# Reasons for choosing Olympic Recurve vs. Compound or Barebow?



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

I started with target recurves in the 70s. Dabbled with compounds when they started beating recurves on the tournament line and there were no separate divisions. I hunted with compounds and recurves. As a kid and later as a coach, I messed around with barebow because it was fun. I most enjoyed target recurves back in the day, so when I came back to the sport, that is where I found myself. I'm glad I made the choice.


----------



## MJAnderson68 (Nov 15, 2013)

I picked it for the same reasons you mentioned as to WHY you would chose it --- when I was at the range and saw 12 year olds hitting 10 after 10 with their compound bows it turned me off to it. I want something that will challenge me and leaves room for constant growth and improvement. I want the move from 270 to 275 indoors to feel like an accomplishment, not wondering if 27 Xs versus 26 Xs last week was just a fluke. Honestly I never considered barebow but have been thinking about it more but with a limited amount of time to shoot I'll stick with olympic.


----------



## kshet26 (Dec 20, 2010)

Barebow doesn't have enough equipment and compound has too much equipment. Also when shooting compound, I find that I get bored and wish I was shooting recurve.


----------



## rstgyx (Apr 13, 2013)

I started with an olympic recurve minus everything except for the arrow rest and plunger so I guess you could say barebow. As I got used to the bow and my skill level increased gradually I transitioned over to more of an Olympic recurve with a long rod, clicker, a sight and then a full v-bar setup.


----------



## Last_Bastion (Dec 5, 2013)

I started with an old hickory longbow. Kept adding more gear and eventually "settled" on barebow. I did that for a bit and then got it in my head that I was going to try to be some big-name archer and thought that the only way to do that was with an oly setup. Now I just like shooting with all the bells and whistles.


----------



## beerbudget (Feb 5, 2011)

I started playing with archery about 5 years ago and immediately drawn to barebow/trad. Compound turns me off because of all the gadgets and the crutches. Olympic recurve turns me off because of the gadgets like compound but looks even uglier because of the ungainly TV antenna.


----------



## baller (Oct 4, 2006)

I began shooting in my friend's shop back in the early 90s, exclusively compound focused on 3d. The closer we got to the '96 games and the more advanced I got at shooting in that time the more interested I got in what I consider to be the purist test of archery available, so I made the conversion to Oly Rec. Unfortunately I never really advanced as far as I think I could have during high school and ended up laying the bow down during college. 

I came back in 2005, mostly compound for 3d and spots and did ok locally, but I missed Oly Rec. I found that the mindset of being satisfied with ones effort and results was very different between FITA compound and Oly Rec. I found myself leaving the field focused on what I did wrong instead of what I did right.

I like the glass half full atmosphere that comes with Oly Rec (at least for me) and will continue to make it a big part if not the only part of my archery career, and it's fun to help others in that quest along the way.


----------



## joebehar (Nov 13, 2012)

limbwalker said:


> So what is it that makes so many recreational archers choose the OR?


John,

For me its a good balance of both right and left brain workouts. You have to be methodical in your shot cycle and form, while at the same time not actually "think" about them.

Although it may very well be the most physically demanding of the disciplines, its not at the level that a recreational archer (even one as myself that took up the sport in his mid 50's) cannot get to a reasonably proficient level and still have a lot of fun.

Also, I think there is just the right amount of tinkering in OR. Enough to keep the geek in me interested, but not so much that I'm spending most of my time adjusting equipment rather than shooting.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> For me its a good balance of both right and left brain workouts.





> Also, I think there is just the right amount of tinkering in OR. Enough to keep the geek in me interested, but not so much that I'm spending most of my time adjusting equipment rather than shooting.


I can relate to these statements. I also like the physical demands of OR at the higher levels. Feels more like a "sport" and less like a discipline than compound or barebow. I know if I'm not in good physical condition, I'm just not going to be competitive at the end of the day. With barebow, I frankly don't give my physical condition any thought at all. Never needed to.


----------



## Ten_Zen (Dec 5, 2010)

Started with Hunting style recurves, sprained my shoulder trying to pull a 45# 60" bow to 29.5" draw. Switched to compound. Got bored with how easy it was. Switched to target recurve with 28# limbs and a 68" bow. Realized that I actually love recurve I just needed a bow that fit my body. Now I shoot 48# OTF with no soreness after hours of shooting, and I am pretty darn accurate at 70m. I feel like Olympic recurve gives the archer a long and steady uphill climb to challenge them for many years. Compound has a steep initial learning curve with a very quick plateau once you get the idea (hard to get into, easy to get good at). Barebow is easy to get into but quickly the archer realizes how difficult it is to get good at and so they reach the base of a very steep climb and realize they probably wont get much further than they are even with years of practice. I feel like OR gives the archer just the right amount of physical and mental challenge to get them interested from the start and keep them advancing for years to come without ever reaching the "Ill never be better than this" plateau.


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

I got started on compound in 2007 after visiting a big box store and having a conversation with TomB's son about how compounds work. Later that evening when talking with the now wife, we decided there was room in the budget for me to get into an activity I had always had interest. Went back the next day and worked with the same young man to test fire several of their offerings. Found one that was just plain comfortable to use and ended up getting it. I took the level 2 and level 3 classes primarily to help my own shooting, but ended up being a JOAD coach in the process. Like John, most of my students are recurve as well so I decided I needed to become proficient with the recurve if I'm going to be coaching recurve archers. Picked on up in January of last year. Since then, I've done most of my practice time with it and do enjoy shooting it. For me, though, the rubber really hits the road with the compound. I can spend weeks shooting nothing but the recurve, pick up the compound, and feel like I've come home on that very first shot. One of these days, I'll pull off all the gear from the Oly rig and shoot it barebow, but that's a ways off. My students ask me every now and again if I'll ever switch to recurve. I usually grin and tell them my heart is in the compound. Always will be.


----------



## acco205 (Jun 13, 2014)

I like it because it makes me work. I have to focus hard and really thing about it. Its a challenge, and its a art form, really.

Compound is simply too mechanical. It certainly makes you feel good, but to me its like getting a toyota corolla and driving to work. Give me a TVR and a windy road. I want something that kicks my ass when I do things wrong and forces you to respect it for what it is.

Trad I have never shot (but want to) - bare bow I only really messed with when I first started shooting recruve. And its fun, but its just not the same.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

John -

Our histories are similar, but I never short drew or snap shot.
Just wasn't really "allowed" in the clubs I belonged to.

As far as your question, one word: Evolution.

Viper1 out.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Olympic style is the only style of archery I haven't competed in. I realize that 30 years past my prime is not the time to start realistically, but it is what it is. Besides, I always draw motivation when people tell me I can't do this or that. By the way, John, I shot another 6 ends @ 70 meters yesterday, barebow. 302.


----------



## Clarsach (Aug 18, 2012)

When I was a kid I shot barebow because that is what I was taught. My uncle taught me. He was a hunter and hunted using a recurve and not a compound. I shot barebow recurve from the time I was about 10 until I went off to college at 18. When I decided I wanted to shoot again I found a club and they start everyone off on barebow so that's what I did, and it was familiar and I liked it, so I have stuck with that for now. 

I'm shooting for the achievement pins in the adult achievement program. I figure when I get all the pins for barebow I will try Olympic style. Despite all the added gadgets it actually seems a bit more challenging if nothing else because of the higher scores needed to get the pins. One of the reasons I haven't jumped right into Olympic style is that it seems to me that those gadgets can either help simply make you more accurate, or they can be a crutch that hides mistakes. I figure by the time I get all the pins for barebow I will pretty much have to have a solid technique and won't be hiding mistakes with gadgets when I add the extras for Olympic recurve.

When I was a kid in school I did try compound and just didn't like the feel of it. Too much mechanical stuff going on with the bow. I could easily outshoot the other kids with recurve even if they were using compound because I had been shooting for several years before we did archery in school gym class, and I just like the feel of it better. 

Besides, what's the point if it isn't hard? Easy quickly becomes boring. I prefer the more demanding challenge.


----------



## SS7777 (Mar 17, 2012)

I'm a recreational archery, have no interest in in competing at the olympics, although I do enjoy going to local shoots and seeing how I do, and really want to join a local league. I started in barebow for a year and switched to Olympic because I found the structure, aiming and tuning of the Olympic bow a little easier. Point of aim and gapping became a bit of a pain to me. I don't enjoy aiming off the target. 

The only thing I've noticed is that most shoots are very kid oriented and most people attending want to go to the olympics. Nothing wrong with that, but I feel a little out of place. I have often wondered if I shouldn't go back to barebow and learn to string walk. Problem with that, is that I don't know anyone doing it here, nor do I know if anyone would even allow it at a local shoot.


----------



## Coodster (Feb 3, 2006)

Olympic recurve is basically a compound without the cams and cables. That's why I shoot barebow. 
Good post John. 
I think people are drawn to Olympic recurve because it's closer to a compound and it's what they see in the Olympics. Archery wise. 

