# OAA Indoors .....



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

how did we all fair ???

Took my new 3D bow out for a test drive (Martin SlayerX C.A.T. cam) and pounded out some itty bitty carbons at over 300 and shot a 577 BHU ..... that's right Murdock, I shot BowHunter Unlimited 

Had a blast shooting just for fun again ..... post up folks


----------



## ontario moose (Aug 8, 2003)

*good shooting!*

Good shooting Pinto.. 

G


----------



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

*how'd you do .....*



ontario moose said:


> Good shooting Pinto..
> 
> G


Gilles ???


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Whats 3D?


----------



## thunderbolt (Oct 11, 2002)

Good shooting Pinto!
I must have been scared by the itty bitty "X" being the 10. Shot the lowest score of the year yesterday. Trying to hold on the X and shot more 9's yesterday than I have in the last month total...


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

I didn't have time to get a FITA indoor arrow set up - my own fault for not really reading the new rules until too late... 

So I used my outdoor skinny arrows - man that inner 10 is small. I'm the first one (or at least the 3rd or 4th) to admit I suck at the best of times - I actually didn't shoot too badly but the score was awful. I must have had 10-12 shots "just out". 565 FITA. 2 weeks ago for the CAFAC with fat arrows I shot what would have been 578.


----------



## ontario moose (Aug 8, 2003)

*Pb*



pintojk said:


> Gilles ???


had a good day.. 581.. 596 big 10, 41x

it was a long day again.. judging the first line and shooting the 2nd line..

Gilles


----------



## H.M. Murdock (Nov 13, 2005)

pintojk said:


> how did we all fair ???
> 
> Took my new 3D bow out for a test drive (Martin SlayerX C.A.T. cam) and pounded out some itty bitty carbons at over 300 and shot a 577 BHU ..... that's right Murdock, I shot BowHunter Unlimited
> 
> Had a blast shooting just for fun again ..... post up folks


Good work

I shot a 560 in Compound. That is a personal worst for me. But I do have a exuse


----------



## thunderbolt (Oct 11, 2002)

H.M. Murdock said:


> Good work
> 
> I shot a 560 in Compound. That is a personal worst for me. But I do have a exuse


well.............:secret:I won't tell anyone else:wink:


----------



## Green Archer22 (Oct 27, 2007)

*oaa's*

Hey folks, myself i shot a 589 with 33x's. Bowhunter unlimited.:darkbeer: Cheers,Hope everyone shot well.

Troy


----------



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

Green Archer22 said:


> Hey folks, myself i shot a 589 with 33x's. Bowhunter unlimited.:darkbeer: Cheers,Hope everyone shot well.
> 
> Troy


great shooting !!!


----------



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

*Wow .....*



ontario moose said:


> had a good day.. 581.. 596 big 10, 41x
> 
> it was a long day again.. judging the first line and shooting the 2nd line..
> 
> Gilles


that's a great score moose


----------



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

*don't tell us .....*



H.M. Murdock said:


> Good work
> 
> I shot a 560 in Compound. That is a personal worst for me. But I do have a exuse


you shot a left handed recurve ??? :wink:

every dog has its day Matty ..... shake it off the FCA's are this weekend


----------



## DODGE-3D (Feb 17, 2005)

I shot a 592 with 36 X's 299-293.BHUL


----------



## Miss Pink (Nov 5, 2007)

The scores are up on the OAA website.


https://www.oaa-archery.on.ca/index.php?option=com_results&id=449&Itemid=154


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2008)

I e-mailed the scores in today and fully expect some changes, there were a few clubs that didn't use the scoreing template which made things difficult to process. If you see any scores that are incorrect or in the wrong class let me know here or at [email protected] .


----------



## hoody123 (Aug 11, 2004)

So, I'm a bit confused here... Having no venue for shooting indoors, I'm signficantly out of the loop on scoring these rounds. 

Best I can tell from looking at the scores is that only the senior male compound shooters count the bitty ten as ten? and all others shoot the bitty ten as an "x" and the regular ten (at least to those of us that shot ages ago) as a ten?

