# Barebow Archery at the Olympics



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

I'm curious as to why barebow archery is not shot at the Olympics. It has been the way that it has been shot since the bow was invented by man and requires much more skill than any other form of archery which has been modernized. 

All of the add on's such as these extra long stabilizers, v bar's, draw checks (clickers), a site, and to a lesser degree a plunger, rest, and so on and so on takes away from the skill factor from archery and starts to make the bow look like a space toy and unrecognizable as a real bow to a lot of people I have talked to.

With that being said, I think it would be interesting if barebow archery were in the Olympics and they had different shoots such as the 18m, 50m, 70m, 90m, and perhaps something very far such as 150m as a semi clout shoot. Along with that they could add in aerial target archery and really make things interesting going the barebow route. 

I along with many other people I know in person think that Olympic style archery looks extremely boring and won't watch it since it's always the same distance, same stance, and there's a bunch of attachments used on the bow that are really just crutches.

Just some thought's I've had tonight and my $0.02.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

I don't know why there's no bare bow archery in the Olympics, it would be fun to see. I'd also like to see compounds in the Olympics.

But, I don't think you can say that bare bow shooting requires more skill than other disciplines. It's more difficult only if the score required to win is the same. A bare bow shooter against an Olympic shooter and their gear, sure bare bow is tougher, but they don't compete against each other.

Regardless if you are talking bare bow, Olympic style or full blown compound competition, in my opinion the skill and practice required to reach the podium is probably very similar. The best bare bow archers in the world can't shoot scores anywhere near the level of the other archery disciplines, but it also doesn't take those scores to win in bare bow competition. 

At some point the equipment becomes irrelevant as long as it's consistent between competitors, from there it's purely up to the individual.


----------



## WoodsmanRyan (Jul 1, 2016)

They've been talking a lot about barebow classes in different organizations quite a bit over in the FITA/NFAA forum. Here's one post about getting it included into World Archery:
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=4105609

Looks like the main reason is that there isn't enough support for it yet, but participation has been growing. We may see it in the Olympics someday, but for that we'd really need some of the other big-hitters in the archery world take an interest (Korea, Mexico, India, France, Italy, GB, etc.). We're just not there yet. But who wouldn't want to see John Demmer or Dewayne Martin representing the US in the Olympics?


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Don't know what to really say about this 

I would love to see barebow archery in the olympics even though I am a huge fan of it as it is now 

You do understand that it would look like this 



Not this


----------



## WoodsmanRyan (Jul 1, 2016)

JParanee said:


> Bruce Wayne sponsors all the best athletes!


----------



## Bowmania (Jan 3, 2003)

Stringstack, And what, may I ask, is your opinion of compounds? LOL.

Bowmania


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

Not even compound which is in all the WA events (world cups, indoor and outdoor target, 3d, field) is included in the Olympics. Barebow is only included in world field and world 3d by WA. I've theorized that world field should join the Olympics and that would get barebow in. But as it stands, there are maybe two target events (Vegas and Bangkok indoors) that are even "adjacent" to barebow target stuff during the same weekend, and Vegas is NFAA rules not WA (hence compounds). There is no world level outdoor target competition, and not even agreement on a distance and face size. USAA shoots 60 m two years and probably 50 m next year I hear. I actually approve of that change to see if numbers increase, but long story short it's still in its infancy and even further than compound from the Olympics. There is no world or continental level of competition, and no set distance. Until that is done, Olympics isn't happening.

FWIW I do both Oly and trad, and reaching the higher numbers takes physical training, skill work, and equipment knowledge. My scores have been improving this summer as I get ready for indoor, and that's because I have been working my tail off on physical training in between archery sessions, which is a different approach from what I have usually taken (people in recurve archery tend to give fitness short shrift, I think it's a big deal). And while it's easier to get scores with all the gadgets, improvement ultimately comes from work on a lot of form details. I did Arizona Cup last year before getting sick and switching to barebow for a while, and was on a bale with a Colombian going to the Olympics this year. He and the Frenchman on my bale put up sick numbers, I mean like all 9s and 10s with a rare 8. At that point I was happy keeping my arrows all on bale. Kind of mindblowing to compete against people like that. I can see where it seems "too easy" but trying to chase that kind of performance is actually a trip. There can be an obsessive/snob/jerk element to some people pursuing Oly -- the sort of thing "instinctive" seems to define itself in contrast to -- but it's kind of a stereotype. And focusing on the gadgets without getting into the physical demands of pulling through a clicker is trying to take what is probably the most physically demanding of the three and treat it like a compound.


----------



## J Wesbrock (Jul 6, 2016)

Takes away from the skill required? Oh dear. I feel a Godzilla facepalm coming up. :wink:


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Guys - 

Some of you may want to research exactly what it takes to change an Olympic venue. 
And the risks involved.

And for the record, IIR the rules correctly, there's nothing stopping a bare bow shooter (or a longbow guy) from going to the Olympic trails. 
There are certain equipment restrictions, but they wouldn't apply to BB or LB, since most of times their restrictions are tighter. 
The only catch is that they would have to beat the top guys will full Oly rigs. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

J Wesbrock said:


> Takes away from the skill required? Oh dear. I feel a Godzilla facepalm coming up. :wink:


I was thinking the same thing. Clearly the OP has never shot competitive with those "add ons".


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

UtahIdahoHunter said:


> I was thinking the same thing. Clearly the OP has never shot competitive with those "add ons".


The OP has been shooting his Sage for less than a year.

Oly is the most physically demanding of the archery pursuits. BB the most mentally difficult (at the top level) and compound demands the most consistency (near perfection). Neither is "easier".


----------



## Halfcawkt (Dec 27, 2015)

Viper1 said:


> Guys -
> 
> Some of you may want to research exactly what it takes to change an Olympic venue.
> And the risks involved.
> ...


Viper,

If I find the consistancy I hope to achieve and am currently chasing, don't put this past me. I know it is a one in a million shot. I would just want to get people's attention who otherwise would have no exposure to shooting a naked bow.

It would also be nice it beat a person or too and gain some respect for what we do.

My chances of any of it are very slim since my eyesight deteriorates with each passing year, so it's a race against time.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

First of all, barebow is not defined in the World Archery Outdoor Target Archery rule book (unless there has been a change since the last rule check I did). It is not an official World Archery classification. Barebow is defined in the World Archery Field Archery Rule Book. The question then should be, why isn't compound in the Olympic. Compound is defined in the Target Archery Rule Book. I would actually like to see field archery, including the team event. I think it would be cool, but not very easy to watch. There are limits set on the number of events. If new ones are added, something has to be removed. I have shot about 30 WA Outdoor target events. While the classification is not formally defined, it is often contested. I would get a lot of comments from the recurve and compound shooters wondering how I could shoot 90 meters without a sight.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

half - 

What Steve (Hank) said. 

As for the Olympics, unless it changed (and I really don't follow it that closely any more), to change a venue, it has to removed and reentered with the new parameter(s). Despite the Hunger Games, archery isn't a great spectator sport and there are other things that would love to take it's place during the out and back in process. 

Next, don't kid yourself, the Olympics is as much a show as a competition, maybe more. That means money, and Steve is again correct that compound would make more sense than BB. 

The following is just my opinion, so take it FWIW. 

Look at the picture of Jimmy. The difference between his bow and an Olympic rig isn't that big. Not every Oly guy uses V-bars, and the length of the stab is a function of weight and distance from the pivot. He's using a sight every bit as real as my Sure-loc. The only thing missing is the clicker, and yes, that's a very real thing. So, is it really that "different" an event? 

IOWs, if you want to compete at that level, you have to shoot with the big boys. 

A lot of people try to get people into what they're into, but after a while you have to realize, just because you or I are into something, getting someone else into it the way we like rarely works out well. I don't even try to get people into archery any more, I try to those already into it, better - if that's what they want.

Viper1 out.


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

Easykeeper said:


> I don't know why there's no bare bow archery in the Olympics, it would be fun to see. I'd also like to see compounds in the Olympics.
> 
> But, I don't think you can say that bare bow shooting requires more skill than other disciplines. It's more difficult only if the score required to win is the same. A bare bow shooter against an Olympic shooter and their gear, sure bare bow is tougher, but they don't compete against each other.
> 
> ...


Barebow requires more skill because for a barebow archer to shoot the same score as an Oly style archer at the same distance requires much more skill than the Oly archer using all of their add on's which are crutches. 

The fact that even the best barebow archers can not shoot scores even close to as high as the best Oly archers shows that the skill gap is much much steeper shooting barebow. 

