# ASA Pro Mens Rankings 2013 My Version Top 5 are really close



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

Rookie of the year so far,,,should be if I have everything right..... Jacob Marlow


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

bhtr3d said:


> Rookie of the year so far,,,should be if I have everything right..... Jacob Marlow


I will look at my scoring system and post right back


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

52	* chris * hacker -34
64	* jeff * hopkins -46
67	* jacob * marlow 
68	* jame * jamison 
68	* luke * parker 
71	* brandon * reyes 
74	* bill * mc call 
79	* gary * studt 
102	* jimmy * jones 
104	* michael * fryfogle 
109	* tim * boykin 
112	* ty * adkins 
117	* shane * siers 
125	* bobby * ketcher 
134	* mark * thompson 
152	* jay * james


----------



## J-Dubyah (Mar 6, 2010)

bhtr3d said:


> Rookie of the year so far,,,should be if I have everything right..... Jacob Marlow


I know his entire family shoots but if this is the same kid I'm thinking of during the State 3D FAA shoot he busted 13 straight 12's...awesome display of shooting.


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

J-Dubyah said:


> I know his entire family shoots but if this is the same kid I'm thinking of during the State 3D FAA shoot he busted 13 straight 12's...awesome display of shooting.


Yup, it's the same high school senior kid.... Really nice kid, and nice family. His brother though....has an issue with chickens.


----------



## J-Dubyah (Mar 6, 2010)

bhtr3d said:


> Yup, it's the same high school senior kid.... Really nice kid, and nice family. His brother though....has an issue with chickens.


Yeah, that was him. Did not realize he was that young...very cool to see a kid like that shoot lights out.


----------



## 3rdplace (Jan 3, 2004)

Actually it was his last 14. 17 out of 20 12's. 

Jake is only 17.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

3rdplace said:


> Actually it was his last 14. 17 out of 20 12's.
> 
> Jake is only 17.


Just what would you know?



Sent from my Motorola Electrify using Tapatalk 2


----------



## J-Dubyah (Mar 6, 2010)

3rdplace said:


> Actually it was his last 14. 17 out of 20 12's.
> 
> Jake is only 17.


Ok...still impressive!


----------



## edgerat (Dec 14, 2011)

3rdplace said:


> Actually it was his last 14. 17 out of 20 12's.
> 
> Jake is only 17.


Hey Jacob Marlow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## WDMJR3DBOWGUY (Dec 2, 2003)

Hey jacob!


----------



## Daniel Boone (May 31, 2002)

Shame the over all pro numbers are down. 

I remember when there as 80 archers in the pro ranks.

DB


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

Daniel Boone said:


> Shame the over all pro numbers are down.
> 
> I remember when there as 80 archers in the pro ranks.
> 
> DB


Ya, but the senior is adding every year...lol


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

hey jacob!


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

Daniel Boone said:


> Shame the over all pro numbers are down.
> 
> I remember when there as 80 archers in the pro ranks.
> 
> DB



I'm with you DB. It is a shame. I believe it is because the money just isn't there anymore. I mean back in the day it paid to be a full time archer.


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

DB I agree with you something needs done with the Pro Class or it will keep getting smaller what a shame! A top 10 finish and your still losing money traveling at a Pro Am.


----------



## STRICNINE (Oct 22, 2012)

No need to rank them, at the end of the day nobody remembers who came in 2nd and beyond. lol


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

STRICNINE said:


> No need to rank them, at the end of the day nobody remembers who came in 2nd and beyond. lol


typical newbie post


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

IRISH_11 said:


> I'm with you DB. It is a shame. I believe it is because the money just isn't there anymore. I mean back in the day it paid to be a full time archer.


I think you are correct!! 

With the cost of living and inflation as high as it is today, you would have to pay a professional a serious salary for him to afford to do it full time!!!


----------



## STRICNINE (Oct 22, 2012)

bhtr3d said:


> typical newbie post


Tim you hurt my feelings, not sure what I'll do now. Boo Hoo. hahahahahaha


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

STRICNINE said:


> Tim you hurt my feelings, not sure what I'll do now. Boo Hoo. hahahahahaha


im sure you will get over it. ....you can cry me a river....see if it floods


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

Scott Bennett said:


> I think you are correct!!
> 
> With the cost of living and inflation as high as it is today, you would have to pay a professional a serious salary for him to afford to do it full time!!!



You are correct! Finishing in the top 10 at Texas 9th and 10th got nothing- zero! What is the incentive to keep shooting if you are not sponsored full time and not have a day job? I feel even worse for the women Pros.


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

cenochs said:


> You are correct! Finishing in the top 10 at Texas 9th and 10th got nothing- zero! What is the incentive to keep shooting if you are not sponsored full time and not have a day job? I feel even worse for the women Pros.


Well, those in the Senior Pros did....they got paid to 11th.....and of course the flight payment to the 3 other shoots.........This also was done in the Men's Pro...they had a flight pay off. This was something they wanted to do.....

