# New NFAA rules



## ccwilder3

I heard from the PRES of the FAA that the NFAA has made some pretty big changes. The three that stuck in my mind were that (1) Skying your bow is now illegal by rule (2) For the Pro's, the X will now be scored as a bonus in the Hunter and Field rounds and (3) The age groups have been changed to match the NAA.


----------



## ThunderEagle

interested in hearing the definition of skying


----------



## Daniel Boone

Wonder why no one else seems to be mentioning these changes.

Age one a big issue and has been needed for years.

Figured once I turned 55 it would change. LOL 
DB


----------



## wolfman_73

Yeah I read a few things also. Senior age at 50 now. 

Sounds like nfaa looking to do some good. Happy to see changes.


----------



## huteson2us2

What is wrong with not changing the rules every year. I have been a NFAA member for 34 years in a row and a several more before that. Every time rules are changed, membership shrinks. When I first shot NFAA, there were only 2 classes. Everytime someone important loses, another class is formed. Now people play pick a class in order to win at the nationals. When I do win, the first question asked is how many in your class? I am getting tired of trying to figure out what the rules will be this year. My feelings are that if the NFAA wants to more like the USAA, then I'll join them. They don't change the rules everytime they meet. I started off shooting FITA recurve back in the 60's. I can always chang back. 
Imagine baseball deciding on 2 stricks instead of 3. 4 bases instead of 3, unless you want to play in the traditional class. A different class for players that don't want to wear gloves. Allowing aluminum bats but only in unlimited class. Then you would have the NFAA of baseball.


----------



## ccwilder3

I didn't feel particularly strong about any rule changes but can't help but think that aligning the age groups with every other archery organization is a good thing.

I believe that last year some of the pro's left the course at the outdoor nationals after a single bad target because it would take a 560 or a 559 to win. That would explain the change in the pro class.

Also, skying your bow is a dangerous practice and needed to be addressed.


----------



## Unclegus

huteson2us2 said:


> What is wrong with not changing the rules every year. I have been a NFAA member for 34 years in a row and a several more before that. Every time rules are changed, membership shrinks. When I first shot NFAA, there were only 2 classes. Everytime someone important loses, another class is formed. Now people play pick a class in order to win at the nationals. When I do win, the first question asked is how many in your class? I am getting tired of trying to figure out what the rules will be this year. My feelings are that if the NFAA wants to more like the USAA, then I'll join them. They don't change the rules everytime they meet. I started off shooting FITA recurve back in the 60's. I can always chang back.
> Imagine baseball deciding on 2 stricks instead of 3. 4 bases instead of 3, unless you want to play in the traditional class. A different class for players that don't want to wear gloves. Allowing aluminum bats but only in unlimited class. Then you would have the NFAA of baseball.


 The only constant in life is Change. The only time membership and participation really took a hit was when they went from the 3-5 target to the 5-4-3. Many 550 shooters became 520 shooters overnight, and rather than pick up their game, they chose to quit. There's also many more alternatives these days for things to do with your time rather than spend two grand for an outfit and practice your butt off than there were when I also started in the sixties. Most people just take the easy road. I see a real push for USAA and NFAA joining forces. If the rules change so much you can't keep up with them, just ask and as far a silver bowls, they've become so plentiful, they don't really mean a whole lot unless it's in freestyle That's all most pay any attention to anyway. There's no free lunch there or BHFS. Maybe we should all go back and shoot recurves off the shelves with wooden arrows. 

I think the X rule for Pros is really great..

And after you shoot beside one of these guys, You'll agree to anything.


----------



## mag41vance

wolfman_73 said:


> Yeah I read a few things also. Senior age at 50 now.
> 
> Sounds like nfaa looking to do some good. Happy to see changes.


I was feeling pretty good about being a couple of years away from Senior Class. Now with that rule change, I'm considered a seasoned veteran in the Senior Class. :mg:
I think I just tweaked my back thinkin about that.


----------



## TNMAN

ThunderEagle said:


> interested in hearing the definition of skying


From the agenda item: "*7. No archer shall draw a bow with the bow hand above the top of the head when drawing on a horizontal plane*."

Guess it's possible that the wording changed during discussion. Probably be waiting a couple of weeks on official minutes of meeting.

Doesn't affect my draw.


----------



## ThunderEagle

Doesn't impact mine either, I was just curious as to how they were going to define it.


----------



## Brown Hornet

ccwilder3 said:


> I didn't feel particularly strong about any rule changes but can't help but think that aligning the age groups with every other archery organization is a good thing.
> 
> I believe that last year some of the pro's left the course at the outdoor nationals after a single bad target because it would take a 560 or a 559 to win. That would explain the change in the pro class.
> 
> Also, skying your bow is a dangerous practice and needed to be addressed.



The age change is fine by me....makes since that all the orgs are in line like you said. But I could care less as I am a good ways away from it mattering to me :wink:

The X as a 6 rule....that was coming anyway you look at it. A lot of PROs got rather ticked the last time that went to vote that it didn't pass....now they have a great PRO chairman so they got what they wanted. As for guys walking off...that had squat to do with it.....if people walked off they should be fined or laughed out of the Pro ranks. Because they knew going in that it was going to take a 559 EVERY DAY to have a CHANCE to beat Jesse...and you probably needed a 560 one day. WHY because he shoots those scores every time out....and has for how many years now? He shot a 559 and 560 in 2008 and a 560 both days and set the animal round record in 2009....so if some one walked off after dropping a few...that's on them....the X as a 6 isn't going to give but a couple of people a shot at the top.....if any of those Pros need me to state the names of the guys let me know :chortle:

as for skying the bow....I agree....as long as they are getting people like the guy in the pic above or the family of sky drawers at Nationals in 2009 that I turned in....or the PRO that sky draws every time he hooks up. :zip:


----------



## Brown Hornet

Unclegus said:


> The only constant in life is Change. The only time membership and participation really took a hit was when they went from the 3-5 target to the 5-4-3. Many 550 shooters became 520 shooters overnight, and rather than pick up their game, they chose to quit. There's also many more alternatives these days for things to do with your time rather than spend two grand for an outfit and practice your butt off than there were when I also started in the sixties. Most people just take the easy road. I see a real push for USAA and NFAA joining forces. If the rules change so much you can't keep up with them, just ask and as far a silver bowls, they've become so plentiful, they don't really mean a whole lot unless it's in freestyle That's all most pay any attention to anyway. There's no free lunch there or BHFS. Maybe we should all go back and shoot recurves off the shelves with wooden arrows.
> 
> I think the X rule for Pros is really great..
> 
> And after you shoot beside one of these guys, You'll agree to anything.



That guy wouldn't be shooting next to me for long....at least not till he turned his lbs down or learned to draw a bow.

Way too many classes.......


----------



## Brown Hornet

TNMAN said:


> From the agenda item: "*7. No archer shall draw a bow with the bow hand above the top of the head when drawing on a horizontal plane*."
> 
> Guess it's possible that the wording changed during discussion. Probably be waiting a couple of weeks on official minutes of meeting.
> 
> Doesn't affect my draw.


But what if it's an uphill field target? Your crazy if you think I am not drawing with my bow hand above my head if the target is above my head. :mg: I draw ON target outdoors....flat ground....up hill....down hill...I draw on target.


----------



## mag41vance

Brown Hornet said:


> But what if it's an uphill field target? Your crazy if you think I am not drawing with my bow hand above my head if the target is above my head. :mg: I draw ON target outdoors....flat ground....up hill....down hill...I draw on target.


I think this rule is going to really hurt our buddy Kent. Every target he shoots is above his head. :noidea:


----------



## bowhunter_va_28

Brown Hornet said:


> But what if it's an uphill field target? Your crazy if you think I am not drawing with my bow hand above my head if the target is above my head. :mg: I draw ON target outdoors....flat ground....up hill....down hill...I draw on target.


I think it said something about "when drawing on a horizontal plane" in TNMANs post. That would seem to cover drawing on target.

sent using tapatalk2


----------



## Brown Hornet

mag41vance said:


> I think this rule is going to really hurt our buddy Kent. Every target he shoots is above his head. :noidea:



LMAO beer through the nose burns.... :chortle:


----------



## Brown Hornet

bowhunter_va_28 said:


> I think it said something about "when drawing on a horizontal plane" in TNMANs post. That would seem to cover drawing on target.
> 
> sent using tapatalk2


I see that now....two long replies and lots of reading causes people to miss little things sometimes :wink:


----------



## rock monkey

If the sample pic is of a pro, then the rule doesnt apply.


----------



## Pete53

so are 60 year olds now in a different class than senior class ? and do these new rules apply this year ?


----------



## ArcheryNut2006

there were two proposals on the senior age, one changed seniors only, starting at age 50 instead of 55, the other proposal changed the Master Senior ages also.


----------



## Unclegus

Got info from our fearless leader the Mid Atlantic Councilman in Vegas.

Seniors 50 - 59
Silver seniors 60 - 69
Master seniors 70+

No lighted nocks in any NFAA sanctioned competitions
12" stabilizer in Traditional
X 6 points for pros
Brought back FSL Pro division
No sky drawing

Think there's too many bowls floating around now? BHFS has been added to cub/youth/ya as well as some other classes in the Adult/senior/S senior/Msenior. Could be as many as 40 or 50 bowls. I think I'm going trade in my VE+'s and go to Silver Senior crossbow... My Crystal ball sees a rise in shooting fees to pay for all of these bowls?


----------



## Brown Hornet

Pete53 said:


> so are 60 year olds now in a different class than senior class ? and do these new rules apply this year ?


I could be off on the date....but I think all new rules go into effect on June 1st every year. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Brown Hornet

Unclegus said:


> Got info from our fearless leader the Mid Atlantic Councilman in Vegas.
> 
> Seniors 50 - 59
> Silver seniors 60 - 69
> Master seniors 70+
> 
> No lighted nocks in any NFAA sanctioned competitions
> 12" stabilizer in Traditional
> X 6 points for pros
> Brought back FSL Pro division
> No sky drawing
> 
> Think there's too many bowls floating around now? BHFS has been added to cub/youth/ya as well as some other classes in the Adult/senior/S senior/Msenior. Could be as many as 40 or 50 bowls. I think I'm going trade in my VE+'s and go to Silver Senior crossbow... My Crystal ball sees a rise in shooting fees to pay for all of these bowls?


Maybe they get a cheaper price for buying in bulk. :wink: 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Unclegus

Brown Hornet said:


> Maybe they get a cheaper price for buying in bulk. :wink:
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm betting on genuine, authentic, silver plastic


----------



## treeman65

rock monkey said:


> If the sample pic is of a pro, then the rule doesnt apply.


rules only apply to the joes


----------



## redman

I like to see the X - 6 [points in all the class not just the pros


----------



## field14

Sky drawing in ALL venues in the USA excepting WAA/FITA is out of hand! There are a few top echelong ASA and IBO shooters that sky draw and are allowed to get away with it! However, those same ones that are way out of line also choose not to compete in World Cup, WAA/FITA/NAA events, too. They'd never pass muster on the strict enforcement of the "sky drawing" rule that is ENFORCED regarless of notoriety.
Setting the shoulder my butt...the best of the best do NOT have to "set their shoulder" in that fashion, and they pass muster for the World Cup, WAA/FITA, and NAA competitions without a problem? 

