# Bigger dot in the animals??



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

Therre has been a lot of wailing and the gnashing of teeth about the size of the dot in the animals. Would you make them bigger, and by how much? Remember this extra point thing isn't supposed to be a gimme...


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

That is a BONUS dot....they aren't supposed to be easy to hit. 

I think the size is PERFECT....why does every one always want to make things easier instead of practicing? Next they will want to go back to the BIG 5 ring like they had back in the day :zip:

I suck and still hit 11 dots....could have VERY easily been 15+ dots.


----------



## Arrow (Aug 30, 2002)

Get rid of the dot and leave the ring for the bonus.

Arrow


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Arrow said:


> Get rid of the dot and leave the ring for the bonus.
> 
> Arrow


This isn't 3D :wink:


----------



## Jbird (May 21, 2002)

Brown Hornet said:


> That is a BONUS dot....they aren't supposed to be easy to hit.
> 
> I think the size is PERFECT....why does every one always want to make things easier instead of practicing? Next they will want to go back to the BIG 5 ring like they had back in the day :zip:



+1

Jbird


----------



## dragonheart (Jul 18, 2008)

Not everyone shoots a scope. A bigger dot would allow everyone to see the spot we are attempting to hit. Score the x sized ring as the extra point. All this would do would make it easier for everyone to aim at the dot. make the dot the same size as the hunter and field face for the comparable distance.


----------



## xring1 (May 28, 2008)

*animals suck!*



Brown Hornet said:


> This isn't 3D :wink:


yea thats right I think the animal targets suck dot or not!


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Yes I shoot FS.....but there wasn't ONE dot that I couldn't see before I drew my bow back.

and my eyes are FAR from good. :mg:

AMFS is the biggest class by far....the second biggest class is BHFS. There were 49 people in that class at Nationals....EVERYONE in that class but 6 people shot over a 560...........

There were almost 130 people in AMFS....10 people didn't shoot over a 560....

Even in the SENIOR FS and BHFS classes there were only a handful of people that didn't shoot over a 560.....

If you aren't hitting the dot....a bigger one won't help you. Shooting better will though.....


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

xring1 said:


> yea thats right I think the animal targets suck dot or not!


:chortle: They aren't that bad :wink:


----------



## PA.JAY (May 26, 2004)

B/H didn't I just see pictures of the animal targets with a solid white circle ?


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

PA.JAY said:


> B/H didn't I just see pictures of the animal targets with a solid white circle ?


Some are white....some are black. Depends on the target. I have a handful of pics posted in the pic thread from Nats....:wink:


----------



## tdaward (Jul 29, 2003)

These people should have shot the animals before the dot....not hard, but more difficult


----------



## Jbird (May 21, 2002)

*Animal Target*

The only unintended result of shooting the dots is that the Nationals were over on Friday for all practical purposes. I don't know what could be done differently but I think that it is unfortunate that the animal round determines the winners and that round is only shot at the Nationals and 14 animals at our state shoot and sectionals. Most people have looked at the animal round as little more than a diversion and now this round is the king maker in all the classes. Just my .02

Jbird


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Jbird said:


> The only unintended result of shooting the dots is that the Nationals were over on Friday for all practical purposes. I don't know what could be done differently but I think that it is unfortunate that the animal round determines the winners and that round is only shot at the Nationals and 14 animals at our state shoot and sectionals. Most people have looked at the animal round as little more than a diversion and now this round is the king maker in all the classes. Just my .02
> 
> Jbird


The shoot was only over on Fri in 3 classes....

Men's PRO....Jesse shooting CLEAN on Wed and Thurs had more to do with that then anything....yes Reo was close....but he also didn't shoot clean on both of the other days....he missed 3 dots. Jesse broke the record. 

Womans PRO....Jamie burnt the woman up on Wed and Thurs also.....he won by 47...and only 11 of that lead came in the animal round.

Mens Barebow.....Rick is virtually unbeatable....

Don't give those dots all the credit.....you don't see 3D shooters crying about so and so shooting more 12s...make them bigger so we can hit them to.


----------



## knarrly (Dec 21, 2004)

No changes needed.............


Everyone shoots the same targets and the best shooter wins, that's the way it's supposed to be.