So, if your not shooting in the class....why does it matter to you what they are getting paid???? If you want to shoot it....then join in and then the pro purse monies will grow.....bickering and whining about them wont make them larger...... People will have to STEP UP to the PLATE if you want to get a serving..... Plain and Simple.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

bhtr3d said:


> Well, those in the Senior Pros did....they got paid to 11th.....and of course the flight payment to the 3 other shoots.........This also was done in the Men's Pro...they had a flight pay off. This was something they wanted to do.....
> 
> So, if your not shooting in the class....why does it matter to you what they are getting paid???? If you want to shoot it....then join in and then the pro purse monies will grow.....bickering and whining about them wont make them larger...... People will have to STEP UP to the PLATE if you want to get a serving..... Plain and Simple.


When I initially got out of archery and ASA almost 20yrs ago, you had to be sponsored by a major company to even enter the pro division. 

Is that not the case anymore?


----------



## reylamb (Feb 5, 2003)

Scott Bennett said:


> When I initially got out of archery and ASA almost 20yrs ago, you had to be sponsored by a major company to even enter the pro division.
> 
> Is that not the case anymore?


Nope, pay the pro fee, whatever that is, and then pony up the $250 entry fee and you are a pro.


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

Scott Bennett said:


> When I initially got out of archery and ASA almost 20yrs ago, you had to be sponsored by a major company to even enter the pro division.
> 
> Is that not the case anymore?


Anyone was able to shoot Pro in ASA since the begining...you didn't have to have a sponsor. But, I will say this... there was some things you had to do first to get to shoot pro in the very begining.... Had to go to a pro shooter school/seminar to learn about how to televison interviews... Also, you had to shoot a set score on the range that was set-up to get to get into shooting pro. 


Now, for monies...sure I would love to see the monies larger. Maybe a stronger marketing push can be made in the months ahead, as most companies in the advertising budgets start having those talks about now....so when we get into that September/October time area they know what and where they are going to apply those dollars at.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

cenochs said:


> You are correct! Finishing in the top 10 at Texas 9th and 10th got nothing- zero! What is the incentive to keep shooting if you are not sponsored full time and not have a day job? I feel even worse for the women Pros.


If the money isn't there it simply isn't there......... There are MANY things one can do that doesn't pay much $$. The market doesn't exist to support many well paid archers. Basically archery isn't popular enough to support many decently paid pro archers and that market supports even fewer pro female archers. I know a few folks that work hard at least 40 - 50 hours a week, year round and barely get by and the work is harder and physically more punishing than archery.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

reylamb said:


> Nope, pay the pro fee, whatever that is, and then pony up the $250 entry fee and you are a pro.


WOW! Interesting to say the least....no incentive to shoot pro division whenever you can shoot the known courses and win money.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

bhtr3d said:


> Anyone was able to shoot Pro in ASA since the begining...you didn't have to have a sponsor. But, I will say this... there was some things you had to do first to get to shoot pro in the very begining.... Had to go to a pro shooter school/seminar to learn about how to televison interviews... Also, you had to shoot a set score on the range that was set-up to get to get into shooting pro.


Wow! Colin lied to me, LOL!!!! J/K!

In all seriousness, why would anyone want to shoot in the pro division without a major sponsor when there really is no incentive to do so?

I mean, you can shoot against much less competition in other classes and stand to walk away with a few dollars.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

Thank goodness there is at least one manufacturer who keeps putting the logs on the fire year after year.


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

bhtr3d said:


> Well, those in the Senior Pros did....they got paid to 11th.....and of course the flight payment to the 3 other shoots.........This also was done in the Men's Pro...they had a flight pay off. This was something they wanted to do.....
> 
> So, if your not shooting in the class....why does it matter to you what they are getting paid???? If you want to shoot it....then join in and then the pro purse monies will grow.....bickering and whining about them wont make them larger...... People will have to STEP UP to the PLATE if you want to get a serving..... Plain and Simple.


You exactly stated the Problem in your post! The prize money should not come from entry fee money for the Pro Class. It does not make any sense. The Prize money should come from sponsors of the shoot not entry fee money. Using entry fee money is just prolonging the down fall of the sport. For example the PGA only charges 125$ to play in one of their events but you must be a card carrying pro or get a exemption to play. It should be a privilage to shoot Pro with hard work not just pay and play this water downs the competition and shows no respect to the shooters that have worked hard to be in the Pro Class.

Which way would grow the Pro Classes Faster
Guarantee a Payout at each event.
Shoot Saturday make a top 20 cut shoot sunday and everyone in the top 20 gets paid
Make requirements to be a Pro and Stay Pro or

Use entry fee as payout money pay 5 or 6 people decent money and let anyone shoot Pro hoping the class and payout grows. Take a few semi guys each year that would replace the guys that didn't win any money and got smart and went back to semi.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

I like the cut off deal.....something like guaranteed to receive your entry fee back for making the cut. Maybe do 30 targets saturday?

but you are right we must do something to get the money up there - an outside sponsor is the only way I see that happening.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

cenochs said:


> Use entry fee as payout money pay 5 or 6 people decent money and let anyone shoot Pro hoping the class and payout grows. Take a few semi guys each year that would replace the guys that didn't win any money and got smart and went back to semi.


It appears that is exactly what is happening today....


----------



## STRICNINE (Oct 22, 2012)

Scott Bennett said:


> WOW! Interesting to say the least....no incentive to shoot pro division whenever you can shoot the known courses and win money.


The issue with that is that even if you win a known class it doesn't pay for your weekend. lol

Texas 2013: K45 1st place $462.00
Texas 2013: K50 1st place $639.00

Whooptie do! My average weekend at an ASA event is around $500.00.

