooting WA legal setup in IFAA Field/3D, when I won Euro 3D's last Summer IFAA President Loet Smit as me why I shot that setup, I explained I shoot both WA and IFAA and it's logical to stay with one setup, he asked me to put forward a proposal to change the Barebow equipment rules in IFAA. 

In Europe at least around half of IFAA shooters are now shooting WA setups, it seems the IFAA is ready for this change. I think it will be good for Barebow.


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

It's about commitment in the end. If the better shooters lead, the rest will follow. An elegant explanation of the the evolution of the class/rules will more than suffice in limiting the debates.

Demmer is showing us the way, in more ways than one. He's operating at the highest standard.

My usual modus operandi doesn't include following. In this case, I'll happily deviate.


----------



## gitnbetr (Jan 17, 2007)

I adopted Demmer's approach and as I believe I told John Magera, I will shoot a WA approved bow and will NOT shoot a stabilizer or clicker in Trad or barebow. I shot the TFAA State championship this past weekend without a stab. It was fun to see the reaction of some of the barebow (compound) shooters who understand the advantage a stabilizer gives.
I also talked to the TFAA and NFAA reps who were there and they asked that I prepare something for consideration regarding an asterisk on records set with a stab. John M. , I may ask your permission to use some quotes from posts you have put up to let them see your viewpoint.


----------



## High Plains (Feb 29, 2008)

I'm on board with this as well. Made my own WA leagal weights too.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

NFAA Barebow has been what it is for longer than some of us have been alive. If folks don't recognize it as Barebow, than that's their own fault for not paying attention. I mean no disrespect by this, but I see no reason to make every other American organization a clone of USA Archery, especially when, from what I've seen, very few FITA Recurve or Barebow folks have any interest in shooting anything other than FITA. Last weekend we had our state indoor FITA championship. This weekend the same club hosted the NFAA Great Lakes Indoor Sectionals. I can count on exactly one finger the number of FITA Recurve or Barebow archers who shot both, not including myself.

As far as the IBO is concerned, USA Archery wants exactly zero, nada, nothing to do with 3D archery. So why should a 3D archery organization care about their concept of Barebow? If people want to shoot 3D archery in this country under FITA Barebow rules, than they should get off their tails and start demanding that USA Archery step up. It's not the NFAA or IBO's responsibility to do USA Archery's job.


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

Not to derail the thread, but the IAA has not been the most welcoming of orgs to NAA shooters. The first event I shot in, my score was not even posted, even though I paid my entry and did not take any hardware (all though I did have the high score). I later went to an IAA field shoot and had to shoot anonymously since only NFAA shooters were welcome. Don't get me wrong, I really respect the local organizer of this weekends event. I consider Randy a good friend. It's just hard to shoot when your presence is not really welcomed. Randy even got the IAA to allow NAA shooters at some events, but I kinda feel like the odd man out.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

gitnbetr said:


> I adopted Demmer's approach and as I believe I told John Magera, I will shoot a WA approved bow and will NOT shoot a stabilizer or clicker in Trad or barebow. I shot the TFAA State championship this past weekend without a stab. It was fun to see the reaction of some of the barebow (compound) shooters who understand the advantage a stabilizer gives.
> I also talked to the TFAA and NFAA reps who were there and they asked that I prepare something for consideration regarding an asterisk on records set with a stab. John M. , I may ask your permission to use some quotes from posts you have put up to let them see your viewpoint.


You know I'm totally on board with this. Feel free.

And you're making me feel bad for using that stabilizer last year to break your records now! LOL. (okay, sorta bad. )


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

J. Wesbrock said:


> NFAA Barebow has been what it is for longer than some of us have been alive. If folks don't recognize it as Barebow, than that's their own fault for not paying attention. I mean no disrespect by this, but I see no reason to make every other American organization a clone of USA Archery, especially when, from what I've seen, very few FITA Recurve or Barebow folks have any interest in shooting anything other than FITA. Last weekend we had our state indoor FITA championship. This weekend the same club hosted the NFAA Great Lakes Indoor Sectionals. I can count on exactly one finger the number of FITA Recurve or Barebow archers who shot both, not including myself.
> 
> As far as the IBO is concerned, USA Archery wants exactly zero, nada, nothing to do with 3D archery. So why should a 3D archery organization care about their concept of Barebow? If people want to shoot 3D archery in this country under FITA Barebow rules, than they should get off their tails and start demanding that USA Archery step up. It's not the NFAA or IBO's responsibility to do USA Archery's job.


Jason, I don't think anyone is referring to NFAA barebow where compounds are allowed. But rather NFAA traditional. Frankly, I couldn't care less if NFAA barebow is allowed to continue under the current rules, as it gives people who choose to use clickers and stabilizers a place to shoot. I'm good with that.

As for USArchery, well, you're right about them and 3D, but we're not taking USArchery's lead. We're taking World Archery's lead. Big difference.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Gabe,

That's very unfortunate about what you experienced with the IAA. I wish every organization was as welcoming and open as the ITAA. But what I'm seeing is not just restricted to sanctioned events. I just rarely, if ever, see a FITA Recurve or Barebow presence at local 5-spot or field shoots (FITA field notwithstanding). It just seems if it doesn't involve shooting the color face at a FITA-type event they don't show up. I wish I had the answer, but I think it's kind of a shame. Field archery is just starting to pick up steam again around here, and we have a huge pool of paper shooters who I'd love to see attend.


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

You just have to travel a lil east Jason. There are plenty of NAA shooters shooting blue and white faces in the city! Our league is also an NFAA 300 round. 

Sorry about the derail folks.....now back to barebow


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

midwayarcherywi said:


> You just have to travel a lil east Jason. There are plenty of NAA shooters shooting blue and white faces in the city! Our league is also an NFAA 300 round.
> 
> Sorry about the derail folks.....now back to barebow


LOL! I try to avoid the city after having to shoot at Gage Park for years. I can see the airport traffic from my office window. That's enough for me.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

John,

I understand what you're saying, but following World Archery's lead is the responsibility of USA Archery, not the NFAA, IBO, ASA, or any other American organization.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I will be shooting either WA Barebow or Compound for everything.

What DOES change is what class that WA Barebow will be in. Likely NFAA Trad indoors and BB outdoors.

With the compound all I need to care about is arrow diameter, almost trivial in perspective.

-Grant


----------



## Walrustx (Jan 9, 2015)

High Plains said:


> I'm on board with this as well. Made my own WA leagal weights too.


Interested in how you did this. Got any pics and how to advice?


----------



## High Plains (Feb 29, 2008)

Walrustx said:


> Interested in how you did this. Got any pics and how to advice?


I don't have any pictures at this time but I took a 5/16" diameter bolt with size 24 threads and put fender washers on it. I kept the entire assembly short enough to pass through the 12.2 cm circle. I ground the bolt head down to fit a few more washers on as well. I wrapped the weight in black tape for looks but I was thinking about spraying it with rubberized undercoating. The entire weight came out to about 10 ounces.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

:thumbs_up


J. Wesbrock said:


> John,
> 
> I understand what you're saying, but following World Archery's lead is the responsibility of USA Archery, not the NFAA, IBO, ASA, or any other American organization.


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

There may be a misunderstanding with some. This thread is about shooters, not the governing bodies. At the end of the day, be autonomous. Shoot what you choose. Participants waiting for the rules to change, don't. Change yourself. Then woodshed (musicians terminology) and win. The precedent has been set.

The word Barebow is not NFAA exclusive. (Especially in this case).


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

High Plains said:


> I don't have any pictures at this time but I took a 5/16" diameter bolt with size 24 threads and put fender washers on it. I kept the entire assembly short enough to pass through the 12.2 cm circle. I ground the bolt head down to fit a few more washers on as well. I wrapped the weight in black tape for looks but I was thinking about spraying it with rubberized undercoating. The entire weight came out to about 10 ounces.


Unfortunately that weight, not being one piece, doesn't meet WA rules as I understand them.
Then again a quarter of the bows at the last WA World Field champs also seemed to have weights which contravene those rules. So who knows?

Personally I don't care how the weight is added so long as it fits through a 4.4" ring, but it would stink to travel to a shoot and be DQ'd over a $20 barebow weight.

-Grant


----------



## High Plains (Feb 29, 2008)

grantmac said:


> Unfortunately that weight, not being one piece, doesn't meet WA rules as I understand them.
> Then again a quarter of the bows at the last WA World Field champs also seemed to have weights which contravene those rules. So who knows?
> 
> Personally I don't care how the weight is added so long as it fits through a 4.4" ring, but it would stink to travel to a shoot and be DQ'd over a $20 barebow weight.
> ...


Thanks for the heads up, I didn't read that far into the rules.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Some people are way too prideful to see the bigger picture. This has never been one organization is better than the other or one country is better than the other. This is and always has been about getting a class unified, bringing up the number if participants, and making things simple for everyone. It just happens that the rest of the world shoots one way and we actually have some organizations that also shoot that way. Its never about USA organizational pride or NFAA is better or IBO is better or ASA is better, so please don't bring up any of that and make it your solid ground. It doesn't not apply. We have every organization that is close to the same rules that it makes no sense why not to tweak things and make this for the better of the class to make this easier for people to shoot. Please stop being soo prideful. It pains me to see how difficult some make this out to be. Numbers have shown that we as a whole want this.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

went back to the first post and I understand Thanks. As for me I will shoot what ever the rules allow from Organization to Organization. I am barebow, ru, trad recurve and recurve bowhunter. Just no sight 


screemnjay said:


> There may be a misunderstanding with some. This thread is about shooters, not the governing bodies. At the end of the day, be autonomous. Shoot what you choose. Participants waiting for the rules to change, don't. Change yourself. Then woodshed (musicians terminology) and win. The precedent has been set.
> 
> The word Barebow is not NFAA exclusive. (Especially in this case).


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

J. Wesbrock said:


> John,
> 
> I understand what you're saying, but following World Archery's lead is the responsibility of USA Archery, not the NFAA, IBO, ASA, or any other American organization.


In my opinion and apparently the opinion of the majority of the shooters on this and other forums things would be better if it was their responsibility.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

grantmac said:


> Unfortunately that weight, not being one piece, doesn't meet WA rules as I understand them.
> Then again a quarter of the bows at the last WA World Field champs also seemed to have weights which contravene those rules. So who knows?
> 
> Personally I don't care how the weight is added so long as it fits through a 4.4" ring, but it would stink to travel to a shoot and be DQ'd over a $20 barebow weight.
> ...


Hate to nitpick, but 12.2cm is actually 4.80314961 inches


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

limbwalker said:


> Hate to nitpick, but 12.2cm is actually 4.80314961 inches


Pick away 

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

J. Wesbrock said:


> John,
> 
> I understand what you're saying, but following World Archery's lead is the responsibility of USA Archery, not the NFAA, IBO, ASA, or any other American organization.


To a degree, that is correct. However, USArchery has more leeway than just strictly following WA rules. For instance, indoor barebow at Nationals, and this summer outdor barebow at US Outdoor Nationals. Neither of those are fully recognized by WA.

What's important is that barebow archers, or should I say RECURVE barebow archers, find a unified set of equipment rules to agree on. Whether that be informally or formally.

Nobody is suggesting that any divisions get taken away. But don't blame the majority when they all choose to accept one definition of recurve barebow.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

for us ******** it's 4 13/16" minus just a little


limbwalker said:


> Hate to nitpick, but 12.2cm is actually 4.80314961 inches


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

2413gary said:


> for us ******** it's 4 13/16" minus just a little


Exactly.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

grantmac said:


> In my opinion and apparently the opinion of the majority of the shooters on this and other forums things would be better if it was their responsibility.
> 
> -Grant


And? The majority of those same people indicated they weren't NFAA Traditional shooters, and I don't recall more than two them shooting IBO RU, so why should any of the rest of their opinions matter? 

So what. If they aren't members and shoot those classes who cares? 

If you want to string walk a barebow recurve in NFAA there's already a class for that. Jimmy Blackmon and I will both be shooting it in Louisville. Will you be there? How about Mechanicsburg or Yankton? There's also already a class for it in the IBO? Will we see you in TN or NY this year?


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

My budget allows me to shoot 1 national event. So I chose the Canadian Nationals since it has the rules that I prefer.

However I shoot NFAA sanctioned state events in the Trad class.

-Grant


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Jason, your arguments don't hold much water. How many guys do you know have the patience to shoot Ru, nfaa trad, us archery? How many shoot both USA barebow and nfaa trad? I can gaurentee a lot more would if they lined up. This is about growing the sport in every organization. Also, the majority of those that do shoot both would be a lot happier making the classes a lot healtier if they did line up. Sounds like win win for nfaa, us archery, Ru and everyone else. Those that rely on a clicker and a stab have their classes to fall back on.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

I have been shooting my WA legal barebow in the NFAA Trad style for 10+ years now. I will shoot the multicolor and blue face indoors all the time. I will happily shoot with anyone at 90m with the same rig. So rule changes wont technically affect me because I have adapted a style to work with both.

But what gets me is that all these different rules for non-sighted recurve shooters makes it difficult for all new shooters. Every where they turn they are bombarded with a different set of rules and prejudices. People just want to have fun and shoot. Having different rules can be discouraging, especially for those that really develop a passion for it and are willing to invest the time and energy to excel.

It is bad enough that there are not very many people that can effectively teach barebow-recurve shooting. Then those who do teach have to explain all the subtle rule differences to their students, even if they know them all. All this does is discourage people. A uniform set of rules will help eliminate these problems and help encourage new and future generations to develop.

I know, this is about we the shooters policing ourselves. Well, what percentage of people that shoot, even read these forums? It is hard to work to a common set of rules by ourselves, when a tournament puts out a flier for an upcoming shoot, and then makes references to the rule set, and a new person sees the flier, looks up the rules, and goes to the shoot. And when they get there, someone is telling them, you should shoot like us because we are following a unified set of rules that are different from the rules the shoot published. What are they going to think?

I would rather see the rules in place.