Think about it, what's more impressive, a 10 shot from 70m barebow 3 times in a row or with a full geared out Oly recurve?



JParanee said:


> Don't know what to really say about this
> 
> I would love to see barebow archery in the olympics even though I am a huge fan of it as it is now
> 
> ...


Well to be faire there are barebow archers that shoot "trad" style bows that are some of the best archers in the world.....I see no reason why you can not put the metal rig shooters with the wooden trad bow shooters.....it's only a difference in material and there's no advantage in speed or forgiveness shooting metal over wood (there are still carbon and foam core wooden trad bow limbs....just different materials). 



Bowmania said:


> Stringstack, And what, may I ask, is your opinion of compounds? LOL.
> 
> Bowmania


I consider compound a form of archery just a very watered down form of archery that requires significantly less skill. It's the softball of archery.



UtahIdahoHunter said:


> I was thinking the same thing. Clearly the OP has never shot competitive with those "add ons".


I have shot with a bow quiver on my bow once and the difference in stability is significant enough to consider it a large advantage especially shooting longer distances. All of the stabilizers added to these bow's are much more forgiving of bow arm movement, bow alignment, reducing bow shake, and are even more forgiving of a sub par release.

Add to that a clicker that tells you when you have reached full draw, a very precise sight, a kisser button, and so on and you have a bow that quite honestly I consider a toy and has no real world function besides shooting at stationary targets using the same stance at the same distance during what I consider to be short shoot off's where there's a lot of luck in play. 



grantmac said:


> The OP has been shooting his Sage for less than a year.
> 
> Oly is the most physically demanding of the archery pursuits. BB the most mentally difficult (at the top level) and compound demands the most consistency (near perfection). Neither is "easier".


Actually I have been shooting for 4 years now and I shoot a Red Stag. I'd love to know how Oly archery is the most physically demanding form of archery though. 

Each form is as physically demanding as you make it. Not to knock anyone but most of the guys that I see shooting Oly style recurve at the Olympics are out of shape and not very conditioned. Some of them are medically obese and I have yet to see an Oly style archer shooting the max allowed weight (60#). 

You have trad archers that are shooting 60# bows+ that are in excellent shape so this idea that one set of archery is more demanding than another form is false. 

Traditional archery or barebow archery is the most difficult of them all. 

The score discrepancy between archers even at the podium tends to be quite large whereas in Oly archery it's normally 3-4 points or less and compound archery it's a point or two usually. 

Again, the skill GAP is barebow is also much larger, when's the last time you have seen a barebow shoot a near perfect round at 70m?

Now that I think about it maybe it's a good thing that barebow archery is not in the Olympics. 

There's something very pure and unrefined about shooting 3D courses with interesting real world shot set ups, slopes, and so on. It can get very creative. The same applies to field archery.


----------



## Corene1 (Apr 27, 2014)

Just wanting to chime in here as far as the physical aspect of barebow over Olympic style. I have shot both styles and will continue to do so, they compliment each other. Shooting only 34 pounds on the fingers with the Olympic set up, but that clicker that was mentioned which sounds so simple, is in fact a torture device. Doing a smooth controlled shot while pulling through the clicker will test your stamina but it will also ingrain the shot motion so when I go to barebow it is easier to hit the same draw length every time which is critical particularly at the longer distances. I know for a fact that shooting a full FITA round of 144 arrows has me much more fatigued than shooting 112 arrow field round in NFAA trad recurve. The stabilizer and sight on the Olympic bow help tremendously but think about holding a tiny pin the size of a small pencil lead on a spot that is about 4 3/4 inches wide at 70 meters while drawing and aiming the bow then holding that form as you slowly pull through the clicker. It is tough! Kind of like holding a needle on a nail head about 30 feet away. 
 Shooting the FITA barebow style has advantages also. You are allowed to string walk so the point of the arrow is on the spot at all distances too so that is a solid aiming system also. If you ever get a chance to shoot an Olympic rig at 70 meters do it, it is tough, as is any form of archery at a competitive level.


----------



## nakedape (Sep 28, 2015)

stringstack said:


> The fact that even the best barebow archers can not shoot scores even close to as high as the best Oly archers shows that the skill gap is much much steeper shooting barebow.


All it shows is that barebow is less accurate...



> Think about it, what's more impressive, a 10 shot from 70m barebow 3 times in a row or with a full geared out Oly recurve?


3 shots involve a lot of luck, total score from 30 shots would be much more interesting.




> Some of them are medically obese


LOL, I do notice quite a few overweight top level compound shooters.
not so much in oly recurve, (yes there are some I see)
IMHO, I don't really see either either barebow or olympic archery as a highly athletic sport...


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Please read the background for the top Olympic Archer in the USA before starting these kind of threads.
Dan


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

stringstack said:


> Barebow requires more skill because for a barebow archer to shoot the same score as an Oly style archer at the same distance requires much more skill than the Oly archer using all of their add on's which are crutches.
> 
> The fact that even the best barebow archers can not shoot scores even close to as high as the best Oly archers shows that the skill gap is much much steeper shooting barebow.
> 
> ...


You post from a very biased and very uninformed position. You and your many friends find it boring, so the *few* (sorry, figured I better go back and point out that this was sarcasm, in case you didn't pick that up) people who partake in this boring form of the sport worldwide obviously enjoy boredom. 

Please, go pick up a 60# recurve, stick all those accessories on it, and especially the clicker, and show me your pinacle of physically demanding. If you posted that video on you tube it would go viral, and likely be called "Archer on a Paint Shaker". 

The scores generally increase with more technology at the pinacle levels, sure, but the point you aren't getting is... that is the point. When you only have a couple point spread, you have to be that much more on and consistent. And with compound, if you miss an x... forget about it. Talk about nerve wracking.

I enjoy all forms of archery, and the concept of saying a form is watered down or easier, is just plain dumb. Different sure, different standards absolutely. But each has their own beauty and nuance for those who have actually tried them. Your depth and breadth of experience is attaching a quiver once.... please.

Cheers


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Stringstack you have to stop  

The pictures I posted had nothing to do with wood vs aluminum risers 

I've been a recurve shooter for over 40 years and this trad style you speak of is silly 

Trad is a new term to describe poor bow shooting 

I shoot and hunt with a recurve 

The one I am Shooting now is an all wood bolt down but I'd shoot it the same as I would an aluminum riser Ilf bow 

If you are thinking that a guy like G Fred or Byron Fergusson could compete with current top bare bow and even middle of the road bare bow shooters shooting any type of single string bow be it if they both shot aluminum or wood you are showing how much you do not understand what you are talking about 

I'm not trying to nasty just informative 

This is coming from a guy that shoots what you would call instinctive which happens to be the worse way you could describe something as simple as saying I shoot a subconscious gap that you could find 

Instinctive shooting is so far from an instinctive action that it's silly 

Anything you do repetitively can not in all fairness be called anything but a learned act 

This whole trad movement for people like me that never came from compounds and have always shot single strings is a silly notion and usually an excuse to have bad form and even lousier shooting 

Instinctive aiming (subconscious gap) and gap shooting are aiming methods that can be done with any bow 

Good consistent shooters are always form oriented wether they are shooting wood , aluminum etc 

And remember this is coming from an instinctive (stupid word) shooter ..... A fair gap shooter will clean an excellent instinctive (subconscious gap) shooters clock nine times out of ten 

Yes in some hunting situations instinctive (subconscious gap) shooters might have an advantage but in more hunting situations a dedicated gap or fixed crawl shooter will have a bigger advantage 

I shoot the way I do because I've been doing it so long it's just what I do 

But I have changed my form over the years to try and emulate a more solid shooting form 

my shooting has improved by doing so 

Tell me by looking at me at full draw what would you describe me as 

An instinctive shooter ? 

A gap shooter ? 

Something else 

Now you know the answer because I have told you how I aim but I hope you see my point 







Btw two of the three bows here are ILF 

ILF is a limb attachment system ....... Nothing more 

Hope this helps 

Your reference to all Ilf rigs as Oly rigs and all wood bows as trad rigs is not what is going on


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

I did not read your rant, all that I saw was that according to you everything is silly.......

I stand by my opinion that barebow is the most difficult form of archery. 

Someone mentioned that Oly style archers are more accurate but this is not inherently true. Accurate at what? 70m bow shot vertical using a single pin sight and stabilizers that would not fit in between most trees sure. If we are talking about shots that require you to shoot under a branch, shoot crouched, in between trees, shoot at unknown distances, shoot aerial targets and so forth and so on than a barebow is more "accurate".