If you are not in Pro or Senior Pro you might as well just go out, have a great time and stop worrying about your finish because even if you win you will barely break even on your trip. If you can't afford to go to the dance without having to win all of your money back you might as well stay at the house. My 0.02.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

cenochs said:


> You exactly stated the Problem in your post! The prize money should not come from entry fee money for the Pro Class. It does not make any sense. The Prize money should come from sponsors of the shoot not entry fee money. Using entry fee money is just prolonging the down fall of the sport. For example the PGA only charges 125$ to play in one of their events but you must be a card carrying pro or get a exemption to play. It should be a privilage to shoot Pro with hard work not just pay and play this water downs the competition and shows no respect to the shooters that have worked hard to be in the Pro Class.
> 
> Which way would grow the Pro Classes Faster
> Guarantee a Payout at each event.
> ...


Most of the prize money for the pro division archers DOES come from sponsors. As I said previously, currently the market (popularity) does not exist for sponsors to put more money on the table or for non-archery related businesses to dump money into sponsoring archers. The market DOES exist for businesses to put money into "hunting" venues such as trashy TV hunting shows. 

There is a large enough audience for businesses to put money into golf. Archery must grow it's overall audience (participants) to attract businesses to spend money on marketing (sponsoring tournaments, funding pro's, buying advertising from venues). Golf has a lot of money involved not because there are pro's but because there is a huge number of folks that participate at local courses and nice private clubs spending a lot of money on golf.

The highest level performers get paid good money ONLY if there it is profitable reason for them to do so. Look at NASCAR. The quantity and quality of sponsors is directly proportional to it's popularity, i.e. fans watching the events on TV and from the stands. 

"Build it and they will come"............build participation and the sponsors will come. 

- Renaming "Pro" to something like "Major Open" would better reflect the reality of the situation.
- I think team 3D archery might be a good thing. I think it could become very popular at the local level........which leads to an increase in participation (popularity)......basically this is how "pro" baseball and football teams came to exist which lead to MLB and the NFL being created.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Scott Bennett said:


> WOW! Interesting to say the least....no incentive to shoot pro division whenever you can shoot the known courses and win money.


How much have you won shooting "the known courses"? You do realize that you can win money on every course out there.... known or not, right? 

I'm trying to figure out why you singled out "known" courses... there is more money to be made in Semi and Open A than any other classes. K45 is decent, K50 has a poor return on investment and the SIMS doesn't pay much over $150 to anyone in any class. 



Scott Bennett said:


> Wow! Colin lied to me, LOL!!!! J/K!
> 
> In all seriousness, why would anyone want to shoot in the pro division without a major sponsor when there really is no incentive to do so?
> 
> I mean, you can shoot against much less competition in other classes and stand to walk away with a few dollars.


Again, how much have you won? You can go to the lower classes and yes, a good shooter will win some $ but the win out thresholds are also low so that same good shooter will soon find tougher competition. 

All in all, I think your reality is distorted. 



STRICNINE said:


> The issue with that is that even if you win a known class it doesn't pay for your weekend. lol
> 
> Texas 2013: K45 1st place $462.00
> Texas 2013: K50 1st place $639.00
> ...


Dude, you need to travel cheaper. My average trip is under $200. The IRS said I turned a profit last year.... until my CPA had another look :shade:


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

Kstigall said:


> Most of the prize money for the pro division archers DOES come from sponsors. As I said previously, currently the market (popularity) does not exist for sponsors to put more money on the table or for non-archery related businesses to dump money into sponsoring archers. The market DOES exist for businesses to put money into "hunting" venues such as trashy TV hunting shows.
> 
> There is a large enough audience for businesses to put money into golf. Archery must grow it's overall audience (participants) to attract businesses to spend money on marketing (sponsoring tournaments, funding pro's, buying advertising from venues). Golf has a lot of money involved not because there are pro's but because there is a huge number of folks that participate at local courses and nice private clubs spending a lot of money on golf.
> 
> ...


I totally agree!! Great way to sum it up!!! Major Open.....


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

tmorelli said:


> How much have you won shooting "the known courses"? You do realize that you can win money on every course out there.... known or not, right?
> 
> I'm trying to figure out why you singled out "known" courses... there is more money to be made in Semi and Open A than any other classes. K45 is decent, K50 has a poor return on investment and the SIMS doesn't pay much over $150 to anyone in any class.
> 
> ...


The reality of the matter is there isnt enough money to support enough "pro's" to do it full time, hence the drop in attendance in the Open Pro class!!!

Its not about how much money I have won, its more about raising participation so that EVERYONE can win more money!!!

Also, the reason I bring up the "Known" classes is simply because it would be much easier to compete on a "Known" distance course than on an "Unknown" distance course, hence easier way to put "money' in your pocket. 

Bottomline is if you or anybody else plans to attend an ASA or ANY other archery tournament in hopes of "breaking even" on your expenses, you are the one with a "distorted reality"!!


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Pro attendance declining....
Not that I may be right, but shouldn't domination of Pro class be considered? Who's been at the top the most? Levi and Jeff for as long as most can remember. Yes, there have been "hit and miss" individuals, but Levi and Jeff have more SOY awards than all others combined.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Scott Bennett said:


> The reality of the matter is there isnt enough money to support enough "pro's" to do it full time, hence the drop in attendance in the Open Pro class!!!
> 
> Its not about how much money I have won, its more about raising participation so that EVERYONE can win more money!!!
> 
> ...