I thought there was something in the agenda concerning a minimum number of competitors in a division before the division would "qualify" for a "National Championship Bowl"???? Something like a minimum of 7 or something like that?
Things are indeed out of hand what with a gazillion shooting styles and now adding even more to the matrix in the younger divisions? Oh, oh. 
Overhaul of prices for registration along with division/shooting class lineups for tournaments...AGAIN...expect the cost of registration to go UP.

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## 2413gary

Changing the senior divisions will just finish killing NFAA to many classes now go back to freestyle and Barebow get some real competition going instead of just giving everybody a bowl when will we learn


----------



## 2413gary

Congratulations! NFAA is now a welfare state! Everybody gets an award; just sign up and get your bowl. You don't even have to work for it. This so down plays the accomplishments of the true Champions!! We have taken the strength of this organization and diminished it through the welfare of those who want something for nothing causing it to become a spineless organization!
Sandy


----------



## Arrowwood

Sandy and Gary, the way I see it, you are both walking, talking, record-breaking proof that's not true... at Mechanicsburg, Sandy was the only shooter in her division, and Gary shot against one other shooter, and both of you earned your bowls, right? At least I believe so.


Caught this at the practice line:


----------



## Unclegus

2413gary said:


> Congratulations! NFAA is now a welfare state! Everybody gets an award; just sign up and get your bowl. You don't even have to work for it. This so down plays the accomplishments of the true Champions!! We have taken the strength of this organization and diminished it through the welfare of those who want something for nothing causing it to become a spineless organization!
> Sandy


Maybe Obama will like what is being done and send us some of the money we have borrowed from China. And the shooters know who the true champions are and who are the wanna bees. You think having BHFS in cubs, Youth and YA is welfare? And what exactly would you try if it was up to you to increasing shooting numbers?? I'm all ears.


----------



## 2413gary

Arrowwood said:


> Sandy and Gary, the way I see it, you are both walking, talking, record-breaking proof that's not true... at Mechanicsburg, Sandy was the only shooter in her division, and Gary shot against one other shooter, and both of you earned your bowls, right? At least I believe so.
> 
> Arrowwood, Yes and we are happy to have them. What we struggle with is in the male non-sight divisions, which includes BB, BH, TRAD, LB there were 34 shooters and 23 received awards. And now they have just added another division to those classes possibly 12 more awards. Where is the competition? We need more competition not more awards.
> Sandy


----------



## Unclegus

2413gary said:


> Arrowwood said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sandy and Gary, the way I see it, you are both walking, talking, record-breaking proof that's not true... at Mechanicsburg, Sandy was the only shooter in her division, and Gary shot against one other shooter, and both of you earned your bowls, right? At least I believe so.
> 
> We need more competition not more awards.
> Sandy
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, we need more competition and not more awards. I couldn't agree with you more. But Devil's advocate here, What if at the Vegas meeting the multitude had decided that the numbers that you quoted above just didn't carry their own weight and for the sake of creating better competition and lowering costs, they decided to announce that they would just plain eliminate those classes in two years and you have that long to prepare to compete in another more popular style??? What would your thoughts be then???????
Click to expand...


----------



## 2413gary

Unclegus, I have been playing this game probably as long as you have and I believe that what we are doing now is not working. I have seen the participation decline. We have been working on some things like getting all non-sight equipment requirements to be the same in all the different organizations such as IFAA, USA (NAA) and NFAA. This should open an avenue to increase some numbers since at the present time the non-sight divisions must change their equipment requirements for each tournament. By not having to change equipment it frees them up to shoot across the board so to speak in all the different organization. The Freestyle archer can pack up their equipment and shoot anywhere in the world with the very same equipment. We are actively involved with trying to increase the participation. If you have any ideas let us know? What are you willing to do to help? We could also combine classes such as BB with BH and FSL with BFHL. These are 4 division that have majorly declined in the past few years. 
Sandy


----------



## 2413gary

Unclegus said:


> 2413gary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, we need more competition and not more awards. I couldn't agree with you more. But Devil's advocate here, What if at the Vegas meeting the multitude had decided that the numbers that you quoted above just didn't carry their own weight and for the sake of creating better competition and lowering costs, they decided to announce that they would just plain eliminate those classes in two years and you have that long to prepare to compete in another more popular style??? What would your thoughts be then???????
> 
> 
> 
> I would FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT! They cannot just vote it out without a petition. The petition is written and sent out to all states then each state give a directive to their Director on how they want him/her to vote on their behalf at the NFAA Annual Meeting. Some Directors don't communicate with their state and some members don't communicate with their Director. We all need to be pro active in communicating with each other and know personally who is voting for us, know who you Director is. We need to have our voices heard. This can make a big difference to whatever division we are in. We hear the voices here on ARCHERYTALK and on TRADTALK but that is not enough. Some of it is voices without action making the voice void in effect. We must speak up for what we want to the officers in charge for our voice be heard. Rally your archery friends to take a stand with you to increase participate and expand archery. We are making an effort and have won a few battles. Many archers have no awareness of the potential danger of losing what they have now. Just exactly like the freedoms of this country. So how do we keep this right? We fight for them and don't give up and tell others to do the same.
> Sandy
Click to expand...


----------



## Unclegus

It's definitely not working. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that one. I wish I knew what to do. In this day of 300FPS+ bows and all the modern gadgetry, and most of all the fame and glory of the top name Hook shooters.( you'll hardly ever see a pic of a finger shooter on the cover of any number of the Archery oriented magazines or ads within unless it's an Olympic team member. I love to shoot fingers and my heart will always be there, but After 48 years of BB and FSL, I changed to FS back in 2010 just to get to meet and shoot with new people other than the small clique of the same people I shot with for years at all levels from local, state, sectional, and national. Guess even as old school as I am ( I don't even have a cell phone) I kind of know that change is in offing and begrudgingly try to embrace it..Peace be with you.


----------



## Unclegus

2413gary said:


> Unclegus said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT! They cannot just vote it out without a petition. The petition is written and sent out to all states then each state give a directive to their Director on how they want him/her to vote on their behalf at the NFAA Annual Meeting. Some Directors don't communicate with their state and some members don't communicate with their Director. We all need to be pro active in communicating with each other and know personally who is voting for us, know who you Director is. We need to have our voices heard. This can make a big difference to whatever division we are in. We hear the voices here on ARCHERYTALK and on TRADTALK but that is not enough. Some of it is voices without action making the voice void in effect. We must speak up for what we want to the officers in charge for our voice be heard. Rally your archery friends to take a stand with you to increase participate and expand archery. We are making an effort and have won a few battles. Many archers have no awareness of the potential danger of losing what they have now. Just exactly like the freedoms of this country. So how do we keep this right? We fight for them and don't give up and tell others to do the same.
> Sandy
> 
> 
> 
> You're missing the point. If you were perrenially the only one in a class, would you not change to something else just to have some competition or graciously smile and walk up and get your bowl every year even though you know the NFAA is losing money on you????
> I have many friend in Archery here in WV. And I shoot at a shop here in the back woods of WV where we shoot spots on Friday nites. There is usually less than 10 shooters. On Saturday nites, they shoot the paper animals. There's standing room only. Getting any of these folks to go somewhere and shoot a spot is like pulling teeth. I've tried my dead level best. Once in a while I can get one or two to venture to an indoor and shoot as a guest, but you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. I can remember back in 09 when the Nats were in PA, and some of my spot shooting friends went to Metropolis instead and shot ASA and I asked them why they would go there and pass up the opportunity to shoot the nats at the best archery course in America and the answer was "We have a chance to win money." We do have one group in Southern WV that shoot indoor spots regularly and have a full house twice a week. Maybe five of them will go shoot the indoor sectionals and nationals, but when it's summertime, it's 3D. My brother and I have begged them to come and shoot our outdoor open or an 810 round. Nada.... I do all I can to promote archery. My Grandkids live in Kentucky where NASP is big. They even have an archery team in their school. I bought both of them the Genesis bows and all of the best accessories you could possibly imagine and spent time with them showing them how to shoot. I don't think the bows have been picked up in over three years. Again, if that horse doesn't want to drink, you can't just drown him.
Click to expand...


----------



## Pete53

gentlemen,when you get to be 50 or 60 or 70 years of age do you really think physically you are as fit as someone younger if you both took care of yourself ? there are some other classes that now have very few people in them.i do think that these new senior classes may draw more seniors to shoot.lets not forget most have been members a long time and worked and paid their share of taxes to this country , we as american`s should be proud to have them come shoot with us !


----------



## 2413gary

Unclegus, Please forgive me for the misunderstanding. Out here we have seen an increase in young people in archery due to the movie "Hunger Games" and the animated movie "Brave". It seems to me then, the way to reach out to the young people is through technology.
Sandy


----------



## Unclegus

2413gary said:


> Unclegus, Please forgive me for the misunderstanding. Out here we have seen an increase in young people in archery due to the movie "Hunger Games" and the animated movie "Brave". It seems to me then, the way to reach out to the young people is through technology.
> Sandy


 If it ain't a rubber deer around these parts, for some reason, people just don't want to fool with it.


----------



## rock monkey

treeman65 said:


> rules only apply to the joes


aint that the truth. saw that same philosophy applied with some IBO footage that made it's rounds on AT.....and not nary a one mentioned the infraction....both in the group and from the viewers way after the event.


----------



## rock monkey

Unclegus said:


> If it ain't a rubber deer around these parts, for some reason, people just don't want to fool with it.


harrumph:darkbeer:harrumph


----------



## pilotmill

The more I think about it the more I want 3 classes. Compound, recurve, longbow. Compound anything goes, recurve Olympic rules, longbow just bring a stick and a mitt. Crazy huh


----------



## Unclegus

pilotmill said:


> The more I think about it the more I want 3 classes. Compound, recurve, longbow. Compound anything goes, recurve Olympic rules, longbow just bring a stick and a mitt. Crazy huh


No, I've always said the two worst days of all my years of shooting were the day I first picked up a compound and the day I put a sight on it.


----------



## snuffer358

The age for all the senior classes is still 55 I just got off the phone with NFAA age has not changed still 55


----------



## fmoss3

Till june the age is 55 Then 50 - 60 - 70, One, two, or three people registered in class, all three get medals.


----------



## Daniel Boone

snuffer358 said:


> The age for all the senior classes is still 55 I just got off the phone with NFAA age has not changed still 55


June 1 it changes
DB


----------



## xring1

Unclegus said:


> 2413gary said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're missing the point. If you were perrenially the only one in a class, would you not change to something else just to have some competition or graciously smile and walk up and get your bowl every year even though you know the NFAA is losing money on you????
> I have many friend in Archery here in WV. And I shoot at a shop here in the back woods of WV where we shoot spots on Friday nites. There is usually less than 10 shooters. On Saturday nites, they shoot the paper animals. There's standing room only. Getting any of these folks to go somewhere and shoot a spot is like pulling teeth. I've tried my dead level best. Once in a while I can get one or two to venture to an indoor and shoot as a guest, but you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. I can remember back in 09 when the Nats were in PA, and some of my spot shooting friends went to Metropolis instead and shot ASA and I asked them why they would go there and pass up the opportunity to shoot the nats at the best archery course in America and the answer was "We have a chance to win money." We do have one group in Southern WV that shoot indoor spots regularly and have a full house twice a week. Maybe five of them will go shoot the indoor sectionals and nationals, but when it's summertime, it's 3D. My brother and I have begged them to come and shoot our outdoor open or an 810 round. Nada.... I do all I can to promote archery. My Grandkids live in Kentucky where NASP is big. They even have an archery team in their school. I bought both of them the Genesis bows and all of the best accessories you could possibly imagine and spent time with them showing them how to shoot. I don't think the bows have been picked up in over three years. Again, if that horse doesn't want to drink, you can't just drown him.
> 
> 
> 
> Brother how do you figure they are losing money??? wonder how much those awards really cost? you know what the NFAA dues and shooting fees are!!!
Click to expand...