Chad


----------



## calbowdude (Feb 13, 2005)

I started in the Boy Scouts with the good ole' "irish spring" starter bows. I picked up a compound and shot fingers with a 5-pin sight. Then I added a stabilizer, bought a used Chek-It sight, and upgraded arrows to XX75 orange arrows. 

A friend of mine convinced me to stick the stabilizer and sight onto a Hoyt TD4 and his back up limbs. I remember buying a new TD4+ and the old Hoyt Carbon Plus limbs with the apple sticker and metal flake champagne color. Tapered blue Shibuya center rod and solid Shibuya side rods with a Shibuya V bar and Angel TFC's. Despite a couple of long breaks for injury, I've kept on. I have a target compound, but I prefer the feel of pulling the string with my fingers and then letting it go. 

I have no serious aspirations for the Olympics, but would like to break certain score goals.


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

I started archery in my late 30's after my kids started in 4H archery, so that I could help them. There was no barebow in youth archery in Texas at that time and the compounds seemed mostly for hunting which my kids were to young to humanely put down an animal. I did want to hunt so I bought a compound at a box box store and it did not fit me. Some of the worst fun I have ever had. Finally got one that fit me and did much better, but I wanted to shoot OR like my kids to understand the issues they were going through and to help them. No real coaches available in Texas during the mid-90's. Found the OR to be quite challenging and forced me to be be in better shape. Actually competed in some events. But following open heart surgery in 1998, the OR was just beyond me from a physical fitness standpoint other than something to play with, so back to the compound and eventually tried barebow to be able to relate to the kids I work with.


----------



## WDWILHELM (Jul 2, 2009)

As a kid, Fred Bear longbows and recurves were always around when visiting Grandpa’s ranch. Grandpa would hand me a bow and some arrows, then tell me to go shoot some stumps. It was great fun shooting at mounds of dirt “from the hip.” The instructions I got were; pull the arrow back to the corner of your mouth, look at what you want to hit, then let go. Simple enough. That is how I started playing this game as a kid/young teenager. 
During my college days I started shooting more “organized” rounds. Things worked fine indoors, but not so much outdoors. I got tired of missing the target and breaking arrows. It is pretty tough to go from an 80 yard walk up to a 35 yard fan shooting instinctive. At some point someone explained gapping and point on to me. What a clever idea to use the point of the arrow, or other part of the bow, to aim with. I tried it, but I felt like it was cheating. I decided that if I was going to aim with something, why not just go ahead and put a sight on the bow?
I put a sight on my recurve bow to reduce arrow breakage and misses. I have been shooting that way ever since. I sometimes wonder if Grandpa rolled over in his grave when I defected to the dark side.

Wyndell


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Later that evening when talking with the now wife, we decided there was room in the budget for me to get into an activity


Kevin, after reading this statement, it makes me wonder how I've managed to stay married these past 24 years! Karin is an absolute saint.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

Not into hunting and generally a suburban type so I never really ran into compounds. I would see trad type wooden bows at a tent or for sale at something like a renaissance fair. So that is what I saw archery as. 

As I started getting too beat up to play the sports I grew up playing, I started looking at sports that didn't require so much running and cutting. Otherwise I thought I was headed to Ed Bundy nostalgia territory. Watersports is one area, archery is another. Since the shop where I took lessons was unusually pro recurve, it reinforced that choice, and since they are one of the better 2-3 places in town (along with John's setup), you could progress if you worked at it. If I'd gone to a less serious place and they couldn't take me very far, who knows.

Kind of like realizing we've been speaking prose all along, I was progressed to taking lessons with a sight, clicker, etc. before I realized that is often seen as a choice. So it's what I'm used to. I like tech so I don't have a bad reaction to the trinkets on the bow. I've played around with BB and trad some -- and am trying to occasionally work in trad tournaments (including perhaps some indoor this winter) -- but I actually see gapping and doing technique without all the gimmicks as harder, not easier. Compound < OR < trad/BB. If I wanted to be better at trad or BB that would require commitment distracting from OR. So it's more of a change of pace.

I've considered getting a compound eventually to play around with, perhaps even a Genesis to use BB, but I enjoy OR and have been seeing more that if you want to have relative success at any archery discipline you need to pick something and stick with it. Also, competitively, there are so many good compound archers in Texas shooting 300s that it seems like the road to anxious shooting. The first several people on the indoor series standings all have perfect scores separated by x totals. You stand next to people at tournaments upset because they lost a tournament the minute they made one bad shot, either in terms of xs or just shooting, gosh, a 4! There is always competitive pressure but that to me is nuts.


----------



## LFate (Nov 6, 2007)

I shoot barebow now but I learned to shoot on an OR rig. I have also tried compound. I didn't really like the compound because with a release I feel like I've lost an essential connection to the bow that I have when shooting fingers. Olympic recurve is both challenging and sexy. I shoot barebow because it is easier on my damaged shoulder and still provides me with a challenge. I would definitely go back to Olympic recurve when I can.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

A drunk is looking for his lost keys under a streetlight and asks a stranger for help. The stranger asks, "Where did you lose them?" "Over there," says the drunk, pointing to a dark alley. "Then why are you looking over here?" asks the stranger. "The light's better." 

That's why I took up OR after starting shooting English longbows and modern longbows, the coaching was better - or so I'd hoped. OR seemed to have more fact-based instruction, real systems with more science and less conjecture taught as fact. I thought I could use that to help my longbow shooting. I'd say that I've since found that the whole issue of instruction is both simpler and way, way more complicated than I'd imagined.


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

limbwalker said:


> Kevin, after reading this statement, it makes me wonder how I've managed to stay married these past 24 years! Karin is an absolute saint.


You are an incredibly lucky man, John. There are days when my wife would like to go back to that time and make a different decision. That's a whole 'nother conversation for another day.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Romantic!

In silhouette, an Olympic recuve bow in the hands of an Olympic recurve archer at full draw, is a breathtakingly beautiful thing to see. To be so physically engaged (naked sights, full draw weight, fingers on the string) and still precise enough to hit yellow at 70meters makes every arrow a worthwhile investment of time and effort. The very physical pursuit of an ideal that can only be chased, never fully captured, is about the most romantic thing (sometimes thrilling, sometimes agonizing) I can think of. So there!


----------



## joebehar (Nov 13, 2012)

You really need to get out more


----------



## wfocharlie (Feb 16, 2013)

Coodster said:


> Olympic recurve is basically a compound without the cams and cables. That's why I shoot barebow.
> Good post John.
> I think people are drawn to Olympic recurve because it's closer to a compound and it's what they see in the Olympics. Archery wise.
> 
> Chad


I don't see it this way at all. OR is basically the same as bare bow with adjustable point on (the forward sight). Not like compound at all. You still have a finger release. You still have to aim at full draw weight and there is no rear peep so you still need a very accurate anchor. This is what I like about it. It is hard and requires a very long learning process to get any level of repeatable competence. I like things that are difficult and require a process and a struggle. I'm a fisherman and I fly fish instead of using bait for the same reasons.


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

In my area, the selection of certified instructors of beginners is HEAVILY skewed towards Olympic style. The old guard of Olympic archers-turned-coaches runs the certification programs and the Olympic style archers tend to stick together (as do the compounders and the 3Ders - I'm not making a value judgement here). Consequently, the inflow of new instructors comes pretty much just from the Olympic clique. The individuals within the various clubs that run courses for beginners are overwhelmingly Olympic oriented, and pass this bias along to their students.

So it's not so much a matter of new students choosing Olympic, Barebow or Compound, it's more that they just want to try "archery" and they're steered towards Olympic by their instructors. Compound and barebow is no more than a footnote.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Take that sight and clicker off then tell us its the same as BB:wink:


wfocharlie said:


> I don't see it this way at all. OR is basically the same as bare bow with adjustable point on (the forward sight). Not like compound at all. You still have a finger release. You still have to aim at full draw weight and there is no rear peep so you still need a very accurate anchor. This is what I like about it. It is hard and requires a very long learning process to get any level of repeatable competence. I like things that are difficult and require a process and a struggle. I'm a fisherman and I fly fish instead of using bait for the same reasons.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Actually, it was my wife that drug me into archery.

We took an intro to archery class about 10 years ago. It had 2 instructors, one a compound guy, and the other a olympic style shooter (and a very good one).

What was interesting to note about the class, was that when I expressed my interest in the Trad/Barebow, the individualized part of the instruction in the class to help develop that interest ended for me and I was ignored from that point on. Whereas my wife who expressed interest in Oly shooting got a lot of help from both of the instructors.

I fell in love with the Trad/Barebow style over the years. Maybe part of it was because it has been a self learned style of shooting. 

I like to become proficient with a barebow-compound some time in the near future, but that depends on if I can find a good deal for a used one to get my feet wet. I do intend to dabble with the Oly style later, but that is more to learn more about it from experience verses academic exercises.