Also pulling through a clicker just requires the use of a shorter arrow and coming to full anchor. But it doesn't vene matter because the way most Olympic archers draw the bow is much different than most barebow archers. I for one do not continue to draw once I have reached full draw. 

I maintain the pressure until I release, if that arrow is pulling any further than I risk cutting my finger open if shooting a broadhead or am going to be inconsistent, I want the arrow to remain as still at full anchor as possible with no forward and no backwards movement at full anchor. 

This idea that instinctive archery does not exist is a funny one as well, how come I do not pay attention to where the point is and only use the point and the rear of the shaft for alignment purposes in my peripheral without paying any attention to where it is in relation to the target. I just see the target and shoot, there is no gapping consciously nor subconsciously. The only time I know that my GAP is, is when I'm at my "point on" but even then focusing on the point screws me up. 

I stand by my statement that most of the Oly archers are out of shape. Most of these guys have been shooting for at least a decade and they are still only shooting 55# MAX (most are shooting around 50#). A true athlete would train and be extremely comfortable at the 60# draw weight giving themselves a significant advantage.


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

Of course you are right, for your definition of what archery is.

However for everyone who has ever shot something besides a red stag (with a quiver on it... once) , I am still going to make your callsign... "paint shaker".


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

bobnikon said:


> Of course you are right, for your definition of what archery is.
> 
> However for everyone who has ever shot something besides a red stag (with a quiver on it... once) , I am still going to make your callsign... "paint shaker".


Go a head but your call sign makes no sense since I have drawn a 40# bow with a 21# bow simultaneously (so a total of 61#, both strings in one hand) and have held it for 30 seconds with no shake at full draw just testing it out. That doesn't mean I would shoot a 60# bow though but that's also not an excuse for the top Oly archers to be using anything less than 55-60# at the highest level of Oly archery. These guys should be in shape.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Wow 

You should of read as you put it my rant 

Everyone on here that knows anything of archery knows just how silly your comments are 

I don't know if I'm addressing a kid or an adult at this point 

You speak of hunting shots 

Shooting around and under things 

Have you ever hunted ? 

Have you ever killed anything ? 

Or are you someone that has a notion of something with nothing to support your comments 

..... The things you say are that silly .....

Btw 

You are seeing your arrow ....it's right on front of your face


----------



## J Wesbrock (Jul 6, 2016)




----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Boy to get Wesbrock to post here you know it's gotta be good


----------



## J Wesbrock (Jul 6, 2016)

Joe,

It's not every day you come across someone who feels qualified to pontificate on the challenges of Olympic archery because he once put a bow quiver on his Samick Red Stag. The internet is a wonderful place.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

J Wesbrock said:


> Joe,
> 
> It's not every day you come across someone who feels qualified to pontificate on the challenges of Olympic archery because he once put a bow quiver on his Samick Red Stag. The internet is a wonderful place.


You ain't kidding  

Hope all is well


----------



## Jim Casto Jr (Aug 20, 2002)

Well... after reading this thread, I've decided to take my F-150 pickup and compete in the Indianapolis 500. Heck, everyone knows it takes more skill to drive a pickup than one of those low-ride Indy cars.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Easykeeper said:


> I don't know why there's no bare bow archery in the Olympics, it would be fun to see. I'd also like to see compounds in the Olympics.
> 
> But, I don't think you can say that bare bow shooting requires more skill than other disciplines. It's more difficult only if the score required to win is the same. *A bare bow shooter against an Olympic shooter and their gear, sure bare bow is tougher, but they don't compete against each other.*
> 
> ...





stringstack said:


> *Barebow requires more skill because for a barebow archer to shoot the same score as an Oly style archer at the same distance requires much more skill than the Oly archer using all of their add on's which are crutches.
> *
> The fact that even the best barebow archers can not shoot scores even close to as high as the best Oly archers shows that the skill gap is much much steeper shooting barebow.
> 
> Think about it, what's more impressive, a 10 shot from 70m barebow 3 times in a row or with a full geared out Oly recurve?


Well duh, no argument. If you read what I wrote it's basically the same thing except I didn't disparage the Oly archers and their choice in gear.

The point is that there isn't anyone shooting bare bow that is shooting scores that would win at the Olympics. I also stand by my opinion that the top shooters in any discipline are all shooting at an incredibly high level and would probably excel no matter what discipline they chose.

I also don't think there's any inherent nobility in any discipline over another, they're just different and we all find the place we like.

Why look down on people just because they choose different gear than you? You do realize that there are people that think you are taking the easy way with your laminated recurve and arrows made of modern materials, right? 

Why is it ok for you to lean on the crutch of modern materials and a production bow when you could prove your superiority by making everything from natural materials like our ancestors?


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

I used to shot 77# when I was younger. The only breakthrough I have never had with that was that I was the only dink shooting over 60# competitively. Wasnt til I went to 41# before I realized indoors what I could actually do for score. Maybe the same reason that I found my scores gone way up shooting lighter weight is the same reason you don't see any top tier Olympic guys shooting 60#. 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

stringstack said:


> I did not read your rant, all that I saw was that according to you everything is silly.......


One of the most respected members (JParanee) of this forum takes the time to write up his thoughts on the topic you started and this is how you respond? Can't take a little dialog and difference of opinion?

How old are you?


----------



## Attack (Oct 25, 2011)

Who draws 2 bows at the same time? Whats the point? I don't think it proves you can compete drawing a 60# bow 100s of shots, just by drawing a combined weight of 60# once. Stop being ridiculous... Unless you are just a troll... In that case, keep up the fine work lol.

Sent from my LG-D959 using Tapatalk


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

This tread is funny.


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

This guy has the best barebow shooter in the country who just won USA Archery Field Nationals and a guy who just won Traditional NFAA Field Nationals chiming in and giving opinion and he still won't listen. Hahaha


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

When your entire frame of reference is Lars Andersen videos and watching Brave, it is hard to be well rounded. Someone figured it out above, I think we are talking to a 12 year old wearing a green arrow costume. Lets give the kid a break.


----------



## Bill 2311 (Jun 24, 2005)

Oh no...
Not Lars again!


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

stringstack, have you tried to hit anything at 90 meters yet? Pie plate? trash can lid? Volkswagen? elephant? side of a barn?


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

I've hit the damn near the center of a target (there were no markings on the target) from 90m on my first shot once on my 2nd or 3rd end but I toss it up as pure luck. 

I stand by what I said earlier with that I think Oly archery has too any crutches to consider it seriously and it's probably one of the major reasons why it's not popular at all (not watched much during the Olympics). I know of people that are not archers that did not even recognize that what they were shooting was a bow due to the long javelins attached to them front and side. 

Also if these guys that are posting are "the best barebow archers in the USA" how come I have never heard of them? I have never heard of a Wesbrook or Demmer and most of things posted in this thread are a joke or just trolling/flaming at this point.

I simply stated that barebow archery takes more skill than any other form of archery and how Oly style archer's relies on too many crutches to shoot the scores they do. 

Let's see them take off the V bar, front stabilizers, clickers, and sight and see how well they shoot.



Easykeeper said:


> Well duh, no argument. If you read what I wrote it's basically the same thing except I didn't disparage the Oly archers and their choice in gear.
> 
> The point is that there isn't anyone shooting bare bow that is shooting scores that would win at the Olympics. I also stand by my opinion that the top shooters in any discipline are all shooting at an incredibly high level and would probably excel no matter what discipline they chose.
> 
> ...


Bow's with fiberglass/carbon/and even foam lamination's really are not that much faster than a bow with no lamination's. Sure there may be a 10-15fps difference compared to a fiberglass backed bow but that's a very small difference in speed. 



J Wesbrock said:


> Joe,
> 
> It's not every day you come across someone who feels qualified to pontificate on the challenges of Olympic archery because he once put a bow quiver on his Samick Red Stag. The internet is a wonderful place.


Why do you think that everyone has to be PC on here? I stated my opinion of how I think Oly style archery does not take as much skill as shooting the original way the bow has been shoot since it was invented, barebow.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Now Demmer and Wesbrock suck cause this guy didn't hear of them  

This is awesome

Kid stop you are making a fool of yourself 

Post up a video of you shooting or at least a pic ...... Please


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

JParanee said:


> Now Demmer and Wesbrock suck cause this guy didn't hear of them
> 
> This is awesome
> 
> ...


I never said they suck I said I never heard of them. 