----------



## field14

snuffer358 said:


> The age for all the senior classes is still 55 I just got off the phone with NFAA age has not changed still 55


You are correct, it is still 55 for seniors...UNTIL JUNE 1, 2013 and then the new age restrictions AND all the other passed agenda items take effect.
June 1, lighted nocks will become illegal for any and all NFAA competitions
June 1, the "sky drawing rule" comes into effect/enforcement (should be in effect all the time, but now after June 1, it is in writing and enforceable simply by applying the rule, regardless of shooter, division, class, or notoriety; same for Pros as for joes, or it is supposed to be).

That "as of June 1" has been a standard for the NFAA for many years; it gives people the time to make the adjustments on equipment and/or rules changes, and also time to get them published and distributed.


----------



## huteson2us2

I will shoot the Nationals in Darrington this year. At 66, I will compete in the adult division because the senior class is becoming a joke. I never felt like I was unable to compete with the 20 year olds untill I hit 60 and all of a sudden, I was unable to even shoot a 28 target course without feeling like I just ran a mile uphill. 50 years olds that I know are still shooting 550s and winning. Now they can compete on the national level and win. I won the freestyle class at Redding the year I turned 55. I always felt bad about that because I really didn't feel like I was a senior and I beat everyone because I was physically in better shape than the archers older than I. Now I feel that I am in the same physical shape as archers in their 70s. 
I will be shooting my very first unmarked 3-D this month. I need to find a different game. NFAA is dying fast and soon there will only be a few like the ones on this forum left talking about the good old days and what new classes should be added to bring more people into archery. By the way, I am the only one on this forum. I bet that no one here can quess why.


----------



## carlosii

Unclegus said:


> Got info from our fearless leader the Mid Atlantic Councilman in Vegas.
> 
> Seniors 50 - 59
> Silver seniors 60 - 69
> Master seniors 70+
> 
> No lighted nocks in any NFAA sanctioned competitions
> 12" stabilizer in Traditional
> X 6 points for pros
> Brought back FSL Pro division
> No sky drawing
> 
> Think there's too many bowls floating around now? BHFS has been added to cub/youth/ya as well as some other classes in the Adult/senior/S senior/Msenior. Could be as many as 40 or 50 bowls. I think I'm going trade in my VE+'s and go to Silver Senior crossbow... My Crystal ball sees a rise in shooting fees to pay for all of these bowls?


age groups now line up with ASA. problem for me is, there's few, if any, field shoots within easy driving distance for me.


----------



## ccwilder3

Our state membership is up over the last few years. It seems to have taken a big jump since we instituted multi-site championships.


----------



## nock tune

huteson2us2 said:


> I will shoot the Nationals in Darrington this year. At 66, I will compete in the adult division because the senior class is becoming a joke. I never felt like I was unable to compete with the 20 year olds untill I hit 60 and all of a sudden, I was unable to even shoot a 28 target course without feeling like I just ran a mile uphill. 50 years olds that I know are still shooting 550s and winning. Now they can compete on the national level and win. I won the freestyle class at Redding the year I turned 55. I always felt bad about that because I really didn't feel like I was a senior and I beat everyone because I was physically in better shape than the archers older than I. Now I feel that I am in the same physical shape as archers in their 70s.
> I will be shooting my very first unmarked 3-D this month. I need to find a different game. NFAA is dying fast and soon there will only be a few like the ones on this forum left talking about the good old days and what new classes should be added to bring more people into archery. By the way, I am the only one on this forum. I bet that no one here can quess why.


So tell me ? whats tour point!


----------



## Unclegus

David, I think he forgot to take his meds.


----------



## field14

Name me ONE 50 year old that shot in ADULT Freestyle and WON any major big event indoors or out, espeically in the Championship or Pro Division? I know ONE...and that was Dave Barnsdale winning vegas a few years back..in the "Adult" and not Senior Division, that is.

You can't WIN in the Adult Freestyle Division anymore with a run of the mill 550; won't cut it on a Sectional or National Level...unless nobody shows up.


----------



## nock tune

I'm disappointed that no one "directors" had any input on how to promote the NFAA an any one looking into new venues for the Outdoor National.... Seems like a waste of a meeting .....
Plus if any one needs X's to count as 6 points its us Joe's, score change should be for all of use not just the Pros


----------



## carlosii

nock tune said:


> I'm disappointed that no one "directors" had any input on how to promote the NFAA an any one looking into new venues for the Outdoor National.... Seems like a waste of a meeting .....
> Plus if any one needs X's to count as 6 points its us Joe's, score change should be for all of use not just the Pros


:thumbs_up

i see where they're moving the unmarked 3d down to ft. lauderdale in 2014...not sure the reasoning. that's a long haul for lots of folks.


----------



## MMBowhtr

nock tune said:


> I'm disappointed that no one "directors" had any input on how to promote the NFAA an any one looking into new venues for the Outdoor National.... Seems like a waste of a meeting .....
> Plus if any one needs X's to count as 6 points its us Joe's, score change should be for all of use not just the Pros


that worked out well last time didn't it, if the NFAA had made it for the pro's only back in the 70's they wouldn't have lost half their membership over night and give rise to the IBO a few years later


----------



## ccwilder3

carlosii said:


> :thumbs_up
> 
> i see where they're moving the unmarked 3d down to ft. lauderdale in 2014...not sure the reasoning. that's a long haul for lots of folks.


While it will be closer to me, I absolutely agree with you. That has been my complaint about the outdoor nationals. Washington and Pennsylvania are too far for most shooters in the south unless they have a couple of thousand dollars to spend to attend a tournament. One reason the indoor national has such a good turnout is because it located within a 10 hour drive of 90% of the population. They should try to have all the national tournaments in KY or MO.


----------



## field14

50-59 = Senior
60 -69 = Silver Senior
70+ = Master Senior.

The sky drawing rule is way, way, way overdue. NAA/WAF/FITA have had a "sky drawing rule" for years, and it is strictly enforced. From what I"m told the definition voted in is very clear and not open to interpretation, and I was also told that it will be ENFORCED.

The picture above isn't an exaggeration; seen this and even worse (shooter actually having the bow sideways and parallel or nearly parallel to the shooting line, with head turned away from the intended flight path of the arrow!) Young kids are actually being taught to contort their bodies, turn away from the intended path of the arrow, and that it is OK, cuz they "gotta pull at least 40 pounds before they can go hunting."

It is NOT acceptable, pro or not. There are some "Pros" out there who indeed to come to full draw with their bows skied way above the top of their head to, "settle the shoulder"...not anymore; at least not in the NFAA/FITA/WAF/IFAA/NAA....


----------



## carlosii

field14 said:


> 50-59 = Senior
> 60 -69 = Silver Senior
> 70+ = Master Senior.
> 
> The sky drawing rule is way, way, way overdue. NAA/WAF/FITA have had a "sky drawing rule" for years, and it is strictly enforced. From what I"m told the definition voted in is very clear and not open to interpretation, and I was also told that it will be ENFORCED.
> 
> The picture above isn't an exaggeration; seen this and even worse (shooter actually having the bow sideways and parallel or nearly parallel to the shooting line, with head turned away from the intended flight path of the arrow!) Young kids are actually being taught to contort their bodies, turn away from the intended path of the arrow, and that it is OK, cuz they "gotta pull at least 40 pounds before they can go hunting."
> 
> It is NOT acceptable, pro or not. There are some "Pros" out there who indeed to come to full draw with their bows skied way above the top of their head to, "settle the shoulder"...not anymore; at least not in the NFAA/FITA/WAF/IFAA/NAA....


be interesting to see what happens on the pro front. who is going to be responsible for calling them on it? the pro chair?


----------



## Kstigall

carlosii said:


> be interesting to see what happens on the pro front. who is going to be responsible for calling them on it? the pro chair?


I'm willing to bet nobody speaks up in public. Really there is no sense in going public unless the archer insists on challenging the rule by breaking the rule in competition.


----------



## brtesite

ccwilder3 said:


> While it will be closer to me, I absolutely agree with you. That has been my complaint about the outdoor nationals. Washington and Pennsylvania are too far for most shooters in the south unless they have a couple of thousand dollars to spend to attend a tournament. One reason the indoor national has such a good turnout is because it located within a 10 hour drive of 90% of the population. They should try to have all the national tournaments in KY or MO.


 no problem. All you need now is to have some club willing to get in the rotation


----------



## ccwilder3

brtesite said:


> no problem. All you need now is to have some club willing to get in the rotation


Yeah, that is the catch. I don't know if either state has a field setup big enough to host a national.


----------



## USNarcher

Everyone can sit back and complain but what are YOU doing to help promote this sport and grow the NFAA. No matter what decision is made someone isn't going to like it. I volunteered and was voted in to become a state director so I can try to make a difference. But it isn't me that makes the decisions or comes up with the agenda items. It is the membership of the state that I represent.

If some choose to quit the NFAA because of the rules that are voted in then that is their right. It is also my right to say that they are weak and are quiters. If you don't like the changes then actually put some time effort and real thought into it and give an alternative that EVERYONE agrees with and you will realize it isn't that easy. Yes we have a lot of divisions and classes but we also have a lot of diversity in this sport. If you just have a compound class the FS will dominate and the pin shooters will leave, etc. The directors are not self serving by any means. They come together and do their best to make the right decisions. If anyone thinks they can do a better job, by all means step up and contribute.

I just spent 10 days in Las Vegas. I volunteered to set up, referee and break down. I tell you I have a new respect for those that have done it for all these years. Loading and unloading 3 tractor trailers, setting up and running this tournament is back breaking and takes ALL of your time. Yes they get reimbursed for room but I will tell you it's not worth it for that reason. It's because they have passion and are giving something back to this sport. And for that they get mostly complaints about how things could be run better. Think about it.


----------



## rock monkey

ok, that's great.....we finally got the seniors to 50 thing passed. maybe some can stop whining. now how about kickin some people hard enough in the backsides till their heads pop out? clearly, their field of view is quite restricted from their perspective.


the C/BL has typos......but nobody seems to care.

the C/BL has options for rounds that arent even shot, that could be removed without issue. optional targets that most likely arent even in print and cost-prohibitive to have a custom run.


i know that ohio's director wont answer emails let alone vote with the majority of the membership's wants. i asked him what the NFAA's club insurance program consists of.........2yrs ago. have i gotten a reply? NO. i get a better response from Jimmy Hoffa. yes, i asked the state VP about it first, and when he didnt know, i went up the chain. personal interests and non-communication policies dont support the cause. when a club has questions, who do they turn to if NOBODY wants to do anything?

the NFAA isnt going to do a damn thing that requires them to actively promote or advance themselves. just keep doin the SSDD. i know for a fact that the duties and responsibilities in the C/BL specifically states that the VP of the NFAA shall perform public relations. buying a banner ad and not keeping it relevant doesnt do a whole lot for the cause. when's the last time we shot IN Atlantic City? a website that's harder to navigate than a tax return, that is always encouraging. maybe getting their grandchildren to put one together that functions better than an easter egg hunt would help.

maybe it's time the barn was burnt down and start from scratch because remodeling and rehabbing it just stirs up the mud.