Anyways, I brought up my class experience, and wonder how much of what happened to me happens in other classes. At my club, over the past 10 years there has been a lot of instructors, and a boat load of students, young and old, have gone through the system. Not one of them have taken up Traditional/Barebow/Longbow as a style. They have all migrated to either Olympic style or Compounds or determined that archery is not their thing.

So how much influence does the class room instructor have on what their students tend towards. I am not saying that instructors have a negative bias against Trad/Barebow/Longbow. But students do respond to their instructors passion towards something.

I also believe that the allure of the Olympics is one of the major drivers why many young people take an interest in shooting the Olympic style.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> By the way, John, I shot another 6 ends @ 70 meters yesterday, barebow. 302


Ben that's awesome. 325 with a full Olympic rig should be no sweat then.



> Olympic recurve is basically a compound without the cams and cables.


Okay, this made me laugh. 



> In my area, the selection of certified instructors of beginners is HEAVILY skewed towards Olympic style.





> I also believe that the allure of the Olympics is one of the major drivers why many young people take an interest in shooting the Olympic style.


I think those last two statements are probably #1 and #2, in no particular order. Yes, most coaches either teach compound or Oly. recurve. There are probably more Oly. recurve coaches/archer than any other discipline, and I'd say that's because it may be the discipline that requires the most instruction to master. 

However, there is a desperate shortage of GOOD barebow coaches. I hope to change that over the next 20 years.

John


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

joebehar said:


> You really need to get out more


Haha - I keep asking for the car keys, but my wife keeps saying "No!"


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Coodster said:


> Olympic recurve is basically a compound without the cams and cables.


No it's not. That's like saying a manual transmission is an auto transmission without the "D", and that's why you ride a horse carriage.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

I dare say most of us past our mid 30s took up Olympic recurve because it was the style we were most exposed to in real life, and had little direct relations to the fact that it was the only style allowed at the Olympics.


----------



## Coodster (Feb 3, 2006)

I should have clarified when I made the statement compound is like oly recurve. 
It is the way I shoot the compound with fingers and no peep. 
For me it is very much like oly recurve only diffrence is in performance and let off. 
Form, sight, stabilizer, even anchor is the same. 


Chad


----------



## Mormegil (Jan 26, 2012)

Started shooting FITA compound a couple of years back. Wanted some variation for when I wasn't in the mood for "hit the x or go home" (I mostly end up going home). Thought about barebow or olympic recurve, my nephew started up olympic recurve so I picked that so I could shoot with him. Of course he took to it like a duck to water and left me floundering in his wake. I keep going back for more because I've found it helps with my compound shooting and because it presents it's own challenges.


----------



## joebehar (Nov 13, 2012)

wfocharlie said:


> I like things that are difficult and require a process and a struggle. I'm a fisherman and I fly fish instead of using bait for the same reasons.


This is a really interesting comment. I'm also a flyfisher. Of all the archers I know that shoot OR and fish, they are almost all flyfishers.

Coincidence?


----------



## Gryffin du Verd (May 20, 2013)

I started out in OR specifically because it is used in the Olympics. I said from the very beginning that if they used barebow in the Olympics, I'd shoot nothing else, as that has always seemed to be the purest form of archery. I also think barebow requires true talent to shoot, so I have a huge amount of respect for barebow archers.

Two factors have recently come into play. I've recently accepted that I'm not going to the Olympics (due to John's argument, along with an honest appraisal of how much I've improved after an intensive summer of training). At the same time, a good friend of mine also convinced me to give barebow a try -- and I had an absolute blast. If I'm not going to the Olympics, then it doesn't really matter what they shoot -- so I'm going to put my money where my mouth is and shoot barebow.

To answer one of John's queries, I think if the Olympics shot barebow you'd see barebow as the primary form of recurve archery in the U.S. It all depends on what you're looking for in archery, I think. If you get a rush from hitting an X, a compound bow will do that better than an OR bow. If you are looking for an extreme test of your archery skill, barebow will do that better than OR. If, on the other hand, you like a balance of these two aspects, OR is probably the one for you. It just depends on what you enjoy!

Gryffin


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Gryffin du Verd said:


> I started out in OR specifically because it is used in the Olympics. I said from the very beginning that if they used barebow in the Olympics, I'd shoot nothing else, as that has always seemed to be the purest form of archery. I also think barebow requires true talent to shoot, so I have a huge amount of respect for barebow archers.
> 
> Two factors have recently come into play. I've recently accepted that I'm not going to the Olympics (due to John's argument, along with an honest appraisal of how much I've improved after an intensive summer of training). At the same time, a good friend of mine also convinced me to give barebow a try -- and I had an absolute blast. If I'm not going to the Olympics, then it doesn't really matter what they shoot -- so I'm going to put my money where my mouth is and shoot barebow.
> 
> ...


Well stated.


----------



## c-lo (Jan 8, 2012)

I started barebow, was seduced by the compound, went back to barebow and I am now shooting Olympic recurve. 

Barebow archery is very intense for me, I love that about it but that same intensity also created TP problems for me, my experience is that the level of intensity is less with OR as the equipment in contrast to BB solves some fundamental archery problems for you, I am thinking particularly of a sight but would also include the clicker in that. 

I would say that the one of the big reasons I currently shoot OR over BB is that I have far, far less issues with TP, which makes the time I spend in archery more enjoyable.


----------



## larry tom (Aug 16, 2012)

I started archery relatively late in life. I'm in my mid-sixties and started shooting two years ago. I started by taking lessons through a local club, and they had recurves. It appealed to me on a simple, almost organic level. Don't want to go too Zen, but for me it was the "one with the bow" aspect that was appealing, and I liked the challenge. In selecting a bow, at the time I thought I wanted to avail myself of options not knowing how far I would go in the sport, so I bought an ILF rig. Spent the better part of the first year shooting bare bow, but then started to add more components. So now, I'm shooting full Olympic style. Still learning, but loving every minute I shoot. LT


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Many of life's choices are based on 3 things....Goals, Abilities and Personality.

Archery really isn't any different. People choose styles and equipment based on those. This is the reason why some people are drawn to Olympic archery while others are drawn to more modern equipment or even more primitive.

I started out with a bow that was given to my mother when she was very young. It was a selfbow that drew about 10 - 15lbs. I out grew that very quickly and graduated to a Bear red fiberglass bow that drew about 30lbs. Being self taught...I soon realized that if I put marks near the sight window of my bow I could aim easier and be more accurate hunting squirrels with it. When I got to my teens I was fascinated with the power of compound bows and got my first compound bow at 13. I eventually became very competitive in Field and 3D archery and later developed target panic. As timing would have it...I was being drawn to more traditional bows because of their simplicity and the romance of reconnecting with the way my Cherokee ancestors use to shoot. The first time I shot a recurve as a young adult I feel in love. It felt more natural to me as an extension of myself without all the shooting aids attached. There was less to go wrong mechanically and I had to rely more on my hand and eye coordination...which is the reason why I wasn't interested in Olympic style archery after trying it.

My choices are personal and I don't look down upon anyone who makes different decisions along their path in archery. I can appreciate ALL aspects of archery...whether it's shooting compound bows, FITA style or primitive. I love it ALL but bowhunting, trick shooting and competitive 3D are what draws me the most and those are primarily what have influenced my choices along the way.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Orange+Blue (May 20, 2011)

I picked up a bow for the first time four years ago. I had ideas to shoot longbow, but the club I went to is a JOAD club that is predominantly OR, so I started Barebow Recurve like everyone else.
At the point the coach was introducing sights into our development, I was still fighting huge form issues, and the sight just made life harder for me, so I took it off.
By the time I had corrected all the problems and was ready to aim more consistently, I had made an unconscious decision to stay barebow rather than put on the sight, so I kept with it for 3 years or so.

Last year, I made a decision to try full OR. The reasons are somewhat complex, but in short ( and no particular order)
1: Lack of competition in FITA Barebow in the New England region. I wanted to see how I stood against other shooters.
2: I wasn't having fun anymore shooting Barebow outdoors. The combination of 90m + the 5 ring face at 50m and trying to maintain a single rig that would work for weekly indoor league and all the outdoor distances was such a compromise that I was losing or breaking too many arrows that I could not afford and not achieving results I was happy with.
3: I wanted a change and a challenge.
4: I had an enforced layoff for 4 months due to injury and I was having hard time getting back to the being able to manage and control the weight I needed to make 90m point on, which was having a knock on effect on other parts of my body. OR offered a way to shoot 90m and still drop 8-10 lbs of draw weight.

Cheers,

Matt


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> If I'm not going to the Olympics, then it doesn't really matter what they shoot -- so I'm going to put my money where my mouth is and shoot barebow.


I can relate to this. 