----------



## Melthuselah (May 12, 2006)

I disagree that the animal round is what wins or loses the tourny. If you shoot any round bad you have a had time making it up, except with the present format you can shoot a bad field or hunter round and have a mulligan. I think they should score everything you shoot. By that I mean if they are going to have a five day tourny score five days, If they are only going to score three days have a three day tourny. I wasn't there but those are my $.02


----------



## south-paaw (Jul 3, 2006)

*i agree....*



Brown Hornet said:


> That is a BONUS dot....they aren't supposed to be easy to hit.
> 
> I think the size is PERFECT....why does every one always want to make things easier instead of practicing? Next they will want to go back to the BIG 5 ring like they had back in the day :zip:
> 
> ...




```

```
i don't think it needs to be changed at all...


----------



## archerpap (Apr 24, 2006)

Jbird said:


> The only unintended result of shooting the dots is that the Nationals were over on Friday for all practical purposes. I don't know what could be done differently but I think that it is unfortunate that the animal round determines the winners and that round is only shot at the Nationals and 14 animals at our state shoot and sectionals. Most people have looked at the animal round as little more than a diversion and now this round is the king maker in all the classes. Just my .02
> 
> Jbird


If I would have given up after Friday, I wouldn't have picked up 14 more points and finished where I did. I beat Brad outright on the 2 other scores, but his animal round was awesome. Did he leave the door open?...yes he did, for a few of us. We just didn't finish the job. I missed every long target all week, the 80/70 on field and the 70's on hunter. That's 6 points more I could have picked up, and Brad beat me by 5. Same goes for Mark and Tom also. I don't think anyone I shot with said it was over, it just made it tougher on us. I know from one of Brad's other posts, that he spent some time working on those dots, and it paid off for him. I know I'll be working on them the next time they roll around. Like Hornet said..."practice a little more!" The dots are the same size as the X's on those distances, so if you can hit the X at 60YDS, a dot at 59YDS is no different.


----------



## Jbird (May 21, 2002)

*I wouldn't Change Anything Either*

Certainly wouldn't make the dots larger. My only comment was that it seems to me that since the dots on the animals put those 28 bonus points in play that the animal round went from unimportant to possibly the determining round. To me, the meat and potatoes of Field archery is the Field and Hunter rounds and it seems odd that a 3-D type round has a major role now in determining our winners. I think, given the opportunity, I would choose to shoot an expert round rather than an animal round. But I am happy either way. Shot my best animal round this year so I'm happy.
Jbird


----------



## Arrow (Aug 30, 2002)

No, it is not 3-D, but before the dots, we had a shape to aim at. Now, if we take the dot out, we still have to aim at the middle of the kill. I think that if we force some aiming during the animal may make it more interesting.

Arrow


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

Jbird said:


> Certainly wouldn't make the dots larger. My only comment was that it seems to me that since the dots on the animals put those 28 bonus points in play that the animal round went from unimportant to possibly the determining round. To me, the meat and potatoes of Field archery is the Field and Hunter rounds and it seems odd that a 3-D type round has a major role now in determining our winners. I think, given the opportunity, I would choose to shoot an expert round rather than an animal round. But I am happy either way. Shot my best animal round this year so I'm happy.
> Jbird


you have the 5 4 3 2 1 0 scoring system ( Expert Scoring System), make the Pro's use it, if you must, but leave the rest of us alone. 

Only reason the animal round decides is because one professional Freestyle compound with a release has learned how to clean the other two rounds. With a couple of other professional's not far behind. And one amerature Male freestyle with a release shooter has learned how to shoot the animal better than ever before and he capitalized on his new found skill. 

The game isn't too easy for all the rest that shoot it. fingers bare bow recurve, compounds etc..


----------



## MAYOR (Feb 15, 2008)

*Field and Hunter*

Add another 28 Field or Hunter and throw out the animals.


----------



## Rattleman (Jul 6, 2004)

Bees said:


> you have the 5 4 3 2 1 0 scoring system ( Expert Scoring System), make the Pro's use it, if you must, but leave the rest of us alone.
> 
> Only reason the animal round decides is because one professional Freestyle compound with a release has learned how to clean the other two rounds. With a couple of other professional's not far behind. And one amerature Male freestyle with a release shooter has learned how to shoot the animal better than ever before and he capitalized on his new found skill.
> 
> The game isn't too easy for all the rest that shoot it. fingers bare bow recurve, compounds etc..