So in the mean time, when I go to NFAA 900 rounds and Field shoots, I will continue to tease the other Trad shooters to come and shoot with the Adults instead of following that youth stake rule option that clubs post as being a mandatory rule.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Demmer said:


> Jason, your arguments don't hold much water. How many guys do you know have the patience to shoot Ru, nfaa trad, us archery? How many shoot both USA barebow and nfaa trad? I can gaurentee a lot more would if they lined up. This is about growing the sport in every organization. Also, the majority of those that do shoot both would be a lot happier making the classes a lot healtier if they did line up. Sounds like win win for nfaa, us archery, Ru and everyone else. Those that rely on a clicker and a stab have their classes to fall back on.


And what IBO class would that be, John?

There is already a class in the IBO for people wanting to shoot FITA Barebow. What you guys want to do is exclude (not include, exclude) anyone who shoots a clicker from that class (and put them where? nowhere). Sorry, but that flat out stinks, especially considering how many recent winners would be subsequently booted from RU.

There is also a class in the NFAA for anyone wanting to shoot FITA Barebow. The problem is, you guys don’t like where it is so you want to change Traditional to fit that mold. The NFAA is already a member of an international archery organization, and in my opinion, should follow THAT organization’s lead…which they do.

You guys already have classes in which to shoot. You just don’t like what you have to shoot against, so in one case you want to flat out ban them. I won’t support that.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Here are shooter numbers from last year in the BB recurve and NFAA Trad divisions
USA FIELD 19
USA INDOOR 26
USA TARGET ?
NFAA FIELD 12
NFAA INDOOR 47
NFAA TARGET 6

Just a look at California which are NFAA members
TARGET 43
INDOOR 70
FIELD 9

The majority of archery ranges in the US are NFAA so for me the large numbers of Barebow recurve are NFAA members. let NFAA allow stringwalking and counter balance weight in the Trad division. Then WA BB archers could shoot their equipment right along side NFAA Trad. for me this would be the simple fix. One thing I have learned in the last two weeks is it' not equipment that produces high scores. It's Practice, Practice, Practice and John Demmer has proved this.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Speaking for me personally, I couldn't care less what happens on the 3D circuit. I just want to see the recurve barebow TARGET competitions (by target, I'm talking paper faces here) unified. 3D is it's own beast. 

I cannot disagree with NFAA just allowing stringwalking and keeping their stabilizer, although as I've already stated, that 12" stabilizer is worth at least 10 points indoors for me personally. But that would be a step in the right direction anyway. It would bring us closer together.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Gary, where did you pull your numbers from? 

According to the USArchery results, we had 45 men and 17 women in the Senior barebow division at Indoor Nationals, plus Ben and Mike Frizzell who shot in the 60+ recurve division (Ben won it with a barebow rig!). We also had a number of youth shoot barebow in the recurve divisions.

There was no barebow division in US Outdoor Nationals last year, but will be this year. So we will see how the participation is. I'm going to have 7 barebow archers from just my little club there in Decatur.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I got numbers off USA archery web site if I missed someone Sorry I stand corrected. I thought it was funny that there were only 9 men and 17 women
Thank you


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

John I understand but we may be missing a boatload of shooters to draw from The first time I went to the IBO world trad shoot in Tenn. there were over 550 single string shooters. I was blown away !!


limbwalker said:


> Speaking for me personally, I couldn't care less what happens on the 3D circuit. I just want to see the recurve barebow TARGET competitions (by target, I'm talking paper faces here) unified. 3D is it's own beast.
> 
> I cannot disagree with NFAA just allowing stringwalking and keeping their stabilizer, although as I've already stated, that 12" stabilizer is worth at least 10 points indoors for me personally. But that would be a step in the right direction anyway. It would bring us closer together.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Gary, last year at the Trads it looked like about half that number, not sure why.


----------



## Chris1ny (Oct 23, 2006)

Barebow should be, maybe an arrow rest, and a nock, that's it. IMHO.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

That's what I thought also this year will tell us if numbers are down or it was just Cloverdale


Bigjono said:


> Gary, last year at the Trads it looked like about half that number, not sure why.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Jason, I understand what you are saying, but doesn't mean the logic isnt flawed. What you are saying is that a fita barebow rig fits in a class that allows compounds, clickers, and vbars? Under that logic that bow also fits in ever compound class and Olympic class. Why doesn't every organization fit all hunting compound style bows with the open compound classes? Would that be best for the class, would that bring in more shooters? I guarantee that will kill the numbers that's essentially what is going on now. This is the point I hope many people can see. We are not fully grasping the shooters that we can with the rules that are currently out there. The nfaa barebow class is essentially a "catch all class" which some were purposing. Hows that class doing? Jason, you shoot nfaa barebow. In all the Ibo shoots except trad worlds, compound unaided is pretty much exactly the same as nfaa barebow. You would fit in that class. Now, that's besides the point. We never said let's trash the Ru class and change it all. You guys are assuming that. I'm going to talk to Jimmy some more about it and see if we can come up with a better plan. We have dropped soo many shooters in trad worlds over the last two years, and I believe its because of the health of some of our classes. Its pretty much a common theme I believe in the current set of affairs that is going on with not having a unified set. Too many unhappy people out there.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Gary, you must have looked at the wrong list.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

John,

It's nice to know guys like me, Scott, Mark, and Jared would no longer be welcomed at the IBO Traditional World Championship under your plan. Much appreciated, and I'm sure there will be no shortage of people glad to _not_ see us on the podium anymore. I suppose that's one way to get rid of the competition.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Saying equipment doesn't put up the scores kinda drives me nuts a little bit. I like shooting everywhere, so I constantly change to fit the rules. I know what equipment does for me. If I shoot a 560 with wa barebow rig, I usually score around 575 with an nfaa trad rig and a 580-585 with a long rod. Short rod usually gives me an average of 10-20 points over a wa bow and a long rod 15-25. It all depends on the day and how well I am shooting. On good days, they give me less and on bad days they give me more. Equipment matters a good deal. I hope people understand that and appreciate what it takes to shoot any style and the scores everyone accomplishes. Everything is relative to the style they shoot and doesn't directly correlate with other styles.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

So that would be 62 shooters nation wide for WA I stand corrected again California alone produces more NFAA shooters in one State This was my point WA does not have the numbers NFAA has. Making NFAA conform to WA just doesn't make since to me. if the numbers were reversed then yes. If recurve shooters wanted to shoot WA the numbers would be there. There not.


Demmer said:


> Gary, you must have looked at the wrong list.
> View attachment 2168226


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Jason, you have not read my post correctly. Please reread it again.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Gary, this isn't a one organization is better than another. When you compare national shoot, to national shoot, they are fairly equal. I can assure you that California also produces the most USA archery members as well.


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

I for one would NEVER vote for a class to eliminate the use of clickers...I for one HAD to use a clicker to break target panic..if someone told me I had to take it off then I couldn't have shot and maybe would have found another sport. Some very good friends of mine MUST use a clicker to shoot I would in no way be a part of them not having a class to shoot in.

I think some of us is getting really caught up over what goes on overseas where target archery rules the day.


Dewayne Martin


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Dewayne, no one ever said we are getting rid of a clicker in RU or even pushing that issue. Obviously that seems to be a shot at me.


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

Demmer said:


> Dewayne, no one ever said we are getting rid of a clicker in RU or even pushing that issue. Obviously that seems to be a shot at me.[/
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

I will add my fairly new guy 2 cents.

A uniform set of rules will allow an intermediate archer like myself to set up a rig and shoot at whatever event I choose to shoot at. Am I going to travel all over and shoot them like Demmer?? No, I don't have the time. However, if you want me or other similar archers to show up it needs to be simple across the board.

Also, being a fairly new archer with skills that are developing every year, I don't know how to properly prepare myself. Let's use the clicker for example. We all know the clicker is a great tool and probably the most important device for providing a consistent and accurate shot. But, I don't want to play with a clicker if I can use it in some events and not others. So.....Barebow is not properly defined if a clicker is allowed in some organizations, and not others. So amid all of this lack of uniformity, I tend to stay away from a few events. I don't have the desire to try to figure out all of the minutia in rules between the different organizations, as it's a major PIA. And I am sure I speak for a lot of others, it's just as easy to shoot at home, locally, in our back yards, and maybe a few non competive Trad Rendezvous where everybody is shooting off the shelf. 

In other words, the rules need to be set to attract all of the Trad shooters that AREN'T currently showing up, not the few that ARE already showing up. The true competitors will come no matter what. The additional crowds of shooters that you need to have a successful event need some uniform standards or they will stay home. Remember, a lot of archers are not currently competition archers, if you want to get them in the ranks of competing then some standards need to be adopted that cater to the masses, not the few.


----------



## BubbaDean1 (Dec 20, 2014)

Jason look at the numbers in RU 2006 and previous to 2010 when the clicker was added. Look at the NTC & World shoots not Trad world. I am sorry but a clicker is a shooting aid.......if you have TP fix it. Don't run a class in the ground because a couple of guys wouldn't be able to shoot.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Guys, don't forget the fact that you are all friends and I guarantee that no one intends to offend anyone else.
I think it's safe to say that there is no one set of regs that will please everyone. It's a nice idea and would be more fiscally friendly to the archer but there are too many road blocks I think. We don't have NFAA here so I'm not impacted by that and if I go home and want to shoot barebow I can't string walk so have to shoot with the Oly guys so WA barebow and iBO/OAA RU class are my only options and I enjoy both equally.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

2413gary said:


> John I understand but we may be missing a boatload of shooters to draw from The first time I went to the IBO world trad shoot in Tenn. there were over 550 single string shooters. I was blown away !!


Great point. But Gary, are we really going to get 3D shooters to use a metal ILF riser, a rest and plunger? How common is it for a guy to use a NFAA trad/WA barebow style rig in a 3D event all season. I guess it was my assumption (I know, I know) that most 3D shooters were not using flipper rests and plungers?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Guys, don't forget the fact that you are all friends and I guarantee that no one intends to offend anyone else.


Amen to that. We need to stick together. And let's not forget that nothing we say here on these forums is going to make a change. It will take formal petitions and votes to do that. Or, voluntary compliance in the meantime.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

From the grumbling I always hear at the Trads, it's the whole 25" metal riser thing that's killing it, let alone stabs and clickers etc so that is the issue we are facing there, it's different to setting up a unified barebow at more target based shoots.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

2413gary said:


> So that would be 62 shooters nation wide for WA I stand corrected again California alone produces more NFAA shooters in one State This was my point WA does not have the numbers NFAA has. Making NFAA conform to WA just doesn't make since to me. if the numbers were reversed then yes. If recurve shooters wanted to shoot WA the numbers would be there. There not.


The compelling reason for me to err toward WA rules is that they are MORE restrictive on equipment, rather than less restrictive. In other words, it is a more demanding, and truer (in my opinion) to the title "barebow" than NFAA trad. is. That's all. 

And that's not to put down any other definition. I have shot everything there is to shoot without wheels on it, just about. And I enjoy them all. But we're talking about championship equipment here, and IMO that means the most demanding of all "barebow" rigs. And I'm sorry, but what World Archery recognizes as a "barebow" does matter. Esp. if you want international competitors to travel to major events like Vegas and Lancasters and Louisville and US Nationals.

Can you imagine the outcry if the top European barebow archers all showed up in Louisville one year. Or Lancasters? It would be epic. And it would raise the bar. And that's what great competitors should want.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

John if I came across as one being better than the other that was not my intent. It was about numbers unless I am wrong (I have been at times) NFAA Is larger in numbers than USA Archery. Both organizations have there place and do a good job of promoting archery.


Demmer said:


> Gary, this isn't a one organization is better than another. When you compare national shoot, to national shoot, they are fairly equal. I can assure you that California also produces the most USA archery members as well.


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

Some of the posters in this thread need to tap the friggin Brakes. 

This thread is NOT about rules or exclusion. It's about the choice of the shooters. Gary stated that it's his choice to adhere to the written rules of each organization that he shoots. I respect that. I choose to shoot a WA compliant set-up regardless of the written rules. The Gary I know, respects my choice. Regardless there will probably be no shortage of Jokes/Trash Talk at Oristemba.

I believe the division would have a more healthy future if we all shot similar (Recurve) bows. 

It doesn't take legislation to become organized. We can also disagree without being disagreeable.

Let me clearly that state I own and shoot two compounds Barebow with fingers, as well as, 4 recurve Barebow/Trad set-ups and 2 longbows (with varying degrees of mediocrity). This thread is really specific to the Recurves. At the end of the day, it's how you choose to show up. Me, my recurve will pass through a 4-3/16ish circle. If yours doesn't, it's okay.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Gary brought up a good point about head count at tournaments.

I just looked at the head count for 4 different events last year (hopefully I counted correctly)

Indoors draws different numbers of people than field events. Since WA doesn't even acknowledge Barebow for Indoor and Outdoor target, I will focus on the field event which they do recognize the barebow.

2014 WA Outdoor FITA World Championships - Barebow (all age and sex combined) - 75
2014 USAA Outdoor FITA Field Nationals - Barebow (all age and sex combined) - 22
2014 IFAA World Championships - BowHunter-Recurve (all age and sex combined) - 12
2014 NFAA Outdoor Field Nationals - Traditional (all age and sex combined) - 9

These three styles Barebow, BowHunter-Recurve, and Traditional are very close to each other.

From a world championship point of view WA barebow rules dominates in attendance

From a US National point of view, USAA barebow dominates in attendance.

So why does the USAA FITA Field championships draw more people than the NFAA Field Nationals when comparing WA Barebow vs NFAA Traditional??

I believe that a big reason for this is because of the World FITA Field Championships has a Barebow division. Barebow is recognized, and it is a draw for the best of the best. It is the Olympics for Barebow shooters. It is the incentive.

I am quite sure that with the World FITA Field championships being in Ireland in 2016, that the USAA FITA Field championships with the barebow division will again dwarf the NFAA Field nationals for Traditional style, and probably more than 3 to 1. There is a higher, world recognized, goal for Barebow than some local national recognition.