I'm a 54 year old man I have better things to do than troll online. 

You are the one acting like a kid. :wink:


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Please let me explain than 

I know you fancy Byron Fergusson etc 

Byron is a great ambassador for the sport and a fine archer but he is primarily an entertainer .... A performer 

Have you seen him shoot ? 

he is a gifted trick shot .... But a trick shot is just that 

When I saw him he missed more than he hit but every performer has a bad day and I do like him but he could not preform on the same stage as anyone competing today 

G Fred 

Nice man but it saddens me to say is one of the fathers of the down fall of single string archery 

I'm sorry to have to be the one to break this stuff to you 

Enjoy your archery


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

54 years old... or 12, who knows. Nobody watches archery in the Olympics... you are an entertaining fellow for sure. Just continues to show that you have no knowledge to speak from and just spout whatever comes to mind. Your Google fu is as weak as your concept of archery. Check out the viewer stats on the last Olympics. Google Wesbrock and Demmer. Sure they dont shoot in your moms back yard with you, but they may have some reputation outside of her yard. Educate yourself and you may not come off as such a troll. But, then you wouldn't be as entertaining, so actually keep it up. I can't wait to see what you will come up with next.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Good old G.A.P days. I think we got a ringer. Stringstack!
You didn't even look up Brady Ellison's profile. Shame. He's is a great guy. That has shot great with every kind of weapon. He just likes Oly and works very hard at being the best. 
Dan


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

As a matter of fact... let me help you

http://www.espn.com/olympics/summer...ays-archery-most-popular-sport-cable-networks

That being said, you are probably thinking of the 2014 games, where I will admit, basically nobody watched it... being the winter Olympics and it isn't a winter event...

I stand corrected.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

stringstack said:


> He is more than just a trick shot. When's the last time you have killed the game he has taken, shot aspirins out of mid air, and shot through a finger ring? These shots require a great deal of precision and you calling him just a trick shot is a an insult to him and Howard Hill.
> 
> 
> Look I thought you were a kid and I was trying to help out
> ...


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

J Wesbrock said:


> Did you really just ask Joe than question? His trophy room looks like someone stuffed and mounted the San Diego zoo.


Haha Jason this guy needs to do his homework before he speaks. haha so funny. This thread is cracking me up.


----------



## recurveboy (Mar 14, 2010)

What is going on here?


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

recurveboy said:


> What is going on here?


Just a kid in an Arrow costume who can shoot two bows with one hand teaching a bunch of actual archers what the sport is about.

But, the popcorn is fresh...


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

bobnikon said:


> Just a kid in an Arrow costume who can shoot two bows with one hand teaching a bunch of actual archers what the sport is about.
> 
> But, the popcorn is fresh...


Says the one that has the last name Nikon and an avatar photograph from a Dungeons & Dragons video game........


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Guys -

OK, I'll admit it, there is some entertainment value here. 

When some one posts something that's utterly ridiculous (whether he's trolling or actually believes it), the best medicine is usually to ignore it. 
Pisses the do-do out of him, and every body else gets the message.

Just sayin'

Viper1 out.


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

New lows Arrow. Keep it up.


----------



## Corene1 (Apr 27, 2014)

Strange thing, is even the women here are scratching their head and smiling.


----------



## akfeathers82 (Jan 4, 2015)

I know I am. 😃

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk


----------



## SteveB (Dec 18, 2003)

At least you're consistent in being delusional.


----------



## nakedape (Sep 28, 2015)

Although I don't agree with Stringstack's opinion, I have to say that his opinion is not all that unusual amongst the barebow recuve archers I have met. I would venture to say that the majority of your recreation barebow archers with their samick sages share his opinion.

FWIW, I did start with a barebow last fall, and have focused on oly recurve for the last 4 months.
I have to say there were certain things about oly recurve that were a turn off at first that made me hesitant about trying it.
(and partly is that I am a cheap bast*rd that didn't want to fork out more $$ into the sport ;-) )


----------



## die_dunkelheit (Jul 29, 2016)

I think this guy is a lib troll, he got outdone at his own game and resorted to calling names (highly uncreative and poorly thought out names too). Exactly like a lib does in every argument they've ever tried to have with free thinking people. 
That doesn't mean it isn't thoroughly entertaining to read though especially over a good drink :darkbeer:

Dude you should go back to the first page and actually read it. Being new to ArcheryTalk I don't know anyone here from anyone else but even I can tell the responses are from those who actually know what they are talking about; and most of them are to and for your benefit. I shoot only traditional "instinctive", which I 100% agree with JParenee is a stupid name for it. The archery range I like to go to backs up against a soccer field which means when I'm the only one there I can go back FAR.. It's 135 yards from the backstops to just in front of the fence at the far end of the soccer field (it's not a regulation size soccer field). Stemming from my obsession with shooting my rifles farther and farther and just for kicks I regularly go back with my bow to 100 yards, 1.575yd farther than your coveted 90m (90m = 98.42519685yd). Yes, I do hit my 18"x18" target at that range, but certainly not every time, and by no means in the X. 

Lets look at this from a slightly different perspective. Using some pretty simple and widely used MATH, the universal language for putting bullsh*t to bed. 
In firearms we commonly use "MOA" or Minute of Angle to define adjustment in sights. Minute of Angle is 1/60th of 1 degree. 1 Minute of Angle happens to produce almost exactly 1" between two straight lines at 100 yards. That is the distance between 2 lines emanating from a common point separated by any angular value will increase the farther it is measured from the shared point. I don't think it is humanly possible to maintain 1 MOA consistency with a bow of any kind or any draw weight. What about 1 degree of consistency? What would releasing every arrow within 1 degree of the first arrow's trajectory exiting the bow do to the shot group? Easy MATH, if 1 MOA = 1 inch when measured at 100 yards then we need just multiply by 60 to find 1 degree rather than 1 MOA. This yields 60 inches when measured at 100 yards! That is; 1 degree of accuracy in the exiting trajectory of the arrow would still produce a group 5 feet in diameter. 

Can you do even that? 1 degree resolution based mostly on muscle memory? Probably not. I certainly can't and it's something that I regularly tease myself with.. I get 7-9ft groups on my best days shooting that far only after probably 30-40 shots of practice. So 9-10 of a dozen land within the backstop and 3, 4 if I'm lucky, land within the target. I have yet to put one on the X.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

On top of that! the Oly went too the Set point system for the team comp.
Dan


----------



## olddogrib (Apr 4, 2014)

On a much lighter note, everybody's bashin' Ralph Lauren, but I think Demmer would look stylin' in this year's unis on the podium...they just left off the big "S". I think you gotta go red/white/blue camo for DeWayne! Then again my wife says I have no clue about fashion, so I thought this was the thread I should contribute to, lol! P.S. Jason, thanks for the hot tip on Joe's treestand...I'm gonna hunt it when he's working and see if I can kill Cecil's brother.


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

Hey Jason Westbrock I may steal you idea and put a "tractor pin" on my quiver.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

You hauling something UIH?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## J Wesbrock (Jul 6, 2016)

UtahIdahoHunter said:


> Hey Jason Westbrock I may steal you idea and put a "tractor pin" on my quiver.


Be my guest.


----------



## olddogrib (Apr 4, 2014)

Okay, I'll bite....what does a "tractor pin" on a quiver do?


----------



## J Wesbrock (Jul 6, 2016)

olddogrib said:


> Okay, I'll bite....what does a "tractor pin" on a quiver do?


Many years ago a guy I knew had a Matchbox tow truck on his quiver. When I asked him why he had it, he said it was for pulling his head out of his ___. I thought it was funny, so I have a little John Deere tractor on my quiver now.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Hey Westbrock, you think my tractors sexy?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Demmer 

I'm gonna start looking for a Little matchbox D8


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Lol. 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## olddogrib (Apr 4, 2014)

My Quiver's not big enough for the equipment I'd need, mine's buried pretty deep sometimes. John Deere doesn't make the Terex Titan, do they? I believe that was GM, probably wouldn't pull a wet noodle and comes with a faulty ignition switch to boot...oh, never mind!


----------



## ghostgoblin22 (May 3, 2013)

man I just read this whole thread, wow lol very entertaining....stringstack buddy don't you wish you could turn the clock around lol..............................................and I would bet on JP's game room as well compared to hills all day


----------



## bowshooter47 (May 12, 2012)

This guy reminds me of OSB who use to be on other websites.