Hey Bill the Pro FS would still shoot the same scores. They almost never shoot anything past the Pro line anyway.


----------



## Rattleman (Jul 6, 2004)

Melthuselah said:


> I disagree that the animal round is what wins or loses the tourny. If you shoot any round bad you have a had time making it up, except with the present format you can shoot a bad field or hunter round and have a mulligan. I think they should score everything you shoot. By that I mean if they are going to have a five day tourny score five days, If they are only going to score three days have a three day tourny. I wasn't there but those are my $.02


ZACKLY What he said:teeth:


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

Rattleman said:


> Hey Bill the Pro FS would still shoot the same scores. They almost never shoot anything past the Pro line anyway.


go shoot a round and just count the x as a five and the rest of the center a 4and the first ring from the middle a three.
heck you never shoot many past that ring anyway and tell me your score won't go down. 
anyone's would until they learn how to hit all the X's to get the 560.

same people would win though. because people that can shoot will win.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Bees said:


> you have the 5 4 3 2 1 0 scoring system ( Expert Scoring System), _make the Pro's use it, if you must, but leave the rest of us alone. _
> 
> Only reason the animal round decides is because one professional Freestyle compound with a release has learned how to clean the other two rounds. With a couple of other professional's not far behind. And one amerature Male freestyle with a release shooter has learned how to shoot the animal better than ever before and he capitalized on his new found skill.
> 
> The game isn't too easy for all the rest that shoot it. fingers bare bow recurve, compounds etc..


See in red above....THAT was tried many, many years ago and was a debacle. The Pros didn't like it and in actuality, the "joes" thought that doing it that way made the "Pros" elitists and "snots."

I'm strongly in favor of shooting the EXPERT scoring for ALL of the field and hunter rounds. The lines are on the target, let's start using them ALL THE TIME. If you miss "big" then you should be "docked" big, IMHO.

If we don't do what I suggest above, then instead of the animal round...shoot the EXPERT field round, scored 5,4,3,2,1...and once again, the cream rises to the top, just as always.

One big reason for the animal round was to have a quick round to finish the tournament with. However, with 3/5 format, the animal is now in the "middle" and has field/hunter on each side of it.

I can guarantee that the "wannabees" would howl to high heaven, however, if the expert scoring was implemented, not realizing that they would psychologically IMPROVE in a short time once they got into realizing they had to shoot closer to the middle in order to score better....the size of the "5-ring" does NOT change in expert scoring...it is the size of the "misses" that changes your score!

field14


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

field14 said:


> See in red above....THAT was tried many, many years ago and was a debacle. The Pros didn't like it and in actuality, the "joes" thought that doing it that way made the "Pros" elitists and "snots."
> 
> I'm strongly in favor of shooting the EXPERT scoring for ALL of the field and hunter rounds. The lines are on the target, let's start using them ALL THE TIME. If you miss "big" then you should be "docked" big, IMHO.
> 
> ...


I don't blame them for not liking it. Heck I don't like it either. 
So what to do when more than one can clean all targets?? 
NAA has never been cleaned at all the distance's have they?? Either Field or FITA???


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Bees said:


> I don't blame them for not liking it. Heck I don't like it either.
> So what to do when more than one can clean all targets??
> NAA has never been cleaned at all the distance's have they?? Either Field or FITA???


I know what you mean about "changing the scoring" to tougher just 'cuz ONE and I repeat, ONE person shoots a 560 field, followed by a 560 Hunter and then only one down on the animal.

With regard to FITA Field round...yes, I believe that the FITA field round has been cleaned many, many times, in spite of half the round being UN-MARKED distance.

As far as the Full FITA round...I don't think we'd ever see a perfect 1440 on that round. "Cleaning 90 meters" with a perfect 360 is extremely unlikely to ever be accomplished. Nobody in a Star FITA event has ever broken 1420, have they? That 1420 barrier could well fall this year, however. Those remaining 20 points are going to come tough.

I really only suggested the EXPERT round as the final round as a replacement for the Animal round and added the suggest of expert scoring, since the lines are there and it doesn't change the size of the bulls-eye but makes you pay for a wide miss, and separates the men from the boys.