----------



## USNarcher

Rock you are 100% correct about the C/BL. Some things were addressed and corrected and I am sure that there are plenty more. I for one will read through it more carefully in the next few months and submit items that may need to be cleared up or chnaged. Now that I know the process and how things go I will look at things like that.


----------



## USNarcher

Seriously though. If you were an outsider looking in and read all of the constructive criticism on here you would come to the following conclusion. Beings how archery doesn't seem to be an physically enduring sport and the fact that there are really only 2 types of bows then all we need is 4 trophies. 2 kids trophies and 2 adult trophies. One for compound one for recurve. If we don't need more age divisions then why should we seperate male from female? If we don't need more classes then you shoot what you bring, it's your choice. Boy howdy would our sport grow then. Just that simple.


----------



## field14

Kstigall said:


> I'm willing to bet nobody speaks up in public. Really there is no sense in going public unless the archer insists on challenging the rule by breaking the rule in competition.


The key to all of this is WHEN (not an if on sky drawing...there will be those that will test the waters!!) the rule is broken in competition, that it is ENFORCED regardless of whether it is a pro or a joe; it matters not. Of course, will the line judges do their jobs and ENFORCE it, or will they sit back and wait for another "shooter on the line" to complain about it? IMHO, this rule is NOT up to the shooters to self-police. It is a SAFETY issue and that falls upon the line judges and those in control of the shooting line. Rule violation? Nail 'em then and there. It is their JOB to insure safety on the line, and not up to the shooters to do this. We'll see how often the water gets tested come June 1, 2013. Will those in control grow cajunas and ENFORCE this or will they turn their heads?

About the whiners complaining and being angry with USNarcher.....If I recall, 80% or more of NFAA members AND Non-NFAA members responding to those polls were in favor of the change in the age limits on Seniors, etc. 80% wanted the age limits changed. What is there to pee and moan about when 80% say to go for the change?

Yet, according to USNarcher's post..we apparently have some "senior pros" that are supposedly angry with the Director(s) that made the poll and got the information collated and presented? How many of those "senior pros" that are griping, peeing and moaning, etc actually took part in the polls? 

A friend said it best: Yes, some say that "I had to wait until I was 55 before I went to seniors, so the rest of them can wait too." My friend went on to say, "Yep, that really gets changes made, doesn't it? It is a bunch of nonsense to make that stance and expect something different to happen."

Cry and moan because the competition might just stiffen up, and there will be MORE in the senior division and "fewer easy pickings" for the Adult Divisions? HMMMMM....bit worried are we? A few that I know have already commented, "Wow, I'm now a senior and can get out of the adult and I should really be able to win more frequently!" Yep...these guys are counting their chickens before they hatch; it is likely those pickings won't be as easy as they think they will be!

I figure (but could be wrong, but I doubt it) that most of the whiners are those that didn't participate in the polls and didn't make their feelings known to their Directors either. Others are "top shots" so they figure "just suck it up and learn to shoot better"!
If you have a Director that isn't voting how the constituents tell him/her to vote, then what is that Director still doing as a "director"?? Recall them from office and can 'em!


----------



## carlosii

i'm trying to figure out how all this discussion is going to help the sport grow.


----------



## xring1

*skying???*

Would you all call this SKY drawing???


----------



## ThunderEagle

Good question Xring,

"7. No archer shall draw a bow with the bow hand above the top of the head when drawing on a horizontal plane."

From earlier in the thread, this is the definition. I don't know if the "horizontal plane" factors into this or not. I know I start my bow hand high, but more like the middle of my head, maybe about a hand width higher than when I'm at anchor. However, I also keep the arrow pointed at the target.


----------



## gcab

Just out of curiosity, how many on this thread complaining about the rule changes actually go to the NFAA shoots to where this will affect them(vegas, louisville, yankton, state, sectionals, etc)? For some of the names here, I look through and didnt see them on the results from previous shoots in the last year.. so what are you complaining about it? If you didnt go before the change, and you are complaining about the change itself.. then you probably won't go after the change. So why not stop complaining and just go away so those that want to enjoy themselves with the sport dont have to deal with the nonsense. Ill miss Louisville this year, but maybe next year. I look forward to the changes.


----------



## vanguard

I think with all the " AGE " changing classes, there should be " NEW " records started June 1 2013. If you already set a record it should stand forever. NOT be replaced by a 50 yr old in the " NEW " senior class cause it was " SET " by at least a 55 yr old " NOT "
A younger 50 yr old. Just say'n and same for the other age groups.


----------



## vanguard

I been there seen it first nationals 2000, shot 60x at sectionals. Some old timers shoot awesome scores, but will not be right for younger whipper snappers come along 5 years younger and beat there score because of an age change


----------



## Daniel Boone

gcab said:


> Just out of curiosity, how many on this thread complaining about the rule changes actually go to the NFAA shoots to where this will affect them(vegas, louisville, yankton, state, sectionals, etc)? For some of the names here, I look through and didnt see them on the results from previous shoots in the last year.. so what are you complaining about it? If you didnt go before the change, and you are complaining about the change itself.. then you probably won't go after the change. So why not stop complaining and just go away so those that want to enjoy themselves with the sport dont have to deal with the nonsense. Ill miss Louisville this year, but maybe next year. I look forward to the changes.


I like the new rule but honestly understand where these members are coming from. Anyone 55 that does shoot on local level/state or national has a right to voice there opionion. When did it become a requirement to go to national shoot. If some of us wouldnt have complained for many years after years this might not have happened at all.
DB


----------



## Brown Hornet

carlosii said:


> i'm trying to figure out how all this discussion is going to help the sport grow.


I was gonna respond with a quote to your other post about outdoor nationals and indoor nationals....

Yes indoors being in Kentucky is a better location for a lot more people....but in all honesty the difference in attendance has very little to do with location and a lot more to do with the number of shooters that do shoot or have shot or would go to shoot field. 

Indoor Nationals draws field shooter, FITA shooters, 3D shooters, and indoor only shooters....

Outdoor Nationals draws field shooters....and only those that are truly die hard and can afford to go. 

I was at the range the other day while an indoor shoot was wrapping up....they had around 43 shooters....other then myself and Niño there were only 2 other people in the range that had ever shot a field round. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Brown Hornet

xring1 said:


> Would you all call this SKY drawing???


Your damn straight I would....

The funny thing is most of the people that draw that way...or struggle to draw the bow...have a release arm elbow in the same or similar position. 

Learn the proper drawing motion already people :chortle:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## archer_nm

Matt you did good and I thank you for getting involved, I wish all NFAA members could be a Director for one meeting and shoot to see what goes on.


----------



## rsarns

Most of us go to te Nationals and just hve fun and shoot. I would like to say thank you to all the volunteers that help setup, run and organize the shoots we all enjoy. It is appreciated!


----------



## xring1

Brown Hornet said:


> Your damn straight I would....
> 
> The funny thing is most of the people that draw that way...or struggle to draw the bow...have a release arm elbow in the same or similar position.
> 
> Learn the proper drawing motion already people :chortle:
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I may have missed it but what is going to be the penealty for doing this??


----------



## field14

xring1 said:


> Would you all call this SKY drawing???


No, her bow hand is NOT above the top of her head, AND there is very little being done at this point within the draw cycle of the bow.

But that is "my" interpretation of the rule as it was originally proposed in the agenda item. I heard that it was re-written slightly, but don't know the final wording.


----------



## field14

xring1 said:


> I may have missed it but what is going to be the penealty for doing this??


IF the NFAA follows what they should and goes with what WAA/FITA/IFAA/NAA do, then there is ONE warning about it, and if that is repeated, the shooter is then asked to leave the shooting line and they are no longer in the competition. This also INCLUDES the practice ends, too.
The FITA/WAA/NAA also do NOT expect "peer enforcement" of this rule...it is specifically in the hands of the tournament officials.


----------



## ThunderEagle

field14 said:


> No, her bow hand is NOT above the top of her head, AND there is very little being done at this point within the draw cycle of the bow.
> 
> But that is "my" interpretation of the rule as it was originally proposed in the agenda item. I heard that it was re-written slightly, but don't know the final wording.


I think that might have been the point of him posting the picture. I also agree that it doesn't violate how the rule is worded as presented in this thread. However, I think most of us can agree we don't want to see people drawing this way.


----------



## field14

ThunderEagle said:


> Good question Xring,
> 
> "7. No archer shall draw a bow with the bow hand above the top of the head when drawing on a horizontal plane."
> 
> From earlier in the thread, this is the definition. I don't know if the "horizontal plane" factors into this or not. I know I start my bow hand high, but more like the middle of my head, maybe about a hand width higher than when I'm at anchor. However, I also keep the arrow pointed at the target.


Thunder eagle you mean to say, ""7. No archer shall* NOT *draw a bow with the bow hand above the top of the head when drawing on a horizontal plane."

Of course the "shall" makes it enforceable, if the line judges and tournament officials do their jobs.


----------



## ThunderEagle

I just copied and pasted, but I'm not sure if your correction makes sense to me. "No Archer shall not..." Doesn't that get into double negative territory?


----------



## field14

ThunderEagle said:


> I just copied and pasted, but I'm not sure if your correction makes sense to me. "No Archer shall not..." Doesn't that get into double negative territory?


ThunderEagle,
You are correct, and I am mistaken. I gripe when people don't READ things, and then turn-around and make the boo-boo myself!

The way it is written is indeed clear and enforceable....if the tournament officials simply enforce it across the board for everyone!

""7. No archer shall draw a bow with the bow hand above the top of the head when drawing on a horizontal plane."

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## ThunderEagle

No worries, I just couldn't wrap my head around the wording.

I'm a software developer and "they" like to write requirements that way. Shall do this, shall not do that, May do this. Drives me nuts, take the lawyering out of it!

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## gcab

field14 said:


> No, her bow hand is NOT above the top of her head, AND there is very little being done at this point within the draw cycle of the bow.
> 
> But that is "my" interpretation of the rule as it was originally proposed in the agenda item. I heard that it was re-written slightly, but don't know the final wording.


Just out of curiosity, what does the bow hand not being taller than the top of the head have to do with anything? So in the picture given, the hand is, lets just say for example, even with the head. So if the draw hand continues to be drawn at a downward angle, and the shot goes off.. that is not dangerous, or less anyways, than if the bow hand was above the head? Not sure that makes sense to me. And what about really short people shooting the top target at Nationals or Vegas, or youth that shoot the 20 yards.. top target would be above their head so they have to draw higher to being with. Not sure how that will be monitored for enforced... almost like the 2 line judges for the 50 bails per side or whatever it typically is will need to stand around measuring angles for drawing per archer and so forth. Seems like time spent on other issue could have been better spent to help grow the sport, but thats ok. I accept the rule change and no complaining. Just not sure how that will work


----------



## field14

gcab said:


> Just out of curiosity, what does the bow hand not being taller than the top of the head have to do with anything? So in the picture given, the hand is, lets just say for example, even with the head. So if the draw hand continues to be drawn at a downward angle, and the shot goes off.. that is not dangerous, or less anyways, than if the bow hand was above the head? Not sure that makes sense to me. And what about really short people shooting the top target at Nationals or Vegas, or youth that shoot the 20 yards.. top target would be above their head so they have to draw higher to being with. Not sure how that will be monitored for enforced... almost like the 2 line judges for the 50 bails per side or whatever it typically is will need to stand around measuring angles for drawing per archer and so forth. Seems like time spent on other issue could have been better spent to help grow the sport, but thats ok. I accept the rule change and no complaining. Just not sure how that will work


It has everything to do with it...READ THE RULE! Clear and explicit; no excuses, no room for "judgement"...
Copy/pasted from the agenda item: *"7. No archer shall draw a bow with the bow hand above the top of the head when drawing on a horizontal plane."*

It also is explicit..."..when drawn on a horizontal plane" too. 
Matters not what you think or don't think is "silly"...it is the rule after June 1, 2013. So READ THE RULE...and unless you are one of those that doesn't understand "ILLEGAL" like so many do with regard to immigration...and yes, that law is being ignored too and pushed beyond the limits. There will be those to test the waters, no doubt about it.