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

ghostgoblin22 said:


> man I just read this whole thread, wow lol very entertaining....stringstack buddy don't you wish you could turn the clock around lol..............................................and I would bet on JP's game room as well compared to hills all day


Why would I regret anything that I've said? I stick by what I originally said. Traditional Archery as it has been shot since the bow was invented is the most difficult form of archery by far......

Anyone claiming that Oly or compound archery is more difficult is full of it and they know it. Shooting all of those X's they shoot using an Oly rig but instead doing it barebow is astronomically more difficult.

What we have is just a few people on here that like to talk trash and derail threads and start arguments on purpose. But this is to be expected of any online forum.......



die_dunkelheit said:


> I think this guy is a lib troll, he got outdone at his own game and resorted to calling names (highly uncreative and poorly thought out names too). Exactly like a lib does in every argument they've ever tried to have with free thinking people.
> That doesn't mean it isn't thoroughly entertaining to read though especially over a good drink :darkbeer:
> 
> Dude you should go back to the first page and actually read it. Being new to ArcheryTalk I don't know anyone here from anyone else but even I can tell the responses are from those who actually know what they are talking about; and most of them are to and for your benefit. I shoot only traditional "instinctive", which I 100% agree with JParenee is a stupid name for it. The archery range I like to go to backs up against a soccer field which means when I'm the only one there I can go back FAR.. It's 135 yards from the backstops to just in front of the fence at the far end of the soccer field (it's not a regulation size soccer field). Stemming from my obsession with shooting my rifles farther and farther and just for kicks I regularly go back with my bow to 100 yards, 1.575yd farther than your coveted 90m (90m = 98.42519685yd). Yes, I do hit my 18"x18" target at that range, but certainly not every time, and by no means in the X.
> ...


Anything is possible......

Also there's nothing wrong with calling instinctive archery.......instinctive archery. It is instinctive just like throwing a ball and becomes more natural the more you do it......


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

bowshooter47 said:


> This guy reminds me of OSB who use to be on other websites.


No man don't say that 

Ken was a hell of a shot and proven hunter 

Ken posted pics and videos of him shooting and killing things with his bow 

Ken was opinionated but had and has my respect as a hunter and archer


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

It seemed to me, so far, that the better shooters, in any class, tend to have experience in others. Interestingly, they respect all of them for what they are, different types of the same game, "Shooting."

Comparing pistol shooting to off hand rifle shooting to bench rest shooting...

Kind of like comparing a motorcycle to a bus to a tug boat, and comparing tug boat drivers superior pilots, because the motorcycle and the bus are simply too easy to drive on a road...


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JParanee said:


> No man don't say that
> 
> Ken was a hell of a shot and proven hunter
> 
> ...


If you could get Ken to calm down, he could also hear what you're saying, if you said it nicely, and in a way that let him keep his opinion as valid, if even as his own.

I miss Ken. Good guy. Helped develop customer service skills too


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

BarneySlayer said:


> If you could get Ken to calm down, he could also hear what you're saying, if you said it nicely, and in a way that let him keep his opinion as valid, if even as his own.
> 
> I miss Ken. Good guy. Helped develop customer service skills too


I miss Ken also 

We got to be friendly and I respected his shooting and hunting ability 

Boy would he go off on Asbell though  

And being a big Instictive shooter that is funny 

The gentleman on this thread and I mean this in a nice way just proves people don't know what they don't know....... It's that simple


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

BarneySlayer said:


> It seemed to me, so far, that the better shooters, in any class, tend to have experience in others. Interestingly, they respect all of them for what they are, different types of the same game, "Shooting."
> 
> Comparing pistol shooting to off hand rifle shooting to bench rest shooting...
> 
> Kind of like comparing a motorcycle to a bus to a tug boat, and comparing tug boat drivers superior pilots, because the motorcycle and the bus are simply too easy to drive on a road...


I'm going to have to disagree with you here. I know plenty of real life archers that think that Oly style archery looks just plain silly and is too easy *compared to barebow archery* due to all of the crutches permitted. 

I talked to an older gentleman a few weeks ago about this and he thought the long heavy stabilizers, clicker, rods sticking out of either side, and the sight takes out the a majority of the skill from archery and thought it looked "lib". He wished it was just traditional recurve/longbow only allowed with no attachments or bow accessories. 

But the Olympics tend to be a very sporty event so in a way I'm actually quite glad barebow archery is not in the Olmypics. I say let it stay where it belongs which is 3D archery, field rounds, and indoor rounds. 



JParanee said:


> I miss Ken also
> 
> We got to be friendly and I respected his shooting and hunting ability
> 
> ...


What don't I know that I don't know? Please enlighten me and I'm sincere in asking you to tell me what I need to know. 

The original post was how I believe (among many others) that the state of current Olympic archery is dull and that the archers rely on too many crutches to shoot the score that they do.

Let's see them take off all accessories including the sight and see how well they shoot. That's true archery at it's roots. 

In my opinion and many other real life archers (not just forum posters), Oly style archery looks "lib" as another poster in this thread labeled me. It has a high end sporty Ralph Lauren kinda look where as traditional archery has a working man old fashioned traditional look. 

Two separate styles. 

It's too easy compared to barebow archery. If you take a group of barebow archers and had them shoot 70m barebow the difference between those at the top and bottom would be quite drastic and the skill ceiling required in shooting a high score would be through the roof. 

This makes barebow archery more difficult to shoot at the same distance and score the same compared to all other forms of archery.

*The point that if you take 3 barebow archers and place them at 70m and have them shoot a total of 12 arrows, and also take a group of 3 Oly style archers with kitted out bow's and have them shoot a total of 12 arrows each as well that the difference between the barebow archers scores and the Oly style archers would be significantly different, where do we disagree here? This is the main point that I made in my first post in this thread that others seem to disagree with.*

Also no offense, but I don't care if you nor others on here have respect for me or think I am a "great hunter, shot" and so forth and so on. 

This is an online forum and I will never meet nor know anyone posting on here and even if I did, it would not matter because I only come on here to shoot the crap with other archers and discuss whatever's on my mind. 

Internet forums are not a place to be taken seriously as people act completely different in real life.

I do not take this seriously and do not care about what others think about me on here....it's an online watering hole where I'm free to speak whatever's on my mind.


----------



## Attack (Oct 25, 2011)

I think you are confused as to what barebow is. Barebow is a riser that fits through a 12 cm ring... No sight. It is not your beloved magical hunk of wood and instinctive shooting. Your modern bow and modern arrows are easier to shoot than a primitive sinew backed longbow with wood arrows and flint tips... Therefore it is not real true archery... Can you see your rational now? It is not easier, just different. The level of accuracy for each kind of archery is different. So what if your chosen form of archery is different than someone elses. All archery is about consistency, the way to consistency is through perfect for, no matter what type of archery you choose. The only way to get to consistency is through form and keeping it the sane every time. It is not easier or harder. 

Sent from my LG-D959 using Tapatalk


----------



## ranchoarcher (Sep 26, 2013)

Try it before you knock it. Shooting OR is not as easy as it looks getting the scores you're "expected" to get. For that matter. take an off the shelf wood riser as compared to a modern metal riser with a plunger and elevated rest. The later will inherently be more accurate. A compound, well that raises the stakes even higher. With compound you better get all 10's or you're out. With the increased accuracy demanded comes the added tension and stress of performing. Having crutches doesn't mean you don't have to run. Now ya gotta run faster. Jump in a tournament and that puts a different spin on everything. All styles of archery have their difficulties and advantages. It's about personal preference. if you dont care for shooting OR, fine. But don't berate someone's choice because it isn't yours. OH, don't think you won't run into someone from here. It's very possible.


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

ranchoarcher said:


> Try it before you knock it. Shooting OR is not as easy as it looks getting the scores you're "expected" to get. For that matter. take an off the shelf wood riser as compared to a modern metal riser with a plunger and elevated rest. The later will inherently be more accurate. A compound, well that raises the stakes even higher. With compound you better get all 10's or you're out. With the increased accuracy demanded comes the added tension and stress of performing. Having crutches doesn't mean you don't have to run. Now ya gotta run faster. Jump in a tournament and that puts a different spin on everything. All styles of archery have their difficulties and advantages. It's about personal preference. if you dont care for shooting OR, fine. But don't berate someone's choice because it isn't yours. OH, don't think you won't run into someone from here. It's very possible.


I never berated someones choice, just said that I don't like it.....it's too watered down and the people shooting Oly style rely on crutches. 

Also, I think I know what the issue is. 

A lot of people are missing the point that I made with my original post. 