I seriously doubt that the NFAA gurus and leadership would ever abandon the "traditional" animal round...it took years and years and years to get the "dots" put onto those targets and to change the scoring to give a "bonus point" for hitting the dot.

field14


----------



## Rattleman (Jul 6, 2004)

Bees said:


> go shoot a round and just count the x as a five and the rest of the center a 4and the first ring from the middle a three.
> heck you never shoot many past that ring anyway and tell me your score won't go down.
> anyone's would until they learn how to hit all the X's to get the 560.
> 
> same people would win though. because people that can shoot will win.


Bill the expert round scores the X and dot as a 5. But if you used the X as a 6 or just a tie brreaker then WELLLLLLLLLLLLL who knows


----------



## 6X60 (Jan 5, 2009)

field14 said:


> See in red above....THAT was tried many, many years ago and was a debacle. The Pros didn't like it and in actuality, the "joes" thought that doing it that way made the "Pros" elitists and "snots."
> 
> I'm strongly in favor of shooting the EXPERT scoring for ALL of the field and hunter rounds. The lines are on the target, let's start using them ALL THE TIME. If you miss "big" then you should be "docked" big, IMHO.
> 
> ...


Expert scoring wouldn't do anything but widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots.

Jesse's, Dave's and Reo's scores would have been exactly the same with expert scoring.

In fact, it wouldn't have any real affect on scores until you got down to maybe the 530 shooters, maybe even lower scores. I shoot 540's and I can't remember the last time I put an arrow past the "pro line" so how is that going to help?

Guys in the middle to bottom of the pack will give up points but the good shooters scores will stay the same.

What the game could use is something akin to the championship stakes in golf. How you do that I'm not sure. Perhaps adding Pro stakes or maybe the Pros have to shoot an X to get a 5. I'm don't know. And, I'm not sure we're to that point. Same guy wins, no matter what you do.

As for the animals, the orginal point of the thread...they're perfect as they are. Or at least close enough. I haven't heard or seen any idea I like better.


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

6X60 said:


> Expert scoring wouldn't do anything but widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots.
> 
> Jesse's, Dave's and Reo's scores would have been exactly the same with expert scoring.
> 
> ...



That's hitting the nail on the head if I ever heard it...


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

For those saying go to the expert round scoring....

Are you mad?:doh: You are the ones that will be effected....not the "experts". Most of the Pros probablly didn't shoot arrows outside the PRO Line....I know Dave did twice with a miss set sight.. But I don't count those brain farts. So he would have shot a 557 big deal.

Hell my score would have been the EXACT SAME every day but ONE...and that day it would have been ONE POINT lower.

The scoring is fine...heck I shot a half in the near dark because of the full trees yesterday and couldn't see my fiber half the time and still didn't have anything much out of the 5 ring. 

The scoring is fine....why is it that those that don't shoot good scores are the ones that always want to change things to make it harder? The ones winning are still going to win.....even changing the X to a 5 isn't going to change anything. How many Xs do you think Jesse shot? How about Reo... X Hunter....or Phantom?


----------



## toyrunner (Jun 26, 2006)

I asked that same question right after the nationals and never did get an answer... how many X's do those guy's shoot?


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

toyrunner said:


> I asked that same question right after the nationals and never did get an answer... how many X's do those guy's shoot?


A LOT.... I know X Hunter and the Bulldog usually shoot in the 70's. 

I imagine Jesse shoots in the 80s maybe even the 90s if he is hot like he was at Nationals....heck I have seen rounds were X Hunter and Phantom have hit 80Xs...and Phantom shoots pins 

A lot of those guys don't count Xs at all though....


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

don't need to make the x a 6 just a 5.


x=5
the rest of the black =4
so now all your tweeners are 4's not 5's

the first ring which is a 4 is now a 3

the next ring which is still a 4 is now a 2

the next ring which is now a 3 is a 1

the next ring which is still a 3 is now a zero.

call it anything ya want but it will lower the score.



It would affect anyones score until you learn how to shoot all X's.


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

Rattleman said:


> Bill the expert round scores the X and dot as a 5. But if you used the X as a 6 or just a tie brreaker then WELLLLLLLLLLLLL who knows


change it to where the x=5 only the rest of the center is a 4. then 3 then 2 then1 then 0


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Bees said:


> don't need to make the x a 6 just a 5.
> 
> 
> x=5
> ...