I actually think that OR may be the least mentally demanding of the three diciplines even though it's by far the most physically demanding. That may be why some folks choose it - because with the clicker and sight to take care of aiming and when to release (as opposed to barebow), and the fact that it doesn't carry with it the expectations of compound scores, a person can actually get their best results by just switching off the brain and letting the body take over. Not sure that's true for compound or barebow. 

I think compound and barebow are mentally exhuasting more than physically exhausting. I know they are for me.

John


----------



## Ms.Speedmaster (Dec 10, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> As a coach of mostly recreational Olympic recurve archers, I often find myself asking the student WHY they chose what is basically the most physically demanding discipline in archery.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> ...


Because you told me to. 

You know my story, but for the record... after compound, which was my first love, my longbow stole my heart. Immediately after which you put an OR in my hands and I've been kicking and screaming ever since, lol. 

The truth of the matter is I now absolutely love shooting my recurve, because it is so much more satisfying. The compound shoots itself. The longbow has enough weight behind it, and simplicity, to almost shoot itself. But the recurve... she and I (yes, it's a she - just like my car) have had a love-hate relationship going on, but we're figuring things out and I think it's forever. 

Two other reasons for this track, in no particular order, are: 
1. Tinkering is fun. Can't shoot recurve without tinkering. 
2. I can pass on this experience and knowledge to my students.

The compound is like an old friend. Will always be there and you know you can rely on them.
The longbow is like a good looking guy who isn't too bright. Nice to look at and date, but not a long term relationship.
The recurve is that long term relationship. Bumps and challenges, but there for the long haul.

Lynda


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

Ms.Speedmaster said:


> The compound is like an old friend. Will always be there and you know you can rely on them.
> The longbow is like a good looking guy who isn't too bright. Nice to look at and date, but not a long term relationship.
> The recurve is that long term relationship. Bumps and challenges, but there for the long haul.


That's the funniest and most truthful thing I've read all day! :darkbeer:


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

I started out with everything geared more towards hunting so 3-D became just a natural progression for me...I've always wanted to be the best at anything I've tried or at least beat the best there was to beat...I've somewhat achieved that in 3-D here in the US and would love to go overseas to compete against the best over there...that is all in BB.

Along the way I knew that dots would only help my 3-D game so I joined a few winter leagues and slowly but surely got to where I could average 290s on a Blue white face...and then did I want to start competing in that discipline...I went to Louisville that same year shooting my Black Widow with a ton of discipline and placed 6th...even beat an Olympic shooter whom I thought had very little discipline.

I've never tried Olympic style rigs at 70 meters but I know I could get acceptable accuracy with some discipline...I'm basically shooting the same bow now with no rest,plunger,clicker,sight and 3 stabilizers at half the distance in a 5" group...correct me if I'm wrong but if I put all that stuff on the same bow shouldn't I be able to keep them in a 10-14" group at 70 meters??

I've never thought of a specific discipline as less work like BB is less than OLY or Compound is less than OLY or BB...I'd never make that assumption.not trying to ruffle any feathers...I just don't see the difference.


Dewayne Martin


----------



## rat4go (Apr 14, 2011)

Wow. Interesting thread! 

My personal archery migration is documented in other posts, so I'll leave out most of the details. 

The short version is that I didn't pick Oly recurve INSTEAD of other archery disciplines (mostly hunting compounds), but in ADDITION to. I'd never shot an Oly recurve until about 15 months ago. I bought a used oly recurve bow (Hoyt Eclipse) that I was going to transition my daugter to from her entry level KAP ProStyle set-up when she was ready, but until she was, I shot it along side her and I kinda fell in love with shooting Oly stuff. I'm on my second riser in 9 months (Horizon Pro to GMX) and have gone thru a couple sets of limbs as well (poundage increases). I have gotten to the point where I'm not embarrassed by my Oly recurve shooting and am looking for opportunities to shoot in the form of local leagues or tourneys.

At this point, my approach is that if the target looks like (or is) an animal, I've got the compound in hand. If it's concentric circles, I'd much rather shoot the Oly bow. 

The other minor benefit in shooting both disiplines is that when I try to help out with the JOAD stuff as Level 1 guy, I feel like I have a decent basis for helping either new compound or new recurve shooters get started since I've dabbled in both.

Also, I'm not ruling out giving barebow recurve a try sometime soon. I used to play the compound game with no release and no sights and kinda enjoyed it. i probably wouldn't hunt that way, but shooting circles with a barebow recurve seems like a happy middle ground. 

Honestly, I just like shooting archery and it's even better when I can shoot with my dad, my friends and especially my kids, regardless of what type of bow I have in hand!!


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Originally Posted by Ms.Speedmaster View Post
The compound is like an old friend. Will always be there and you know you can rely on them.
The longbow is like a good looking guy who isn't too bright. Nice to look at and date, but not a long term relationship.
The recurve is that long term relationship. Bumps and challenges, but there for the long haul.




Mulcade said:


> That's the funniest and most truthful thing I've read all day! :darkbeer:


I'll second that! Way to nail it, Lynda! :cocktail:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I'm basically shooting the same bow now with no rest,plunger,clicker,sight and 3 stabilizers at half the distance in a 5" group...correct me if I'm wrong but if I put all that stuff on the same bow shouldn't I be able to keep them in a 10-14" group at 70 meters??


Only one way to know for sure... 

What most guys who shoot trad or barebow don't consider is WIND. It's one thing to hold gold at 70 on a calm day, but you'll find that very rarely is any major tournament shot on a calm day. In fact, some fields like A&M often feature 15+ mph crosswinds and only the best shooters with the most experience in the wind will break 320.



> I've never thought of a specific discipline as less work like BB is less than OLY or Compound is less than OLY or BB...I'd never make that assumption.not trying to ruffle any feathers...I just don't see the difference.


I think everyone who is committed to a single discipline likes to believe they are shooting the "hardest" of them all, when in reality, shooting any of them to an elite level is equally difficult and requires the same amount of training and dedication.

Something to remember is that one cannot assume anything about another discipline until they have tried it. The three are far enough apart that they demand unique skill sets that must be refined over time. Just because someone's great at one, doesn't mean they will ever be great at another discipline. It just doesn't work that way. If it did, you'd see Braden and Reo and co. all switch to Olympic recurve 6 months before the trials, and finish in the top 16. To my knowledge, that's never happened.

However, there have been a number of Olympic recurve shooters who are former RA's who found great success with the compound. I believe Reo and Rod Menzer were both RA's at one time. Dave Cousins once told me he "tried" recurve but could never get his average to a level where he felt competitive.

I know my barebow shooting greatly improved following my years of training with the Olympic bow. But in order to finally reach my goal of 280+ on the NFAA indoor target with a barebow, I had to focus solely on that discipline for most of a year.

John


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

John, I too believe if I dedicated 1 year to OLY 70 meter scores I'd be shooting close to some of the 2nd tier shooters...not Brady or Jake but I think I could be posting respectable scores.


I may try it later on maybe spring because I've never tried it..however I've mastered shooting with a clicker so thats got to be part of the battle.

I know I watched in Lousiville this past year and the OLy shooters wasn't scoring any better than we was hardly.



Dewayne Martin


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

vabowdog said:


> John, I too believe if I dedicated 1 year to OLY 70 meter scores I'd be shooting close to some of the 2nd tier shooters...not Brady or Jake but I think I could be posting respectable scores.
> 
> 
> I may try it later on maybe spring because I've never tried it..however I've mastered shooting with a clicker so thats got to be part of the battle.
> ...


Dewayne, you just added your name to a growing list of trad/bb shooters who have all convinced themselves of the same thing. 



> and the OLy shooters wasn't scoring any better than we was hardly


I see this all the time. I can shoot "nearly" as good as the top guns at 18 meters, therefore it surely must translate to 70, right? I mean, a 5 handicap in golf is nearly the same as a 3 handicap, right?

Wrong. I could offer any number of reasons why that is, but I think instead I'll let you find out on your own.

You could try asking Ty Pelfry or Mark Applegate. They could shed a little light on it for you, as those two were some of the first to congratulate me on making the '04 team, taking me out to lunch in L'ville the following spring and showing real class in the process.

When a former bb/trad shooter shows up to a major USAT ranking event and shoots a 330+ on a windy day, I'll be the first one there to contratulate them. But until then, talk is not only cheap, it is pretty offensive to those who have actually done it.

What's that old saying? Nothing ventured, nothing gained? 

That's the real beauty of this sport though. We all get to pick a style and then go shoot where all the world gets to see our results. 

John


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I started out when I was 6 at a club which is very recurve based, not necessarily OR just recurve in general. From there I spend almost 20 years as a backyard shooter and eventually devolved into a squat-and-pluck instinctive guy. It's been a 4 year process to get away from that but I'm finally rather happy with my shooting. Along the way I tried OR for a while but something about it messed with my BB shot timing and that was giving me enough trouble (TP from the squat-and-pluck era) as it was so I decided to abandon that in favour of just shooting BB. Last winter I bought a compound just to see what all the fuss was about. Honestly shooting that bow with a hinge release felt like the best BB release ever: complete surprise. It oddly enough really helped me work on my shot sequence and my BB shooting has been quite a bit better since.