A quick photograph of the offender solves the problem of enforcement. Easy. Big deal only for those sky-drawing outside the limits of the written rule. Enforcement NOT a problem...if the line judges and announcer have the cajunas to do so regardless of whether it is a Joe or a Pro.


----------



## rock monkey

i seriously doubt anyone, even at the top level of competition will be called out or even brought to the attention of the officials at a tournament. the higher you go (competition-wise), the less the rules apply to or more correctly are enforced.

http://www.ibo.net/pdf/2013/IBO_RULES_2013.pdf

C. Binoculars and Rangefinders
1. An integral part of IBO 3-D competition is the archer’s ability to judge yardage without the assistance of range finding devices or assistance from others. Therefore, cameras, rangefinders, or any other devices that may be used to calculate yardage to the target are prohibited. An archer may not use parts of his or her body, the bow, or any other accessories or equipment to calculate yardage. Archers using adjustable sights may not adjust their sight elevation after drawing the bow and sighting the target. Any mark on otherwise legal binoculars that could be construed as a reference point for range finding is prohibited.
2. Hand-held binoculars are allowed without magnification limitations.
3. *Binoculars shall not be used at the stake after the shot has been taken.* An archer with an adjustable sight may not re-adjust his or her sight after using binoculars at the shooting stake. Archers may utilize binoculars additionally to view the target while waiting their turn at the shooting stake or from an on-deck area behind a group that is in the process of shooting a target.







yes, i know this is an IBO event but the same context of peer enforcement applies. rules apply to ALL COMPETITORS EQUALLY.

get off my knob about who is involved. if i could get ahold of the link for the 2012 rules, i'd have posted it.

if you want to say this is a new addition to the IBO rules, here's the same paragraph from 2009

C. Binoculars And Rangefinders 
1. An integral part of IBO 3-D competition is the archer’s ability to judge yardage without 
the assistance of range finding devices or assistance from others. Therefore, cameras, 
rangefinders, or any other devices that may be used to calculate yardage to the target are 
prohibited. An archer may not use parts of his or her body, the bow, or any other 
accessories or equipment to calculate yardage. Any mark on otherwise legal binoculars 
that could be construed as a reference point for range finding is prohibited. 
2. Hand-held binoculars of 8.5 or less magnification (per manufacturer’s specifications) are 
allowed. 
3. Binoculars shall not be used at the stake after the shot has been taken. An archer with an 
adjustable sight may not re-adjust his or her sight after using binoculars at the shooting 
stake. Archers may utilize binoculars additionally to view the target while waiting their 
turn at the shooting stake or from an on-deck area behind a group that is in the process of 
shooting a target.


----------



## Xs24-7

They are not at an IBO shoot in your video, they are at an ASA shoot.


----------



## rock monkey

Xs24-7 said:


> They are not at an IBO shoot in your video, they are at an ASA shoot.


wrong, it was at the Cardinal Shooting center, OH.....3rd leg TC..... the weekend of july 15th.


----------



## gcab

field14 said:


> It has everything to do with it...READ THE RULE! Clear and explicit; no excuses, no room for "judgement"...
> Copy/pasted from the agenda item: *"7. No archer shall draw a bow with the bow hand above the top of the head when drawing on a horizontal plane."*
> 
> It also is explicit..."..when drawn on a horizontal plane" too.
> Matters not what you think or don't think is "silly"...it is the rule after June 1, 2013. So READ THE RULE...and unless you are one of those that doesn't understand "ILLEGAL" like so many do with regard to immigration...and yes, that law is being ignored too and pushed beyond the limits. There will be those to test the waters, no doubt about it.
> 
> A quick photograph of the offender solves the problem of enforcement. Easy. Big deal only for those sky-drawing outside the limits of the written rule. Enforcement NOT a problem...if the line judges and announcer have the cajunas to do so regardless of whether it is a Joe or a Pro.


So whats the rule when an archer does not draw on a horizontal plane? The picture above shows an archer not drawing on a horizontal plane.. just for arguement sake, lets say the arrow is at a 45 degree angle. So hand is head height or less, so this would be considered safe? Got it. Now it makes sense.


----------



## brtesite

xring1 said:


> Would you all call this SKY drawing???


don't know about the wording, but in my opinion, from the picture, she look like she is struggling to get the bow back because of the poundage. That is where Most of the "sky drawing " comes from. It is only that one second that it takes to get the string back . After that , they seem to handle it ok. That one second is where the danger of the release going off.


----------



## nock tune

So your standing at a target 65yards away and its 15 degress down hill. you draw your bow as per the rule ,level and all that and your release goes off sending your arrow to who knows were, is that less dangerous than "sky drawing" ?


----------



## zenarch

redman said:


> I like to see the X - 6 [points in all the class not just the pros


I think the X should be eliminated in all of archery, especially indoors. Maybe then the sham shoot-offs in Vegas and the Nationals wouldn't be so boring and drawn out. If it's a ring on the target, give it a scoring value. Make it so that one bad shot indoors doesn't put you out of a 3 day tournament as it does now.
Joe B.


----------



## field14

zenarch said:


> I think the X should be eliminated in all of archery, especially indoors. Maybe then the sham shoot-offs in Vegas and the Nationals wouldn't be so boring and drawn out. If it's a ring on the target, give it a scoring value. Make it so that one bad shot indoors doesn't put you out of a 3 day tournament as it does now.
> Joe B.


Good point, Joe! In addition, they count the X's in Vegas as the seeding position for the shoot-off and the REAL winner, that is the person with the most "X's" has to basically win the tournament TWICE to garner the money! This year, Chance Beaubouef shot 86 baby-X's, and it didn't do him any good at all.
My opinion is that if they want to have this hoola shootoff, then fine...BUT...the person that shoots the 900 with the most X's....sits out and is guaranteed no worse than either 2nd or 4th place! They do this in bowling and have for years. The top "qualifier" sits and everyone else "shoots up" to qualify to shoot against that top qualifier. He is guaranteed no worse than 2nd place for being the best one for the entire series of games bowled for the tournament!

I know everyone knows the rules going in, BUT....it is ridiculous to shoot 86 X's and then you have to basically start from scratch again and shoot thru ALL of the shootoff to win. You already won it the first time by shooting more baby-x's than anyone else.

If they won't guarantee the top X-shooter that shoots 900 at least to the quarter finals (4th place), then GIVE A BONUS to the one that does shoot 900 with the most X's. This person has earned at least that. Too many times the person with a 900 and the most X's gets NOTHING for his efforts, and IMHO, that is plain wrong!
Probably, with the way things have gone in the past, the BONUS MONEY for the person with a 900 and most X's would "float" better than having that person "sit" and have everyone else shoot up for the right to face him in the finals, but either way would be better than the way it is right now.

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## Rolo

field14 said:


> Good point, Joe! In addition, they count the X's in Vegas as the seeding position for the shoot-off and the REAL winner, that is the person with the most "X's" has to basically win the tournament TWICE to garner the money! This year, Chance Beaubouef shot 86 baby-X's, and it didn't do him any good at all.
> My opinion is that if they want to have this hoola shootoff, then fine...BUT...the person that shoots the 900 with the most X's....sits out and is guaranteed no worse than either 2nd or 4th place! They do this in bowling and have for years. The top "qualifier" sits and everyone else "shoots up" to qualify to shoot against that top qualifier. He is guaranteed no worse than 2nd place for being the best one for the entire series of games bowled for the tournament!
> 
> I know everyone knows the rules going in, BUT....it is ridiculous to shoot 86 X's and then you have to basically start from scratch again and shoot thru ALL of the shootoff to win. You already won it the first time by shooting more baby-x's than anyone else.
> 
> If they won't guarantee the top X-shooter that shoots 900 at least to the quarter finals (4th place), then GIVE A BONUS to the one that does shoot 900 with the most X's. This person has earned at least that. Too many times the person with a 900 and the most X's gets NOTHING for his efforts, and IMHO, that is plain wrong!
> Probably, with the way things have gone in the past, the BONUS MONEY for the person with a 900 and most X's would "float" better than having that person "sit" and have everyone else shoot up for the right to face him in the finals, but either way would be better than the way it is right now.
> 
> field14 (Tom D.)


All true, at least in the abstract. But, I haven't heard much of a ground swell from those actually affected by the current rule to change it to what you propose either. In fact, it has been represented that those who are affected by the rule (Vegas & Indoor Nats) are fairly comfortable with it, and not looking for a change...at least generally speaking.

There certainly would be a loud objection to changing it from the general membership, whether it be just for the 'Pro' or 'Championship' divisions, and/or all divisions. The change in field scoring likely passed because it is a "+1" scoring method, and not a straight 6-5-4-3 system.


----------



## field14

Rolo said:


> All true, at least in the abstract. But, I haven't heard much of a ground swell from those actually affected by the current rule to change it to what you propose either. In fact, it has been represented that those who are affected by the rule (Vegas & Indoor Nats) are fairly comfortable with it, and not looking for a change...at least generally speaking.
> 
> There certainly would be a loud objection to changing it from the general membership, whether it be just for the 'Pro' or 'Championship' divisions, and/or all divisions. The change in field scoring likely passed because it is a "+1" scoring method, and not a straight 6-5-4-3 system.


Oh, but there is a ton of grumbling about the NFAA round not being a "challenge" and "boring as h### and that something should be done to make it more of a challenge for the "Pros". One thing mentioned was 6 points for the X-ring, and 7 points if it is "Inside out" on the X-ring for a total possible of 420. There is even a target face out there that accommodates this quite well, but when brought forth, it didn't garner the support, so it apparently went by the wayside.

I don't know if the change in the shootoff for Vegas I mentioned above has ever been presented or not. It isn't really all that significant to take that one person with 900 and the most X's and guarantee then no worse than the quarter finals, or better yet no worse than 2nd place. It certainly would have to be approached and worded properly, and this catfish doesn't have the "whiskers" to even attempt to present it. This would have to come from a card-carrying PRO or group of card-carrying PROS in order to have any chance of passing muster.
The bonus money for that shooter with 900 and the most X's would probably be even tougher? I don't know, but obviously, again, I'm not a card-carrying PRO, so couldn't have a say in this; thus it is only an "idea" and not much more than that.