The open shooters also only score bitty ten as an "x" and the regular ten still as a ten? 

Am I close to right on this one? (I can't imagine that Dietmar missed 11 full sized tens And that Tim and Big F only missed the bitty ten 3 times)
Thanks for the clarification!


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2008)

Basically it is like this, when the OAA brought in the new IFAA indoor champs this year run under the IFAA rules of shooting it was felt that the "ten ring" champs should follow the Fita rules of shooting meaning that if you shoot in the *Master/Senior/Junior/Cadet compound *classes you will be scoring inner ten for the final score. All other classes will score "normal scoring" ie X-10-9-8 etc. This brings us inline with the National body.


----------



## H.M. Murdock (Nov 13, 2005)

pintojk said:


> you shot a left handed recurve ??? :wink:
> 
> every dog has its day Matty ..... shake it off the FCA's are this weekend


Won't be shooting. I will be moving in to my new place


----------



## hoody123 (Aug 11, 2004)

Sean McKenty said:


> Basically it is like this, when the OAA brought in the new IFAA indoor champs this year run under the IFAA rules of shooting it was felt that the "ten ring" champs should follow the Fita rules of shooting meaning that if you shoot in the *Master/Senior/Junior/Cadet compound *classes you will be scoring inner ten for the final score. All other classes will score "normal scoring" ie X-10-9-8 etc. This brings us inline with the National body.


Gotcha, but when it comes to scoring, there seems to be a bit of inconsistency (at least with Dietmars) on how non-"x"s are scored. It reads (at least to me) that he didn't track what was an old school 9 versus an missed inner ten ring. (he lists 0 tens and 11 nines and it seems really unlikely to me that when he blew the inner ten they were ALL old school 9's. 

What's the "accepted" way to score it? Theoretically a tie could be settled on outer tens?


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2008)

Arrow values are supposed to be recorded as X, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, etc. Then you take the outer ten score subtract the number of 10's shot, to get the inner ten score. It is a possiblity that the score for Dietmar was recorded incorrectly on the spreadsheet submitted, but it's up to him to get it corrected if he wants.


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

There was a lot of confusion on this and other matters where I shot. The organizers weren't even sure what the scoring was going to be - we kind of discussed it and came up with the right answer.

We had a kid actually start scoring on the 40 cm face at 10 yards before we caught it and got him back to 20 yards at the 60 cm.

Somebody has to rewrite the instructions a little more clearly and make sure each host club has someone on hand who is *absolutely sure *about how it's supposed to be run.

Have the scorecard *clearly state* (for exampole) to indicate the X count, the outer-10 count not including the Xs, the outer-9 *not including* the outer-10 (which is the compound 9), etc, etc. 

On FITA scorecards, when you're filling in the Xs and 10s, the 10s INCLUDE the Xs. Obviously some people did and some people didn't do that, so everything is screwed up. I hope nobody loses out on a medal because of this.

---------------------------
What really ticks me off is that this use of the FITA inner-10 for just the one equipment category basically arbitrarily throws out an OAA tradition of shooting the 10-ring face as-is, which we have been doing since 1974.


----------



## DsrtRat (Mar 8, 2004)

Looks like some messed up results. Rick Roth and Troy Piercy are Senior BHUL not Master.


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2008)

Again folks I only put in what I get, we had several clubs that for what ever reason chose not to use the template or alter it and sent it in, why I don't know. There was a problem with the first template sent but was rectified and resent to all locations. The instruction letter was sent with the template explaining very clearly how and what was supposed to happen. In fact I sent it twice to all locations.I have confirmation notes that all loctaions read the e-mail. We will rectify any corrections that maybe requiered.

It should also be noted that it was the OAA membership that asked for an aglinment with the FCA, well we got it and eveything that goes with it. For the most part it went ok with a few corrections. Not to many times in the past has the results ended up on the web site the day after the last shoot date. We had a total of 260 for the Fita champs and 145 for the IFAA champs, we will make some admin changes for next year so the clubs can't alter the programe and will have to show they know how to use it before it can go forward,this should solve alot of the problems I ran into this year.