So really I can appreciate all 3 in different ways. I don't think that I won't be going back to OR any time soon since it really does need to be a 5-6 days a week sort of hobby but nothing is written in stone. I actually prefer shooting compound indoors (but outdoors is frustrating) to the other disciplines so I might play with that over this next winter, I do find that it makes a nice companion to competitive BB shooting.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> From there I spend almost 20 years as a backyard shooter and eventually devolved into a squat-and-pluck instinctive guy.


 Been there, done that! That's where the clicker was so helpful for me. It helped break my target panic that I had developed with a compound/sights as a kid - the whole reason I started shooting "instinctive" in the first place. That little piece of spring steel literally allowed me to aim again, overnight. Of course, Larry Skinner told me it would, but it took me a while before I even agreed to try it. As usual, Larry was right.

John


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> Only one way to know for sure...
> 
> What most guys who shoot trad or barebow don't consider is WIND. It's one thing to hold gold at 70 on a calm day, but you'll find that very rarely is any major tournament shot on a calm day. In fact, some fields like A&M often feature 15+ mph crosswinds and only the best shooters with the most experience in the wind will break 320.
> 
> ...


To your point, Braden finished 51st at the 2011 Olympic Trials Stage 1.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Yup. Mary (Zorn) Hamm did better on the women's side, but neither were ever in any danger of making the top 8.

At some point, you can be good at all three, but you have to pick one and specialize to be world class. There is that much difference between them.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

limbwalker said:


> Been there, done that! That's where the clicker was so helpful for me. It helped break my target panic that I had developed with a compound/sights as a kid - the whole reason I started shooting "instinctive" in the first place. That little piece of spring steel literally allowed me to aim again, overnight. Of course, Larry Skinner told me it would, but it took me a while before I even agreed to try it. As usual, Larry was right.
> 
> John


True! My first shots with a clicker were amazing. But I found that it started to control me, rather than the other way around and when I went back to BB all that control was gone. Ultimately I approached the TP issue from a different direction and I'm glad I did since it's working rather well.
Now that I've got the TP thing pretty much licked (ha!) I'm going to do some work with the clicker again but with a different perspective. Probably not OR, but NFAA BB which really isn't that different I suppose. I will shoot my WA BB rig but add a pull-chain clicker.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Grant, although the clicker allowed me to aim overnight, it did take me months to finally gain control over it as opposed to it controlling me. I'd say it was a good 6 months of training before I could pull through and not shoot an arrow if the sight picture wasn't exactly what I wanted. So that part wasn't overnight. And in fact, that's the part that usually makes or breaks someone new to OR. They either push through and learn to master the clicker, or they quit and move on to something else.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I can't disagree with that at all. I think if I could have had the time to practice 5-6 days a week with it then that would have been possible in 6 months. Unfortunately it was a time when I was doing a lot of small deployments on the ship and there just wasn't practice space for an OR, I could just sneak enough time/room to shoot bale with my BB every few days.

-Grant


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

John, what is your sense on the Olympics adding Barebow? There is a lot of rumors that compounds will be an exhibition event in 2016. I have no problem with that. I think it is a good idea to bring in the compound guy/gals. But I also think Barebow should be a class.

The Olympics already has a boat load of styles for the other shooting events:
Rifle
Men’s 50m Rifle Prone
Men’s 50m 3-position Rifle
Women’s 50m 3-position Rifle
Men’s 10m Air Rifle
Women’s 10m Air Rifle

Pistol
Men’s 50m Free Pistol
Men’s 25m Rapid Fire Pistol
Men’s 10m Air Pistol
Women’s 25m Pistol
Women’s 10m Air Pistol

Shotgun
Men’s Double Trap
Men’s Skeet
Men’s Trap
Women’s Skeet
Women’s Trap

Modern Pentathalon – 10m Air Pistol

Biathalon
Men’s 10km
Men’s 12.5km Pursuit 
Men’s 15km Mass Start
Men’s 20km
Men’s 4x7.5km Relay
Women’s 10km Pursuit
Women’s 12.5km Mass Start 
Women’s 7.5km
Women’s 15km 
Women’s 4x6km Relay
Women’s 7.5km
Mixed Relay

This doesn't even count fencing/sabre events.

Whereas Archery, the oldest sport of the Olympics gets just one measly event.

The Olympics already has set the precedent of having multiple shooting event styles with different equipment. So why not allow Barebow and Compounds as regular equipment styles? Why not have different event styles such as field events? or winter events (ie biathalon with a bow)or team events, and even mixed equipment events (one has to shoot all three Barebow/Olympic/Compound). I am sure Brazil can offer some outstanding field courses.


I know, a little off topic, but the Olympics does have a big influence in what people do.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

You're reasoning is sound, but barebow doesn't have a snowball's chance in hades of making it to the Olympics. 

I've often used the example of all the cycling and shooting diciplines. Heck, how many distances do they run in track or swim in the pool?

Lots of reasons for barebow never making it though... Not the least of which is that people want to see excellence at the Olympic games, not someone trying to hit the gold, but rather someone never missing the gold. And while we have some exceptional barebow shooters worldwide, there really aren't that many of them, in enough countries, to ever get it added to the schedule. 

The reason compound is being considered is because it has spread worldwide and there are lots of competitive nations now (thanks to WA promoting compound through their world cup and world championship events). 

Another strike against barebow is that the competitors themselves are terribly unorganized and I'm afraid their independent spirit works against them when it comes to launching a unified campaign in an effort as great as trying to get a discipline into the biggest sporting event on earth.

Finally, there's simply not enough money to be made in barebow for the manufacturers to support it. And we simply cannot ignore the influence the manufacturers and major sponsors have in WA and the IOC's decisions.

I'd be happy to just have barebow taken seriously here in the states. 

John


----------



## Ms.Speedmaster (Dec 10, 2010)

lksseven said:


> I'll second that! Way to nail it, Lynda! :cocktail:


Lol, thanks. And there was me thinking I was being totally non-PC. Ha!

And that coming from someone who is still a relative newlywed with my rig. 

I've yet to struggle with wind at a tournament; I'm still struggling with not being ruled by the clicker; I'm only out to 60m so far... and that's just for starters. 

However, my _really_ crumby score at the Games of Texas, which I've since beaten by many points at AAP, was enough to get me to the State Games of America in Nebraska, July 2015. I have almost a year to train, and that excites me like nothing else in my archery life so far. I know this isn't a highly thought of event, but it has given me a goal. And, to have one of my students also place with me, will make the training a whole lotta fun.  

Just knowing that there is a big hill to climb for me and my discipline, and that it is totally doable - _if_, I apply myself - is a huge motivator. I honestly don't think I would feel the same way if that were a compound event for me.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Dewayne, you just added your name to a growing list of trad/bb shooters who have all convinced themselves of the same thing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You are pretty safe in picking on barebow/trad and saying there is little chance of them shooting 330 plus at 70 meters. What you are not stating is that there are few oly style archers in this country shooting that score and even fewer doing it on a regular basis. I will make a little wager with you, though. $100. If I can't shoot a 325 by the trials next year, I will donate to your Joad program, If I do then you donate to my trip expenses.. Back in my prime I was shooting Nfaa archery, working, and raising four children. I did not have the time or inclination to try Oly style archery. I still prefer Nfaa archery but my curiosity and interest is now into World archery events and specifically trying to make the Olympic team. Everyone on here has pooh poohed that idea because of my age but it is still my goal, and I don't think you or others really realize at what level I can shoot my fingers. Hopefully I can reach my new prime before I'm relegated to the old folks home.:teeth:


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

Ben, as I'm not interested in trying out for any Olympic team I'm going to setup an OLY rig this winter and by next spring remember this is Va...we can't shoot outside 12 months a year we have snow and -10 sometimes...


I too am really interested in seeing the scores that I can post at 70 meters....maybe 325 maybe 225 but my money is on 325.



Dewayne


----------



## barebow52 (Nov 7, 2007)

itbeso said:


> You are pretty safe in picking on barebow/trad and saying there is little chance of them shooting 330 plus at 70 meters. What you are not stating is that there are few oly style archers in this country shooting that score and even fewer doing it on a regular basis. I will make a little wager with you, though. $100. If I can't shoot a 325 by the trials next year, I will donate to your Joad program, If I do then you donate to my trip expenses.. Back in my prime I was shooting Nfaa archery, working, and raising four children. I did not have the time or inclination to try Oly style archery. I still prefer Nfaa archery but my curiosity and interest is now into World archery events and specifically trying to make the Olympic team. Everyone on here has pooh poohed that idea because of my age but it is still my goal, and I don't think you or others really realize at what level I can shoot my fingers. Hopefully I can reach my new prime before I'm relegated to the old folks home.:teeth:


Ben has had great success in every other style he has chosen to compete in. I dont see this style being any different.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Ben, Dwayne
come to the house Sandy will have you both tuned up in no time:teeth:


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

2413gary said:


> Ben, Dwayne
> come to the house Sandy will have you both tuned up in no time:teeth:




I'm in, just tell me when...what's for dinner??? Mule deer tenderloins?? Sounds good to me.