Basically it IS 6-5-4-3 scoring for the PROS excepting the total possible isn't changing, they just "make up points" for those missed, is all, so that a "4" doesn't necessarily put you completely out of the tournament, and that isn't all bad. Gives you some semblance of a chance to make up those "4s" by shooting more X's. I heard where one of the shooters in the shootdown at Vegas shot 94 X's at the Outdoor Nationals last summer; case in point...shoot a few "4's" and with a higher X-count (6's), you make up for them and are right back in the hunt.


----------



## Rolo

field14 said:


> Oh, but there is a ton of grumbling about the NFAA round not being a "challenge" and "boring as h### and that something should be done to make it more of a challenge for the "Pros". One thing mentioned was 6 points for the X-ring, and 7 points if it is "Inside out" on the X-ring for a total possible of 420. There is even a target face out there that accommodates this quite well, but when brought forth, it didn't garner the support, so it apparently went by the wayside.


Yes, grumbling and boring, not just limited complaints of the Pros either. But without fundamentally changing the game (either scoring or distance shot) that isn't going to change. Change the scoring for the Pro division only, and the AM division is going to protest...loudly and repeatedly. Change the scoring for all divisions, and the AM divisions will equally protest. Since the NFAA is 'built' around the AM divisins, I don't see either changing.

Also, just going by what was represented to me, by someone(s) directly affected.



field14 said:


> I don't know if the change in the shootoff for Vegas I mentioned above has ever been presented or not. It isn't really all that significant to take that one person with 900 and the most X's and guarantee then no worse than the quarter finals, or better yet no worse than 2nd place. It certainly would have to be approached and worded properly, and this catfish doesn't have the "whiskers" to even attempt to present it. This would have to come from a card-carrying PRO or group of card-carrying PROS in order to have any chance of passing muster.
> The bonus money for that shooter with 900 and the most X's would probably be even tougher? I don't know, but obviously, again, I'm not a card-carrying PRO, so couldn't have a say in this; thus it is only an "idea" and not much more than that.


Don't know if it has or hasn't. Completely a Council/WAF board issue. But again, going on what has been represented, there is not a clamoring for a change, and those affected directly have shot in many events with the same bracketing system you mention. Bonus money for high x count sounds like a good idea...might even be possible if and when additional sponsorship money is put into the pot. Likely going to have to come from non-endemics though...the industry cannot continue to be the sole support. At least all the 900 shooters are guaranteed some $ (at least they were last year).



field14 said:


> Basically it IS 6-5-4-3 scoring for the PROS excepting the total possible isn't changing, they just "make up points" for those missed, is all, so that a "4" doesn't necessarily put you completely out of the tournament, and that isn't all bad. Gives you some semblance of a chance to make up those "4s" by shooting more X's. I heard where one of the shooters in the shootdown at Vegas shot 94 X's at the Outdoor Nationals last summer; case in point...shoot a few "4's" and with a higher X-count (6's), you make up for them and are right back in the hunt.


Yes, that is the intent, but it is a +1 system. Allows the AMs to compare their scores more easily, which is a big concern in the AM classes. Rather than recording a '6', it will be scored as a '5' and an 'X' or '+1'. "Base score' remains a 560 +a point for Xs. So, 2 columns. One the base score, one the number of Xs. Totaled to be whatever. Allows the AMs to compare base score and total Xs, while also allowing the Pro division members to 'come back' after dropping some 4s. Had it been proposed in a 6-5-4-3 format, I doubt it would have passed.

And yes, the majority of the pro division (at least those whoi responded) were in favor of this.


----------



## ThunderEagle

field14 said:


> My opinion is that if they want to have this hoola shootoff, then fine...BUT...the person that shoots the 900 with the most X's....sits out and is guaranteed no worse than either 2nd or 4th place! They do this in bowling and have for years. The top "qualifier" sits and everyone else "shoots up" to qualify to shoot against that top qualifier. He is guaranteed no worse than 2nd place for being the best one for the entire series of games bowled for the tournament!


Isn't that how the LAS Classic shoot-off works?


----------



## Kstigall

ThunderEagle said:


> Isn't that how the LAS Classic shoot-off works?


The LAS Classic uses shootoffs and then finally a "shoot up" format.


----------



## Brown Hornet

Yep f14 that bulldog from Va shot 90 some Xs at Nationals....he usually shoots in the 90s some place is what one of his shooting buddies told me when we were talking about it before this rule passed...

But he also said that King FreakShow has also been known to drop 100X :chortle: 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Unclegus

Brown Hornet said:


> Yep f14 that bulldog from Va shot 90 some Xs at Nationals....he usually shoots in the 90s some place is what one of his shooting buddies told me when we were talking about it before this rule passed...
> 
> But he also said that King FreakShow has also been known to drop 100X :chortle:
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It's definitely going to be interesting, Only thing is going to be kind of difficult for a while to get used to what the barometer is reading when it's 672 instead of 560. Will the Pros now have to take a lunch and a sleeping bag when they go on the range even with a three let down rule.


----------



## gobblemg

When do the new rule take effect. Senior class going to 50 years old instead of 55 is the one i'm asking about.


----------



## Daniel Boone

gobblemg said:


> When do the new rule take effect. Senior class going to 50 years old instead of 55 is the one i'm asking about.


June 1 2013


----------



## gobblemg

Thanks


----------



## reylamb

rock monkey said:


> wrong, it was at the Cardinal Shooting center, OH.....3rd leg TC..... the weekend of july 15th.


Landscape wise it does look a lot like Metropolis....not that it matters, ASA has the same rule about not using binos after the shot.


----------



## yeahyeah

Please explain, why is the X -6 point rule for the pros only...I really don't know why, not trying to start anything, new to sport.

Thank you -Adam


----------



## yeahyeah

I think i might have figured it out...for ties, are the pros scored separate from the joes?


----------



## Pete53

thanks for the senior answers,i would like to mention something about nfaa membership,here in minnesota we have a large state club called the MSAA we used to have some of the group including myself as nfaa members.the MSAA has over 2,000 members and our state indoor most of the time has around 1,000 members shoot this state indoor,but the nfaa came up with a ******ed rule that all MSAA members had to be nfaa members to part of the nfaa.well they lost over 400 nfaa members including myself ,so in times like this its time for the nfaa to change their policy for the betterment of archery,so for starters make a state club have 20 % of their state members become nfaa too.that will give the nfaa 400 new or more members !


----------



## ccwilder3

Pete53 said:


> thanks for the senior answers,i would like to mention something about nfaa membership,here in minnesota we have a large state club called the MSAA we used to have some of the group including myself as nfaa members.the MSAA has over 2,000 members and our state indoor most of the time has around 1,000 members shoot this state indoor,but the nfaa came up with a ******ed rule that all MSAA members had to be nfaa members to part of the nfaa.well they lost over 400 nfaa members including myself ,so in times like this its time for the nfaa to change their policy for the betterment of archery,so for starters make a state club have 20 % of their state members become nfaa too.that will give the nfaa 400 new or more members !


In Florida you have to be a member of the NAA or the NFAA to be a member of the Florida Archery Assoc. I believe it is because of insurance.


----------



## brtesite

Pete53 said:


> thanks for the senior answers,i would like to mention something about nfaa membership,here in minnesota we have a large state club called the MSAA we used to have some of the group including myself as nfaa members.the MSAA has over 2,000 members and our state indoor most of the time has around 1,000 members shoot this state indoor,but the nfaa came up with a ******ed rule that all MSAA members had to be nfaa members to part of the nfaa.well they lost over 400 nfaa members including myself ,so in times like this its time for the nfaa to change their policy for the betterment of archery,so for starters make a state club have 20 % of their state members become nfaa too.that will give the nfaa 400 new or more members !


not to poke a stick in the eye, but it is no different than to require all club members to pay dues if they want to belong to a club


----------



## Brown Hornet

Pete53 said:


> thanks for the senior answers,i would like to mention something about nfaa membership,here in minnesota we have a large state club called the MSAA we used to have some of the group including myself as nfaa members.the MSAA has over 2,000 members and our state indoor most of the time has around 1,000 members shoot this state indoor,but the nfaa came up with a ******ed rule that all MSAA members had to be nfaa members to part of the nfaa.well they lost over 400 nfaa members including myself ,so in times like this its time for the nfaa to change their policy for the betterment of archery,so for starters make a state club have 20 % of their state members become nfaa too.that will give the nfaa 400 new or more members !


So you had 400 plus people drop their NFAA membership and stop shooting over $20? :chortle:


----------



## Rolo

Pete53 said:


> thanks for the senior answers,i would like to mention something about nfaa membership,here in minnesota we have a large state club called the MSAA we used to have some of the group including myself as nfaa members.the MSAA has over 2,000 members and our state indoor most of the time has around 1,000 members shoot this state indoor,but the nfaa came up with a ******ed rule that all MSAA members had to be nfaa members to part of the nfaa.well they lost over 400 nfaa members including myself ,so in times like this its time for the nfaa to change their policy for the betterment of archery,so for starters make a state club have 20 % of their state members become nfaa too.that will give the nfaa 400 new or more members !


It wasn't a rull that just materialized out of thin air. It had been in the book for a long time. And, the rule only applied to the 2 sanctioning shoots. A non-NFAA member could not participate in the 2 state shoots that the NFAA required for the state to be an NFAA affiliate.

That rule was changed and modified in 2012. Now, non-NFAA members can participate in all state NFAA sanctioned shoots as 'guest participants'. They are ineligible for awards, etc. Which makes perfect sense for the purpose of a sanctioning shoot. To my knowledge, there has never been a rule that required NFAA membership to join a state affiliated club. Only NFAA membership was required to shoot in the 2 sanctioning shoots.

There are minimum NFAA members of local clubs required to become affiliated with the state/NFAA. I think it is 5. Not a lot really...


----------



## rock monkey

Pete53 said:


> thanks for the senior answers,i would like to mention something about nfaa membership,here in minnesota we have a large state club called the MSAA we used to have some of the group including myself as nfaa members.the MSAA has over 2,000 members and our state indoor most of the time has around 1,000 members shoot this state indoor,but the nfaa came up with a ******ed rule that all MSAA members had to be nfaa members to part of the nfaa.well they lost over 400 nfaa members including myself ,so in times like this its time for the nfaa to change their policy for the betterment of archery,so for starters make a state club have 20 % of their state members become nfaa too.that will give the nfaa 400 new or more members !


show me where the IBO and ASA allow non members to shoot for awards? better yet, show me ANY winner of a state level or higher 3D shoot where the winner was NOT a member of the sanctioning org.









yup, thought so.


----------



## Unclegus

I'd kinda like to see that one myself.


----------



## 2413gary

World IBO trad championship


rock monkey said:


> show me where the IBO and ASA allow non members to shoot for awards? better yet, show me ANY winner of a state level or higher 3D shoot where the winner was NOT a member of the sanctioning org.


----------



## rock monkey

since the rules for the Traditional Worlds cant be found online, i can neither confirm nor deny the exception to the rule of having to be a member of an org to be able to compete for awards.


----------



## Arrowwood

http://www.ibo.net/pdf/2012/2011-12 Trad IBO Rules.pdf


----------



## rock monkey

Arrowwood said:


> http://www.ibo.net/pdf/2012/2011-12 Trad IBO Rules.pdf


Trad Worlds' rules for 2013 read the same.

in the context of the discussion, for anyone that shoots modern equipment, you cannot shoot for awards WITHOUT being a member of the org.

all of the trad shooters i know, go out and shoot for fun. very few if any care about getting anything more than coming back with the same amount of arrows. the reality of the trad guys vs the modern guys, even when the trad guys miss a target and hunt down their arrows, they still take less time on the course than the modern equipment shooters.