I am also quite sure that if WA would recognize barebow at the indoor and outdoor target world championships, there will be an explosion of the number of people showing up with WA legal barebows shooting at all of our events even if they are under current NFAA, IFAA, IBO, ASA rules. And if there was a common set of rules, one can just imagine the excitement in all of this.

Pete


----------



## Darryl Longbow (Apr 11, 2003)

I swore to myself I would not continue this but find that I will. Traditional does have the stabilizer. How it got passed or why has always been a mystery to me.As a NFAA member longer than many of you have been alive and fairly well versed on their politics I have my own thoughts that it was only by the wish of a few instead of the supposed 80 percent of the membership.There are I am sure a few Traditional shooters who use them in competition especially at nationals. I do know they are very rare around the state of Virginia at local or state shoots. All of those who wish to shoot WA rule barebow at any Trad shoot I know of would welcome you and your equipment. The only problem would be the string walking and that is where the greatest problem lies . String walking is a calibrated aiming system that will produce for most archers a superior level of score. Not all, there are exceptions of course, but most.By allowing string walking you will do away with what we call traditional. What you don't seem to grasp is that the average trad shooter does not want to string walk and considers there method of off the shelf with one anchor a more pure form of barebow than a stringwalker with a weighted riser an adjustable rest and a pressure button. I am so tired of defending trad archery over all those who would change it to make it better.You claim that the BB recurve standard as is proposed here will unify non sighted finger shot recurves. Perhaps for a few of you that compete on an international level that might be true.It will drive the rest of the traditional archers to trad only events. So I see you as bringing more problems for the trad archer rather than unifying them.Many of us , the majority of trad archers do not want to change or share your international values.You also state that you don't want to be involved in 3D archery but I am pretty sure the NFAA or any other organization will go for separate rule for say field and 3D so we would be stuck with these WA rules for everything.Work for a recurve BB division with WA rules and you will find the trad community as your strongest ally, try to change us even more and we will fight you to the bitter end.Numbers count with the organizations and the manufacturers and there is a large and growing push to the simpler form of archery called traditional.I will not apoligise for the rant any longer instead I will do everything I can to organize the trad community and defeat your proposistion to change us. There, now I am through with it.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> String walking is a calibrated aiming system that will produce for most archers a superior level of score. Not all, there are exceptions of course, but most.By allowing string walking you will do away with what we call traditional.


Boy, you hit a nerve there...

Is this a contest of archery, or is this a contest of who is more "traditional?" Because if it is, I'll show up in a loincloth and shoot with a friggin' thumbring. 

If a group wants to create make-believe rules, call them "traditional" and shoot under them, so be it. But they have no place in serious modern day recurve barebow archery. That's my opinion, after having been all the way around the "trad" block and back a few times. 

I sat and listened to the trad police on the Leatherwall for over a decade, and it's the same old nonsense time after time. "ooh, yea they shoot great and all, but they AIM..." LOL! 

Give me a friggin' break. 

What is the difference between someone who goes through great pains, including raising their anchor, to set up a zero crawl indoors at 18M and someone who keeps a lower anchor and crawls 1/2" to get the same sight picture? Answer - NONE.  They are both using the arrow as a sight.

What's the difference between someone who has a carefully calibrated gapping system and aims like hell, and someone who gaps with their finger tab? Answer - NONE. They are both using the arrow as a sight.

What if someone chooses to have a partial crawl and still gaps, like I do? Then what? Is that pseudo-trad?

Darryl, if you're tired of defending "trad" archery, there is probably a reason for it. It's a make-believe world that doesn't really exist. As soon as someone discovered they could use the point of their arrow to aim, the so-called "instinctive" magic went away, never to be seen again.

This cling to a make-believe "tradition" is the EXACT reason we recurve barebow archers cannot be taken seriously by the major archery organizations, and will be kicked to the curb so long as we give it credence. I'm not saying there shouldn't be divisions for those who choose to believe in "traditional" or "instinctive" but for God's sake, don't punish the rest of us because we don't believe in false ideology. 

And no, I don't apologize for those comments either.

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> You also state that you don't want to be involved in 3D archery


Who said that? If I want to shoot 3D events (and I probably will this year) I'll grab my hunting recurve (shot off the shelf) or my longbow and wood arrows. Problem solved!



> It will drive the rest of the traditional archers to trad only events.


And what exactly is wrong with that? I don't show up at the Texas Traditional Championships with my 27" ILF target recurve and demand they let me shoot it. There are some fantastic traditional-only 3D events around the U.S. that are enjoyed by a huge number of archers. If they want to play with the target barebow recurve crowd, they are more than welcome to. Just like when I put down the longbow and picked up the Olympic bow. I wanted to play with the Olympic shooters, so I got an Olympic bow. I didn't demand the Olympics create a division for my 3-piece Adcock longbow.

All we're saying here is that the international standard for modern target recurve barebow has been established. Many of us accept this standard and choose to shoot under those restrictions. We also feel that if more archers would do the same it would increase competition, raise the level of shooting and by showing unity, create a more inviting division that will be taken more seriously by the major target archery organizations.

Ask yourself this question. Do any of the major U.S. archery organizations take barebow recurve, or barebow period, seriously? 

NO.

And why not?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> Boy, you hit a nerve there...
> 
> Is this a contest of archery, or is this a contest of who is more "traditional?" Because if it is, I'll show up in a loincloth and shoot with a friggin' thumbring.
> 
> If a group wants to create make-believe rules, call them "traditional" and shoot under them, so be it. But they have no place in serious modern day recurve barebow archery. That's my opinion, after having been all the way around the "trad" block and back a few times.


In some ways I think you and Darryl Longbow are making the same arguments. You say "more demanding, and truer" and he says " more pure form of barebow" and "more traditional".

John, I think you are filled with good ideas and practicality, but in this particular case I'd say you don't really have a good position to be mocking Darryl Longbow given how close your arguments actually are and how they really boil down to opinion and personal preference. Other than for safety, rules of sports are generally arbitrary. 

These kinds of arguments, though, date back to the 1800's, when people were argued over whether point offset aiming was "true archery".


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Warbow, you're completely, dead wrong. And I'll tell you why.

No, rather, I'll ask you a simple question.

Define "traditional."

And go.....


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

And why does this hit a nerve with me? Because I spent over 10 years listening to Neo-trad's who made up rules and looked down their noses from their high horses at anyone who didn't shoot "instinctively," who shot 3-under and not split, who shot a metal riser, who used carbon arrows, who dared to (gasp!) AIM... etc., etc., etc. 

It's a no-win race back to the cave. And frankly its the precise reason that barebow archers of any flavor cannot and will not be taken seriously by the governing bodies of target archery in the U.S.

There ARE TOURNAMENTS already for so-called "trad" archers, shooting "traditional" bows "instinctively." There are already divisions for this. Even USArchery has a longbow and traditional recurve division in it's rules. So please tell me why the neo-trad nonsense has to extend all the way up to include the divisions that allow 27" metal risers and friggin' stabilizers? 

WTH is "traditional" about a 27" ILF target riser with a carbon fiber stabilizer, shooting 6 grains/inch carbon arrows with spin wings? What?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> Warbow, you're completely, dead wrong. And I'll tell you why.
> 
> No, rather, I'll ask you a simple question.
> 
> ...


Don't mistake me for a trad snob. You can go check my old posts in various trad forums where I make that same point, that there is no single tradition of archery, so arguing what is "more" traditional is an argument that begs the question, "_which_ tradition?". 

When it comes to trad vs. neotrad, I've said consistently that people should shoot what and how they like.

But you used the term "more pure." More pure than what? What's "pure" about it? It isn't that I don't follow your argument about simpler equipment, but rather than it is much the same as that made by Darryl Longbow, where he uses the term "traditional" but he does so in part because to him that includes the same concept of "pure" or "simpler" or whatnot. You two don't disagree that lines have to be drawn, you only disagree on where to draw them. That really is just a difference of degrees.

Getting people to agree on common rules for competition is a different matter, where you have to get people to agree on arbitrary rules. And I think most people prefer the arbitrary rules to just coincidentally max out with exactly the set up and style they shoot. I think you are more open than that, but I think it is the nature of competitive archers to want rules that favor their own skill set and preferences.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Warbow, I have shot so-called "traditional" hunting bows most of my life. I shoot them "instinctively" and without crawling the string. Why on earth would I argue in favor of allowing stringwalking if I didn't think it was a way to level the playing field and remove the bias? I will be at a disadvantage to any experienced string walker I shoot against, just as I'm already at a disadvantage to any archer with a proven gapping system. My argument is that rules are for equipment, and romantic notions are for the way they are shot. Making archers touch the arrow proves nothing. Nobody has made a good argument (that sounds like an adult conversation) as to what it proves. If they can, I'd love to hear it.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Darryl Longbow said:


> I swore to myself I would not continue this but find that I will. Traditional does have the stabilizer. How it got passed or why has always been a mystery to me.As a NFAA member longer than many of you have been alive and fairly well versed on their politics I have my own thoughts that it was only by the wish of a few instead of the supposed 80 percent of the membership.There are I am sure a few Traditional shooters who use them in competition especially at nationals. I do know they are very rare around the state of Virginia at local or state shoots. All of those who wish to shoot WA rule barebow at any Trad shoot I know of would welcome you and your equipment. The only problem would be the string walking and that is where the greatest problem lies . String walking is a calibrated aiming system that will produce for most archers a superior level of score. Not all, there are exceptions of course, but most.By allowing string walking you will do away with what we call traditional. What you don't seem to grasp is that the average trad shooter does not want to string walk and considers there method of off the shelf with one anchor a more pure form of barebow than a stringwalker with a weighted riser an adjustable rest and a pressure button. I am so tired of defending trad archery over all those who would change it to make it better.You claim that the BB recurve standard as is proposed here will unify non sighted finger shot recurves. Perhaps for a few of you that compete on an international level that might be true.It will drive the rest of the traditional archers to trad only events. So I see you as bringing more problems for the trad archer rather than unifying them.Many of us , the majority of trad archers do not want to change or share your international values.You also state that you don't want to be involved in 3D archery but I am pretty sure the NFAA or any other organization will go for separate rule for say field and 3D so we would be stuck with these WA rules for everything.Work for a recurve BB division with WA rules and you will find the trad community as your strongest ally, try to change us even more and we will fight you to the bitter end.Numbers count with the organizations and the manufacturers and there is a large and growing push to the simpler form of archery called traditional.I will not apoligise for the rant any longer instead I will do everything I can to organize the trad community and defeat your proposistion to change us. There, now I am through with it.


NFAA longbow is available for these people and the lack of numbers is staggering.

-Grant


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> Warbow, I have shot so-called "traditional" hunting bows most of my life. I shoot them "instinctively" and without crawling the string. Why on earth would I argue in favor of allowing stringwalking if I didn't think it was a way to level the playing field and remove the bias? I will be at a disadvantage to any experienced string walker I shoot against, just as I'm already at a disadvantage to any archer with a proven gapping system. My argument is that rules are for equipment, and romantic notions are for the way they are shot. Making archers touch the arrow proves nothing. Nobody has made a good argument (that sounds like an adult conversation) as to what it proves. If they can, I'd love to hear it.


I didn't say that you were arguing in favor of your own style, rather that most people do.

Level the playing field is a very subjective thing, though. Sports are never really *level*. When you level it based on your point that not everybody has a face suitable for face walking, you take away from people who do have such a face. To some that is more level, to others favoring people who can string walk is unbelieving it. I think I understand why you consider it more level, based on the idea that string walking is a skill anyone can develop vs. a physical feature you are born with. But if we really want to "level" the playing field, why not have poundage limits so that weaker and smaller archers aren't disadvantaged by stronger ones who's bows have flatter trajectories that are more forgiving of range estimation errors? The field is never truly level, though that doesn't mean I think you shouldn't try to do what you are doing to make it level. But, why, for instance doesn't a 12" stab make it more level? Isn't that more fair to people with stability problems? The argument is a subjective one, so I don't know that there is one clear answer to it.

That being said, I can see some practicality to your arguments, and I also think pretty much nobody gets why there is a 12" stab in the trad division.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Warbow, there are times you make me wonder why I came back to post here again...


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> Warbow, there are times you make me wonder why I came back to post here again...


Oh, come on, it's not like what I'm writing is radical or unreasoned or anything. :dontknow:

(Or as if you haven't written lengthy posts to other people who are really more intransigent and more invested in this than I am... :embara: )


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

I'm suggesting, if as has been stated here, the majority doesn't understand why there are 12in. stabilizers in Trad, don't shoot one. Just because the rules say you can, does it mean you have to?

I've never met a stringwalker who didn't gap or pick a point. I've never met an all conquering stringwalker. The guys who shoot the numbers, do so because they are able to operate at a higher standard regardless. I've never met a champion anything that was intimidated by what others were choosing. A champ just wants you to bring it.

My harsh opinion is, there are those among us who are AFRAID to get it handed to them. Grow a set and compete. Step in harms way, that's where the Hero's are.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

screemnjay said:


> I'm suggesting, if as has been stated here, the majority doesn't understand why there are 12in. stabilizers in Trad, don't shoot one. Just because the rules say you can, does it mean you have to?


John says it's worth 10 points. What serious competitor is going to toss ten points? (I'm sure there are some, but, just giving away an easy legal 10 point advantage? That's not playing to win. You might as well shoot as "guest".)


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

Warbow said:


> John says it's worth 10 points. What serious competitor is going to toss ten points? (I'm sure there are some, but, just giving away an easy legal 10 point advantage? That's not playing to win. You might as well shoot as "guest".)


Yeah, like Demmer. That's the high standard part. Check the scoreboard baby!
I found the low 270's recently indoor. Guess what...t ain't enough. More work to do.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

screemnjay said:


> Yeah, like Demmer. Check the scoreboard baby!


Hmm...


----------



## cpnhgnlngct (Dec 9, 2010)

I'm in. I'll support this.

I shot WA legal at IBO worlds in New York this year in RU. (Because of last minute tuning issues mind you, stab had to come off  )

But being a new kid in the block for target archery, me and my other recently target archery obsessed crew always complain about the varying rules between our games of choice.