Dewayne


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

vabowdog said:


> I too am really interested in seeing the scores that I can post at 70 meters....maybe 325 maybe 225 but my money is on 325.
> 
> Dewayne


A 325 is nothing but 9s. 54 average out of 60 for 6 ends. Its much harder than it sounds. 

999999
999999
999999
999999
999999 = 324


for indoor, the equivalent in my opinion would be anything over a 287 on a vegas 3 spot recurve fingers. again, harder than it sounds. 

Chris


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

And of course this has been turned into another "picking on barebow archers" thread by a few...  You guys seem to be hell-bent on turning this into an "us vs. them" argument. Hey, whatever floats your boat...

I actually think it's funny that a barebow archer (myself) can pick on barebow archers though.

Guys, talk is cheap. I can go back over 10 years on this forum and the leatherwall before it and count the number of trad and bb shooters that wanted to tell me how "easy" it was to shoot Olympic. blah, blah, blah. Well, like my good friend Jim Belcher just said, show up and shoot. It's really that simple. There is no reason to proclaim this or that. Everyone can do what I did and put down the barebow (golly, did I actually shoot barebow before I shot Olympic?), pick up the Olympic bow, and pay the registration fee and find out. 

Also, what happened to the "world class" scores from the previous thread? 325 is hardly world class anymore. I mean, I put down the barebow and 9 months later opened the 2004 trials with a 332. And even that's barely "world class" these days, if even. 

But let me tell you, if all this bravado is about proving me wrong, I must ask where I ever wrote that a barebow archer cannot shoot world class Olympic scores. Why would I? I was a barebow archer who eventually went on to shoot 332,336 and 341 at the Olympic trials at 34 and then 42 years old. 

Tell you what Ben, if you can shoot a 330+ at the trials... not before, but AT the trials... then I'll donate $100 to the archery club of your choice. If not, you get to donate $100 to my JOAD club. I think that's more than fair. 

I predict it will take a 320 average just to make the cut to 16, and then a 330 average to make the top 8. Then basically one guy aside from Brady and Jake will need to maintain 330+ to even get a sniff. That's just how good the boys are shooting anymore, and the field is much deeper than it used to be. In 2004, I earned the third spot with just over a 320 average. In 2012, I shot several points better than that, and still finished 11th. I wish you guys the same luck I wish all the archers who show up, regardless of their background or experience. Because we will all need it. 

John


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

itbeso said:


> You are pretty safe in picking on barebow/trad and saying there is little chance of them shooting 330 plus at 70 meters. What you are not stating is that there are few oly style archers in this country shooting that score and even fewer doing it on a regular basis. I will make a little wager with you, though. $100. If I can't shoot a 325 by the trials next year, I will donate to your Joad program, If I do then you donate to my trip expenses.. Back in my prime I was shooting Nfaa archery, working, and raising four children. I did not have the time or inclination to try Oly style archery. I still prefer Nfaa archery but my curiosity and interest is now into World archery events and specifically trying to make the Olympic team. Everyone on here has pooh poohed that idea because of my age but it is still my goal, and I don't think you or others really realize at what level I can shoot my fingers. Hopefully I can reach my new prime before I'm relegated to the old folks home.:teeth:


:thumbs_up :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

chrstphr said:


> A 325 is nothing but 9s. 54 average out of 60 for 6 ends. Its much harder than it sounds.
> 
> 999999
> 999999
> ...


Chris, I'd say the equivalent is more like a 290 on a Vegas face.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

vabowdog said:


> Ben, as I'm not interested in trying out for any Olympic team I'm going to setup an OLY rig this winter and by next spring remember this is Va...we can't shoot outside 12 months a year we have snow and -10 sometimes...
> 
> 
> I too am really interested in seeing the scores that I can post at 70 meters....maybe 325 maybe 225 but my money is on 325.
> ...


Dewayne, I learned to shoot Olympic in Illinois. Shot my first 1300 fita in practice (a 1313) on New Year's day with snow on the ground. Shot my second 1300 the very next day, running into the garage to warm my fingers on a space heater in between ends. 

I'll tell you fella's this much, if you show up in Louisville with a recurve bow, you might have a chance. If you think you're going to still shoot trad in L'ville next March, and then switch to Olympic, good luck.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

So, enough with the chest thumping trad talk... 

Who else has chosen Olympic over Compound or Barebow, and why? I'm curious to know your reasons. There have been some great responses so far.

John


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

I think one of the biggest draws to Olympic archery is because...it's Olympic archery. 

C'mon...it's the Olympics :wink: 

It's about as prestigious as it gets...at least to how the general public perceives it.

I just wish more of the human element was involved involving more hand and eye coordination than the way it's currently set-up...but it's more likely to go more 'modern' than more primitive.

Ray :shade:


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I started Barebow like most of us. In 1967 put a sight, clicker and stabilizer on (Olympic recurve) no wait archery wasn't in the Olympics then shot that way for three years. Went back to Barebow and never looked back. I can't thump my chest because my arms are so strong from shooting Barebow I might hurt my self. :wink:
Gary


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Gary... LOL.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

It just occurred to me that 90% of the smack talk I've ever heard on an archery line is either among compound shooters, or barebow shooters (where it rises to an art form!) 

I can honestly never recall a good case of talking smack among Olympic shooters. I really have no idea why that is, but it is. Anyone else noticed this phenomenon? Anyone have an explanation for it?

It really is one of my favorite things about shooting barebow though. A good day on the line with friends all ribbing each other the whole way through is time well spent.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

John I noticed the same thing shooting all the Fita shoots in LA when Sandy was training. Some of the Oly guys just didn't have much of a Since of humor. I had to try really hard to get some to smile:teeth:


----------



## Gryffin du Verd (May 20, 2013)

limbwalker said:


> Another strike against barebow is that the competitors themselves are terribly unorganized and I'm afraid their independent spirit works against them when it comes to launching a unified campaign in an effort as great as trying to get a discipline into the biggest sporting event on earth.


I'm noticing this as well and am a bit confused by it. For example, as I'm looking into shooting barebow at Vegas instead of Olympic, I see that NFAA barebow includes compound. That strikes me as a bit odd, not that you could shoot a compound without sights, but that you would want them to compete with recurve barebows. It doesn't seem to me that would be much of competition for either group. 

But I also find all the various types of barebow, traditional, etc. among NFAA and FITA to be rather bewildering. I'm just starting out in barebow (from OR), but I'm not at all sure what rules I should be using...


----------



## Cylosis (Jan 5, 2014)

limbwalker said:


> I can honestly never recall a good case of talking smack among Olympic shooters. I really have no idea why that is, but it is. Anyone else noticed this phenomenon? Anyone have an explanation for it?


Alternative perspective:
You don't mock someone for being a poor piano player. If they strive to improve, study/train longer and harder, they will succeed. Anybody can learn to play the piano.
I think the same applies in Oly recurve, every bout of mockery I've exchanged quickly boiled down to a case of "well I/you need to practice more." The fact that there is a studied and fact-based way to shoot an OL makes early progression fairly linear. There isn't much smack to talk because it's just an unavoidable fact that everybody has different experience levels.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> And of course this has been turned into another "picking on barebow archers" thread by a few...  You guys seem to be hell-bent on turning this into an "us vs. them" argument. Hey, whatever floats your boat...
> 
> I actually think it's funny that a barebow archer (myself) can pick on barebow archers though.
> 
> ...


John, I haven't taken this thread as you picking on barebow types. That and I agree with most of your assertions on the difficulty of shooting Oly style, especially since there is no peep involved. You need to chill a little when we are having fun needling you. I have talked to a lot of barebowers and you have a lot of respect coming from that direction. I, personally, feed off people who say that I can't do something. No disrespect to you or anyone else who says that, just motivation. I don't have any doubt about how difficult 330 is, but if I didn't think I could top that I wouldn't waste my time trying. I think you can relate to that mindset.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> But I also find all the various types of barebow, traditional, etc. among NFAA and FITA to be rather bewildering. I'm just starting out in barebow (from OR), but I'm not at all sure what rules I should be using...


Well, don't expect that to change anytime soon. LOL. But that's why I said what I said. OR is fairly narrow, and even Compound unlimited is fairly narrow, but it seems "barebow" is wide open to interpretation. You'd think it would be the least complicated by rules, but that's just not the case at all.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

vabowdog said:


> I'm in, just tell me when...what's for dinner??? Mule deer tenderloins?? Sounds good to me.
> 
> 
> Dewayne


I don't think you could restrain yourself when Sandys pets come up to feed.:teeth:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> John, I haven't taken this thread as you picking on barebow types.