*I'm not talking about one barebow archer competing against another, I'm talking about if we take a set of barebow archers, a set of Oly style archers, and a set of compound archers and put them at a set distance than we would see the top level compound archers shooting significantly better than the top level Oly archer, and the Oly style archers shooting astronomically better than the top barebow archers. This is what I meant by that barebow archery is the most difficult form of archery. *

If I were to go to a range and hand someone a bow that shoots all three they would shoot compound the best, recurve good but not nearly as well as they did with the compound, and with barebow they would be way behind what they were shooting Oly style. 

This is what makes traditional/barebow archery the most difficult form of archery and thus has the highest skill gap and takes the longest amount of time and skill (if it's even possible to master......) to "master" (again I do not believe it's possible to master barebow archery) and shoot the lights out at 50m, 70m, and so forth and so on.

Nobody on here knows my name and I don't know anyone's name on here as well. As I stated I primarily post on here just to state my opinions as a form of entertainment when I'm not busy or not shooting. 

My shooting at event's days are long gone anyways since I stopped competing over 25 years ago.

Take care.


----------



## Jim Casto Jr (Aug 20, 2002)

Gee Whiz! You're worse than Hillary Clinton. Now you're using the word "difficult" trying to justify what you said earlier. In your first post you were using the word "skill." Shooting bare bow is not more difficult, nor does it require more skill (at the top levels)--it's different. Your whole premise has been about comparing apples to oranges and for some reason you fail to recognize the futility of your argument.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

stringstack said:


> I'm going to have to disagree with you here. I know plenty of real life archers that think that Oly style archery looks just plain silly and is too easy *compared to barebow archery* due to all of the crutches permitted.
> 
> I talked to an older gentleman a few weeks ago about this and he thought the long heavy stabilizers, clicker, rods sticking out of either side, and the sight takes out the a majority of the skill from archery and thought it looked "lib". He wished it was just traditional recurve/longbow only allowed with no attachments or bow accessories.
> 
> ...


Do you really want to have this conversation ? 

First this place to you might be a cyber space watering hole that you can spew nonsense on but for many of us it is not 

We are life long archers that care about the sport 

Secondly some of us actually know each other 

The world of archer is a small one 

We see and shoot with each other and travel to different shoots wether they be formal competitions or fun shoots and there is no online BS 

Some of the people posting on here are not internet warriors they are some of the very best barebow shots on the planet .....yes on the planet 

Ya know years ago one of the very best barebow archers out there made a post that Howard Hill could not compete with today's archers 

Like you I was stepped in my childhood heroes and being a hill fan took exception to his statement ...... I was wrong 

Howard hill could not shoot the scores a guy like Martin , Demmer and Rogers can its not boasting it's the truth 

Now I love HH and he was a great promoter of archery etc but he was not the greatest shot to ever live he was a promoter and showman and did an awesome job but that was it 

You are still living in your mind that many of OUR notice I said Our child hood fantasies are true 

I was many years ago of the same opinions but I stepped out into reality and went and shot with and saw people shoot that blew my mind 

What I thought was reality was not 

Not even close 

Guys like Demmer are shooting the best barebow scores to ever be shot 

They deserve all respect because unlike your heroes of make believe there is no one saying action and setting up the photo staged promotional shot 

They are shooting on a world stage for all to see 

Go attend a big shoot 

Watch what is really happening and who is really winning not what and who you wish was winning and shooting 

You have been shooting for a few years and make statements like you know something when in truth my 13 year old daughter knows more about real archery 

You say that as you put it Oly archers are taking the easy way out 

Have you ever seen in real life a group of top end Olympic archers shoot ? 

I know Jake Kamnski , Brady Ellis and in the compound world Reo Wilde 

These men would be at the top of the heap no matter what they are shooting 

You actually think a guy like Byron Fergusson and G Fred could even compete with today's bare bow archers and you are so far off base it is jokeable 

I have seen both shoot and as I said Byron is a great showman and ambassador to the sport and a good trick shot but that is where it ends ..... Sorry it's the truth 

You make comments like when I have meaning (me) killed near the game Byron has I can talk ..... You have no idea my hunting background etc .... I won't get into it but I have hunted all over 4 continents and you have no idea of anything you speak of 

You think this is a place of Internet fantasy and a cyber space watering whole where being ananamous gives you the right to spew false facts etc 

You see many on here use there real names go to shoots and shoot and actually hunt so we do not look at this place as a place to just say stupid things etc 

I ask you this 

Have you ever hunted ? 

Have you ever killed anything with a bow ? 

If so post up pictures 

If not you have no right to say what works and what does not work in a hunting situation 

You are regurgitating nonsense you read on the Internet with no facts to back up what does work etc 

We all go thru a learning period on what we have to seperate as fact from fiction but you are stuck in the fiction world 

Btw 

You refer to ILF bows as Oly style 

I will repeat this for the 10th time 

Ilf is a limb fitment system nothing more nothing less 

I posted up three pics of me shooting three different bows ...... 2 were ILF one was a bolt down .

From those pics you could not tell which was which .... You dismissed that because in your mind ILF only means Olympic Bow 

This is what I mean by people don't know what they don't know and some are so closed minded that they do not want to learn 

Archery as it should be is many things to many different people. Most in time see things for what they are .... Basically the truth in the matter . You sir want it to be a certain way even if it is fantasy not fact 

Good luck in your archery journey and I wish you well


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

stringstack said:


> This is what I meant by that barebow archery is the most difficult form of archery.


I think you have *difficult* confused with *least accurate*. I think Ellison or Broadwater could chime in and attempt to set you straight and you would argue with them too. haha This is funny. Many of these guys on here have shot all forms of archery and know that all of it is different. How do you feel about a crossbow? Too easy? Been using them since the middle ages.


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

So,

I think I see part of the issue here.

Stringstack this isnt meant as an attack, just pointing out that the form you are defending is the same form that some of the best barebow" archers here shoot, and they are trying to explain something to you. 

Nobody has said that any form of archery is better than any other except you. That is because most of us have shot all of them, and appreciate them for their own beauty. Most people are saying that each has its own challenges and nuisances.

The big mistake is... you can't compare scores across the disciplines. Just because the scores are higher in certain equipment classes doesn't mean it is easier, and here is the point... *because you are competing against others with the same equipment.* 

It is like saying single speed BMX is better because it is slower and therefor harder and more pure than a tour de France bike. Completely different disciplines with different expectations, capabilities and requirements. Yet some people can enjoy them both because instead of hating the differences they embrace them.

Anyhow, this thread has been insightful, ridiculous and entertaining all at the same time. The best thing is it is all archery.

Cheers


----------



## marcelxl (Dec 5, 2010)

The OP should be honoured by the time and effort put into this car crash by some archery illuminatti. 

and that saying……it's hard to fill a pot that is already full?


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

If you really believe that shooting barebow is not any more difficult than shooting compound or Oly style archery than I have nothing else to add........

Getting consistent good shot placement/groups barebow at the distances shot in Oly archery is unheard of. That proves that barebow is more difficult.

Some of you are basically saying that riding a bike with training wheels is just as difficult as riding a bike without training wheels....... 

Also I never said ILF was not traditional or traditional or w/e. I might of stated that I do not like ILF because they typically use metal risers (I prefer 100% wooden risers) but that's it. 

If that's what you want to believe than that's fine but most archers I know in real life and the legends of the past such as Hill have even stated that he does not like Oly style archery because they use crutches and it takes away from the skill factor and beauty of shooting a bow. 

If you're going to add attachments and sights why not just shoot a gun?

Hill was known for saying he does not like sights or any other attachments because they are just crutches and takes away from the beauty and challenge of shooting a bow as it's been shot since man invented it, which would be sightless and unaided. 

As for Hill not being as good of an archer as today's competitive archers I would have to say it's a false argument since Hill only shot longbows and could only compete primarily in longbow tournaments. I believe he could win the longbow world championship as he won an insane amount of field archery tournaments in a row. 

He could not compete in most of the tournaments as he shot a longbow and not a recurve so he would not even be allowed to participate in most of the tournaments if not all the tournaments that the current leaders of barebow archers are competing in. 

I've personally never seen Byron shoot anything besides aerial targets and short distance exhibition shot's so I can't comment on how accurate he is at longer distance but I highly doubt he is an average shot. He has taken a white tail deer from 50 yards and an elk from I believe he said 60 yards. That's extremely difficult to pull off even with a compound and he's doing it with a longbow. 

Also I see nothing wrong with comparing scores from different forms of archery. This is how we find out whether or not one form of archery is more difficult to shoot than another.....