Unified BB rules, why wouldn't we support WA.

Being an engineer, I have to live through this daily. What's that?? A beautifully designed measuring system using a simple decimal point shift to segregate logical breaks in units of measure.... (kilometer, decimeter, meter, centimeter, millimeter)

Whoever thought F'n - inches, foot, yard, mile was a good idea... 

We always have to be different than the world I guess... So absurd.


----------



## mrcina (Dec 2, 2013)

Too many different sets of rules and too many institutions. I like stringwalking but I don't like marked tabs and even written notes people use. I like the part when you need to calculate the distance, crawls and elevation but without 20 tiny marks. 

How come cut in shelves are traditional? Not a provocation, just interested


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I've never met a champion anything that was intimidated by what others were choosing. A champ just wants you to bring it.


Amen to that. This push toward a unified set of rules is about achieving excellence in the recurve target barebow division, and then being taken seriously because of it.


----------



## Darryl Longbow (Apr 11, 2003)

First, I am not exactly a neo trad or a person who considers himself a trad archer. That is a convienent word that is used to demonise someone who does not agree with your vision.I am an archer that chooses to shoot a recurve that is metal (Bear take down magnesium model) I choose to shoot what is called instinctive for 3D and hunting and I gap for field and target.I do not believe in the use of the stabilizer for the division I am classed in so I don't. After 55 yrs of competition,as a trad,barebow,freestyle (sponsored pro in 1976-80)Olympic and every other division available I don't care anymore if I get beat or not I simply do my best and if that is not good enough then that is on me. John I am glad that I made you mad, that was my intention,Now put yourself in the shoes of the run of the mill trad shooter for a second and look at all these post about changing what is called the traditional division. Does it make you mad ? There are a great many traditional archers that work on their game just as hard as any other shooter and want to be respected for what they do as much as anybody else.I am not against WA BB and its rules for barebow,I agree with you that you deserve a place but I don't think it should be at the expense of changing a lot of other people who believe in and love what they do as much as anyone else.Is string walking going to produce a score better than a gap shooter ? Not all but most. One is measured by the crawl of the string and the other by a visualized gap in space. The measured crawl allowing point on for every target is for most going to produce better results.What the traditional archer wants is to do as well as he can shooting against others shooting the same way. They do not want to change that .They see stringwalking as changing that. BB and what is refered to as traditional are as much a separate game as a freestyle unlimited compound vs. a stick and bailing twine.Most would feel better shooting against a one anchor compound shooter(bowhunter style) than a stringwalker with a recurve. Right or wrong that is the perception.Organise BB, no one is against that in any way,leave the trad division alone.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Darryl, I would think NFAA Trad is about as far removed from what most guys consider Trad as you can get anyway. It's already closer to BB recurve than trad.


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

Darryl, reading is a skill. This Thread is about the individual Archer's ability to make a choice. It's not about organizations, and rules. You say "we", "us" but I interpret "I". You use tenure as an excuse to have an opinion. You don't need an excuse, it's okay to make the choices you've made. 
At the end of the day, what's in the best interest of the greater whole doesn't always suit the individual. What I can tell you is, if you are cognizant of the youth/next generation you'd be aware that unity is the best way to grow the division. Confusion is exclusive to inclusion.

I don't know why John would get mad, you're train of thought and those like it, is/are transperant.


----------



## mrcina (Dec 2, 2013)

But why would one accept stabilizer as traditional but not stringwalking? There is no logic. And I don't understand why you wouldn't allow stringwalking in your traditional class when you already shoot against people who use stabilizers in which you don't believe in and you don't care if you get beat.
People are used to their divisions, that's all. But you can't make everyone happy unless you have hundreds of divisions. 

SOLUTION:
You should just make sign-up forms with a list of existing archery equipment with a checkbox next to every item. So when someone signs up to a competition, he checks all that he will use and you run the forms through the scanner and the computer automatically puts people into groups. They all shoot together but at the end you have the scores grouped. If you do online application, it is even simpler to do. The prize scales with the number of applicants


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

If someone feels that strongly about not stringwalking they are welcome to shoot in Longbow or Bow Hunter.
Just as those who currently feel strong about stringwalking currently shoot in Barebow Compound.

-Grant


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

What amuses me is, here in California, so many of the good shooters will help you learn how to gap. There is a general consensus that although there is faster gratification Stringwalking, the solid platform is gap. At some point (beyond point on) all stringwalkers need gap or pick a point skills. Heck, Gary and Sandy will invite you over, teach you everything they know and feed you. So will Alan. Demmer helped me with tune issues over the Internet. There is no fear of the Mighty Invasive Stringwalkers because they're busy cleaning animals or polishing awards.

I've never heard anything above and beyond a friendly discussion about technique amongst the better competitive shooters. Never.


----------



## Darryl Longbow (Apr 11, 2003)

screemnjay, you are right about reading being a skill,so I wonder how you could think this thread is all about individual archers choices and not organizations and there rules. The fact is it is about individual archers who want to change a organization to fit there own wishes.I am not concerned in the least if you see I instead of we,it is obvious that the many traditional archers I talk with on a daily basis do not count as we,apparently they don't count at all. These changes being better for a future generation is debatable at best and I am glad your crystal ball has seen that it is for the best, makes me feel better. I am also glad you are such an astute mind reader to see my transparency as well as those who don't agree with your view, it makes you rather transparent does it not ? I think if john got somewhat frustrated (mad) he realized later that it was intended to make him look at it from the other side.Again to more important posts,I am against the use of the stabilizer in the traditional division and refuse to use one despite it being legal to do so, that is simply my choice. I am pro barebow an anti changing an entire division to fit someone else.I feel to be pro BB I would suggest asking for that division first as I feel there is a far better chance of getting that rather than changing another division.For what it is worth from my limited experience I do not feel you will get the change in the traditional division you want. I do not think that the majority of trad shooters embrace the stabilizer rule and will embrace stringwalking even less.The PERCEPTION is unfortunately stronger than the truth of the matter,and the perception as it being different is very real.Squalkingjay I would make a strong suggestion that you consider your inuendos carefully and not be such a hero over the internet I yes that is I have found they come back to haunt you sometimes in the real world and being clever is not all it is cracked up to be. Thank you young man.


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

^^^^^LOL!!!

Thank you for the compliments. Yes sir, I'm transparent, clever and yes, a hero to some.I've publicly stated my choice. Read my posts. I started this thread. I know it's intent, however I like your ever amusing presence. Carry on.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I need that on a Tee Shirt LMAO


screemnjay said:


> ^^^^^LOL!!!
> 
> Thank you for the compliments. Yes sir, I'm transparent, clever and yes, a hero to some.I've publicly stated my choice. Read my posts. I started this thread. I know it's intent, however I like your ever amusing presence. Carry on.


----------



## Darryl Longbow (Apr 11, 2003)

Gladly. I believe I have spoken my opinion as well. The thing you said about all stringwalkers needing to gap or pick appoint beyond point on distances puzzles me, I thought you went to another anchor to reach the longer distances kind of thought that was what BB was about.Guess my ignorance is showing in my old age or maybe things have changed a lot.We used to use several anchors and string walk down from them as necessary so we could use the point on for any target and would not have to gap or use a pick a point aiming method. Do you still use the tab to determine your crawl and if so how precisely do you measure for is it by the yard ? do you still count serving strands to get a real precise crawl. Seems like David Hughes and Denny Cline used to do that. I think I heard mentioned by Ty Pelfrey that was the way he set his sight, on the back instead of the front by a measured crawl.Is it being done that way today ? please enlighten me to these newer techniques . Like your picture.


----------



## Darryl Longbow (Apr 11, 2003)

Oh I almost forgot if you have never heard anything more than a friendly discussion among top competitors then that tells me you have not been around long.Silly but true I have seen fist fights over such things over the years, when the release started to become real popular around 1971 it happened more than you might believe. I understand that when sights started to become popular there was a fair amount of hard feelings between them and BB shooters as well.Well it may be so between top competitors they tend to never stand up for what they believe in they just agree with the crowd then go beat all of them on the course.Of course that's true, it was only us ignorant not always top competitors that did such and who cares what they think, right ?


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

Darryl, the ways you mentioned are still in effect. Me, I an kind've a hybrid shooter. I set bows up for different games and always have a point on that covers most of the shots. I'll use combinations of crawls, gaps and points. For me, long point on distances means the bow is harder to crawl at the short distances because of tune issues. I never crawl bigger than about 3/4 in. That will get me close with a given set up. The rest of zeroing in is about shooting and figuring it out. At 18 meters, I'm on the nock, on the page with my tune. At 80 yards, I spray and pray usually shooting from a 45 yard point on. What learning how to string walk did for me is help me see gaps at the riser better. When guys would say, that's an 1/8th in gap, I had no reference, after learning crawls, I could first see it on the string and then translate it. Easier to do than describe.

Some shooters use the tab, some count the serving. The problem with the tab is, if you lose it, your lost. 

At the end of it all, learning to stand and deliver shots in good consistent form has been more beneficial than any aiming technique. Coming from years of Freestyle Ultd, that's been the hardest part. Now I shoot freestyle with all of the techniques I've learned sightless with fingers. I'm not insinuating proficiency.

I'm fortunate to run with a good crowd I guess. Most of which are bigger than me. Keeps me honest. Been clowning around this since the late 70's off and on.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Most guys are using tab stitches or marks these days. Haven't seen anyone count serving in any of the WA Worlds footage.
Also I shoot past point-on for everything beyond 65yds and that works quite well with pick a point or just looking through the shaft for me.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Now put yourself in the shoes of the run of the mill trad shooter for a second and look at all these post about changing what is called the traditional division. Does it make you mad


Sorry, but "run of the mill trad shooters" don't usually shoot in the NFAA traditional division, because long metal risers and 12" stabilizer aren't "traditional" enough for the run of the mill trad shooters I know. They are busy shooting instinctively off the shelf. 

Where these rules really matter is in the top 10% of barebow shooters. In other words, the guys who honestly have a chance of winning or placing if they give an event their best effort. Why any of these rules would matter one bit to someone who never has a chance to place or win among the top shooters escapes me. For example, I went to Louisville 2 years ago and competed in the so-called "traditional" division (even more traditional then, because the 12" stabilizer was not yet allowed). I was so poorly prepared that I knew it would be a miracle if I finished in the top flight. And frankly for that reason, I couldn't have cared less what the rules were. I would have shot gap or string walk or instinctive, stabilizer or not, etc., etc. It wouldn't have mattered because I basically had zero chance to win anything anyway. I was just there to enjoy the company, show off a new bow, and have fun. I managed to do all three things, so mission accomplished. 

Where these rules start to matter is when the top shooters are divided by them. Then there is debate that follows about who the better barebow shooters really are. When you can't compare scores across platforms, then nobody knows who the real champions are, and that is a problem. That gets to the credibility of the division, and it's why we're not taken seriously by the major governing bodies. 

I'd like to hear people's solution for that problem - being taken more seriously by the NFAA, USArchery, IBO or ASA. Whatever we can do together to raise the status of barebow archers, I'm all for.

Obviously I think the string walking/touching nock question is preposterous, but I'm willing to do either so long as everyone agrees. Same goes with the stabilizer. So long as everyone agrees.

But for God's sake, let's all find a single set of rules for recurve barebow we can agree on. Please. 

IMO, WA rules have the best chance of being accepted across the board by the greatest number of top barebow archers, and that's why I support them. But whatever the greater group decides, I will shoot. The sooner the better!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> At some point (beyond point on) all stringwalkers need gap or pick a point skills.


I have not been stringwalking for more than a year now, and even I have found this to be true. I gap at 60 meters outdoors, and I even gap indoors at 18M, even though I'm also stringwalking. I string walk to be able to use the anchor I want, not because I think it's a superior method over gapping. If anything, gapping is the superior method for my most preferred style of archery - bowhunting!


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I would like to point out that WA BB rules aren't exactly killing the division in Europe where it's easy as popular as Olympic at national level events.

-Grant


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

^^x2


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Well I see now where you are coming from. You could care less about the run of the mill archers This is a Elitist attitude your true colors have shown through. It's the run of the mill archers that make up the archery organizations not your Precious top 10%. It's a sad day when this type of thinking want to control the Barebow group. It's bigger than the top 10% the rules are for all of us.


limbwalker said:


> Sorry, but "run of the mill trad shooters" don't usually shoot in the NFAA traditional division, because long metal risers and 12" stabilizer aren't "traditional" enough for the run of the mill trad shooters I know. They are busy shooting instinctively off the shelf.
> 
> Where these rules really matter is in the top 10% of barebow shooters. In other words, the guys who honestly have a chance of winning or placing if they give an event their best effort. Why any of these rules would matter one bit to someone who never has a chance to place or win among the top shooters escapes me. For example, I went to Louisville 2 years ago and competed in the so-called "traditional" division (even more traditional then, because the 12" stabilizer was not yet allowed). I was so poorly prepared that I knew it would be a miracle if I finished in the top flight. And frankly for that reason, I couldn't have cared less what the rules were. I would have shot gap or string walk or instinctive, stabilizer or not, etc., etc. It wouldn't have mattered because I basically had zero chance to win anything anyway. I was just there to enjoy the company, show off a new bow, and have fun. I managed to do all three things, so mission accomplished.
> 
> ...


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

As rules go, I think the highest standard is WA. I also believe there is a perception/connection that the ability to shoot Internationally, on the World Stage, with what is perceived as the Worlds finest, that makes their package the most alluring. Shooters like Alan, Ben, John, Lori, Rebecca etc. are perceived with a higher level of reverence as a result of their achievements in that environment. 

I'd like to achieve on that very same level. I'll divulge, my equipment choice is actually based on that dream/desire. Gonna slow down the diversification stuff and get some discipline. Demmer finding that discipline works to his favor. It sucks enough he's better than I. I refuse however, to let him out work/smart me. I type that with the utmost respect.

John your presentation of how serious the division in America, is taken/regarded is rooted in this.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

2413gary said:


> Well I see now where you are coming from. You could care less about the run of the mill archers This is a Elitist attitude your true colors have shown through. It's the run of the mill archers that make up the archery organizations not your Precious top 10%. It's a sad day when this type of thinking want to control the Barebow group. It's bigger than the top 10% the rules are for all of us.