Could there be any other factor that affects attendance in the Pro Class?....

And man, if everyone figures out how easy it is to "get money" in the known distance classes, the game will change..... I can't believe more haven't seen it sooner and started cashing their checks. Wow, what does this say about all those guys who aren't getting paid in the known classes?

....and there are lots of shooters who can make the sport pay for itself. Reality distorted and all I suppose. I'm not feeding my kids and driving equity into my house but it sure doesn't cost me much to do what I like to do.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I go to the asa shoots and hope to finish high enough to pay for the weekend, last year I did that three times and it was a nice pat on the back nothing more. I go to the asa shoots because they are awesome and to me winning any class regardless of the class would be a icing on the cake thing for me. I have made many new friends on the courses and wouldn't trade any of my first two years experiences.

As far as money in the pro class, we need some bigger sponsors that have huge money such as budweiser or other such companies who fork out the sponsorship money that would send us over the top. Makenzie is a nice sponsor but they are just a small company compared to the big dog sponsors out there. Even Bass pro shops would be a upgrade to the sponsorship level, they even have programs in nascar so you know they could handle asa lead sponsorship.

I personally think the asa people like the size that it is at right now and have no plans to make it a bigger sponsored sport, which is fine but I wish they could find a big sponsor.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

Scott Bennett said:


> The reality of the matter is there isnt enough money to support enough "pro's" to do it full time, hence the drop in attendance in the Open Pro class!!!
> 
> Its not about how much money I have won, its more about raising participation so that EVERYONE can win more money!!!
> 
> ...


:becky: *Come and get you some*..............if you can!


----------



## Aim-WellArcher1 (May 13, 2012)

I shot in open a with an ex-pro shooter that was buying time till he could shoot senior pro.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

Kstigall said:


> :becky: *Come and get you some*..............if you can!


For the record, the last ASA tournament I shot in was in the Semi-Pro class....there was no such thing as "known" classes, period. 

Back to the regular scheduled program, LOl!!


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

SonnyThomas said:


> Pro attendance declining....
> Not that I may be right, but shouldn't domination of Pro class be considered? Who's been at the top the most? Levi and Jeff for as long as most can remember. Yes, there have been "hit and miss" individuals, but Levi and Jeff have more SOY awards than all others combined.


What are you trying to say? Make it fair for the rest of the field? Penalize or impede the ability of the guys who are always in the top of the tier?


----------



## Aim-WellArcher1 (May 13, 2012)

Just for giggles, I run a range and recently held my second asa federation qualifier, do ya'll think the asa could trim off some of the classes. My opinion that would maybe put more in each remaining class and raise the prize money for the remainder of classes. Like combining bow novice and open c, just for example.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

Aim-WellArcher1 said:


> Just for giggles, I run a range and recently held my second asa federation qualifier, do ya'll think the asa could trim off some of the classes. My opinion that would maybe put more in each remaining class and raise the prize money for the remainder of classes. Like combining bow novice and open c, just for example.


I think that would be a great idea!!


----------



## Aim-WellArcher1 (May 13, 2012)

also once you win out of a class you there till you win out of it, no more backing up?

there are 31 classes in the asa. If your a woman you get a choice of 7 classes if i counted right, no making this a man vs woman thing but that breaks all the men up between 24 more classes. 

There's your $$$$


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Aim-WellArcher1 said:


> also once you win out of a class you there till you win out of it, no more backing up?


I think you should read this;

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2001543

"backing up" has it's place. It keeps people playing.... kind of like having a variety of classes and levels to compete at.


----------



## Aim-WellArcher1 (May 13, 2012)

Just idea's


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> I think you should read this;
> 
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2001543
> 
> "backing up" has it's place. It keeps people playing.... kind of like having a variety of classes and levels to compete at.


We know why you posted that....you want more kudos for your post on that thread >LOL....


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

bhtr3d said:


> We know why you posted that....you want more kudos for your post on that thread >LOL....


Yes.... that and it bothers me to see us "haze" people for moving back. 

I get that it must be policed and I believe that we have to protect the entry level classes from "sandbaggers" but I also think my term of "life sentence" at the top is appropriate. There are talented archers who'll win up, go good for a few years and things change.... their commitment, their ability, their life, their family, their priorities, their eyesight.... should that guy be able to move back freely because he isn't competitive where he's at?

Whoever the pro was that was shooting Open A.... I say, more power to him for having the balls to find his way a place that made sense for him.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

Its really simple....if you want larger purse, either attract the attention of a few "super sponsors" or eliminate classes and raise entry fees.


----------



## STRICNINE (Oct 22, 2012)

I can't drive to an ASA event for under $200. lol


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Scott Bennett said:


> Its really simple....if you want larger purse, either attract the attention of a few "super sponsors" or eliminate classes and raise entry fees.


Who doesn't want a larger purse right?... but I can't say it's a priority for me. And I have to ask; at what cost? Where does the larger purse go? All classes? Pro class(es) only? To the winner of the class? Deeper in the field (that's been done)?

It's tax politics I suppose but I don't think that has the effect you think it will.

Cut the classes.... attendance falls proportionally.
Raise the entry fees.... attendance falls proportionally. 