That might be one of the dumbest ideas I have ever heard on scoring....

and like I said before....and others have said... Those that are winning are still going to win....you will hurt people that shoot scores in your range more then the people winning. 

Perfect example....last year at States... X Hunter and Phantom shot 81 and 80 Xs one day  the second place guys shot 59 and 41... They would have gotten worked. I can promise you none of X Hunter or Phantoms misses were outside the Pro Line....

I have shot with a lot of you....including you...your very good friends with the outside of that line and what you want to be the 1 and 0 rings.....:doh:


----------



## josh_X_wny (Oct 18, 2006)

Is this really an issue until multiple people start cleaning rounds regularly? Jesse B wins no matter how you change the target scoring. When you start to get multiple people cleaning the field rounds you should just start counting X's like a NFAA indoor round. I think it will be awhile before you have to start counting inside out X's


----------



## Rattleman (Jul 6, 2004)

Personally I think that the Pros should shoot all five days or 3 days but make them all shoot the same amount on the same days. Then after the last day if we have ties then make them shoot off for 1st,2nd and 3rd just like in vegas or the indoor Nats. No need to change the target or the scoring for the Pros. But for the Joes score the same but have X's count as tie breakers only. No reason in MHO to change everything just because one pro shoots clean. As stated above the only ones that will be affected by the different scoring will be the run of the mill joes and I feel this would only discourage them from playing our game.


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

Brown Hornet said:


> That might be one of the dumbest ideas I have ever heard on scoring....
> 
> and like I said before....and others have said... Those that are winning are still going to win....you will hurt people that shoot scores in your range more then the people winning.
> 
> ...


All it would do, as I have said before is lower the score, there wouldn't be any 560's for awhile. but it won't change your winner. under a scoring system like that I would have a hard time beating 500 as I shoot a lot of 5's that are not X's  
FITA indoor does it with the baby x =10 and the rest of the ring a 9 and none have cleaned it yet that I know off. plus they limit the size of the arrow which makes it harder to clean too. Outdoor FITA has the x= 10 and the rest of the yellow a 9 and at 90 meters I don't think it's been cleaned yet.

So for those that cannot stand the fact that one Archer is good enough to shoot 5's and clean the targets it's a way to stop the cleaning for awhile anyway. 
it could be a way for the animal round to still be important but not dictate the outcome


me, personally, I still don't think the Field game needs changing at all.


----------



## Ode1891 (Aug 30, 2006)

there were dots on the animals? wow, I never noticed. it's all a blur to me now

you guys kill me :lol3: :BangHead:


----------



## xpuncher (Apr 16, 2005)

Why is it that everyone is wanting to change things? Make the scoring harder for the pro's leave it alone for the joes! I haven't seen one pro on here complaining about the scoring system. Leave it alone and shut up and shoot your score! If you don't like the score you shot then get out and put in some more string time!!!!! All the pros know the deal with the 3/5 format and those that elected to only shoot 3 days knew the risk! Good shooters will shoot good scores no mater what!!!!


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

xpuncher said:


> Why is it that everyone is wanting to change things? Make the scoring harder for the pro's leave it alone for the joes! I haven't seen one pro on here complaining about the scoring system. Leave it alone and shut up and shoot your score! If you don't like the score you shot then get out and put in some more string time!!!!! All the pros know the deal with the 3/5 format and those that elected to only shoot 3 days knew the risk! Good shooters will shoot good scores no mater what!!!!



I kindly like the way you talk.... UH Huh......


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

xpuncher said:


> Why is it that everyone is wanting to change things? Make the scoring harder for the pro's leave it alone for the joes! I haven't seen one pro on here complaining about the scoring system. Leave it alone and shut up and shoot your score! If you don't like the score you shot then get out and put in some more string time!!!!! All the pros know the deal with the 3/5 format and those that elected to only shoot 3 days knew the risk! Good shooters will shoot good scores no mater what!!!!


I read the posts and not many are advocating a change, 
Just a what if, if the powers to be decided that a course needed to be Jessie Proof.. Some out West think that their coarse out there is tougher and the Pro's won't ace it. Perhaps they are right only time will tell.


