# Men's Pro is Dying On the Vine!



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

In the Men's Pro class at Erie, there were 23 shooters. There were only 31 at Bedford this year. ASA has a little better turnout, but it still is much lower than it used to be. ASA has only averaged 42.6 Open Pro shooters in 5 tournaments, and that is in a year with record breaking attendances! I wonder what can be done to build these classes more? Any ideas?


----------



## WhitBri (Jan 30, 2007)

I think any way to increase the pro class would decrease overall attendance. As I think you would have to decrease number of classes and force move up more. Most would rather win or be relavent in a class then move up and get spanked.


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

Easy way to fix the pro class!! Make it FREE and have sponsors pay the winnings! But the catch would be you must qualify to be a Pro and must meet certain requirements (point system to stay a pro). ASA has the sponsors, each Pro Am is sponsored by one or more manufactures. The class gets no respect when they let anyone pay and shoot who has not qualified or earned their way in...
Let shooters get sponsor exemptions and have local qualifiers for people wanting to enter the Pro Class for a particular tournament, have a qualifying tournament at the end of the year for archers that want to shoot Pro or have been dropped from the class. 

The Pros need to stand up together and get things changed or this sport will always be treated at a backyard association


----------



## 3rdplace (Jan 3, 2004)

Darin I think the only way to increase the numbers in ASA is to change the $ win out to ten times the entry fee like all the other classes. Generally we only have 3 to 4 shooters win out a year and lately we have that many moving back to Semi Pro. This year with the increased turnout we have four that have won out already.


----------



## gatorhunter (Mar 14, 2008)

I think the big reason for lower numbers is cost I have been shooting in pro class for two year and do not have a Sponsor to pay my way it cost me about 700 a Tournament


----------



## YankeeRebel (Dec 30, 2005)

Bring in Money sponsorship and throw it into a pot for each Pro Am and then pay out as ASA currently does with entry fee's. When people see a chance to win $50,000 or even a $100,000 they will pay to take a shot at the big money. And as far as qualifying to being a Pro, I feel the only qualification a shooter needs is being in compliance with speed and equipment. Ability wins the tournament not the Money. Money just get's ya in it but your ability is what wins it. :thumb:


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

WhitBri said:


> I think any way to increase the pro class would decrease overall attendance. As I think you would have to decrease number of classes and force move up more. Most would rather win or be relavent in a class then move up and get spanked.


That would decrease overall participation in the game ultimately making it LESS attractive to a potential sponsor. 



cenochs said:


> Easy way to fix the pro class!! Make it FREE and have sponsors pay the winnings! But the catch would be you must qualify to be a Pro and must meet certain requirements (point system to stay a pro). ASA has the sponsors, each Pro Am is sponsored by one or more manufactures. The class gets no respect when they let anyone pay and shoot who has not qualified or earned their way in...
> Let shooters get sponsor exemptions and have local qualifiers for people wanting to enter the Pro Class for a particular tournament, have a qualifying tournament at the end of the year for archers that want to shoot Pro or have been dropped from the class.
> 
> The Pros need to stand up together and get things changed or this sport will always be treated at a backyard association


If businesses felt they could make money by putting more money on the table, basically increasing their marketing budget, they would do it. However, "forcing" sponsors does not work if you don't have the leverage, i.e. a large pool of potential customers for the sponsor. I expect some of the current sponsors are literally donating money as they are spending more on 3D than it is worth to them. Look at BowTech, they have a very small presence in target archery and they seem to be doing well. 

Making the "Pro" class a more exclusive club or level is unlikely to help it grow. "Exclusivity" only makes something more attractive when you have more people wanting in or to join than you need to be successful. Once the "club" reaches a certain threshold then you can start upping the membership fees and increase the "qualifications" for being a member. 



YankeeRebel said:


> Bring in Money sponsorship and throw it into a pot for each Pro Am and then pay out as ASA currently does with entry fee's. When people see a chance to win $50,000 or even a $100,000 they will pay to take a shot at the big money. And as far as qualifying to being a Pro, I feel the only qualification a shooter needs is being in compliance with speed and equipment. Ability wins the tournament not the Money. Money just get's ya in it but your ability is what wins it. :thumb:


The idea is simple and obvious. But unless it's higher education you don't just simply tell your customers to hand over more money. For archery to have $50,000+ purses archery needs to become a LOT more valuable to the business world. Archery competition is only a very small sliver of the archery industry. 



gatorhunter said:


> I think the big reason for lower numbers is cost I have been shooting in pro class for two year and do not have a Sponsor to pay my way it cost me about 700 a Tournament


Exactly! The cost of participating in national tournaments limits your participation. The cost of being a big time "sponsor" is a limiting factor for potential sponsors.