As for posting pictures of what I have killed and what not I see no point in doing so. Again this is the internet, it's not a place to be taken seriously and I make sure to separate my real friendships from those online as people online tend to act and talk much different than in the real world. 

Lastly if Oly style archery is just as difficult as barebow how come we don't see any guys shooting bows free from attachments competing at the Olympics?

I shoot traditional barebow archery because simply it is the most difficult way to shoot and because it is the original classic way to shoot a bow and has been shot since the bow was first created by man. If it was just as difficult as shooting Oly style I would not shoot barebow.....

I'm sorry but not sorry that I have strong opinions.

Take care.


----------



## J Wesbrock (Jul 6, 2016)

JParanee said:


> No man don't say that
> 
> Ken was a hell of a shot and proven hunter
> 
> ...


I agree. Ken may have been a bit hard headed, but he dang sure could shoot and hunt.


----------



## Corene1 (Apr 27, 2014)

I really appreciate these last few threads. In my thoughts it doesn't matter which discipline you shoot, the time and effort put into any style is tremendous at a high level and I am always amazed at the level of expertise shown by the top shooters in any class. Personally I have shot several different styles from compounds to traditional to Olympic style . Are my scores higher shooting Olympic style , absolutely, but the time and effort put into shooting competitive scores against comparable equipment is equal through out the different styles.


----------



## Corene1 (Apr 27, 2014)

stringstack said:


> If you really believe that shooting barebow is not any more difficult than shooting compound or Oly style archery than I have nothing else to add........
> 
> Getting consistent good shot placement/groups barebow at the distances shot in Oly archery is unheard of. That proves that barebow is more difficult.
> 
> ...




I think this statement is where all the problems get started.
you say "Getting consistent good shot placement/groups barebow at the distances shot in Oly archery is unheard of. That proves that barebow is more difficult."

This doesn't prove barebow is more difficult, it only proves barebow is less accurate at the same distances shot with olymipic bows. The effort put into the shot and the training required to be competative is equal through the different classes of shooting.


----------



## J Wesbrock (Jul 6, 2016)

stringstack said:


> He could not compete in most of the tournaments as he shot a longbow and not a recurve so he would not even be allowed to participate in most of the tournaments if not all the tournaments that the current leaders of barebow archers are competing in.


Name me one such tournament. This is exactly what Joe meant when he said you don't know what you don't know.


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

Some things are more difficult for some than others.  :wink: Like rational thinking.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

stringstack said:


> I shoot traditional barebow archery because simply it is the most difficult way to shoot and because it is the original classic way to shoot a bow and has been shot since the bow was first created by man. If it was just as difficult as shooting Oly style I would not shoot barebow.....


You really don't get it do you, nobody is arguing with your opinion that achieving a defined level of accuracy while shooting a stickbow without a sight is more difficult than with a sight or other accessories. I'd guess we all share that opinion and it's one of the reasons we find stickbows attractive.

You're basically preaching to the choir about the limitations of single string bows shot without sights. We get it and probably know the limitations at least as well if not better than you. 

_It's your arrogant dismissal of any archer not shooting the same gear you chose that garners the argumentative posts._

The issue is you're taking the position that it requires less skill and hard work from the shooter to shoot the kind of _scores required to win_ in other archery disciplines like Olympic or compound. 

If you don't think the top shooters in Olympic or compound archery are just as skilled as the best bare bow shooters you are sadly mistaken. With all due respect to the members on this forum shooting the top bare bow scores (currently the best in the world); to imply they are inherently more skilled or work harder is just plain disrespectful to the hard work of the champions in other fields.

In fact, due to the shear number of shooters in the genre you could probably make the case that unlimited compound is the toughest style of archery to consistently shoot top level scores. Those men and women are shooting perfect scores just to get the the shootoffs. The talent pool is incredibly deep in that field. 

Think about it, you are posting in a forum where by nature everybody here is shooting the same type of of bow as you, _by choice_. Many of us have been shooting stickbows for 30,40, 50 years or more, don't you think we are aware of the capabilities of our gear? In fact if you looked closely you would find that most of us have extensive experience with pretty much all of the types of bows up to the fanciest compound and we still choose the stickbow as our main or only focus.

Besides, you are still choosing a level of archery equipment that brings inherent advantages. If you think shooting your laminated limb recurve with modern arrows is not easier than making your own bow from a stave, cutting and straightening natural cane arrows, making a string from sinew and knapping your own heads you are again sadly mistaken. The way you are shooting is much easier than "*the original classic way to shoot a bow and has been shot since the bow was first created by man*". 

There are archers that shun your equipment because the way you shoot is too easy.


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

The disagreement comes from some people believing that Olympic Archery is just as difficult to become proficient as shooting barebow both bows being used at the same distance.

I stand corrected in that longbow are allowed at most tournaments that recurves are allowed (most just shoot in the longbow class) in but I still believe that Hill would win most field/3D and indoor tournaments.

Hey Easy, how is the way that I shoot to easy? I do not believe it. I shoot barebow what other styles are there below that? Primitive? It's the same thing just with a self designed bow........

You can still cut a shelf into a primitive bow so it's a silly argument.


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

Easykeeper Nailed it.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

stringstack said:


> The disagreement comes from some people believing that Olympic Archery is just as difficult to become proficient as shooting barebow both bows being used at the same distance.


:doh:


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

Stringstack,

Show us. 
Pick up all the crutches.
Shoot an Olympic qualifying score
I mean, after all, with sights, stabilizer, rest, plunger, clicker... it is that easy right?

Great point made a couple times that you haven't addressed?
Why are you still choosing the modern advantages that you are? Red Stag, pshaw, modern black magic in that factory built thing.
I think the guys have already outlined what you should be shooting.

Get off the fence, you are either pro or anti technology. Which is it?


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

stringstack said:


> The disagreement comes from some people believing that Olympic Archery is just as difficult to become proficient as shooting barebow both bows being used at the same distance.


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

bobnikon said:


> Stringstack,
> 
> Show us.
> Pick up all the crutches.
> ...


What "modern advantages"? Fiberglass which is just a form of lamination? Why don't we stop using exotic light weight wooden arrows as well since that gives us an advantage and shipping items did not exist back in the primitive times. We should stop looking online on how to build bows as that's an unfair advantage as well.

You are straw-manning at this point. 

Barebow is barebow. I want to see an Olympic Archer take off all of his attachments and shoot identical to how he did with all attachments on the bow.

That will settle this argument for good.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

stringstack said:


> What "modern advantages"? Fiberglass which is just a form of lamination? Why don't we stop using exotic light weight wooden arrows as well since that gives us an advantage and shipping items did not exist back in the primitive times. We should stop looking online on how to build bows as that's an unfair advantage as well.
> 
> You are straw-manning at this point.
> 
> ...


Do you even read what people write? If you do read what's written, are you having trouble comprehending it?


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

Easykeeper said:


> Do you even read what people write? If you do read what's written, are you having trouble comprehending it?


I did read it, do you comprehend what I've been saying all along? Barebow archery is inherently more difficult to shoot than any other style.

I'm done posting in this thread, it's reached a low level of maturity and will probably continue to do so.

If you disagree with me than you disagree with the legend Howard Hill (who stated that he did not like other forms of archery because they rely on crutches and it takes away from the skill and classicness of archery) as well who won over 100 field tournaments in a row.

Don't expect any more responses here you won't get any. 

Take care all.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

stringstack said:


> I did read it, do you comprehend what I've been saying all along? Barebow archery is inherently more difficult to shoot than any other style.


I see, it's a comprehension issue.


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

I guess this dead horse is just done being beat. 

Bringing facts to the fantasy fest that is your muddled belief system won't sway the stringman in his arrow costume worshiping at the alter of lars andersen. 

Go to your SCA re-enactment, slay some orcs and enjoy the rest of your weekend kid.

I am out.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

stringstack said:


> I never berated someones choice, just said that I don't like it.....it's too watered down and the people shooting Oly style rely on crutches.
> 
> Also, I think I know what the issue is.
> 
> ...


If that's what you mean, you're right. It is harder to achieve a given level of accuracy with less technical advantages at your disposal.

I guess what a lot of us are taking exception to, is the idea that it takes less skill to be proficient with an olympic bow, or a compound bow, of whatever designation, because as you change equipment, what is considered indicative of a level of skill changes with it. What is considered very good for an 'Trad' setup would be consider 'meh' for n olympic recurve setup, would be considered 'blech' for a sighted compound setup with a release.