----------



## DsrtRat (Mar 8, 2004)

Are you7 having fun yet Sean? LOL!


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2008)

Always have fun,it always works out somehow, for the most part it went well. Did you use the arrows I sent? you must have it looks like you shot alittle over your head this time:wink::wink:


----------



## DsrtRat (Mar 8, 2004)

Actually, if you knew anything about the OAA rules:BangHead:, you would see that I couldn't have used them this weekend:wink:

Got em all put together for a test drive at league tonight. Can't wait!


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2008)

Judging by your score you shot I assumed that you used them and got away with it, after all that score with legal arrows from you would be "suspect" and would warrent a drug test I think.....now this is fun.:wink::wink::wink:


----------



## DsrtRat (Mar 8, 2004)

No worries. What is your address again Sean? I want to be sure the urine sample goes the correct place. 

(are you just looking for performance enhancing drugs or all drugs?)


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Sean McKenty said:


> It should also be noted that it was the OAA membership that asked for an aglinment with the FCA,


Can you give me the names of some of these people? I don't recall a whole lot of OAA members standing around between ends saying "Man, I wish the OAA would align with the FCA..."

Just curious...


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

*mix up*

Is this the tourny we shot last week because the score cards had x`s counted and outer 10`s subtracted on score cards and spaces for each spot, fairly simple to follow if club printed new cards to use....:darkbeer: Are results posted yet for us to check on ....


----------



## DsrtRat (Mar 8, 2004)

Is there a reason we count outer tens then subtract them? Would it not be easier to simply say "you re shooting freestyle. count "x" as ten, the rest of the yellow as 9"? WHy score it as a ten then have math to do? WHy not just score it for what it is worth?


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Let me be the first to answer: 

"Because that would make sense"...:wink:


----------



## Green Archer22 (Oct 27, 2007)

*oaa's*

Well guys i just have one thing to say..........COME TO BOW HUNTER UNLMITED.:wink::tongue: Muhahaha


----------



## CaptainT (Aug 14, 2005)

DsrtRat said:


> Is there a reason we count outer tens then subtract them? Would it not be easier to simply say "you re shooting freestyle. count "x" as ten, the rest of the yellow as 9"? WHy score it as a ten then have math to do? WHy not just score it for what it is worth?


The OAA does use 10 Count to break ties (after X's). It also is intended to make it easier to call arrows when a compound shooter is on the same but as a non-compound shooter (less who's arrow is it anyway - and yes it does happen).

I know that before I took on the headache of President and shot regularly that I carried a calculator in my quiver.


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2008)

Stash said:


> Can you give me the names of some of these people? I don't recall a whole lot of OAA members standing around between ends saying "Man, I wish the OAA would align with the FCA..."
> 
> Just curious...


OAA AGM 2006


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2008)

DsrtRat said:


> Is there a reason we count outer tens then subtract them? Would it not be easier to simply say "you re shooting freestyle. count "x" as ten, the rest of the yellow as 9"? WHy score it as a ten then have math to do? WHy not just score it for what it is worth?


This way all archers are scoring the same way during the round, you want to see problems team a compound with a BH Unl and a an open shooter and see how many mistakes are made, I can say for sure that when the FCA scored inner ten for compounds there was many scoring mistakes because of scorcard problems. It was felt that since it affects 4 compound classes it was easier to have everyone score the same way then have the compounds deduct the outer tens at the end. When they did this they said that mistakes went way down.


----------



## Miss Pink (Nov 5, 2007)

I didn't have any trouble scoring.



:tongue: then again i didn't do any of the scoring....


----------



## thunderbolt (Oct 11, 2002)

Miss Pink said:


> I didn't have any trouble scoring.
> 
> 
> 
> :tongue: then again i didn't do any of the scoring....


Same here... called em and let someone else do the rithmaticukey:


----------



## Xslayer (Feb 10, 2003)

Thanks to the OAA and all who made this provincial happen.

Not an easy task with so many changes.