Were you drunk when you wrote that?


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

itbeso said:


> Were you drunk when you wrote that?


Oh my!!! Orestimba's gonna be Classic!!! 

LOL!!!


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

2413gary said:


> Well I see now where you are coming from. You could care less about the run of the mill archers This is a Elitist attitude your true colors have shown through. It's the run of the mill archers that make up the archery organizations not your Precious top 10%. It's a sad day when this type of thinking want to control the Barebow group. It's bigger than the top 10% the rules are for all of us.


Gary, I don't know how to say this differently than I have said it a dozen times. If it was left up to the run of the mill trad archers there wouldn't be a trad class. The NFAA is not going to stand by and let that class go unattended year after year at it's sectional and national tournaments. It will dump that class as they did with FSL. The ONLY reason there is still a trad class is because of the top 10% shooters attending those tournaments. And you know my thinking as to why the overwhelming majority of trad shooters went to that class, and it most certainly was not to embrace competition. In reading the posts regarding unity, I see the selfishness that has always pervaded the finger shooter divisions. The bottom line is : united we stand, divided we fall. Pure and simple. One poster talked about "our wishes" , referring to the people who have the ambition to actually try to get all of the recurvers united. This same poster talked about talking to great numbers of trad shooters in his area, like there actually were great numbers. He also talked about shooting some old bear recurve traditionally as if that bow wasn't drilled and tapped for a stabilizer back then. It's laughable, I have one piece bows that I bought new back before the compound was even being shot in competition, they are set up for stabilizers. These people who want to call themselves traditionalists don't have a clue, they just want to impose their view as to what they think trad should be to suit their wants.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

screemnjay said:


> Oh my!!! Orestimba's gonna be Classic!!!
> 
> LOL!!!


I just might shoot one in the ground this year to get one of those knives!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

2413gary said:


> Well I see now where you are coming from. You could care less about the run of the mill archers This is a Elitist attitude your true colors have shown through. It's the run of the mill archers that make up the archery organizations not your Precious top 10%. It's a sad day when this type of thinking want to control the Barebow group. It's bigger than the top 10% the rules are for all of us.


Oh for pete's sake Gary. Are you going to go there? Have you been waiting for a "gotcha" opportunity or is that how you really feel? 

Elitist? Have you seen me struggle with barebow? Obviously not. I am in no danger of winning crap. But I do have a little experience competing at the top levels in a division (not necessarily barebow though) and I coach a wide range of archers. So really the only ones who tend to complain are the ones who are afraid of losing or the ones who just got beat, and rarely is that the realm of the 14th ranked archer. They usually just want to show up and have a good time and maybe shoot a personal best. By the way, that is exactly where I'll be this weekend... in absolutely no danger of winning or even placing, but rather just showing up to work on my technique and enjoy myself with a BARE BOW.

So, here's a thought. Rather than go after me personally with hyper-divisive terms like "elitist," how about you answer the question of why barebow archers are not taken as seriously by the major organizations as compound and Olympic recurve archers are? Maybe it's because barebow archers are too busy spending their time insulting one another? Hmmm?

I'm starting to get the impression that there are some who DO NOT wish to have the barebow recurve division taken seriously, so that the status quo of thinly sliced divisions can continue. Is that the case?


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I have been a run of the mill archer and attended a lot of shoots that I didn't stand a chance in hell to win. But I shot and the rules mattered to me. No mater what the rules are I will be there. 
When and if there is a petition to change the rules I will be at the meeting voice my opinion and vote for what I think is best for our group. 
I got a little out of line but its how I feel. 
I'm done here


itbeso said:


> Gary, I don't know how to say this differently than I have said it a dozen times. If it was left up to the run of the mill trad archers there wouldn't be a trad class. The NFAA is not going to stand by and let that class go unattended year after year at it's sectional and national tournaments. It will dump that class as they did with FSL. The ONLY reason there is still a trad class is because of the top 10% shooters attending those tournaments. And you know my thinking as to why the overwhelming majority of trad shooters went to that class, and it most certainly was not to embrace competition. In reading the posts regarding unity, I see the selfishness that has always pervaded the finger shooter divisions. The bottom line is : united we stand, divided we fall. Pure and simple. One poster talked about "our wishes" , referring to the people who have the ambition to actually try to get all of the recurvers united. This same poster talked about talking to great numbers of trad shooters in his area, like there actually were great numbers. He also talked about shooting some old bear recurve traditionally as if that bow wasn't drilled and tapped for a stabilizer back then. It's laughable, I have one piece bows that I bought new back before the compound was even being shot in competition, they are set up for stabilizers. These people who want to call themselves traditionalists don't have a clue, they just want to impose their view as to what they think trad should be to suit their wants.


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

I'm shooting in a tournament this weekend with NFAA Rules and my stabilizer is staying off my barebow rig.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Canada has approximately 1/10th the population of the US. I shot our 3D Nationals last year and we had 6 adult male in barebow with quite a few more who couldn't make it but are very competitive. Our indoor nationals (multi-site) had 18 in adult male.
If things were proportional in the US there would be at least 180 adult males shooting barebow at national events. 

The difference is we have 1 organization at the national level with a unified set of rules that follow international standards.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

UtahIdahoHunter said:


> I'm shooting in a tournament this weekend with NFAA Rules and my stabilizer is staying off my barebow rig.


:darkbeer:


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> So really the only ones who tend to complain are the ones who are afraid of losing or the ones who just got beat, and rarely is that the realm of the 14th ranked archer.


This makes me think of a club that I have shot with for years with my compound in both BHFS and Open. It's an 8 week indoor 3D league which takes place inside a rodeo arena with shots out to 70 yards. This year I decided to shoot exclusively with my stringwalking ILF Barebow setup. They didn't know which class to put me in, so they stuck me in Traditional Class which consists of about 15 archers. Well I was welcomed with open arms at first, because many of those guys I have known for years. Well I have been consistently shooting 50-60 points higher every week, than the guy who won it last year. Now the trad shooters won't even talk to me and I have a feeling that I might be snubbed at the awards banquet. Which is fine, but next year they might have to make a barebow class.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

This is my point. Not that the top ranked archers have any more votes to cast than the 20th ranked archer, but that they are more likely to squabble when the rules are not consistent from one organization to the next, because frankly it affects them more. You might say, they have more to lose, or more at stake. Not only that, but as Ben always likes to point out (and IMO rightly so) the top-ranked archers tend to put their money where their mouth is, and travel and support more events. So it should matter more to them whether the rules align, than say, the 20th ranked archer.


----------



## trevorpowdrell (May 8, 2012)

As a run of the mill shooter who attends competitions at the state, sectional and if I can get the time off work national level it usually makes no difference to me what I shoot. 
Shooting in Master 50+ Recurve Barebow because I string walk I am the only competitor in my class/division at local NAA and NFAA shoots. 
It is only at the national level that I see competition. 
It has always seemed strange that in the NFAA because I string walk I would have to compete against compounds but I entered the local shoots anyway and found out even fewer archers shoot compound barebow than recurve barebow or trad (at least in my area). 
I usually shoot a WA legal bow but recently started playing with using a 12" stabilizer as Senior Games allowed that last year.
From my perspective we better get our house in order and stop being so insular. 
We need to promote recurve barebow archery on the local, national and world stage. 
We need to get some international competitions other than field archery to have recurve barebow as a division. 
This will not happen if we have lots of different rules and classes. 
We have started in the right direction of getting recurve barebow back in the NFAA outdoor nationals and partially for indoor nationals. But this will quickly get reversed if we do not have people turn up and shoot. 
We need to have recurve barebow open for the younger divisions at indoor JOAD and nationals. 
There has been a large influx of kids who want to shoot recurve barebow who end up shooting olympic recurve or compound because either recurve barebow is not offered at local shoots or the rules are different for each event. 
We are a small group of dedicated archers who need to band together and find common ground.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> We have started in the right direction of getting recurve barebow back in the NFAA outdoor nationals and partially for indoor nationals. But this will quickly get reversed if we do not have people turn up and shoot.
> We need to have recurve barebow open for the younger divisions at indoor JOAD and nationals.
> There has been a large influx of kids who want to shoot recurve barebow who end up shooting olympic recurve or compound because either recurve barebow is not offered at local shoots or the rules are different for each event.
> We are a small group of dedicated archers who need to band together and find common ground.


Did you mean USArchery outdoor nationals, or did NFAA remove barebow from their outdoor nationals too?

And you're right. We have a TON of young JOAD barebow archers who want to compete in both indoor and outdoor nationals. 

Still working on it.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Where these rules start to matter is when the top shooters are divided by them. Then there is debate that follows about who the better barebow shooters really are. When you can't compare scores across platforms, then nobody knows who the real champions are, and that is a problem.


I can't for the life of me imagine sitting around fretting over such things. For spectators to do so reminds me of little kids arguing over whether or not Spiderman could beat up Batman. For competitors to debate this seems narcissistic. I've never viewed any of my state, sectional, national, or world championships as validation of being better than anyone else. All they meant is I was fortunate enough to score higher than some other people at those particular venues on those days. Nothing more. And I pray to God I'm never so arrogant to think, or need to think, otherwise. 




limbwalker said:


> That gets to the credibility of the division, and it's why we're not taken seriously by the major governing bodies.
> 
> I'd like to hear people's solution for that problem - being taken more seriously by the NFAA, USArchery, IBO or ASA. Whatever we can do together to raise the status of barebow archers, I'm all for.


The IBO and NFAA _do_ take barebow archery seriously. Good grief, John, the IBO even has a series of standalone events just for recurve and longbow shooters. They're doing more to promote barebow archery than any other organization in this country right now. Whereas USA Archery has dropped barebow classes from their shoots, the NFAA has done the exact opposite, actually adding a longbow class a couple years ago and modifying Traditional to be in line with their international organization. The NFAA owns The Vegas Shoot, and didn't they just hand out a $5k check to the Barebow class winner? 

It seems that USA Archery is the _only_ national organization right now that _doesn't_ take barebow archery seriously.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Jason, I'm speachless at your last post. Of course Spider-Man can kick Batmans butt, no contest, he does web walk after all [emoji16]


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

J. Wesbrock said:


> The IBO and NFAA _do_ take barebow archery seriously. Good grief, John, the IBO even has a series of standalone events just for recurve and longbow shooters. They're doing more to promote barebow archery than any other organization in this country right now. Whereas USA Archery has dropped barebow classes from their shoots, the NFAA has done the exact opposite, actually adding a longbow class a couple years ago and modifying Traditional to be in line with their international organization. The NFAA owns The Vegas Shoot, and didn't they just hand out a $5k check to the Barebow class winner?
> 
> It seems that USA Archery is the _only_ national organization right now that _doesn't_ take barebow archery seriously.


Jason lays down the SERIOUS smack here. I'm glad you posted this. Amazing how a derail can sometimes lead to something good. I have a better understanding of my own opinion as a result. 

I believe the disconnect/divide, with regards to legislation, is based on those that have an attraction to the International Competitions yet don't want to shoot multiple rigs. There is only a partial disconnect because, there are those that recognize having to do so is an acceptable necessary evil. The issue gets even more murky when you bring in to account, the ages old, silly Tradition of bickering over technique and gear. 

The truthful reality is, International recognition is not the end all and frankly doesn't matter to some, while to others, it's a component of the highest form of Archery recognition. Jason's post reflects that the Organization most responsible for that International recognition is deficient to the point of being Cavalier. That is a problem.

Unified rules could very well increase the Talent Pool however, I'm not sure it would alter the prognosis of International recognition one bit, unless the Olympics becomes a venue. That's not likely to happen.

Those interested in International Archery have a choice, multiple set ups, or not.


----------



## trevorpowdrell (May 8, 2012)

Slight correct to mypost I meant ' recurve barebow back in the NAA outdoor nationals and partially for indoor nationals' . 
The NFAA continues to have trad and barebow divisions at nationals.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Jason, you keep using the term "barebow" in the most loose term as possible. You say nfaa barebow which allows compound, vbars, and clickers then you say Ru clickers and a short rod, then you argue by using longbow in your points. It sounds like you and others are scrambling trying to pull on ever single cord possible. Even the ones that have no bearing on anything. Just so you know probably around 40% of the people showed up to Vegas to shoot in the "barebow" class brought single string equipment in the hopes that maybe someday nfaa will take notice and give the single string "barebow" archers a class. We had a pretty impressive number of recurve and longbow shooters show up in the "barebow" class that has compounds in it. Now, can you imagine the number of recurve and longbow shooters that would show up if they didn't have to shoot against compounders?????? 
I just don't get how some think that having miss matched classes is a good thing and even the best thing overall for our side of archery. What do you think would happen to the open compound class if NFAA or USA archery decided that they will change the rules to restrict their stabs to nothing? Numbers would drop dramatically. As Ben said it, it seems that it is very apparent that some want to be divided and persue their own personal interests. I just hope that the majority continue to see the bigger picture and see what unity can bring to our side of archery. From the ground floor(kids) and up, this will be a great thing. How to train, coach, and bring in others to our great sport would be soo much easier. Some people seem to think we are trying to eliminate some classes. We are trying to get a base line class period. The clickers will have their classes. I wish some wouldn't turn this into a bickering joke. Fortunately I won't quit on something I am truly passionate for and believe this will help us grow.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Jason, you make some great points that are to be taken seriously. 

I'm aware that the 3D events cater well to sightless archers. As they should. Even when I shot Olympic for years, I still hunted with a traditional, sightless recurve bow. It is a popular style for hunting, and as such, is popular in 3D events.

But I'm talking about paper target archery here. And there is a difference. The "trad" world I come from largely still recognizes a distinction between 3D events, and "target" events. I suppose I do too. Most die-hard 3D archers wouldn't be found dead on a "target" field, especially a flat one. Some might shoot indoors because they are forced to by the weather, but that is the only reason. You know exactly who I'm talking about too. There is a large group of 3D archers who NEVER shoot target archery, and there is a large group of target archers who NEVER shoot 3D, and then there is some overlap. 