> You are pretty safe in picking on barebow/trad


Okay then I'm just confused.



> You need to chill a little when we are having fun needling you.


If that's all it is, I can dish it out and take it too. But something that was posted a few pages ago crossed that line. 



> I, personally, feed off people who say that I can't do something. No disrespect to *you* or anyone else who says that, just motivation.


Why would I feel disrespected? I never said you couldn't do something. You and Dewayne are just choosing to interpret it that way. I think you guys NEED to have someone tell you that you can't do something. Well, I'm not that guy. I'm actually on your side because I've been in your shoes and I know what lies ahead. I'm just not going to sugar-coat it for ya, mostly because I've shot head to head with many of the guys we'll see next fall. 



> I don't have any doubt about how difficult 330 is, but if I didn't think I could top that I wouldn't waste my time trying. I think you can relate to that mindset.


To a point. When I took up the OR, it was so that I could learn more to help my own kids who were new to JOAD, and because I had always had an interest in Olympic archery but had never had the opportunity to shoot one. I really had no personal goals for it as I didn't really have any target archery history at all. Of course I wanted to see "how good" I could get with it, but that was always a personal goal. It never had anything to do with anyone else. It's still that way for me. At every event, I'm there to shoot the best I can, regardless of what anyone else is doing. It was actually others (Robert Wolff and Larry Skinner) that worked on me for a while to convince me to start competing with the OR. I shot with Robert nearly every week, and he saw me struggle with the barebow back in those days. He and Larry were constantly in my ear telling me I could "beat those guys" - they saw something I had no idea about. So I really owe it to them, not to my own desire to beat anyone or do something someone told me I "couldn't do." 

I just put one foot in front of the other, trying to achieve one small goal, then the next, then the next. When I rolled into the 2003 Texas Shootout, my only goal was to FINISH. After 36 arrows I was ranked 2nd behind Butch and I adjusted my goal. After 72 arrows I adjusted it again, and after finishing 5th at that event, only then did I start giving any thought to qualifying for the 2005 U.S. Archery Team. Then the goal was top 8 at Gold cup and once I had done that, top 8 at the Olympic trials. What most folks don't know is that the 2004 Oly. trials were just a ranking event for me for the 2005 USAT. I had absolutely no idea in my head I could actually make the Olympic team. I was just there to earn ranking points, that's all.

So, having said all that, the idea of even thinking about the end goal first is completely foreign to me. And whenever I hear it from my students, I'm the first to present them with their next immediate goal, and all their intermediate goals. Yes, we can dream, but dreaming too much is unhealthy and unproductive, when the real task at hand is just the next step ahead.

If I were in yours and Dewayne's shoes - and I have been - I'd first be trying to figure out how to shoot a 295 on an NFAA face with an Olympic bow, then a 300. And then looking to shoot a 298 average at Louisville next March, and only then start thinking about 325's outdoors. 

John


----------



## Drowsy (May 9, 2013)

When I first started archery, I picked up a recurve because the cost-to-entry was much cheaper than going with a compound. After that, I decided I wanted to shoot competitive barebow once I realized how accurate I could be without sights. In my early days, I was really proud of the fact that I could out-shoot our local guys at the range with nothing but a standard recurve. 

Once I started to shoot long distances, I realized that shooting Olympic Recurve was something that I really wanted to do, because I enjoyed shooting FITA, and because I fell in love with the thought of the long and arduous journey to mastering OR. 

In between, I had a short love affair with compound, but after the first week of hitting nothing but 9s and 10s indoors, I felt it was too easy. There was no challenge for me at the time. (However, I have a new understanding of compound with back tension release aids and I can say, I was wrong to say it was too easy.) 

That being said, I still like to shoot all forms of archery, barebow, OR, compound. It just happens to be that most of my money is invested in my OR rig and coaching. I'd still like to get a decent target compound for giggles, or when I get bored, but I always end up coming back to my OR rig. Sometimes I'm tempted to strip down my GMX and shoot it barebow, but I cringe at the thought of trying to get a decent tune for string walking, and shooting without a clicker seems so foreign to me now...


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I'd still like to get a decent target compound for giggles, or when I get bored, but I always end up coming back to my OR rig.


That made me smile. When I get bored, I always go back to barebow.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Okay then I'm just confused.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Like I said in my last post,john, you need a serious case of humor. Even when given compliments, you seem inclined to dampen that with negativism. I am not going to set mediocre standards or goals at this stage of my archery journey. As far as 295 Nfaa, that was surpassed circa 1974 with an old carroll bow, a piece of foam glued on the riser and a straight pin pushed into the foam, no clicker. 298 at money shoot. My goal will be 300 with 60x whether it's attainable or not. I'm going to exit this thread because some people seem to think that Oly style is all there is, the be all to end all. I hope to show that it is just another archery discipline, no more, no less.


----------



## Mormegil (Jan 26, 2012)

limbwalker said:


> That made me smile. When I get bored, I always go back to barebow.


My greatest fear at the moment is that the guy at my club with his new barebow rig will get bored with it and put it up for sale - because the odds of me not buying first and explaining to the wife later just aren't that great.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ben, I'm not sure what you're referring to. I actually have an exquisite sense of humor and prefer to have fun over taking things seriously 99% of the time. I just tend to lose my sense of humor when people contradict themselves after accusing me of something I've not done. 



> I am not going to set mediocre standards or goals at this stage of my archery journey. As far as 295 Nfaa, that was surpassed circa 1974 with an old carroll bow, a piece of foam glued on the riser and a straight pin pushed into the foam, no clicker.


But that was him. 



> because some people seem to think that Oly style is all there is


You guys are seeing something I'm not. Who exactly seems to think Oly. is all there is? Maybe some do, but I guess that's what you get for visiting the FITA forum, eh? If I didn't care for traditional bows, I'd probably not spend much time on the traditional forum.

If anything, the purpose of this thread was to question people's logic for even choosing the discipline in the first place. When you consider both ends of the spectrum - compound and barebow - it's a bit odd that any recreational archer would choose the Olympic bow anyway, esp. considering the physical demands it puts on a person.

You wouldn't believe the number of folks I've tried to talk OUT of shooting OR, simply because I thought they were better suited or would enjoy compound or barebow more.

John


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Personality plays a roll in which direction an archer will follow.

Olympic archery isn't for everyone nor are any of the other choices such as trick shooting, barebow, Kyudo, combat archery, 3D or horseback archery.

IMO...there's absolutely no reason to bash anyone for their choice of equipment, styles or technique...but you see it all the time...especially in the trad community and trad forums. There's almost always someone putting someone down and trying to sound more 'elite' 

Ray :shade:


----------



## Coodster (Feb 3, 2006)

John 
I didn't mean to derail your post. 
This will lighten the atmosphere 
32 years ago I started out in archery with a bear whitetail 2, shot it with a glove, had the junk flipper and that was it. 
I loved to see the arrow fly 
later as a young teen I earned enough money to buy a used Martin mag lynx, this one was the cats meow (no pun intended) had a sight and a stabilizer. For the life of me I didn't know how to use the sight, so off it came. 
I had that lynx till I got out of the military. 
Thought I would buy a new bow. So a quick call to cabelas and a reflex bighorn is on it's way. Still not knowing how a sight works even a peep. It had a prong rest sight and stab. Keep in mind I'm going to shoot it with a glove. 
Soup sandwich comes to mind in a hurry. 

First 6 arrows was lost and bent in the first 6 shots. 
I was thinking this isn't working to say the least so a call to the nearest archery shop 200 miles away. 
That was a eye opener the first time I went in, new arrows, rest, some instruction and tuning. I hit the target at 20 yards I was elated. 
I joined their leage and shot as much as possible. 
A few years and a few bows later a guy was shooting a longbow and let me shoot it. 
Even now I remember my reaction WOW. 
That archery season all I could think is hunting with a recurve. It was all down hill from there. Switching from compounds and recurves
I wanted to be a better shot and started shooting more vertical and soon sight stabilizer is on my recurve, then full blown oly setup. 
The more I shot OR/compound the more I felt disconnected from archery. 
I learned of bb and tried it and the passion was there I felt part of the shot/bow. I've been at it since. 
Yeah I have longbows recurves and still two compounds. 
I can pick them up and shoot them but my heart isn't in it, I have to force myself to practice where as bb I want to practice. 
There is passion in bb for me I feel connected. 

I'm not the best shot but I'm enjoying my archery journey. 
I'm not a compound shooter, not a traditionalist, I'm an archer. 