Great job all. :thumbs_up:thumbs_up

Bruce


----------



## Foghorn (Jun 24, 2005)

Sean McKenty said:


> OAA AGM 2006



Correct me if I am wrong, but I was at that meeting and I recall that the committee was setup to reduce categories and not adopt FCA rules!!! I am sure that there are others that were at that meeting that thought the same thing. As far as the poles on the OAA site are concerned, I believe that over 70% of the OAA members that voted were against the new rules. So if MOST of the membership are against these rules, why not change them back to the way they were.

Dietmar Trillus


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2008)

Foghorn said:


> Correct me if I am wrong, but I was at that meeting and I recall that the committee was setup to reduce categories and not adopt FCA rules!!! I am sure that there are others that were at that meeting that thought the same thing. As far as the poles on the OAA site are concerned, I believe that over 70% of the OAA members that voted were against the new rules. So if MOST of the membership are against these rules, why not change them back to the way they were.
> 
> Dietmar Trillus


Well I was on the commitee to align the OAA with the FCA, struck at the 2006 AGM along with several others. With this alignment classes will be reduced and or combined soon enough.

As for the polls listed, from my years of doing OAA business I have found that only the upset say anything, I can say that when I was President if I listened to only the complainers we wouldn't have a junior travel team to the US, any type of 3-D events, certainly no crossbows. I think we made the right decision to adopt them.

What has really changed, we now can use the OAA/Fita indoor champs for National records and ranking, last year we couldn't. The field and outdoor champs hasn't changed and is more friendly to the BH classes. The 3-D has broader rules. We have another indoor champ round that doesn't have arrow restrictions so having one that does I think is a good compromise for those looking for records or ranking on the national level.


----------



## H.M. Murdock (Nov 13, 2005)

*Alright I have been quiet too long*

I do not to make any one upset. There is some thing here I don't under stand. How could the new rules have been a surpise to any one. The committee was struck in 2006 to deal with the rules. This was in the minutes from the meeting that were posted on the old OAA website. If this wasn't enought the OAA mailed a letter to every member before the 2007 AGM stating that ther was going to be a vote on new rule change. After the new rules were adpoted there were posted for everyone to read and could make a protest if they wanted to see a change. After the changes were made the rules were posted for evry one to read. Now after all of that, how could any of this be a surprise or people not understand.


----------



## hoody123 (Aug 11, 2004)

Murdock, I'll take a bit of responsibility for bringing this up here. I just wasn't clear on how scoring was done now. I've been away from the game for quite a while and it's a bit confusing pouring over documents, I just thought with the vast knowledge here it'd get cleared up.

Didn't mean to stir the pot!


----------



## H.M. Murdock (Nov 13, 2005)

hoody123 said:


> Murdock, I'll take a bit of responsibility for bringing this up here. I just wasn't clear on how scoring was done now. I've been away from the game for quite a while and it's a bit confusing pouring over documents, I just thought with the vast knowledge here it'd get cleared up.
> 
> Didn't mean to stir the pot!


That's not the problem I didn't understand the rules the first time I read them I didn't even understand some of them the second time around. Forutnally ther is a little guy in Emeryville that we help out just about anybody. 

The thing that really gets me is that people seem to thing this something brand new just dropped in their lap. The rule changes were made well aware to everyone so that it could be voted on at the AGM. Why is it just now people are finding fault.


----------



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

*Matty, you've been right on .....*



H.M. Murdock said:


> Why is it just now people are finding fault.



but, there has been some questioning of the new rules when they were just brought out to the membership.

Now, as with Sean and Stash, I've been around this circle for just under 20 years, no matter what rules were brought to the table, they would always be questioned, and as a member that is our "right" but .....

The 2007 AGM was held at Colby this past year and if memory serves me correct there was 11-15 members that showed up ..... that's like 1% of the total membership 

As Murdock said, there was plenty of notice for anyone to come out attend and voice their concerns about the new rules. In my eyes almost 99% of the membership must have agreed since they did not bother to show up.

The OAA listens, the board works hard trying to make our game "fair" for all, adopting the FCA rules brings us in line with our main governing body, something many have asked for in past. 