Adding sponsors with big purses... it's easy to see the positives associated with this. There must be more negatives than we can account for... or less opportunity.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

Aim-WellArcher1 said:


> Just for giggles, I run a range and recently held my second asa federation qualifier, do ya'll think the asa could trim off some of the classes. My opinion that would maybe put more in each remaining class and raise the prize money for the remainder of classes. Like combining bow novice and open c, just for example.


Putting "Bow Novice" (hunter gear) in with an Open class would do just the opposite of increasing participation. "Hunter" class gear is where a LOT of 3D competitors start. Putting the newb with his basic camo hunting gear in with a guy toting fancy target gear even if the archers aren't all that great is not going to inspire participation. Maybe dumping the Unlimited class would be possible....... I can't see combining the classes that are popular. That would be counter productive.



Aim-WellArcher1 said:


> also once you win out of a class you there till you win out of it, no more backing up?
> 
> there are 31 classes in the asa. If your a woman you get a choice of 7 classes if i counted right, no making this a man vs woman thing but that breaks all the men up between 24 more classes.
> 
> There's your $$$$



"No more backing up"...... Are you serious? I am 50 years old and have recently been shooting K45. I may be able to improve in some areas but ultimately father time weighs in. As it is if I win out of K45, unlikely but possible, I have to go to K50, Open A or higher. I can't say how long I'll pay premium entry fees if I _know_ I can't finish in the top half of my class. I'm NOT wealthy. The way I understand it is I can't even go to Seniors should I get lucky in K45. You are suggesting that if someone tries shooting Open A he should not be allowed back into Open B? Hog wash.......... If someone chooses to try K50 they should be able to step back to K45. There is NO benefit to penalizing folks for stepping up and not being successful.

Actually if you are a woman you have a choice of ALL the classes! No classes are defined as for men only.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

The reason I even joined in on this conversation was not for larger purses but because in todays society, it would take a fair wage to temp a man/woman to quit their day job in order to compete in archery tournaments to pay the bills.


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

Kstigall said:


> Putting "Bow Novice" (hunter gear) in with an Open class would do just the opposite of increasing participation. "Hunter" class gear is where a LOT of 3D competitors start. Putting the newb with his basic camo hunting gear in with a guy toting fancy target gear even if the archers aren't all that great is not going to inspire participation. Maybe dumping the Unlimited class would be possible....... I can't see combining the classes that are popular. That would be counter productive.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


your over 50.....kent...you can also go to senior open


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Scott Bennett said:


> The reason I even joined in on this conversation was not for larger purses but because in todays society, it would take a fair wage to temp a man/woman to quit their day job in order to compete in archery tournaments to pay the bills.


Hmm, good question/point. It's not something I've really considered though. I guess that's becuase it doesn't seem like the life I want to live. 

There are a very few that have archery as their only income.... I'm guessing but I think....

Jesse (wife has income), Chance, Reo, Levi (could but unfair to say archery is his only income with the show), Hopkins?, J. Goza, J. Wallace, Danny Mc?


***disclaimer- only a few of those do I have any real knowledge of. I'm making plenty of assumptions for the sake of conversation - bare with me.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

There is no question in my mind that they are a select few (men and women) who are actually professionals in every sense of the word. For that, I think they should be well compensated for their abilities. 

However, we shouldn't be too naive to think that competitive archery could actually sustain enough wage to support even a minor household because its nothing more than a hobby-sport that is supported by peoples disposable income. 

Simply put, there is just not enough money to go around to support very many full time professionals.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

SonnyThomas said:


> Pro attendance declining....
> Not that I may be right, but shouldn't domination of Pro class be considered? Who's been at the top the most? Levi and Jeff for as long as most can remember. Yes, there have been "hit and miss" individuals, but Levi and Jeff have more SOY awards than all others combined.





Scott Bennett said:


> What are you trying to say? Make it fair for the rest of the field? Penalize or impede the ability of the guys who are always in the top of the tier?


No, nothing of the kind. Just said who's been dominating the top and maybe some back out due to knowing it's a lost cause.


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

Everyone has been asking where to get sponsors they already have them!

FL- Easton
AL- Realtree
LA- Hoyt
TX- Brunton
KY- TruBall/Prime
IL- Mathews
Classic- Delta

Where does this sponsor money go? Have each sponsor put up money for the Pro Classes. Bid out the Pro Ams highest payout gets first pick. Or shop for one large Sponsor. You won't see any of this happen until Mike sells.

How many sports have you seen that where on TV (ESPN) had large sponsors and paid good money in the beginning and instead of steaming ahead they decided to go backwards no TV coverage no large sponsors payouts dwindled and still are in business? 3D archery is the only one I can think of.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Well, we have come full circle, back to growing archery. It ain't happening. Every time it's 3D needs this or that or changes made or combining associations. It ain't happening.

Instead of talking why doesn't someone jump all over Chevy, Ford, Dodge or whoever?

Still, I have yet to see one organization give comment on if they want outside archery sponsors or even tried going outside of archery for sponsors. If they have would someone point out where?


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

STRICNINE said:


> I can't drive to an ASA event for under $200. lol


Geez.....i drove 18 hours one way for less than that round trip.

Plus with two of us wasnt too bad.

Sent from my Motorola Electrify using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

SonnyThomas said:


> No, nothing of the kind. Just said who's been dominating the top and maybe some back out due to knowing it's a lost cause.