Why are we trying to cater so hard to the overlapping minority? Let the 3D events have their rules, and the target events have theirs. As far as I'm concerned, a 27" ILF metal riser with a rest and plunger is as out of place on a 3D course as a wood longbow shooting wood arrows is out of place on an indoor 18M paper target event. I don't care if someone wants to use them, but that's not the majority, nor should the decisions by a minority of archers drive the rules for the majority.

In my mind, there is a need to unify the target barebow recurve division and bring it up in stature with *both* USArchery and the NFAA. One way we can do this is to unify the equipment so that it makes it easier on the archers who shot both, and so there is a clear and competitive champion recognized.

As for your comment about "fretting about such things" I doubt you do. I would even say most archers do not do this. I put myself in that group most days. But you and I both know that there will always be debate about who the better archer is, when four archers all shoot four different styles of bows, and all four call themselves the same thing.  It's just not logical, and it hurts our credibility.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> *Some people seem to think we are trying to eliminate some classes. We are trying to get a base line class period.*


There are a few folks currently engaged in this discussion that need to read this statement by John, then re-read it, then re-read it again.

Because this idea gets lost or ignored nearly every single time they open their mouth.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Demmer said:


> It sounds like you and others are scrambling trying to pull on ever single cord possible. Even the ones that have no bearing on anything. Just so you know probably around 40% of the people showed up to Vegas to shoot in the "barebow" class brought single string equipment in the hopes that maybe someday nfaa will take notice and give the single string "barebow" archers a class. We had a pretty impressive number of recurve and longbow shooters show up in the "barebow" class that has compounds in it.


You are correct, and no wrong answer to this thread. I've seen everything from garage bow to Montana longbows as well at Vegas. With that, though, we also don't know that if there were a Trad division in Vegas, would that number, or close to it, have signed up there instead. Anecdotally, I have probably been asked hundreds of times if there is a Trad class at Vegas. I have never been asked if there is a recurve-only BB class. Anecdotally, and to be fair in observation, I would say that the majority asking didn't have a preference along those two lines either. Of those who do have the preference, it might not be large enough to matter, then, it might. Life doesn't work that way, though. In the end, you will have to eliminate one to get numbers for the other.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Sandford, mens crossbow has absolutely terrible numbers year after year, but still has a class. Last four years were 6,3,4, and 8. Point is there will be wayyyy more than that to show up. Lancaster finally gave recurve "barebow" a shot and we had around 40. That was 40 that were willing to show up to the middle of no where in PA in the middle of winter. Imagine what would show up to Vegas in the middle of the winter at a place that has stuff to do and actually above 20°.  I doubt they would be disappointed.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Before I hear it from the select few, if the rules of barebow in Lancaster were under wa bb rules, the numbers would have been at least the same. It has nothing to do with anything "all inclusive". I will continue to bring up the numbers of nfaa barebow at outdoor nationals, indoor nationals or even ifaa worlds if I have to for a class that is " all inclusive".


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Demmer,

FITA didn’t invent the term “barebow.” It’s been around a lot longer than either of us has been alive. There’s an enormous amount of barebow archery that has absolutely nothing to do with FITA. Pretending that if it’s not FITA Barebow it’s not _true barebow_ is, well…a little arrogant, in my opinion.

And please, with all due respect (and I do mean that), might I suggest you engage in a little introspection the next time you start talking about people looking out for their own personal interests? I’m not the one trying to shove my favorite shooting style down other organizations' throats just because the organization that _should_ be promoting it couldn’t care less.


----------



## hawghunter2585 (Mar 16, 2010)

If someone were to ask you. "What is the most prestigious barebow tournament in the world?" what do you think would be the most common answer? For me, I would say FITA Field (just my opinion). Because of this, I feel the WA Barebow regs should be that standard.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Jason, one could then argue that Vegas "barebow" is a compound division. I mean, there are guys who shoot compounds in that division right? Same as the guys who use compounds with scopes and releases. So they should just call it compound. Because both of them use compounds. I mean, it's pretty much the same thing, right? 

Calling a bow with clickers and stabilizers on it a barebow is a reach at best. I think everyone knows this. Walk down the street and show pictures of two bows to complete non-archers and ask them to pick the barebow. Would they pick the one with stabilizers and clickers on it (or wheels) or would they pick the simple, bare, recurve bow. I call it the "regular person test." If the rules cannot pass the "regular person test" then maybe they aren't as clear as they should be.

Saying I can stringwalk my WA-legal rig in the NFAA "Barebow" division is just like saying guys who want to use clickers and stabilizers can shoot in the Olympic division. There is zero difference.

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

hawghunter2585 said:


> If someone were to ask you. "What is the most prestigious barebow tournament in the world?" what do you think would be the most common answer? For me, I would say FITA Field (just my opinion). Because of this, I feel the WA Barebow regs should be that standard.


Really, this is an excellent question. But I would again specify whether we're talking target or 3D. Because there are some very prestigious 3D tournaments in the world, where 99% of the participants have zero interest in shooting what they call "target archery." 

But yes, the internationally recognized gold standard for modern recurve barebow archery is - at the present time - WA Field. Anyone who isn't willing to admit this probably isn't being 100% honest with themselves.

John


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

First, I'm not shoving anything down anyone's throat and I do feel sorry if you personally feel that way. Second of all, I am showing how loosely the term barebow is thrown around from organization to organization. There is no clear definition on that term and I am clearly not telling you or others what the term barebow means or is supposed to mean. Call it what you want. Call it fita barebow, call it world arhery barebow, call it recurve barebow. I dont care what you call it. Its a shame that term is a hangup for some. It is very appearant you do not want unity. Jason, I clearly am pushing for unity in our sport, which in my opinion and many others feel that is a great thing. There are always classes for those that don't agree. It is that simple. I feel you lost all respect when you said im trying to run out the clickers in ru and therefore eliminating the competition and keeping you off the podium. Please, as you can tell i am not afriad of competion and show up to just about everything I can. For some reason this has hit a personal nerve with you. The funny part is how much you are agueing and you have your class to shoot in. The real funny part to all this is that this most likely will bring about a greater competition and pull up the numbers across the board everywhere. That my friend is why we are trying to seek this. I am truly sorry if anyone feels that I'm pushing this because they feel I am a selfish person. That really breaks my heart and cuts to the core. 
As a side note, my favorite bow and my greatest romance in archery is the selfbow. I dont know if that means anything or not.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Barebow is the new "trad." It means something different to every person who uses the term, I think. LOL.

I agree with John. Call it whatever, but for pete's sake, why can't we have *one* unsighted class that goes from entry level to world championships, that is recognized the way compound and oly. recurve are?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

And for those new to this issue, this debate goes back a long, long way. 

Anyone ever wonder why archery was removed from the Olympic games from 1920 to 1972? We "enjoyed" a self-inflicted 52-year absence from the greatest sporting event in the world because archers COULD NOT AGREE on a single set of rules to shoot under. So the Olympic games took it out of the program.

Sound familiar?

It wasn't until FITA came together and got agreement on a single definition of an "Olympic bow" that archery returned to the games.

So, we have had agreement for 43 years on what an Olympic recurve is. There has been agreement for decades now on what a "compound unlimited" bow is. 

How long must we wait before us recurve barebow archers get to enjoy the same status?


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Demmer said:


> I feel you lost all respect when you said im trying to run out the clickers in ru and therefore eliminating the competition and keeping you off the podium.


Two things and them I'm probably going to follow Gary's lead and step out.

First, when you talk about getting IBO and WA in line, what do you think that means, especially when your response is that clicker shooters will fit into Male Compound Unaided?

Secondly, if you took that I was pointing at you individually with that second part than I apologize for not being clear. I've been at this for 30+ years and I've got a long, long list of "if you can't beat 'em ban 'em" stories. While eliminating the competition isn't your motivation, there will be no shortage of passengers on the band wagon for just that reason.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> And for those new to this issue, this debate goes back a long, long way.
> 
> Anyone ever wonder why archery was removed from the Olympic games from 1920 to 1972? We "enjoyed" a self-inflicted 52-year absence from the greatest sporting event in the world because archers COULD NOT AGREE on a single set of rules to shoot under. So the Olympic games took it out of the program.
> 
> ...


True, a lack of unified international rules is why archery was dropped. And it is specifically why a bunch of NGBs, including the NAA, came together to form FITA, which formed agreed upon rules for international competition, **in the 1930s**. So, while archery was dropped for lack of unified international rules, it was left out for decades for other reasons. (Your point still stands, of course, I just don't want people to get the wrong idea that we didn't have international competition rules until 1972.)

Side note:

For some context in terms of the NFFA traditions, here are all the NFAA bow classes from 1942:



> SHOOTING RULES
> 1. Any kind of bow, except a cross bow, and any kind of arrow, except broadheads or arrows that would unreasonably injure a target fact [sic], may be used in any event unless otherwise stated.
> ...
> GENERAL
> ...


That's it. Though, one has to read those rules in the context of what bows were available in the 30's and 40's, back when steel limbed bows were the high tech thing.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Jason, I was happier when NFAA and USArchery - the two major target organizations that offer barebow recurve - were closer in line.

I understand that the 12" stab. might have brought NFAA closer together with the 3D shooters, but it really fouled up the target side of things IMO. It was a move in the wrong direction from where I stand, but I realize not everyone wants to just shoot target with their barebow recurves. I just wish folks still used real hunting bows for hunting practice (3D) and target bows for target archery.

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Archers shooting in instinctive class must use bows free of any sights, marks or blemishes that could be used in aiming. This applies to the string also.
> 
> In the freestyle class any kind of sight may be used, except one calibrated for the course.


So one could infer that stringwalking in fact, is MORE traditional than having to touch the arrow nock, since that is a newer rule. LOL


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

I find it interesting that the guy getting all sideways in these discussions about a proposed rule change is the same guy who helped push a stabilizer rule in with very little discussion. I know I for one did not hear about it until it was a done deal. Lesson learned so I will be reviewing these agenda items more carefully in the future. 

Also of interest is the wording of the proposal then “Traditional is the only division that must change their equipment when changing from NFAA to IFAA or NAA. It would be nice to know that your equipment is legal when moving from shoot to shoot. Traditional equipment rules are different from shoot to shoot. Traditional equipment rules are different everywhere you go. Help us align with the other organizations.” – Sound familiar? 

How the heck does adding that stabilizer help alignment with the NAA. I suspect most had no clue what they were voting on. Since nearly every shooter I know dislikes the stabilizer except for the effect on scores I feel like if this same open dialogue had happened then that stupid rule never would have been implemented.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Scott,

Even though I also shoot NFAA Traditional, I had no opinion one way or the other about the stabilizer rule. As I was told yesterday, agenda items are supposed to be disseminated by the state orgs. Ours doesn't communicate such things. I asked Gary to email the agenda items for this year's meeting to me, and I plan to contact our state reps with any concerns I have.

If you'd like, I can email them to you so you know what's being voted on.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Jason, my response to you saying to shoot MCU was you told me to shoot nfaa barebow. MCU in the Ibo has the same rules as nfaa barebow. That's all I was making a point with on that one. I assure you that the clicker is staying in RU. All we are seeking is to get a baseline class. A foundation so to speak. A common ground for this side of archery to build off of and grow. 
For everyone, this is never about my style is better, my organization is better, by bow is more "barebow" than yours. We are trying to grow this great sport and not keeping it stagnant. I am very passionate for our sport and you all can see that. I try to show that compound and Olympic styles are growing like crazy, but we seem to be a little sluggish. Almost every compound class has a baseline set of rules everywhere and so does Olympic. I just point out that we do not and would really see this thing grow like the others. Like I said, we are seeking a baseline class. Having it under the current set of WA bb rules is a very middle ground from a wooden bow off the shelf to a Ru bow with a stab and a clicker. It happens that the majority of the world has these rules and pulls in pretty big numbers at the shoots that we have not seen here yet. There are a lot of dots connecting this that shouldnt be ignored. Nfaa has the barebow class and Ibo has the MCU or Ru class that help those out that need to use the clicker. It doesn't make much sense to get rid of those. Never asked them to and never will. Jason, I will more openly talk to you on the phone about this. Maybe we will still disagree, maybe we won't, but there will be a better understanding.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

SBills said:


> I find it interesting that the guy getting all sideways in these discussions about a proposed rule change is the same guy who helped push a stabilizer rule in with very little discussion. I know I for one did not hear about it until it was a done deal. Lesson learned so I will be reviewing these agenda items more carefully in the future.
> 
> Also of interest is the wording of the proposal then “Traditional is the only division that must change their equipment when changing from NFAA to IFAA or NAA. It would be nice to know that your equipment is legal when moving from shoot to shoot. Traditional equipment rules are different from shoot to shoot. Traditional equipment rules are different everywhere you go. Help us align with the other organizations.” – Sound familiar?


As if the NFAA has ever been slavish in following IFAA rules...

So, that does make me wonder how the IFAA wound up with a 12" stab? :dontknow:

One think I like on the IFAA's website are attempts to show the class differences visually, such as this one:










Curious about the distinction of "allowed but not seen as standard" in the light yellow highlights.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

J. Wesbrock said:


> Two things and them I'm probably going to follow Gary's lead and step out.
> 
> First, when you talk about getting IBO and WA in line, what do you think that means, especially when your response is that clicker shooters will fit into Male Compound Unaided?
> 
> Secondly, if you took that I was pointing at you individually with that second part than I apologize for not being clear. I've been at this for 30+ years and I've got a long, long list of "if you can't beat 'em ban 'em" stories. While eliminating the competition isn't your motivation, there will be no shortage of passengers on the band wagon for just that reason.