My suggestion, let's try working with the OAA board to make this work, let's help them out by talking with them, attending the AGM's, voting on key motions when we can, and get involved at your club level, letting those members know what's going on.

It's gonna be a huge learning curve for all of us, but until we try how will we know if it does/doesn't work :wink:


----------



## #1 Hogger (Aug 17, 2005)

Sean thanks for the great job you have done to get the templates out to the clubs and to get scores up and to the members in record time. Believe me people without help from people like Sean I would still be trying to sort things out and you'd be after my hide.Atta boy SeanNow eveyone get back to posting your scores and bragging if you can or just have a good ribbing
Congratulations to all
Andy The Older


----------



## Miss Pink (Nov 5, 2007)

Ok I counted.... there were 260 people who participated in the OAA's of them were

110 kids... who I believe are not voting members.

150 Adults who are voting members

Of those 150 adult memebers that shot the OAA'S 62 were affected by the new OAA rules. That is 35 % any way you cut it.

Of the 35 % that shot I would bet that most of us are not happy with the new rules. I don't know for sure... I haven't done an official poll. If I have to I will contact every one of the people that these rules affected to get a clear idea of who doesn't like the new rules. And report back. It would be interesting to see what the numbers break down as to who these rules really affect. My guess is that these rules reflect 30-35 % of the OAA. My question then is why would anyone who is not affected by the rules even vote on them. 


Now I can say that I did not vote at the 2007 AGM. I know someone out there is saying to themself... well Miss Pink you can't complain if you didn't vote. Here's the thing.... I am very new to the sport of Archery. So new in fact that the second time I was ever in a bow shop was the day they had the AGM at Colby. I know that Pinto will remember me, cuz I was all over his pink arrow. He was lucky to walk away with it.

As a new archer who never experienced the old rules even I don't like them. This Jan. in my first ever tournament in Caledon I was told I could not score the way I had been taught to score. Imagine my confusion. My exact words were who in the [email protected]#L thought these up. 

I get you are trying to streamline the classes and reduce them as per the governing body I agree . But why change all the rules just align the classes with the FCA. Can we not stay somewhat unique. If we are going to be a carboncopy of the FCA why not get rid of the middle man and let the FCA handle the memebership.

Remember I am new.... from where I am standing all that is happening is people are being alienated. The shoots that I see (indoors) in the US where they don't have these misguided rules. I make this statement from the results I have seen in Lancaster at the Classic and from Las Vegas this past weekend. Still not sure what Louisville does.

Another question to the OAA is; how are the archers that want sponsorship susposed to take a score to Matthew's, Bowtech, Martin, or anyother potential sponsor. That is not even close to being in line with the Americans. If I were a potential sponsor, I would look at Chris Priester who rarely shoots less then a 590 (he shot a 568) in the OAA's this year and laugh. As archers we no longer meet their criteria due to these misguided rules. We cannot compete.

There were quite a few people at the bow shop that day. Do I have a count no. Do I think that there was more then 40 people yes it's possible. There is not a hope that I would drive from Sault Ste. Marie to attend the AGM. Why? I would hope that those opposed to the possible new rules would speak up for me. With that being said, I likely would have sent an e-mail to the "people" who are susposed to listen to us the archers that pay to be in the voting ranks. 


I get the feeling that perfect scores are not what is wanted anymore, or is it that someone just obliterated the old scores and there is somone else that didn't like it. Why be a hater. All records are meant to be broken that is why they are records, especially in sport. 

In closing I do not like the OAA rules (just incase you didn't get that before). I think the rules should be reversed to what they were in 2007 for the indoor events. Also the people that these rules affect are the ones you want to listen to. Not the ones that they do not affect.

Thanks for your time,

Miss Pink


----------



## thunderbolt (Oct 11, 2002)

Maybe, just maybe we should give the OAA directors (all volunteers by the way) a break and work with the rules that are in place now for a bit and see how things work out. It doesn't matter how things are scored South of the border, we can use outer 10 to be able to compare if necessary.