Point well taken!! 

I think you might be on to something. Intimidation for sure.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

SonnyThomas said:


> Well, we have come full circle, back to growing archery. It ain't happening. Every time it's 3D needs this or that or changes made or combining associations. It ain't happening.
> 
> Instead of talking why doesn't someone jump all over Chevy, Ford, Dodge or whoever?
> 
> Still, I have yet to see one organization give comment on if they want outside archery sponsors or even tried going outside of archery for sponsors. If they have would someone point out where?


I agree!!! I mean, look at Levi's decorated Dodge Ram truck....that is exposure within itself....some people would probably prefer to drive a dodge ram just because he does. LOL....of course, I am a Dodge/Mopar man.....

But you are exactly right....all the major businesses and most of the minor business in the archery world are already sponsors in some form or fashion....if we all want archery to continue to grow, its going to take the attention of major companies outside archery to get this thing off the ground!!!


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

cenochs said:


> Everyone has been asking where to get sponsors they already have them!
> 
> FL- Easton
> AL- Realtree
> ...


The coverage and payouts did NOT stop because the sponsors were getting a good return on their investment. That isn't how it works. It went away because TV and sponsors could not justify their expense. NASCAR is getting less money from TV and car sponsors have decreased as the popularity of NASCAR has slipped over the last couple of years. Sponsors and TV follow the money and the money comes from the customers (people in the stands, watching on TV, purchasing product).

If Mike caused sponsors and TV to step aside, which I doubt, he shot himself in the foot. If there was more money flowing in 3D archery it would be more money flowing into his pocket. _Maybe _if the ASA was run differently or by different people it would have more growth but it might also degenerate. There is no way Mike is solely responsible for the growth and popularity of archery across the board! There is no doubt the ASA is the best run, most creative and the most forward thinking archery org in this country. So to say how the ASA is organized and run is holding archery back is a reach. The NFAA is stuck in the mud, poorly structured and has executed some very questionable business calls. The IBO is froze in time and quite possibly deteriorating.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

Kstigall said:


> The coverage and payouts did NOT stop because the sponsors were getting a good return on their investment. That isn't how it works. It went away because TV and sponsors could not justify their expense. NASCAR is getting less money from TV and car sponsors have decreased as the popularity of NASCAR has slipped over the last couple of years. Sponsors and TV follow the money and the money comes from the customers (people in the stands, watching on TV, purchasing product).
> 
> If Mike caused sponsors and TV to step aside, which I doubt, he shot himself in the foot. If there was more money flowing in 3D archery it would be more money flowing into his pocket. _Maybe _if the ASA was run differently or by different people it would have more growth but it might also degenerate. There is no way Mike is solely responsible for the growth and popularity of archery across the board! There is no doubt the ASA is the best run, most creative and the most forward thinking archery org in this country. So to say how the ASA is organized and run is holding archery back is a reach. The NFAA is stuck in the mud, poorly structured and has executed some very questionable business calls. The IBO is froze in time and quite possibly deteriorating.


Honest question...is ASA a non-profit?


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Scott Bennett said:


> Honest question...is ASA a non-profit?


No.


----------



## Scott Bennett (Aug 12, 2012)

tmorelli said:


> No.


Problem solved!!

At the end of the day, its all business....


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Kstigall said:


> There is no doubt the ASA is the best run, most creative and the most forward thinking archery org in this country.


Here's my agreement and doubt...it is certainly, at least by all accounts, the best run archery organization in *part* of the country...but not the entire country. It's footprint just isn't there. I understand the business side of things, and the basis of why it is what it is, but in the end, it comes down to business and the bottom line. Because of that, it simply aint country wide. I imagine it it tried to expand, issues that are similar to the other orgs may creep in.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

Rolo said:


> Here's my agreement and doubt...it is certainly, at least by all accounts, the best run archery organization in *part* of the country...but not the entire country. It's footprint just isn't there. I understand the business side of things, and the basis of why it is what it is, but in the end, it comes down to business and the bottom line. Because of that, it simply aint country wide. I imagine it it tried to expand, issues that are similar to the other orgs may creep in.


Why don't some folks on the wrong coast get together and create something about like what Mike is doing with the ASA. Might even be able have a working agreement with the ASA to use their rules, classes and maybe the Mckenzie contract.......... Basically a wrong coast ASA franchise. No reason the same couldn't be achieved in other regions of the country where the ASA as it is structured now can not reach. 

If there is support for a west coast based ASA type tournament archery then it shouldn't be a problem.  The problem is that as it stands right now it needs to be grown in place, i.e. in the west. Having the ASA spread itself thin won't do much good for archery or for the ASA's revenue. Moving a very successful tournament from say Georgia to mid-Nevada won't increase archery growth.


----------



## Daniel Boone (May 31, 2002)

Kstigall said:


> Why don't some folks on the wrong coast get together and create something about like what Mike is doing with the ASA. Might even be able have a working agreement with the ASA to use their rules, classes and maybe the Mckenzie contract.......... Basically a wrong coast ASA franchise. No reason the same couldn't be achieved in other regions of the country where the ASA as it is structured now can not reach.
> 
> If there is support for a west coast based ASA type tournament archery then it shouldn't be a problem. The problem is that as it stands right now it needs to be grown in place, i.e. in the west. Having the ASA spread itself thin won't do much good for archery or for the ASA's revenue. Moving a very successful tournament from say Georgia to mid-Nevada won't increase archery growth.