----------



## J Whittington

Field answer this ? Post 91 has a video of chance, Levis, Hammer, and Brooks shooting. Based on the new NFAA skying rule,,,, with the exception of Nate, all of them are skying their bows?


----------



## xring1

J Whittington said:


> Field answer this ? Post 91 has a video of chance, Levis, Hammer, and Brooks shooting. Based on the new NFAA skying rule,,,, with the exception of Nate, all of them are skying their bows?


i thought so too!


----------



## STRICNINE

Don't pick on Emily, she's too cute for criticism. lol


----------



## J Whittington

as the rule is written, I feel Emily was not breaking the rule


----------



## field14

J Whittington said:


> Field answer this ? Post 91 has a video of chance, Levis, Hammer, and Brooks shooting. Based on the new NFAA skying rule,,,, with the exception of Nate, all of them are skying their bows?


Pay close attention to those persons you mention...and you will see that there is only a very slight pressure/draw back on the string when they are "slightly" above their heads with their bow-hand...and by the time the bow is back only a few inches, their hand is already to eye level and coming down. By the time they hit anchor, most are likely already on or near the 10 ring with their bow sight.
In addition...those that shoot WAA/FITA, World Cup series ARE LEGAL with the way they draw their bows; if not, they wouldn't last thru the first practice end without being taken off the line. Those persons have shot NUMEROUS FITA/WAA/NAA/World Cup events without any problems (including the Hammer), so it should be obvious to you, they are in compliance.

There are a FEW "Pros" that come to full draw with the bow hand way above their heads and then come down to target level...THOSE types, along with many of the mid to lower level shooters are the ones that are very obvious, and in addition are extremely unsafe.

Besides that, the rule is written and will take effect on June 1, 2013...depends upon whether the tournament officials have cajunas to enforce this across the board or not. 

It isn't going to be up to the "fieldman" to interpret, enforce or discuss the rule. 
From June 1 on, it is the "law of the land".
It is quite obvious from one of the pictures of a shooter nearly at full draw with his bow hand above his head...those are the EASY violations to watch for...and the most dangerous ones, too. He would be off the line after one warning. Others that pull this draw the bow most of the way back before bringing the bow hand down....???? You'd better learn to draw the bow correctly or you'll be warned and then taken off the line if you don't comply. It isn't a majority of shooters that pull this unsafe stunt, and the ones complaining about the rule are likely those that are guilty or feel they are guilty and don't wanna change; but you will get that opportunity to change...or you won't be competing on the line.
field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## gcab

field14 said:


> Pay close attention to those persons you mention...and you will see that there is only a very slight pressure/draw back on the string when they are "slightly" above their heads with their bow-hand...and by the time the bow is back only a few inches, their hand is already to eye level and coming down. By the time they hit anchor, most are likely already on or near the 10 ring with their bow sight.
> In addition...those that shoot WAA/FITA, World Cup series ARE LEGAL with the way they draw their bows; if not, they wouldn't last thru the first practice end without being taken off the line. Those persons have shot NUMEROUS FITA/WAA/NAA/World Cup events without any problems (including the Hammer), so it should be obvious to you, they are in compliance.
> 
> There are a FEW "Pros" that come to full draw with the bow hand way above their heads and then come down to target level...THOSE types, along with many of the mid to lower level shooters are the ones that are very obvious, and in addition are extremely unsafe.
> 
> Besides that, the rule is written and will take effect on June 1, 2013...depends upon whether the tournament officials have cajunas to enforce this across the board or not.
> 
> It isn't going to be up to the "fieldman" to interpret, enforce or discuss the rule.
> From June 1 on, it is the "law of the land".
> It is quite obvious from one of the pictures of a shooter nearly at full draw with his bow hand above his head...those are the EASY violations to watch for...and the most dangerous ones, too. He would be off the line after one warning. Others that pull this draw the bow most of the way back before bringing the bow hand down....???? You'd better learn to draw the bow correctly or you'll be warned and then taken off the line if you don't comply. It isn't a majority of shooters that pull this unsafe stunt, and the ones complaining about the rule are likely those that are guilty or feel they are guilty and don't wanna change; but you will get that opportunity to change...or you won't be competing on the line.
> field14 (Tom D.)



Ok, so when you basically inferred me of not understanding the rule from lack of reading skills, you said in big, bold letters that if the hand is above the head, its skydrawing and therefore illegal. So now you are saying it is only illegal depending on the amount of pressure there is at that position. So what is the psi allowed for that? And doesn't that go against your "no room judgement" statement? And I'm still wondering how the hand above the head has any more danger awarded to it than below the head. Again, in looking at the picture of the lady that you state the bow hand is even or below the head, the arrow is still pointing at like 45 degrees or more. But since the hand is equal to the head, there is less danger with that arrow... say for example in Vegas, getting launched into the stands?


----------



## Rolo

I tend to agree with Field and J. Whittinton, as the rule is written. The video demonstrates the hand certainly abovbe the head at the start n all but 1, but the actual drawing of the bow does not appear to occur until the bow hand is level with the head. Will be an interpretation issue. But the video also demonstrates how the rule will be next to impossible to enforce anywhere but on a shooting line. There simple isn't going to be an official at every stake on field or 3-d ranges.

With regard to the picture of the female...clearly not a violation of the rule as written. But I think it exhibits a MORE dangerous situation than any of the people depicted in the video...


----------



## field14

gcab said:


> Ok, so when you basically inferred me of not understanding the rule from lack of reading skills, you said in big, bold letters that if the hand is above the head, its skydrawing and therefore illegal. So now you are saying it is only illegal depending on the amount of pressure there is at that position. So what is the psi allowed for that? And doesn't that go against your "no room judgement" statement? And I'm still wondering how the hand above the head has any more danger awarded to it than below the head. Again, in looking at the picture of the lady that you state the bow hand is even or below the head, the arrow is still pointing at like 45 degrees or more. But since the hand is equal to the head, there is less danger with that arrow... say for example in Vegas, getting launched into the stands?


I inferred NOTHING of the sort. The rule is written, it goes into effect for EVERYONE on June 1st, 2013, so get used to it. If you don't like the rule, then don't compete; plain and simple.
Also, argue with the NFAA rules interpretation committee, not me.
Go ahead and pick it apart all you want. It won't get it changed just for you cuz you think special things and want to get nit-noe. As defined, if you violate that rule, you are subject to a warning and a repeat of it will remove you from the shooting line. Not much left to interpret or argue about there.
I seriously doubt the arrow is at 45 degrees or more if the hand is at head level. Remember, it also says something like "from an horizontal plane" so as to allow for the uphill and downhill targets...but INDOORS, there isn't such a thing as much uphill and downhill, now is there?

I'm not going to play semantics with you, so go with your arguments and picking apart to the NFAA's RIC.


----------



## Rolo

field14 said:


> I inferred NOTHING of the sort. The rule is written, it goes into effect for EVERYONE on June 1st, 2013, so get used to it. If you don't like the rule, then don't compete; plain and simple.
> Also, argue with the NFAA rules interpretation committee, not me.
> Go ahead and pick it apart all you want. It won't get it changed just for you cuz you think special things and want to get nit-noe. As defined, if you violate that rule, you are subject to a warning and a repeat of it will remove you from the shooting line. Not much left to interpret or argue about there.
> I seriously doubt the arrow is at 45 degrees or more if the hand is at head level. Remember, it also says something like "from an horizontal plane" so as to allow for the uphill and downhill targets...but INDOORS, there isn't such a thing as much uphill and downhill, now is there?
> 
> I'm not going to play semantics with you, so go with your arguments and picking apart to the NFAA's RIC.


The problem, at least as I see it, is not that the rule itself is ambigous, it is that the application of the rule could be. In the video, for example, all but one clearly has their bow hand above their heads (and it ain't an uphill) when pressure ( at least some) necessary to draw the bow is being applied. Is this or is it not a rule violation? Strictly, they do appear to be in the act of drawing their bows with their head above their head...etc. So, could it be applied differently, by different people...based on this thread, absolutely.

I also think the picture of the female drawing the bow presents a more dangerous situation than anyone depicted in the video...but there is absolutely no violation of the rule being committed. In the end, the rule wasn't intended for the folks in the video, it was intended for the guy in the other pic. The intended remedy of the rule however, may very well have been associated with the picture of the female, and maybe some in the video...at least IMO.


----------



## gcab

field14 said:


> I inferred NOTHING of the sort. The rule is written, it goes into effect for EVERYONE on June 1st, 2013, so get used to it. If you don't like the rule, then don't compete; plain and simple.
> Also, argue with the NFAA rules interpretation committee, not me.
> Go ahead and pick it apart all you want. It won't get it changed just for you cuz you think special things and want to get nit-noe. As defined, if you violate that rule, you are subject to a warning and a repeat of it will remove you from the shooting line. Not much left to interpret or argue about there.
> I seriously doubt the arrow is at 45 degrees or more if the hand is at head level. Remember, it also says something like "from an horizontal plane" so as to allow for the uphill and downhill targets...but INDOORS, there isn't such a thing as much uphill and downhill, now is there?
> 
> I'm not going to play semantics with you, so go with your arguments and picking apart to the NFAA's RIC.



I never said I wanted the rule changed. I asked for clarification on some of it. And post 71 picture.. you are telling me that arrow is at least 45 degrees? And that is safe? Safer than if her hand was above her head? You said it is clear cut plain and simple, then you said with the video that there appears to be little pressure on arrow so no big deal. All I did was ask for clarification, you are the one that talks in a condescending fashion to everyone anytime they disagree with you. I never said I wanted it changed, and I certainly dont draw in any fashion that would be an issue at all, so I dont need to worry about getting kicked off the line. But for someone that has been complaining about the dangers of "skydrawing" for years, I would think that it would be easier to understand that the way the rule is written doesnt necessarily eliminate the risk.. for example the lady drawing.


----------



## TNMAN

There's always the general safety language "competitor---creating a safety hazard may be DQ'd. The new rule is meant to supplement, not replace, the general rule of don't do something stupid that might get someone hurt. Officials always had the means to stop an obvious sky draw or any unsafe draw---even before the new rule.


----------



## field14

TNMAN said:


> There's always the general safety language "competitor---creating a safety hazard may be DQ'd. The new rule is meant to supplement, not replace, the general rule of don't do something stupid that might get someone hurt. Officials always had the means to stop an obvious sky draw or any unsafe draw---even before the new rule.


I agree TNMAN...the new rule supplements the existing "safety rule" that was too interpretive and the new one provides some "Teeth" and removes most of the "in the opinion" thing of the safety rule. It is amazing that for years, FITA/WAF/IFAA/NAA have had their rule about sky drawing in there, and it hasn't raised a ruckus...but boy, come time for the NFAA or heaven forbid IBO, or ASA to put in a rule about it, and all heck is breaking loose!
IBO and ASA apparently haven't done it yet, but perhaps the time has come for them to implement something along those lines, because overbowed shooters incorrectly and unsafely drawing their bows is a HUGE safety concern for those orgs, too. Of course, here comes the "well, nobody has been hit, injured, maimed, or whatever (yet), so we have a pristine record."