Basically just keep going out there and trying to shoot your best and beat yesterdays score... I know I will, cause I left tons of room for improvement, but where I need to improve is by bringing practice scores to tournaments. Or at least something close...


----------



## Foghorn (Jun 24, 2005)

Sean McKenty said:


> Well I was on the commitee to align the OAA with the FCA, struck at the 2006 AGM along with several others. With this alignment classes will be reduced and or combined soon enough.
> 
> As for the polls listed, from my years of doing OAA business I have found that only the upset say anything, I can say that when I was President if I listened to only the complainers we wouldn't have a junior travel team to the US, any type of 3-D events, certainly no crossbows. I think we made the right decision to adopt them.
> 
> What has really changed, we now can use the OAA/Fita indoor champs for National records and ranking, last year we couldn't. The field and outdoor champs hasn't changed and is more friendly to the BH classes. The 3-D has broader rules. We have another indoor champ round that doesn't have arrow restrictions so having one that does I think is a good compromise for those looking for records or ranking on the national level.



First off, if the poles mean anything to you and the rest of the OAA board why even bother asking for our opinions. I ask you on how the new rules really affect ME? They don’t but I do believe they affect the growth of archery in Ontario and don’t help promote the sport to new archers by making it more difficult to shoot decant scores. Heck it’s hard enough to get shooters to participate without putting arrow restrictions and score ring restrictions in place. If people want to shoot and score FCA rules they will, just find a registered FITA tournament on the FCA web site. 

I won’t even get going on the new 3D rules.

Also if the board was there to adopt the FCA rules, how in the world did the IFAA field rules get used for field instead of the FITA Field rules like the REST OF CANADA USES at our National Championships.
Dietmar Trillus


----------



## Foghorn (Jun 24, 2005)

Sean McKenty said:


> Well I was on the commitee to align the OAA with the FCA, struck at the 2006 AGM along with several others. With this alignment classes will be reduced and or combined soon enough.
> 
> As for the polls listed, from my years of doing OAA business I have found that only the upset say anything, I can say that when I was President if I listened to only the complainers we wouldn't have a junior travel team to the US, any type of 3-D events, certainly no crossbows. I think we made the right decision to adopt them.
> 
> What has really changed, we now can use the OAA/Fita indoor champs for National records and ranking, last year we couldn't. The field and outdoor champs hasn't changed and is more friendly to the BH classes. The 3-D has broader rules. We have another indoor champ round that doesn't have arrow restrictions so having one that does I think is a good compromise for those looking for records or ranking on the national level.



One last thing and I will be done with this. Did you notice that allot of the people complaining about the new rule changes are very respected people that have been a big part of archery in Ontario for many years. Maybe some of these people might just have a point! 

Maybe the OAA should have a really close look at what is happening here.

See Ya!

COMPLAINER!

Dietmar Trillus


----------



## Xslayer (Feb 10, 2003)

Sean McKenty said:


> Well I was on the commitee to align the OAA with the FCA, struck at the 2006 AGM along with several others. With this alignment classes will be reduced and or combined soon enough.
> 
> As for the polls listed, from my years of doing OAA business I have found that only the upset say anything, I can say that when I was President if I listened to only the complainers we wouldn't have a junior travel team to the US, any type of 3-D events, certainly no crossbows. I think we made the right decision to adopt them.
> 
> What has really changed, we now can use the OAA/Fita indoor champs for National records and ranking, last year we couldn't. The field and outdoor champs hasn't changed and is more friendly to the BH classes. The 3-D has broader rules. We have another indoor champ round that doesn't have arrow restrictions so having one that does I think is a good compromise for those looking for records or ranking on the national level.




Change is never easy, If the OAA has taken on the challenge to make things better we all have to give it some time.

I personally like the blend of the old and new, there is still an Open class for those who want to shoot the larger arrows and the addition of the IFAA 5 spot is a nice addition aswell. 

It will just take some getting used to, it's only been a few months.

I agree with Sean, "We have another indoor champ round that doesn't have arrow restrictions so having one that does I think is a good compromise for those looking for records or ranking on the national level."[/QUOTE]

Bruce Malmberg
Ontario Archer 20 years.