 Totally agree. My hopes regions archery expands to west coast. Never understood why what ASA does in SE United States cant be done in Calif and all the way Northwest states. Plenty of archers in those states. Bottom line it takes allot of commitment to do what ASA does and does it so well. Not an easy task.
DB


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Kstigall said:


> Why don't some folks on the wrong coast get together and create something about like what Mike is doing with the ASA. Might even be able have a working agreement with the ASA to use their rules, classes and maybe the Mckenzie contract.......... Basically a wrong coast ASA franchise. No reason the same couldn't be achieved in other regions of the country where the ASA as it is structured now can not reach.
> 
> If there is support for a west coast based ASA type tournament archery then it shouldn't be a problem. The problem is that as it stands right now it needs to be grown in place, i.e. in the west. Having the ASA spread itself thin won't do much good for archery or for the ASA's revenue. Moving a very successful tournament from say Georgia to mid-Nevada won't increase archery growth.


Simple...it's been tried, at least sorta in the 'mid-west' and it didn't work very good. I agree with the business decision. I also agree with everything you said about what makes the ASA successful. Just have a hard time calling it a country-wide thing. It's actual foot-print is not.

Oh...we like to chase critters other than whitetails regularly. We also tend to like the relative lack of people...which gets back to why the ASA doesn't have much influence out here, and why the NABH folded. There simply isn't support for it, and because of the relative sparsness, even if there was, attendance numbers would likely not be anything resembling the current numbers, on the down-side. If it could work, it would have to be marketed from the org, and the org would have to be willing to take a financial hit for a few years in hopes of a potential gain. History says that is unlikely. Don't have a disagreement with the 'why' at all. Think it is a wise decision. Ain't complaining about it either. Just saying the influence of the ASA out here is minimal. NFAA or NFAA esq. (target heavier) orgs. seem to have a lot more influence in the Rockies than the ASA.


----------



## Aim-WellArcher1 (May 13, 2012)

Nothing against mike and/or asa, but what i understand the regions archery to be shooting for would work.

Don't make use shoot all the regions but just qualify for a centralized championship. This might be key to spreading not only the work load of that guys and girls that run the asa but also make the foot print bigger and expand the popularity. (i like spitballing ideas)


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

what remains to be seen with the regions model is attendance. 

I don't know about you guys but I show up at ASA shoots almost 1k miles from home because I know more than 1k other archers are doing the same. I'm not traveling hundreds of miles for a club shoot.... How do they get their numbers up from within a region? My fear is that these first few look like a big club shoot... and then it will be really hard to get attendance (people to travel in) in the future.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

tmorelli said:


> what remains to be seen with the regions model is attendance.


Yep. Attendance = success or lack of it. It's why (at least a big part of the why) the ASA works so well. Have the shoots (multiple) where the people are. Then have a granddaddy shoot at the end of the series. It will draw shooters from all the previous stops. Relatively all centralized within the target base, and 'easy' for the people within that basde to get there. A bigger number of core shooters who are willing to travel 500 to 1000 miles to shoot.

In the western 1/2, the number of dedicated 3-D shooters who are willing to travel isn't there. Getting people dedicated to travel would take a few years. They simply ain't used to it. There's a heck of a lot more people willing to travel 500 to 1000 miles for 'target' oriented things...because those have always been there, and they're more comnfortable with it. They also get to shoot more arrows. The weather in the mountain west also plays a part.

Rinehart kinda sorta tried some things in the less densly populated areas, they were big club shoots. Bowcast is a good and fun shoot, but it is just that, a fun shoot. Other than that, something big does not have much of a positive history in the western 1/2.

Hopefully the regions things works, but there is likely going to be a lot of growing pains.


----------



## STRICNINE (Oct 22, 2012)

So about those rankings.......lol


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

STRICNINE said:


> So about those rankings.......lol


I guess I will have to keep track of IBO scores after this weekend?


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

Rolo said:


> Yep. Attendance = success or lack of it. It's why (at least a big part of the why) the ASA works so well. Have the shoots (multiple) where the people are. Then have a granddaddy shoot at the end of the series. It will draw shooters from all the previous stops. Relatively all centralized within the target base, and 'easy' for the people within that basde to get there. A bigger number of core shooters who are willing to travel 500 to 1000 miles to shoot.
> 
> In the western 1/2, the number of dedicated 3-D shooters who are willing to travel isn't there. Getting people dedicated to travel would take a few years. They simply ain't used to it. There's a heck of a lot more people willing to travel 500 to 1000 miles for 'target' oriented things...because those have always been there, and they're more comnfortable with it. They also get to shoot more arrows. The weather in the mountain west also plays a part.
> 
> ...