How about WHEN the fluorescent or sodium vapor lights are shot out at an indoor event...and by law, the area is to be completely vacated for a minimum of 30 minutes while the person to clean it up, wearing full personal protective equiment (ppe) cleans up the mess. By Law, this is the way it is supposed to happen whenever a fluorescent or sodium vapor bulb is shattered in a public building or business, manufacturing facility!!!

I've seen many a bulb shot out by sky drawers indoors and cringe when it happens...and I've yet to see the area vacated. I get out of dodge for awhile, but it isn't up to ME to enforce the law. I also get off the line when somebody is not in control of their equipment while drawing the bow. 
I've said things to the people about safely drawing their bows and how to correct the problem many times. Often times, they are cooperative and will correct it. Other times, I get hollared at or even threatened over it. So, in those cases, I just protect my own safety and get off the line all together. Stupid is as stupid does...and I won't put myself in peril one way or the other.

It is ridiculous to have to be subjected to abuse when trying to ensure safety....but it is happening way more the past few years than in all of my over 50 years in the game...and getting worse instead of better.


----------



## rsw

Typical of many NFAA rules, grammatical interpretation tends to confuse rather than clarify the rule. Maybe my mind works to simply, but I would have worded it something like the arrow must be pointed directly toward the target while the archer draws the bow. That wouldn't leave a whole lot of room for misinterpretation. It is too bad that we can't have a committee of educated, grammatically proficient personnel edit/rewrite the entire NFAA rulebook to eliminate confusion for both the archer and the officials.


----------



## nock tune

nock tune said:


> So your standing at a target 65yards away and its 15 degress down hill. you draw your bow as per the rule ,level and all that and your release goes off sending your arrow to who knows were, is that less dangerous than "sky drawing" ?


So is it? The next thing the want to change is guess what!


----------



## field14

rsw said:


> Typical of many NFAA rules, grammatical interpretation tends to confuse rather than clarify the rule. Maybe my mind works to simply, but I would have worded it something like the arrow must be pointed directly toward the target while the archer draws the bow. That wouldn't leave a whole lot of room for misinterpretation. It is too bad that we can't have a committee of educated, grammatically proficient personnel edit/rewrite the entire NFAA rulebook to eliminate confusion for both the archer and the officials.


Roger,
I recall that a few years back, a member of AT offered to re-write the rules in a manner to keep the intent of those rules but make them less ambiguous. That never came to fruition...but I also recall that one of the old guard was not pleased because, "READ the rules, they are written perfectly clear for anyone that reads them to understand....

I whole-heartedly agree that a committee should be formed to clean up the entire rule book and Constitution to remove the ambiguities and conflicts. Don't think it will happen, but the idea is sound!


----------



## field14

nock tune said:


> So is it? The next thing the want to change is guess what!


The rule covers that area, and you won't get an RIC ruling on this here on AT, so don't keep bringing up all the what if's; Be part of the Solution and not part of the problem and making things fester, OK?

It is simple, so don't bemoan it any further. We could pick most all of the "rules" to death if we so chose to. I hope I'm reading that you are trying to help and not $$$ch and complain, but rather showing the potential flaws. 

June 1, 2013 the rule about sky drawing takes effect. Leave it up to those responsible to interpret and enforce...and IF you as a shooter feel that a person violated the sky drawing rule or if you feel unsafe..SAY SO...protest...and get 'r DUN. Get it enforced if you feel unsafe. I'd recommend photos of the culprit before carrying things too far.

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## nock tune

field14 said:


> The rule covers that area, and you won't get an RIC ruling on this here on AT, so don't keep bringing up all the what if's; Be part of the Solution and not part of the problem and making things fester, OK?
> 
> It is simple, so don't bemoan it any further. We could pick most all of the "rules" to death if we so chose to. I hope I'm reading that you are trying to help and not $$$ch and complain, but rather showing the potential flaws.
> 
> June 1, 2013 the rule about sky drawing takes effect. Leave it up to those responsible to interpret and enforce...and IF you as a shooter feel that a person violated the sky drawing rule or if you feel unsafe..SAY SO...protest...and get 'r DUN. Get it enforced if you feel unsafe. I'd recommend photos of the culprit before carrying things too far.
> 
> field14 (Tom D.)


Not complaining I think time will tell. But every time a rule is made it brings up another over looked situation .


----------



## field14

nock tune said:


> Not complaining I think time will tell. But every time a rule is made it brings up another over looked situation .


THAT I can agree with...but it is the same no matter what...anything from immigration laws and lack of enforcement, to golf rulings, to basketball officiating (or lack thereof), to our sport...no matter what...somebody is going to either push it to the limits, see how far they can go, or just disregard and violate the rules...no matter what.

Can't write a rule that somebody won't find or try to get their own way by doing the opposite.


----------



## nock tune

field14 said:


> THAT I can agree with...but it is the same no matter what...anything from immigration laws and lack of enforcement, to golf rulings, to basketball officiating (or lack thereof), to our sport...no matter what...somebody is going to either push it to the limits, see how far they can go, or just disregard and violate the rules...no matter what.
> 
> Can't write a rule that somebody won't find or try to get their own way by doing the opposite.


So my point is ,if sky drawing is a safety issue, is not a target thats not level with the shooter just as dangerous?


----------



## Rolo

field14 said:


> I whole-heartedly agree that a committee should be formed to clean up the entire rule book and Constitution to remove the ambiguities and conflicts. Don't think it will happen, but the idea is sound!


Whether or not it will be attempted, who knows. But there is one thing I can assure you...no matter how simple and unambigous the rules may seem to the committee, they will be ambigous. Things are always perfectly clear to the people that write it...not so much for the others, who read and attempt to apply it.

Example: the Bill of Rights is probably one of the the simpliest documents, in terms of wording (especially when paying attention to the meaning of the words at the time they were written) yet folks of my 'ilk' have made huge sums of money arguing about what it means. Then, add the politicians to the mix, it gets even more complicated. No reason to think any other rule, no matter how simple in appearance, won't suffer the same fate.

The 'simple' fix, generally, is consistent enforcement of the rule...and that don't happen much, in or out, of archery...:darkbeer:


----------



## reylamb

rock monkey said:


> show me where the IBO and ASA allow non members to shoot for awards? better yet, show me ANY winner of a state level or higher 3D shoot where the winner was NOT a member of the sanctioning org.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yup, thought so.


ASA allows non-members to attend, compete and have a chance at winning their class for 1 ASA shoot per year. It is not open for all classes, but most of teh amateur classes allow this, one time per year for a non-member.


----------



## rsw

I heard from an NFAA Director that the senior age changes did not affect the senior pro division. Has anybody heard different? It doesn't make sense to me, but then this is the NFAA.


----------



## mag41vance

I am quite certain if the NFAA posted the 10 Commandments from the book of Exodus, Moses & the NFAA would be raked over the coals as well. Subjectivity and interpretation is the problem not rules. Like the Ten Commandments we participants will discover the rules will be broken, either by omission, or commission! Humans are sooooooo predictable!


----------



## rock monkey

reylamb said:


> ASA allows non-members to attend, compete and have a chance at winning their class for 1 ASA shoot per year. It is not open for all classes, but most of teh amateur classes allow this, one time per year for a non-member.


ONE....not ALL events. how long would that last if the 'non-member' came in and blew the top dogs out of the water and took all their cookies?

people getting cranky over the nfaa requiring membership in order to compete for awards is hypocritical at best. would it be fair for a non-member of your club to come in and shoot your member only events, take your trophies/payouts and still not join your club? would you let a non-member come in and shoot at all? would you get upset if that non-member went to a public forum and called your club nasty names because they didnt get an award even if they did have the high score and knew they werent eligible for awards being told up front during registration about it?

the big money gripe is that the state orgs are a loose confederation under the nfaa. you have the state level and you have the national level. like taxes, state AND federal. why should one that has NO inclination or motivation to live outside of their current state have to pay "national' taxes? it's the same train of thought....because you're a part of it.



yes, the IBO Trad Worlds allow non-members to play, but then again, the nfaa allows non-members to shoot at vegas for awards. i dont see the top purse at the Trad World's at the same dollar level as Vegas.


----------



## brtesite

rock monkey said:


> ONE....not ALL events. how long would that last if the 'non-member' came in and blew the top dogs out of the water and took all their cookies?
> 
> people getting cranky over the nfaa requiring membership in order to compete for awards is hypocritical at best. would it be fair for a non-member of your club to come in and shoot your member only events, take your trophies/payouts and still not join your club? would you let a non-member come in and shoot at all? would you get upset if that non-member went to a public forum and called your club nasty names because they didnt get an award even if they did have the high score and knew they werent eligible for awards being told up front during registration about it?
> 
> the big money gripe is that the state orgs are a loose confederation under the nfaa. you have the state level and you have the national level. like taxes, state AND federal. why should one that has NO inclination or motivation to live outside of their current state have to pay "national' taxes? it's the same train of thought....because you're a part of it.
> 
> 
> 
> yes, the IBO Trad Worlds allow non-members to play, but then again, the nfaa allows non-members to shoot at vegas for awards. i dont see the top purse at the Trad World's at the same dollar level as Vegas.


Rock, Vegas is not an NFAA shoot. it is WAF


----------



## ccwilder3

reylamb said:


> ASA allows non-members to attend, compete and have a chance at winning their class for 1 ASA shoot per year. It is not open for all classes, but most of teh amateur classes allow this, one time per year for a non-member.


Actually, you have to join for that one shoot and are issued a membership number. If you want to compete after that, you have to join for the full year.


----------



## carlosii

Arrowwood said:


> Caught this at the practice line:
> View attachment 1588853




the guilty party is a leftie...they are a bit weak in the britches and therefore are forced into skying the draw...:shade: :wink:


----------



## Brown Hornet

The guy in that pic also hasn't started drawing his bow so he is actually not sky drawing...at least not in that picture frame :wink:

If you want to add true sky drawing...just find some video of Dan McCarthy shooting. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## carlosii

i'm not that conversant with the issues facing NFAA and its failure to grow in appeal. i did take a look at the results from one major shoot and was surprised to count something like 47 different classes. of those classes about 25 of them had three or fewer shooters with some having only one participant. there were several classes that had quite a number of shooters as well. but it does seem to me that it might be counter-productive to have that many classes, especially where you have only 3 or fewer shooters in a class.

i don't have an NFAA decoder ring so i wasn't able to really determine what some of the classes were that were being reference by initials...for example, what might be AFFSLR/L???


----------



## Arrowwood

adult female freestyle limited recurve/longbow


----------



## Unclegus

Amateur female freestyle limited recurve/longbow


----------



## Arrowwood

Maybe my decoder ring is busted


----------



## carlosii

Arrowwood said:


> Maybe my decoder ring is busted
> 
> 
> View attachment 1612608


wow...according to that chart there are 80 different classes by my count. is that right? but it looks like they dropped four classes for this year making it 76 classes.

just for the record, i do maintain a membership in NFAA and my state association


----------



## reylamb

carlosii said:


> wow...according to that chart there are 80 different classes by my count. is that right? but it looks like they dropped four classes for this year making it 76 classes.
> 
> just for the record, i do maintain a membership in NFAA and my state association


Im counting 96.....either way, tooo many.


----------



## carlosii

reylamb said:


> Im counting 96.....either way, tooo many.


i will accept your count...i've always been mathmaticelly challenged (as well as spelling challenged).


----------