----------



## Moparmatty (Jun 23, 2003)

Bees said:


> All it would do, as I have said before is lower the score, there wouldn't be any 560's for awhile. but it won't change your winner. under a scoring system like that I would have a hard time beating 500 as I shoot a lot of 5's that are not X's
> FITA indoor does it with the baby x =10 and the rest of the ring a 9 and none have cleaned it yet that I know off. plus they limit the size of the arrow which makes it harder to clean too. Outdoor FITA has the x= 10 and the rest of the yellow a 9 and at 90 meters I don't think it's been cleaned yet.
> 
> So for those that cannot stand the fact that one Archer is good enough to shoot 5's and clean the targets it's a way to stop the cleaning for awhile anyway.
> ...


What is the point of lowering the scores? I don't get it. 

Let Jesse and the rest of the Pro's clean each and every round for all I care. What difference is it to anyone else? What difference does it make to me? I think it's pretty cool that they can shoot that good and it gives me some drive to try and shoot better myself so that one day I too can be as good as them. If there are a couple of people that shoot clean at a tournament, settle it with a shoot-off on the 80 yard target. Pretty simple. That's how any other shooting sport does it so why should field archery be any different?

I think that everyone that pisses and mones about the Pro's, or anyone else for that matter, cleaning a round/rounds needs to spend a lot more time behind the string practicing their game instead of being an "Archerytalk Keyboard Commando" and complaining that "Jesse and X-Hunter beat me by way too many points and that's not fair". 

I know.... I know.... since they are beating me by way too much I need to get on AT and anounce to the world that the NFAA should make it more difficult for them there guys to shoot those high scores on every round. That way my score won't look as bad next to theirs. Wait a minute.... If we make it harder for the Pro's and top shooters to score as high, then that means it will be harder for me to score that high too and my score will still look like donkey poop compared to theirs. :doh:

Oh well.... Let's go a head and do it anyways.


----------



## blueglide1 (Jun 29, 2006)

Moparmatty said:


> What is the point of lowering the scores? I don't get it.
> 
> Let Jesse and the rest of the Pro's clean each and every round for all I care. What difference is it to anyone else? What difference does it make to me? I think it's pretty cool that they can shoot that good and it gives me some drive to try and shoot better myself so that one day I too can be as good as them. If there are a couple of people that shoot clean at a tournament, settle it with a shoot-off on the 80 yard target. Pretty simple. That's how any other shooting sport does it so why should field archery be any different?
> 
> ...


I agree with your whole statement,except the last line.Dont change a thing as far as the format, Matt.LMAO:set1_rolf2:


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

Moparmatty said:


> What is the point of lowering the scores? I don't get it.
> 
> Let Jesse and the rest of the Pro's clean each and every round for all I care. What difference is it to anyone else? What difference does it make to me? I think it's pretty cool that they can shoot that good and it gives me some drive to try and shoot better myself so that one day I too can be as good as them. If there are a couple of people that shoot clean at a tournament, settle it with a shoot-off on the 80 yard target. Pretty simple. That's how any other shooting sport does it so why should field archery be any different?
> 
> ...


that would be up to the shooting committee that is hosting the shoot to make a change or not. Like the 4 wide thing. 
I don't think scoring needs to be changed nor should it be changed, but who knows what lurks in the mind of a committee?


----------



## Moparmatty (Jun 23, 2003)

blueglide1 said:


> I agree with your whole statement,except the last line.Dont change a thing as far as the format, Matt.LMAO:set1_rolf2:


The last sentence was meant to be sarcastic. :wink:


----------



## James Thurman (Feb 3, 2004)

Unclegus said:


> Therre has been a lot of wailing and the gnashing of teeth about the size of the dot in the animals. Would you make them bigger, and by how much? Remember this extra point thing isn't supposed to be a gimme...


 Personal unclegus I think the dot in the animal round should be the size of the hunter and field round dots with the spot in the animal bening a 20 which would make all of the rounds uniform in their score. But I have no problem with the size of the dot in the animal round I think it is time to change the 5 ring in the field and hunter round to the size of the spot in the animal round that we now shoot. Now don't you think that would shake things up just a bit. The best way for us to solve our nfaa problem is just not shoot the animal round at all, shoot the international round instead of animal round.


----------