I don't know. There are only a few "big" target shoots in the entire country and I don't know if any one of them draw as many archers as any of the 8 ASA shoots or possibly any of the IBO Triple Crown shoots. The only 3 "big" target shoots I can think of are Vegas, Indoor Nationals and the Trail Shoot There are some target shoots that are big for target shoots but don't compare a number of 3D. I hope to one day do Vegas but until then I have to settle for the LAS Classic and Indoor Nationals. With so few big target tournaments those that like target shooting tend to travel to the few.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Kstigall said:


> I don't know. There are only a few "big" target shoots in the entire country and I don't know if any one of them draw as many archers as any of the 8 ASA shoots or possibly any of the IBO Triple Crown shoots. The only 3 "big" target shoots I can think of are Vegas, Indoor Nationals and the Trail Shoot There are some target shoots that are big for target shoots but don't compare a number of 3D. I hope to one day do Vegas but until then I have to settle for the LAS Classic and Indoor Nationals. With so few big target tournaments those that like target shooting tend to travel to the few.


I didn't say they were traveling for 'big' shoots. Just willing to travel for target oriented shoots over 3-D shoots. It's nutt'n for guys "out here" to travel to SLC and Pocatello on back to back weeks. They won't travel 100 miles for 3-d on back to back weeks, or at all...at least a lot of them won't. Then to Iowa, maybe Presley's (it's gaining interest locally) MT Open, Vegas, Indoor Nats, Dakota Classic, Big Sky, Outdoor Nats, Redding, Arizona, etc.

Again, people 'out here' compared to people in your neck of the woods. So, more willingness to travel for target oriented games 'out here' than for 3-d...because that is what they are familiar with, and what they enjoy. Doesn't matter how 'big' or small the shoot is. It's the willingness to travel to the venues that I was talking about, and the willingness to travel to 3-d (even the big shoots if they were 'local') doesn't seem to be here. Historically (NABH) it hasn't been here.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Rolo said:


> Historically (NABH) it hasn't been here.


Was there known distance in the NABH game? Think it matters?


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

tmorelli said:


> Was there known distance in the NABH game? Think it matters?


I think that was before 'known distance' in 3-d was ever on the radar. Ah, the god ol' days. :shade:

Does it matter...I don't have a clue. Has the ASA known 45 and 50 grown like it was contemplated it would? Looking at the results, the Pro cross-over that was thought would happen, doesn't appear to have happened...at least on a regular and large scale. 

In these parts, there are a few clubs that have gone to known or RF allowable shoots. From what I have heard, there numbers attending have decreased over-all. Whether it is directly related to known / RF use or other things (economy, scheduling conflicts, etc) I don't have a clue. I shoot them anyway.

But generally, in these parts, and likely due to sparsely populated areas and a lot of nothing, there is not a large and strong core of people willing to travel to shoot in numbers. The largest group that does travel is for target oriented things, and 3-d is the lessor.  (Granted, when it comes to outdoor target stuff, the group gets smaller, but it is still bigger than the group willing to travel the same distance for 3-d).

My experience in the Mt. west is that 3-d is just not that big of thing. Historically, it just has not been included in the 'big' 3-d shoot associations. Without that influence, the base and desire among people hasn't been there. There was a shoot for several years in Colorado (I think at Winter Park that was great and a lot of fun, but it suffered the consequence of numbers and money too) NABH was more a midwest thing, and not really even in the Mt. West, but it was closer. The attendance was local, and then from the traditional 3-d states of the south-east. The influence from the west wasn't there. Cabela's pulled the plug, and became the title sponsor of the ASA for a couple of years. Then, poof, they were gone. Guessing like other things, their return on investment wasn't there. Which is probably the driving force that limits expansion of the footprint of the ASA and IBO. Can't say I blame them.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

I thought it was before known distance came around. 

My pointed question was just curiosity if the archers accustomed and willing to travel for target games just don't judge. Perhaps the uniqueness, success, and location of Redding are coincidental.

I do think its also quite safe to say that the reason "spot" pros haven't broadly transitioned to ASA 3d is..... money. The manufacturers aren't paying contingency. 


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

I think you would see 3D flourish more if there was one set of rules all 3D organizations followed just like golf. Just think how bad golf would be if there were more than one set of rules and each course set there own rules and have par 7's and 9's, it would be a mess. 

One set of targets would be nice also like have mckenzie and rhienhart do 20 and 20. More universal targets and rules would go all long way promoting the sport.

It is hard for a big sponsor to put good money in a Sport that does not have a set rule book and a national following. ASA and IBO are both regional for the most part. 

The IBO is killing themselves not incorporating a known class. They need just one make it known 50 and shooters will come I bet 200 in the class. This is 2013 not 1992 everyone carries a range finder. 

The known class is good for shooters that don't have time to judge targets and work and have families that love to shoot.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

tmorelli said:


> I thought it was before known distance came around.
> 
> My pointed question was just curiosity if the archers accustomed and willing to travel for target games just don't judge. Perhaps the uniqueness, success, and location of Redding are coincidental.
> 
> ...


I think its possible that some may travel more locally if there were more marked yardage. But, some die hard 3-D guys may not travel. So on the local level, it may be a wash. Whether they would travel farther if there were more marked 3-d, who knows. A lot are willing to travel to Redding for 1 shoot a year. Doubt they would travel to 4 or 5 in the same year, if they could go to target oriented venues instead.

Yeah, I'm sure the lack of sponsor miney contributes, and may be the primary reason. But, even if the sponsor money was there, Braden, Reo, Dave and Roger wouldn't have been at the IBO this weekend. And wouldn't go to the next ASA shoot if it conflicted with a WC event. As far as some of the others, assuming a conflict, or non-conflict, hard to say, and would likely be influenced by what their travel schedules otherwise are.


----------