----------



## H.M. Murdock (Nov 13, 2005)

*One thing I want to know*

For all the people that don't like the new rules who is going to step up and challenge to have the rules changed back. With so many people not likeing the new rules it should be easy to get them changed at the next AGM. Of course it would have been eaiser to vote them down in the first place. I still don't know where all the nay sayers were at. They certianly were not at Colby


----------



## CaptainT (Aug 14, 2005)

Anyone who wants to rant or compliment the rules should do so here:

http://archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=645406

This thread should remain related to the OAA Indoor event it was started about.


----------



## H.M. Murdock (Nov 13, 2005)

Foghorn said:


> Also if the board was there to adopt the FCA rules, how in the world did the IFAA field rules get used for field instead of the FITA Field rules like the REST OF CANADA USES at our National Championships.
> Dietmar Trillus


The FCA holds an IFAA affialtion so why can't we use that to hold IFAA indoor and IFAA field events


----------



## CaptainT (Aug 14, 2005)

You're right Mat. 

The motion was to change the rules, not the regulations. The regulations still say that we will be using the IFAA round. That has not changed.



H.M. Murdock said:


> The FCA holds an IFAA affialtion so why can't we use that to hold IFAA indoor and IFAA field events


----------



## Guest (Feb 27, 2008)

Foghorn said:


> One last thing and I will be done with this. Did you notice that allot of the people complaining about the new rule changes are very respected people that have been a big part of archery in Ontario for many years. Maybe some of these people might just have a point!
> 
> Maybe the OAA should have a really close look at what is happening here.
> 
> ...




Yuor comments are answered in my last post, I think the OAA is looking at what is happening, we now are using the same rules as the FCA/Fita for our indoor and outdoor rounds, I can say for sure that there is alot of parents down this way are very gratefull for that because it make sense to them and can see the progression toward the international standards. Now I am not a fan of how the Fita indoor round is shot but can fully understand why we should be following the international standard. We do in IFAA indoor&field, outdoor Fita's that have the SAME restriction as indoor Fita but somehow balk at those same standards for indoors???? We follow the international standard for the IFAA round but not Fita's???????. The FCA holds both international affiliations because of that I feel we need to follow the rules for each. If Fita changes to outer ten for indoors or changes to an 11 then we will as well. Fita went to a 6 ring for outdoor Fita field and if we use a fita field round we would as well.

Change is never easy but in this case from my decades of doing this tells me its for the better, complaining for or against is important and part of the process, the idea is to do it where it counts the most..at the *AGM* and before that your zone directors


----------



## Guest (Feb 27, 2008)

Miss Pink said:


> Ok I counted.... there were 260 people who participated in the OAA's of them were
> 
> 110 kids... who I believe are not voting members.
> 
> ...


----------



## Green Archer22 (Oct 27, 2007)

*oaa's*

If somebody can explain to me how taking a 598 or 600 shooter and turning them into a 580 or 570 shooter makes sence then maybe i'll listen. Lol:darkbeer: Cheers


----------



## Guest (Feb 27, 2008)

nobody is turning them into a bad shooter, infact the only thing that has changed is the score on a piece of paper. A 598 shooter will still be at high end of the results scoring inner ten, to think that a lower shooter say in the 590 bracket outer ten will somehow beat a 598 shooter by scoring inner ten is alittle short sighted


----------



## ZarkSniper (Aug 12, 2003)

*598* or *600* shooter, turns into a *570* shooter? That's crazy. 

Now 580's? I'll take it...thanks



Green Archer22 said:


> If somebody can explain to me how taking a 598 or 600 shooter and turning them into a 580 or 570 shooter makes sence then maybe i'll listen. Lol:darkbeer: Cheers


----------



## H.M. Murdock (Nov 13, 2005)

ZarkSniper said:


> *598* or *600* shooter, turns into a *570* shooter? That's crazy.
> 
> Now 580's? I'll take it...thanks


I will tell you. If I were scoring the big 10 instead of the little 10, I would have shot less 8's. See that was simple


----------