Chad


----------



## Corene1 (Apr 27, 2014)

Interesting thread that is going on here. I have shot non sight 3 fingers under with compounds and recurves for most of my shooting life. I did get immersed in Olympic recurve for a few years but am much more comfortable shooting traditional. I still use the clicker and sight once a week to keep my form and anchor solid. In the original post it asks why so many recreational shooters are choosing the Olympic recurve style. For me that is a hard one to answer as probably 90% of the shooters at recreational shoots around here are shooting sighted compounds with release. Very few finger shooters and even less Olympic recurve shooters. To me a recreational shooter would be a person that goes to novelty shoots, or 3D shoots ,local leagues and the like. A FITA qualifier or a NFAA state or national event would not be a recreational shoot in my thoughts. At the last FITA qualifier at Woodley Park there were only 9 shooters. Grape stakes in Tulare had a good turnout but in general I don't see to many Olympic setups locally compared to sighted compounds. Even if this is just a local occurrence I see the trend is going to be a sighted style be it recurve or compound as shooting a sight will get a person of the recreational level more accuracy quickly. It is much more difficult for a beginner to be proficient with non sighted equipment. That being said, top level shooters no matter what the style will be the ones that are putting in the hours on the shooting range. For myself the work ethic required to shoot consistent gold at 70 sighted or non sighted is tremendous, I myself am one of those red or better shooters and can keep that level without a huge commitment to time on the range I guess that makes me a recreational shooter, and still having fun.
I was thinking this is like comparing a violin virtuoso with the philharmonic to a bluegrass fiddle player, They are both violins, they both take huge amounts of practice and they both make beautiful music , One deals with precision the other with feeling. Just my thoughts.


----------



## Itbesa (Sep 4, 2014)

I started shooting a junior recurve at weekend field archery tournaments with my dad back in the 70's. When I got old enough to pull back 40 pounds, he put together a beautiful blue Jennings compound for me (barebow). Then I became a teenager and dropped archery like a hot potato. Part of that was probably due to the fact that my dad used to like to meet my dates at the front door with his hunting bow in one hand and broadheads in the other. My dates always had me home before curfew. 

Fast forward 30 years and I'm taking up a recurve again, with my kids. Barebow. There are a few reasons I'm shooting barebow. First, it's a good place for my kids to start. Second, since my dad is setting up an OR rig, I am hoping to scrounge through what's left behind in his bowroom and pick up most of what I need to set up a decent barebow for well below market cost.  Third, well, I'm pretty biased, but I can't think of a better barebow instructor than my dad.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> Ben, I'm not sure what you're referring to. I actually have an exquisite sense of humor and prefer to have fun over taking things seriously 99% of the time. I just tend to lose my sense of humor when people contradict themselves after accusing me of something I've not done.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Quite frankly, this was the biggest practical reason why I chose Olympic style recurve - the physical demands of it. I was looking for an alternative form of physical exercise to replace decades of weightlifting, one that would still provide me with the twin demands of physical intensity and endless repetition.

And itbesa, that is a hilarious story about your dad at the door with hunting bow and arrows in hand to greet your dates!


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Corene1 said:


> I was thinking this is like comparing a violin virtuoso with the philharmonic to a bluegrass fiddle player, They are both violins, they both take huge amounts of practice and they both make beautiful music


Great comparison! :thumbs_up

Being a musician myself I can relate...but whether you're playing bluegrass, county, rock or classical music...they all involve precision and feel. They are just conveyed differently.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Dragon Soaring (Jul 4, 2014)

I redently picked up a Sage to have somthing to do with my son. I quickly found the OR is where its at. I am slowly getting the parts now.
I fly RC Sailplanes 60 inch to 4 meter wingspans I design and build with composites. just you air and gravity. the plane is advanced but you still need to know how to fly unpowered in the enviroment.
OR to me is the same as its you string and a stick. The Stick is advanced but you still need to know how to shoot full wieght
Love the simplicity to keep it core.
Love the composits to keep it geek.
BTW my longboards skies and road/mtn bikes are foam, carbon, kevlar and aluminum.

ps short skies still suck


----------



## InKYfromSD (Feb 6, 2004)

I've shot a LOT of competitive compound over the years, and was pretty good at it. Even with fingers (FSL) you have to be darn near perfect. My best in the NFAA nationals was 599. I lost on X's and placed second. With Olympic recurve, and I'm sure in BB, no one is perfect! They never will be. It's ok to miss the X and the 10 ring. I finally learned how to just shoot against myself and enjoy the ride.

As for smack, I never really heard smack on the line with my compound competitors. One particular tough competitor from Indiana and I would trade barbs before and after a tournament though. I shot with the Ohio FITA group a few years ago and participated in an OR elimination. I made it two or three rounds and had to shoot against a young lady from CJO. We were pretty evenly matched and may have been succumbing to the pressure of shooting before a crowd. The gold wasn't seeing too many arrows. The guys behind us were hilarious! The never let up, even while were at full draw. That has to be the most I've had in competition ever.


----------



## mahgnillig (Aug 3, 2014)

Why Olympic? Because it's as far from the hunting brigade as I can get while still shooting projectiles.

The kit is high tech, brightly coloured (no camo) and the point is all about making holes in pieces of paper and keeping score. I enjoy making holes in paper, I do not enjoy killing things (or pretending to). Therefore, Olympic it is


----------



## Sosius (Feb 5, 2014)

I chose Olympic recurve because it's more challenging, and better exercise for my mid-40s body. While there are notable exceptions, recurvers seem to be in better shape overall than compounders.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Personality plays a roll in which direction an archer will follow.
> 
> Olympic archery isn't for everyone nor are any of the other choices such as trick shooting, barebow, Kyudo, combat archery, 3D or horseback archery.
> 
> ...


We've had this discussion on the trad forum, I think the personality theory is circular and ex post facto justificatory. A lot of people come to ranges not knowing what they want. To then ascribe to them conscious goals is a tad strained. I didn't go to a range wanting to shoot OR, I wanted to learn archery and tripped over a range that does OR primarily. The guy next to me on the line last night taking lessons had trouble articulating "why." Guy a few weeks back came in wanting to learn compound, but he got the bow first, which is not usually how it works because even cheap bows cost a little. My experience most people work the other way around. You go to RenFest, or hunting with someone, or whatever, enjoy doing it or watching it, but haven't made a choice yet. It's really only the people whose parents hand them something, or whose friends chose a bow and teach them, who come in with expectations.

After all, if I'd gone to certain other ranges, they trade primarily in hunting stuff and are populated more by hunters, it would have been trad no sight if recurve, or compound. If I got decent at recurve IMO once I neared OR ability or accessories I'd be tapping some instructors' abilities (for the ones more hunting-oriented). Whereas place I go (or John's place or others) sky is the limit. You will transition from more of a trad setup to OR stuff, and it's not like you consciously say, I pick OR, a sight goes on the bow once your progress to point A, a clicker at point B. You're OR before you pick it. You might consciously go back later and say, why not BB, or maybe I want a sight so now I'm OR from BB.

To me it's more like, random location you live or work, that may push you towards certain ranges, and some culture in terms of did your family hunt, do you hunt, or are you a suburbanite. Did you come from certain parts of the country where certain disciplines are more popular. I don't think it's a truly conscious choice until you've already been at it a while and a little indoctrinated in one way or another, and only then is rationality coming in, I enjoy this thing I do, or I secretly wish I could be shooting a bow that's easier, or less drowning in tech, or whatever. But to then say my personality made this happen is after the fact justification when a lot of your initial work is done not knowing what you want, or having someone hand you something you didn't pick and say try this. I have a bow I hand friends when they visit. It's a trad bow because there's more room for play on arrows, no need to move a sight around, a clicker is usually too serious for them. Nock, shoot, pull. They didn't pick that based on personality. I decided at some point what a good starter bow for my friends is, and said, here.......


----------



## beerbudget (Feb 5, 2011)

For me, it was definitely personality. I started in archery knowing nothing so I joined the local club which was 99% sighted compound which I immediately knew did not appeal to me. My “mentor” soon became Viper’s Shooting The Stickbow book. I bought all the gear he suggested (Excel + Privilege) minus the sight and stabilizer because they did not appeal to me either. I taught myself how to shoot 3-under gap and then discovered stringwalking and now trying high-anchor gap ala Dewayne. So, yes, for me it was definitely personality all the way in choosing barebow/trad.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

beerbudget said:


> For me, it was definitely personality. So, yes, for me it was definitely personality all the way in choosing barebow/trad.


:thumbs_up :thumbs_up



Azzurri said:


> I think the personality theory is circular and ex post facto justificatory.


Your Personality has convinced you of that :wink:

Personality plays a roll in ALL of our decisions...whether it's archery related or not.

Some people are more analytical...and thoroughly research their options before making a choice.

Some are more emotional and weigh their options based on feelings. 

And than the are others...who just know they're interested in archery but have no real clue on what direction they want to go...so they go with what's available or what seems to be the most popular where ever they are. 

Everyone has a unique Personality and it influences our decisions whether we understand it or not.

Ray :shade:


----------