Jason, I feel that you are way out of line with your thinking. The reality has been that " If you can't beat em, then lobby for another class". This is the reason that we are as divided as we are now. And as far as the passengers on the bandwagon, that bandwagon is overwhelmingly tilted to the side of those who want a cubbyhole in which they can win an award.. The bottom line of the proposal on board is to give legitimacy to recurve barebow, to increase competition under one united division, and to come up with one set of rules that everyone can adapt to no matter what tournament they go to or what state or country they go to. I, personally, feel that if we have to start by leaving a clicker in the division for United States crew, then start there but those who chose to use it are basically excluding themselves from achieving a world championship. Make no mistake about it, if we do get a united division, then the top archers will usually be at all the championship shoots, no more 2-3 archers signed up for so called "World Championships".


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

Jason I would like that. I'll PM my email.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

John 
I don't do gotcha's when you posted the rules only really apply to the top 10% it offended me. I apologize for calling you an Elitist. FYI I am not afraid to compete at any level against anyone. I have been beaten by the best. I do not complain about the rules nor will I ever. I will however defend what I think is best for NFAA it's my home. Some organizations don't take Barebow Recurve serious as you well know because of our low numbers. My opinion is because Barebow is hard most archers today are into Instant gratification so they buy a sight because its easy to aim. I for one take Barebow very serious. To me aiming with out a sight and watching the arrow hit is amazing. But its not better than Freestyle archery its just what I like. I hope I have answered your questions.
Gary


limbwalker said:


> Oh for pete's sake Gary. Are you going to go there? Have you been waiting for a "gotcha" opportunity or is that how you really feel?
> 
> Elitist? Have you seen me struggle with barebow? Obviously not. I am in no danger of winning crap. But I do have a little experience competing at the top levels in a division (not necessarily barebow though) and I coach a wide range of archers. So really the only ones who tend to complain are the ones who are afraid of losing or the ones who just got beat, and rarely is that the realm of the 14th ranked archer. They usually just want to show up and have a good time and maybe shoot a personal best. By the way, that is exactly where I'll be this weekend... in absolutely no danger of winning or even placing, but rather just showing up to work on my technique and enjoy myself with a BARE BOW.
> 
> ...


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

2413gary said:


> John
> I don't do gotcha's when you posted the rules only really apply to the top 10% it offended me. I apologize for calling you an Elitist. FYI I am not afraid to compete at any level against anyone. I have been beaten by the best. I do not complain about the rules nor will I ever. I will however defend what I think is best for NFAA it's my home. Some organizations don't take Barebow Recurve serious as you well know because of our low numbers. My opinion is because Barebow is hard most archers today are into Instant gratification so they buy a sight because its easy to aim. I for one take Barebow very serious. To me aiming with out a sight and watching the arrow hit is amazing. But its not better than Freestyle archery its just what I like. I hope I have answered your questions.
> Gary


That's the Gary we know and love.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Gary, thanks for the reply. It's clear we're all very passionate about this thing we call "barebow" even if we don't all define it the same way. This is reminding me a lot of many of the "traditional" debates I participated in over many years on the leatherwall.  Lots of passionate people. Nobody wrong necessarily, just different. 

I agree shooting without a sight and watching an arrow find it's mark is one of the greatest things on earth. I was shooting with one of my students Monday night who I've been teaching barebow. He shot compound for years. The joy on his face when he made a good shot was indescribable, but a feeling we all know very well. 

As for that top 10%, I don't think I said the rules only "apply" to them, and if I did, I misspoke. Of course the rules apply to everyone. It's just that to me, I don't often hear guys who are shooting in the 2nd and 3rd flights (my territory these days...LOL) worrying too much about these things. They are usually just happy to show up and fight their own demons. 

My back went out on me a few weeks ago, and I missed our state indoor - an event I've been looking forward to for months now since I felt I had a chance to maybe set a new state record if I shot well. With the condition I'll be shooting in this weekend, it wouldn't matter to me if I was using a stabilizer, string walking with a clicker OR wheels. I'm not going to be competitive, so I'm just going to enjoy shooting with my friends and have as good a time as I can all hunched over in pain. LOL. 

That's really all I meant. Sorry if it sounded "elitist." I certainly don't consider myself barebow "elite" and if I did, I'm sure Ben would straighten me right out in short order and save you the trouble. LOL!


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

I am going to shoot our state's Blue Face indoor championships this weekend with my WA legal barebow in the NFAA Trad class.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

John to answer your last question
I'm starting to get the impression that there are some who DO NOT wish to have the barebow recurve division taken seriously, so that the status quo of thinly sliced divisions can continue. Is that the case?


Nothing would make me happier than all of us here that have posted to show up and kick my butt. But they don't I can't fatten the division by myself somebody else has to shoot with me. 
So here is my Challenge show up and kick my butt.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Mr. Roboto said:


> I am going to shoot our state's Blue Face indoor championships this weekend with my WA legal barebow in the NFAA Trad class.


Pete, my WA legal bow would not be legal in trad as it has 2 separate weights on the front of the riser. Some people are assuming that just because it is WA legal, then it is trad legal and that is not always the case. I'm sure you already know this but I thought I would put it out there for those who might not.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

thank you


limbwalker said:


> Gary, thanks for the reply. It's clear we're all very passionate about this thing we call "barebow" even if we don't all define it the same way. This is reminding me a lot of many of the "traditional" debates I participated in over many years on the leatherwall.  Lots of passionate people. Nobody wrong necessarily, just different.
> 
> I agree shooting without a sight and watching an arrow find it's mark is one of the greatest things on earth. I was shooting with one of my students Monday night who I've been teaching barebow. He shot compound for years. The joy on his face when he made a good shot was indescribable, but a feeling we all know very well.
> 
> ...


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

2413gary said:


> John to answer your last question
> I'm starting to get the impression that there are some who DO NOT wish to have the barebow recurve division taken seriously, so that the status quo of thinly sliced divisions can continue. Is that the case?
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

I personally know several people that shot their NFAA Trad recurve in the Recurve Flights at Vegas because they didn't want to shoot against compounds at Vegas. 

They invested a lot of money to go to Vegas, and chose to shoot with sighted recurves believing that they had a better chance than competing against non-sighted compounds. 

I used to think the same thing. This year I decided to shoot the barebow class with my WA legal recurve. I sucked really bad but had a great time.

Since the prize money at Vegas is based on number of people competing in the class, I am pretty sure that if Vegas opened up a Championship Trad division, the first place money for the Trad division will be greater than the Barebow division because it alone will draw all of the WA barebow and NFAA Trad and Longbow people from the recurve flights into the championship trad class.

A recent email from the NFAA bragging about the turnout for Vegas mentioned that the Championship Barebow class continues to grow, but didn't divide where that growth came from. Was the net growth from compound shooters, or was it from the recurve shooters?

What I found greatly disappointing in the email was the utter lack of mentioning that Dewayne Martin use a recurve to win the division, something that hasn't happened in decades.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

itbeso said:


> Pete, my WA legal bow would not be legal in trad as it has 2 separate weights on the front of the riser. Some people are assuming that just because it is WA legal, then it is trad legal and that is not always the case. I'm sure you already know this but I thought I would put it out there for those who might not.


I'm in the same boat.

However since I just invested in a truly massive piece of 303 stainless (2.75" diameter) I have plans to change that.

-Grant


----------



## Darryl Longbow (Apr 11, 2003)

I think we all agree that there is a need for a unified division for bare bow, it is how to achieve that which seems to be the sticking point. Personally I do not feel the NFAA will be willing to alter the trad division to allow stringwalking despite what numbers show up at nationals under the current rules.I may be wrong, they certainly slipped the stabilizer rule in under the radar on the general membership. Speaking for myself I have always disagreed with it. For myself trad is off the shelf with one anchor and I don't care if your bow is wood, aluminum, carbon or anything else. I am sure others have a different opinion. I also do not think they will be willing to have one set of rules for say field and another 3D.While the turnout for field is low for the trad class the turnout for many NFAA clubs has a good deal of turnout for 3D and I don't think those clubs want to have the trad people left out.I know the argument is they would not be left out due to stringwalking but as I have said befor the perception would be different than reality.Also as has been pointed out different areas of the country probably has different amounts of attendance in different classes, I do know that here we have strong turnout in trad and none in barebow of any kind.So possibly depending on where you are located the "numbers may well differ.What we need to do is find a way to reconise recurve barebow and unify that divisioin. If the majority think that current WA rules are the best solution then that is what we should go for. Again we are faced with the problem of how. Do we try to change an existing class {traditional} ? Do we lobby for a new class (recurve BB} ? Do we just show up and shoot against the compound BB class with WA legal equipment and show the organizations that it is not the kind of bow, compound or recurve but instead the shooters skill. Do we try to unify any non sighted style under one roof, compound BB, bowhunter,traditional, and recurve BB. There is a lot to consider. All of the above will be met by different degrees of opposistion by different people for different reasons. Personally I feel that the creation of a entirely new division would have the greatest chance for success at first and then if the numbers are there perhaps it could become inclusive of other divisions. I also feel that if you attempt to change a current division it will be strongly contested and perhaps result in the loss of what we do have in favor of sight and release shooters only.Again this is just my opinion, it is formed from dealing with the NFAA and other organizations for a long time. Yours will be different and that is as it should be,I ask only that you take a hard look at the options before starting to try and change things by petition. We all agree that change needs to be made, it is how we go about it that will decide the out come.A personal footnote to Ben, I have always respected your skill, hard work, and ability, but your contempt for what is called traditional is over the top.Your way is not the only way despite your many accomplishments.And yes most of my old bows are drilled for a stabilizer as if that means ANYTHING to anybody or has any bearing except to show your contempt and disrespect for others.Jay, thank you for the information,old dogs can learn new tricks.John , thank you for your views and passion for the sport as well as remaining a gentleman we may disagree on some things but I know that what ever comes you will always be there whatever the rules are as will I. Thank you all for a new perspective on an old problem. Now me and my old bow will go out and shoot some arrows off the shelf instinctively, and that shooting in the end is what it is all about.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Last month the 1st annual Oregon Barebow challenge was held. It drew 34 WA legal barebow shooters. Awesome shoot.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> For myself trad is off the shelf with one anchor and I don't care if your bow is wood, aluminum, carbon or anything else. I am sure others have a different opinion.


Actually I agree with you there. To me "traditional" has always been off the shelf, one anchor, and "instinctive" means you are not consciously using the arrow to aim (but then there will never be any way to prove that, so it's pointless to even try to write that in the rules).

I have no problem with one set of rules for target and field and another for 3D. When I shot 3D (so long ago it was 2D!) I shot my hunting bows. Every time. I have never shot a bow at a 3D animal that wasn't my legitimate hunting bow, because to me, that's the whole point of 3D!!! If folks want a target event, shoot a target, not a 3-dimensional foam animal! I've never understood target bows being shot at 3D. Probably never will.

It still seems strange to me to shoot an Olympic rig at field. Seems very out of place. 

I think we need to lobby for a class that is consistent with WA barebow, and see what happens. Give it a few years to show participation and then decide. In my opinion, it will be flooded with archers who wish to go seamlessly back and forth between WA/USArchery events and NFAA events, and the "traditional" division will gradually decline to just a few die-hards, the way the barebow division has.

John


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Darryl Longbow said:


> I think we all agree that there is a need for a unified division for bare bow, it is how to achieve that which seems to be the sticking point. Personally I do not feel the NFAA will be willing to alter the trad division to allow stringwalking despite what numbers show up at nationals under the current rules.I may be wrong, they certainly slipped the stabilizer rule in under the radar on the general membership. Speaking for myself I have always disagreed with it. For myself trad is off the shelf with one anchor and I don't care if your bow is wood, aluminum, carbon or anything else. I am sure others have a different opinion. I also do not think they will be willing to have one set of rules for say field and another 3D.While the turnout for field is low for the trad class the turnout for many NFAA clubs has a good deal of turnout for 3D and I don't think those clubs want to have the trad people left out.I know the argument is they would not be left out due to stringwalking but as I have said befor the perception would be different than reality.Also as has been pointed out different areas of the country probably has different amounts of attendance in different classes, I do know that here we have strong turnout in trad and none in barebow of any kind.So possibly depending on where you are located the "numbers may well differ.What we need to do is find a way to reconise recurve barebow and unify that divisioin. If the majority think that current WA rules are the best solution then that is what we should go for. Again we are faced with the problem of how. Do we try to change an existing class {traditional} ? Do we lobby for a new class (recurve BB} ? Do we just show up and shoot against the compound BB class with WA legal equipment and show the organizations that it is not the kind of bow, compound or recurve but instead the shooters skill. Do we try to unify any non sighted style under one roof, compound BB, bowhunter,traditional, and recurve BB. There is a lot to consider. All of the above will be met by different degrees of opposistion by different people for different reasons. Personally I feel that the creation of a entirely new division would have the greatest chance for success at first and then if the numbers are there perhaps it could become inclusive of other divisions. I also feel that if you attempt to change a current division it will be strongly contested and perhaps result in the loss of what we do have in favor of sight and release shooters only.Again this is just my opinion, it is formed from dealing with the NFAA and other organizations for a long time. Yours will be different and that is as it should be,I ask only that you take a hard look at the options before starting to try and change things by petition. We all agree that change needs to be made, it is how we go about it that will decide the out come.A personal footnote to Ben, I have always respected your skill, hard work, and ability, but your contempt for what is called traditional is over the top.Your way is not the only way despite your many accomplishments.And yes most of my old bows are drilled for a stabilizer as if that means ANYTHING to anybody or has any bearing except to show your contempt and disrespect for others.Jay, thank you for the information,old dogs can learn new tricks.John , thank you for your views and passion for the sport as well as remaining a gentleman we may disagree on some things but I know that what ever comes you will always be there whatever the rules are as will I. Thank you all for a new perspective on an old problem. Now me and my old bow will go out and shoot some arrows off the shelf instinctively, and that shooting in the end is what it is all about.