What's more, it's all the same fundamentals between disciplines, it's merely a matter of emphasis when it comes to specializing. The 'Trad' setup requires far more effort and experience in roundabout aiming techniques, the olympic recurve places far more emphasis on whole-body motor skills consistency, the compound on more focused subtle muscle control.

But, to say that a 'trad' setup (by whatever definition you want to call it) takes more skill, requires a qualification, to achieve the same level of accuracy. At competitive levels, that happens almost NEVER.

Is somebody who averages a 200 on an NFAA 300 round with a 'trad' setup more skilled than the guy who consistently drills between 58-60x 300/300 with a full on freestyle compound rig? I would say, definitely not.


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

BarneySlayer said:


> If that's what you mean, you're right. It is harder to achieve a given level of accuracy with less technical advantages at your disposal.
> 
> I guess what a lot of us are taking exception to, is the idea that it takes less skill to be proficient with an olympic bow, or a compound bow, of whatever designation, because as you change equipment, what is considered indicative of a level of skill changes with it. What is considered very good for an 'Trad' setup would be consider 'meh' for n olympic recurve setup, would be considered 'blech' for a sighted compound setup with a release.
> 
> ...


I'll make one more post because you are someone that has been respectful and mature in this thread and I appreciate that. 

Thank you for that.

I'm glad that you agree with me on the point that I've been trying to make, but to your last point I would pose the question of who would be better, someone shooting 280 barebow or an Oly style archer shooting 280? 

I think me and you could agree that the barebow archer would have to be the better archer to shoot the identical score because he is not relying on any crutches (attachments). 

I think me and you could agree on that and this is again the point that I was trying to make with my original post and throughout this thread.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

That is such a simple answer 

The Oly shooter shooting 280 would be at the level we are talking about not that good of a shot 

The barebow shooter at that level would be a good shot 

Now take the best in both fields and the Olympic shooter will score better than the barebow shooter on average because the scores are higher on average


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

JParanee said:


> That is such a simple answer
> 
> The Oly shooter shooting 280 would be at the level we are talking about not that good of a shot
> 
> ...


So you agree that the barebow archer would be better, and thus barebow would be more difficult since it is more difficult to be just as accurate barebow as someone relying on crutches? 

Thanks for agreeing with me. I'm glad my point is finally understood. 

Take care all!


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

sorry DP


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

No you idiot they are different disciplines so the scores are not comparable 

What is wrong with you


----------



## Attack (Oct 25, 2011)

Yes the barebow shooter would be the better shot in that case but only because the oly bow is a more accurate piece of equipment. The oly score should be higher than the barebow score. This is where your confusion comes from. It is not easier to be competitive at either because there are people that work just as hard at every level to be competitive. What you are saying is that someone shooting a custom made long range rifle shooting 3" groups at 600 yards is less skilled than someone shooting 30" groups at 600 yards with a production package rifle. One is just a more accurate piece of equipment. The skill required to get to the level of accuracy is the same. 

Sent from my LG-D959 using Tapatalk


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Shooting a 285 trad score would have won all but one of the last 10 NFAA Nationals. Missing a single X with Freestyle Compound takes you way out of the top 10 every damn year.
I've won and set records in Washington shooting Trad. I can't place top 20 with compound. 

Unless you happen to live in the same state as perhaps 10 people (5 or more of which have posted in this thread) it's really not very hard to be a state champion shooting barebow/trad. There isn't a single state which doesn't have at least a few compound shooters who can drop a 60x round any day of the week.

Hills scores (such as they actually exist) wouldn't be remotely competitive in the longbow class these days. Oh and the scoring has gotten harder since then as well...


----------



## Malcolm (Jan 5, 2015)

I'm not entirely sure what the point of this thread is, but it seems to me that some of those posting in it aren't perhaps understanding or embracing the spirit of this forum.

Archerytalk is about Archers helping Archers. Actually, archery in general is about Archers helping Archers. Not Archers telling other Archers they're not really Archers because their bow is too fancy.

Everyone is here to discuss *one sport* which they all enjoy. Everyone here in Trad is an archer. Everyone in Gen Pop is an archer. Everyone in the FITA forum is an archer. We all shoot arrows out of bows.

So perhaps if I may say suggest it, given that it has already been pointed out *barebow archers can compete in the Olympics if they simply get the scores*, you might consider focusing your energy on practising and getting the scores, rather prolonging this thread to a ask why someone else hasn't.

Then maybe in 4 or 8 years time, when you're ready and you get on the team, we can see a barebow in the Olympics like old times. It would do a lot more for that agenda than this thread - and nobody would have time to sit on Archerytalk telling the vast majority of members that they're not doing archery properly.

You just need to be better than all the current barebow champions, because none of them have qualified lately. Otherwise they'd be in Rio right now, banging in consecutive 10s at 70 metres as you mentioned. But there's no reason you couldn't have been, if you put enough skill and effort in...

Happy shooting everyone - whatever you shoot. Please keep being happy and respectful to your fellow sportspeople - whatever they shoot. Cheers


----------



## stringstack (Jun 10, 2016)

I agree, I apologize if I put anyone off or came off at rude at certain points. I can be overly passionate about archery, specifically traditional bare bow archery at times as I love it so much. 

I also agree that I'm still a beginner in this great sport and life style and have a lot to learn.....I suck compared to most of the guys on here and have a long ways to go to even get close to touching the champions posting in this thread among many of the other posters of which are more knowledgeable than me. 

It's also very hard for me to convey what I'm saying through text as well so I think I was misunderstood multiple times.

Again, I apologize. 

I hope that everyone is well and enjoying their summer.


----------



## Malcolm (Jan 5, 2015)

Stringstack,

You just earned a lot more of my respect for admitting that you perhaps got a little carried away - and indeed everybody does sometimes.

Your enthusiasm is not to be discouraged - it would be great if everyone was passionate about archery and hopefully it will motivate you to progress in the sport and keep enjoying it for a long time.

Just please keep in mind that the most respected archers are usually some of the most respectful.

Happy shooting


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

stringstack said:


> I agree, I apologize if I put anyone off or came off at rude at certain points. I can be overly passionate about archery, specifically traditional bare bow archery at times as I love it so much.
> 
> I also agree that I'm still a beginner in this great sport and life style and have a lot to learn.....I suck compared to most of the guys on here and have a long ways to go to even get close to touching the champions posting in this thread among many of the other posters of which are more knowledgeable than me.
> 
> ...


Great post ss. I also apologize for a couple less than friendly things I addressed to you...:thumbs_up


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Well, I think we're as sorted as we're going to get 

Welcome to the forum!


----------



## mdschriver (Jul 26, 2016)

I, being a simple archer, understand all of the opinions and have got to say that after watching the Gold medal team match at Rio that I am more inclined to "try" Oly archery as it looks just plain hard! Consider that even the best are hitting 7's at 70 meters........that is a long way to shoot, let alone see that accurately without a scope. Maybe I don't practice enough, but the 10 ring at 75 yards is pretty damn small and they are doing it without a scope, in the wind, holding over 50#.

Again, when I watch Compound indoor, the level of exacting control is something to behold, if they miss the X, they are DONE! I don't always hit the 10, let alone the miniscule X that they have to.......

Overall, you have to give it to the competitive archers that compete at that level.....dedication is the one word that pops up in my mind!


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

mdschriver said:


> I, being a simple archer, understand all of the opinions and have got to say that after watching the Gold medal team match at Rio that I am more inclined to "try" Oly archery as it looks just plain hard! Consider that even the best are hitting 7's at 70 meters........that is a long way to shoot, let alone see that accurately without a scope. Maybe I don't practice enough, but the 10 ring at 75 yards is pretty damn small and they are doing it without a scope, in the wind, holding over 50#.
> 
> Again, when I watch Compound indoor, the level of exacting control is something to behold, if they miss the X, they are DONE! I don't always hit the 10, let alone the miniscule X that they have to.......
> 
> Overall, you have to give it to the competitive archers that compete at that level.....dedication is the one word that pops up in my mind!


To top that they have a time limit. Some are getting the shot off with only few seconds to spare. "Pressure cooker" comes to my mind. "Pressure" being from having to represent your country for a metal. Heat being a very short time to relax and make a prefect shot as the world watches.
Dan


----------



## nakedape (Sep 28, 2015)

Stringstack,

so you want to see oly archers take off their gadgets?
here you go....

;-)


----------



## ranchoarcher (Sep 26, 2013)

This is still going? Can someone pass the popcorn.


----------