Darryl, you can make assumptions about me all you want. My contempt, as you call it, is for all those close minded people who want to make trad something it never was. I guess I'm one of the few on here who will actually call a spade a spade. The competitive trad division was started in 1985 for those archers who wanted to hide from competition in the barebow and bowhunter classes. The problem was that some target types went to that division and actually started shooting decent scores so all the trad types , finding that they couldn't win an award there started staying away from the competitions, thereby making that class irrelevant to the NFAA and other groups. It is still an irrelevant class if you take away the Eagletons, Demmers, Martins, Bills, and other top tier archers who compete in other classes but occasionally come over and support the name , TRAD. What Demmer, Magera, Myself, and others are trying to do is have all those recurve archers come together and make recurve barebow RELEVANT. These are the archers who have put their heart and soul into archery over the last few decades, not sat out that time and now come back wanting time and archery to have stood still for them. And someone please tell me how this unification benefits me, John, Dewayne, etc. If the rules stay the same, the same people will still be kicking butt, but to a diminished crowd. Some of are trying to do what's good for the sport of archery. Some of us are trying to do what's good for us individually. A good look into your hearts is what is needed.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Demmer,

I appreciate your clarification. For the record, I have no problem jumping into a class where I have an equipment disadvantage. I do it all the time, including every year at our state target championships where I shoot in the Olympic Recurve class without a sight. If that’s the class where my equipment puts me, that’s where I shoot. I’ve never in 30+ years of competitive shooting asked a club, organization, or anyone else to change a class to fit me. I shoot what’s offered and am thankful for the experience.

We disagree. It’s not a big deal. I disagree with a lot of people about a lot of things. It’s part of being human, and it’s not like I’m going to have Scott chase them around with a pink Whiffle bat or anything. :wink:


Ben,

I know what you mean about people hiding in certain classes, but I’ve never understood the mindset. The first NFAA sectionals I went to I was preregistered in Bowhunter. When I showed up I noticed there were five times as many people in Barebow, so I told the lady running registration to bump me up to Barebow. She looked at me like I was nuts.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> And someone please tell me how this unification benefits me, John, Dewayne, etc


It would probably move me from around 5th to 15th. LOL. Oh well!

I'd rather be 15th out of 150, than 5th out of 12.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

J. Wesbrock said:


> Demmer,
> 
> I appreciate your clarification. For the record, I have no problem jumping into a class where I have an equipment disadvantage. I do it all the time, including every year at our state target championships where I shoot in the Olympic Recurve class without a sight. If that’s the class where my equipment puts me, that’s where I shoot. I’ve never in 30+ years of competitive shooting asked a club, organization, or anyone else to change a class to fit me. I shoot what’s offered and am thankful for the experience.
> 
> ...


Simple. A choice of pride and character over win any way I can.:thumbs_up


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> It would probably move me from around 5th to 15th. LOL. Oh well!
> 
> I'd rather be 15th out of 150, than 5th out of 12.


And that attitude is what a person a winner in my book.


----------



## Darryl Longbow (Apr 11, 2003)

Ben, you really don't get it do you ? I wonder what kind of bad experience you must have had from some trad shooters.I don't think it was ever a place to run and hide in, It is just as competitive as any other style within its own ranks.I suspect that winning and loosing has very little to do with why trad shooters don't show up in big numbers.They do pretty well in some places I think and like you I don't have a problem speaking my mind about what I believe in at all. Do you believe that no trad shooter has ever worked as hard to improve their game within the limitations of the rules they are under ? That they want and work to improve ?You are by far not the only archer who has been around for a while and you have continually done nothing to reach a workable solution to the problems presented but put down what you see as lesser archers than yourself. I think a good look into your heart would be in order as well.I think you have a biased view toward what you so contemptuously refer to as traditional for some reason.I think you sell a lot of us way short in our love of this sport and our desire to do our thing our way without your input to the contrary.The problem is how to get this to work for a unification that is beneficial to all concerned. My concern is that traditional be left alone, not so we can hide,or want an award,or cant hang with the barebow guys or cant be reconised internationally. Most of us could care less.We dont want people who do things differently making the decisions as to how we do things.We don't care who you are or who you have been or what you have accomplished, it has nothing to do with it . It is simply that we want to be left alone as we are and if you cant understand that then to bad.If you try to change the traditional division you will fail.If you want your own division you may succeed, I hope you do, I want that to. But your tell it like it is contempt and little lessons that everyone seems to overlook because of your skills is ridiculous. Why not use your ability in a positive manner to help instead of being a self righteous blowhard that has to have it his way.Now if they ban me for that comment I could care less, my world does not revolve around the internet.What you have to say to me matters nothing as well,25 yrs of working some of the roughest prisons in this country has rendered me pretty indifferent to your words and silly attitude. so in finish let me say this, if you don't like the truth about your attitude that is just to bad.God I hate self righteous my way or the high way people , this battle will be lost because of it. Thanks loads for setting back any chance it had of being approved by the NFAA. Now I can get off this topic and this forum and go to work hideing out with all my other pathetic traditional friends, so if you decide to give me more words of wisdom I wont be tempted to continue this foolishness and demean your royal presence any more. Thanks for the education, now I understand while the non sight divisions are so divided. Good by. See you at nationals.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Anyway...... So what a few of you guys are saying is this... I don't care that the majority of the shooters that pay their dues and actually show up these events want (to better the class to grow the class) just pick one that we have now because we arent going to do anything. Just shoot one and shut up. Is that what you few are telling us?


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

If the NFAA trad division is modified to be compliant with the WA barebow recurve its only negative impact will be on the people that like to shoot with 12" stabs.

If people want to shoot off the shelf, they still can.
If people want to shoot with a fixed anchor, they still can.
If people don't want to use a plunger they don't have to.
If people want to use wooden arrows, they are allowed to.
If people want to shoot instinctively they still can.
If people want to shoot a 1 piece, home made, recurve, they still can.
If people want to shoot with one eye closed, they still can.
If a right handed shooter wants to shoot a left handed bow with an inverted hand, they still can.

There is no elitism with the rule change. No one is being excluded from anything. There is no Us versus Them in the rule change. All of the NFAA tournaments will still be the same.

The rule change is a subtle rule change to the NFAA trad division only.

You can still wear camo on your clothing.

The only real physical change is the elimination of the 12" stab. It is unfortunate that there are people that this will have a negative impact on. But then again, 2 years ago, it was illegal to have. So it is not like there is a long history of shooters using the Stab in the NFAA Trad division.

NFAA Trad, IFAA BowHunter-Recurve, and WA Barebow, are almost identical right now. A slight tweak to these rules (i.e. unification) will not even be noticed by most of the shooters. Why is there so much animosity to doing this?

Pete


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Demmer,

I can’t and won’t speak for anyone else. I can only express my personal point of view. It is what it is, and we simply disagree. Again, no big deal. If that means you’ve lost all respect for me, that’s a shame because I certainly don’t think any less of you and still consider you a friend. I’ve already apologized for any misunderstanding on my part. 

My personal way of doing things is to show up, shoot whatever class I fit into, thank the hosting organization, have fun, and if appropriate, offer to help. All I was doing was stating where I’m coming from. I know what it’s like to be on a board, what a thankless job it is, and the frustration that comes from being bombarded by people who all want things changed to suit their particular desires. I’ve been on both sides of the equation, so that’s how I try to be mindful of things. If an organization asks for my input I’ll offer it. Otherwise, it’s a handshake, a sincere thank you, and let me know if you need any help. That’s just me, right or wrong.

In the end this whole thing is simple. Draft a proposal, get it on the agenda for the next NFAA meeting and it’ll go to a vote. They’ll either accept or reject it, and either way, I’ll still show up, shoot, and be thankful for the opportunity.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Darryl Longbow said:


> Ben, you really don't get it do you ? I wonder what kind of bad experience you must have had from some trad shooters.I don't think it was ever a place to run and hide in, It is just as competitive as any other style within its own ranks.I suspect that winning and loosing has very little to do with why trad shooters don't show up in big numbers.They do pretty well in some places I think and like you I don't have a problem speaking my mind about what I believe in at all. Do you believe that no trad shooter has ever worked as hard to improve their game within the limitations of the rules they are under ? That they want and work to improve ?You are by far not the only archer who has been around for a while and you have continually done nothing to reach a workable solution to the problems presented but put down what you see as lesser archers than yourself. I think a good look into your heart would be in order as well.I think you have a biased view toward what you so contemptuously refer to as traditional for some reason.I think you sell a lot of us way short in our love of this sport and our desire to do our thing our way without your input to the contrary.The problem is how to get this to work for a unification that is beneficial to all concerned. My concern is that traditional be left alone, not so we can hide,or want an award,or cant hang with the barebow guys or cant be reconised internationally. Most of us could care less.We dont want people who do things differently making the decisions as to how we do things.We don't care who you are or who you have been or what you have accomplished, it has nothing to do with it . It is simply that we want to be left alone as we are and if you cant understand that then to bad.If you try to change the traditional division you will fail.If you want your own division you may succeed, I hope you do, I want that to. But your tell it like it is contempt and little lessons that everyone seems to overlook because of your skills is ridiculous. Why not use your ability in a positive manner to help instead of being a self righteous blowhard that has to have it his way.Now if they ban me for that comment I could care less, my world does not revolve around the internet.What you have to say to me matters nothing as well,25 yrs of working some of the roughest prisons in this country has rendered me pretty indifferent to your words and silly attitude. so in finish let me say this, if you don't like the truth about your attitude that is just to bad.God I hate self righteous my way or the high way people , this battle will be lost because of it. Thanks loads for setting back any chance it had of being approved by the NFAA. Now I can get off this topic and this forum and go to work hideing out with all my other pathetic traditional friends, so if you decide to give me more words of wisdom I wont be tempted to continue this foolishness and demean your royal presence any more. Thanks for the education, now I understand while the non sight divisions are so divided. Good by. See you at nationals.


Darryl, you couldn't demean my presence with any amount of your ill chosen and uninformed words. Your paranoia , while literally silent, is deafeningly loud on this thread. I DO get it and IT is way beyond your comprehension, apparently. Taking your talking points one by one. I was shooting nonsight during the eighties, were you?, since you told us you were away from archery for 42 years. It was common knowledge and I'm not going to sugarcoat the original trad movement for anyones ego. You say you don't want people who do things differently than you making decisions on your shooting style. Who the hell do you think makes those decisions. Not you or your friends. A group of 50 state directors make the rules and if you knew anything about the NFAA, you would know that. Who am I? Where have I been? What have I accomplished? You couldn't begin to know 1 hundredth of the answers to those questions because you never see me on the internet posting pictures of any awards or bragging about any of my achievements, so you can take your blowhard comment and shove it where the sun don't shine.It has always amazed me that people who have actually worked at supporting and furthering the cause of archery come under attack by people who love the sport so much they stay away from it for 40 years. I'm glad that what I have to say to you means nothing because that is exactly what you have put back into archery. And trust this, you know nothing about the non sight divisions and their struggles.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> The only real physical change is the elimination of the 12" stab. It is unfortunate that there are people that this will have a negative impact on. But then again, 2 years ago, it was illegal to have. So it is not like there is a long history of shooters using the Stab in the NFAA Trad division.


I gotta say, that's how I see it too. We were closer together 2 years ago. However, the 3D guys could probably say they are closer together now? I dunno. 

From where I sit, it makes more sense that the two major US target archery org's rules mesh, than for a target and a 3D org's rules to mesh. That's just how I see it though. I mean, I still think 3D is hunting practice, so call me old fashioned.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Jason, so let me get this straight. If 75-90% are showing that they want this and think its a great way for this to grow, we should just sit back and continue to be an unhealthy and not reaching our full growth potential in this sport? You are saying shut up and fit in. I mean dang, come on now. We aren't here to serve the organizations, they exist because we want them. They are supposed to serve us. That is the democratic way isn't it? Can you not see how backwards thinking this is? Shut up, show up and be happy has to be the dumbest way to run any organization. The USA archery tried to get rid of barebow at outdoor nationals. Im glad they (we) didn't shut up, show up and be happy because there was a class they could fit in somewhere. I think that getting that back and getting back the 50+ age class for indoor barebow is the turning point in our voices. By showing that if we can turn it around in US archery, we in fact have a loud voice and some clout as a group of archers. 
Jason, in the end, this has nothing to do with friendship or respect, so they shouldn't change from where it was when it first started.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Honest question here...

Who thinks it makes more sense for NFAA trad to align with a 3D organization, than with WA barebow? 

I've already offered my perspective but I'd like to hear from others on this. 

And FWIW, if I knew it was what the majority wanted I'd still support it because I think that's more important than my personal preferences. I probably wouldn't shoot any more NFAA events than I have 3D events in the past 20 years (meaning - none) but I'm sure losing one archer in the traditional division won't break NFAA.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

LOL. I was talking to Gary Mccain tonight and told him I couldn't wait for the next big trad-recurve barebow shoot. Sounds like we will have 50 archers standing around not talking to one another, all over an internet post. Archery is definitely a trip.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Honest question here...
> 
> Who thinks it makes more sense for NFAA trad to align with a 3D organization, than with WA barebow?
> 
> ...


I think sides have already been taken by those on this forum and they seem to be entrenched. What it comes down to, in my opinion, is whether the NFAA wants to listen to the voice of the archers who actually support their tournaments or listen to those who don't. Seems like simple logic to me but logic doesn't always figure into the Decisions that the NFAA makes.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Lol


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Honest question here...
> 
> Who thinks it makes more sense for NFAA trad to align with a 3D organization, than with WA barebow?


John,

It's been explained to you here and elsewhere several times that the reason for the 12" stabilizer rule in NFAA Traditional was to bring it in line with the counterpart class in their international organization, the IFAA. It had nothing to do with the IBO, ASA, or any other 3D organization. Gary McCain is the guy who drafted the proposal. He's right on this thread. Feel free to ask him for yourself if you feel so inclined.


Demmer,

I sent you a text. This back and forth here is silly and getting us nowhere. If you want to call me, please feel free. I'm done here.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Is NFAA Trad the same as BHR in international competition?


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

itbeso said:


> LOL. I was talking to Gary Mccain tonight and told him I couldn't wait for the next big trad-recurve barebow shoot. Sounds like we will have 50 archers standing around not talking to one another, all over an internet post. Archery is definitely a trip.


Fortunately, you both (we all) know we're better than that.

"Drizzle, Drazzle, Drozzel, Drone. Time for this one to come home"


----------