If archery in general and archery competition in particular was more popular at the grass roots level then there would be more money in the game. The bigger the archery audience the more attractive it is to not only businesses already involved in archery but also to those businesses that could benefit from marketing their products to archers. Greatly increasing the overall popularity of archery in general is the ONLY way to get more money into the game.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I think for the most part the shooters are right where they should be, the pro class is for the elite shooters only and they are really that good. I am a open a shooter and I would love to be able to give levi a run for the money but I am simply not that good right now but it that day comes where I could give him some competition I will pay the entry and get to work.


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

The Open Pro class might have the numbers dwindling ...but do you see the senior pro class is growing.... 

What does that mean? The ranks from down in other classes, do not want to move up? Is it they feel they can not compete with those that have been a long time tested group of shooters in the Open Pro class? 


Will outside sponsorship purse monies bring more up to the plate? 

Maybe the Archey Professional Association should be reactivated and help in the marketing, spornsorship , and advance of the sport .


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Kstigall said:


> That would decrease overall participation in the game ultimately making it LESS attractive to a potential sponsor.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes. :thumbs_up


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

If you shot Men's Pro and got 10th at every national 3d event this year, you would have earned a whopping $775 dollars. Your entry fees for those 7 tournaments (5 ASA, 2 IBO) would have been $1800 ($250 for ASA per event, $275 for IBO per event).


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

Attract the big name sponsors of old when the payouts were much higher

I think Hoyt pays $5000 for 1st place this year in Mens Pro a far cry from what the payouts of old were for staff shooters heck some were paying out as high as $50K


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

shootist said:


> If you shot Men's Pro and got 10th at every national 3d event this year, you would have earned a whopping $775 dollars. Your entry fees for those 7 tournaments (5 ASA, 2 IBO) would have been $1800 ($250 for ASA per event, $275 for IBO per event).


Your exactly correct it is a shame! What is the incentive?


----------



## YankeeRebel (Dec 30, 2005)

Kstigall said:


> That would decrease overall participation in the game ultimately making it LESS attractive to a potential sponsor.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You wouldn't be TELLING no one to hand over more money. You would simply let money come in from all directions thru the recruitment of any and all sponsors. It would not only be good for the Sport of Archery but would also trickle down and help fund bigger payoffs in the ASA Amateur Classes as well. As far as recruitment.....I suggest all shooters from Pro's all the way down get out there and hustle up sponsorship. From a mere $100 here to a $500 there it'll add up in the end to help fund bigger payouts. Just imagine any and all Archery Businesses alone coughing up just $50 a piece. Now look at sponsorship from Car Dealerships, Grocery Stores, Gas Stations, ect ect.....the sky is the limit here. But until we all try we are only going to do what we are doing now.....pissing and moaning about it. If we want payouts to get bigger we have to bring in outside money.


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

Kody.....the 50k was a long time ago.....and a different way money came in.....and how sponsorship / advertising dollars....but with the market having changed...maybe some outside sponsors will open up the monies they have...and need to spend


----------



## archerydude21 (Sep 20, 2010)

shootist said:


> If you shot Men's Pro and got 10th at every national 3d event this year, you would have earned a whopping $775 dollars. Your entry fees for those 7 tournaments (5 ASA, 2 IBO) would have been $1800 ($250 for ASA per event, $275 for IBO per event).


IBO entry fee to shoot PMR is $305 this year.


----------



## draw29 (Dec 11, 2004)

Tie Levi's hands behind his back and someone else might have a chance. Almost total domination. I would get out of that class ASAP.


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

draw29 said:


> Tie Levi's hands behind his back and someone else might have a chance. Almost total domination. I would get out of that class ASAP.


You do know that in the late 90s early 2000....Hopkins was the dominate Pro....Shoot he still is in the shoot off , often.


----------



## markdenis (Sep 7, 2010)

I have been at this and many other sports for more than 40 years. What brings pros in and keeps them there is *money* plain and simple. So what happens is, same as any other individual events of any sport, a few of the top pros will attend and win most of the money most of the time. When you get to the level of "Pro" in any sport you have learned your capabilities, so unless the payouts are far enough back and are worth winning at all, participation will suffer. 

The pros are going to attend where the money is....real easy to figure out. We have a 3-D shoot every month and I have never seen a pro compete at our club....again real easy to figure out why not. 

Any sport that competes for money must figure out how to pay good money and be able to pay it back further down the line to sustain and ad to shooters' numbers.


----------



## Alpha Burnt (Sep 12, 2005)

All of the pro archers are scared of Levi, no one wants to be dominated...they just drop back to MBR or AHC in IBO where they can steal a buckle from the working man...


----------



## markdenis (Sep 7, 2010)

Well not all of them are afraid of him I'm sure, but if you pay enough money back for places down the line attendance will improve.




Alpha Burnt said:


> All of the pro archers are scared of Levi, no one wants to be dominated...they just drop back to MBR or AHC in IBO where they can steal a buckle from the working man...


----------



## Jay-J (Apr 20, 2005)

No doubt MONEY is the answer. The problem is besides entry fees the only money involved is coming from within the archery industry. The industry NEEDS OUTSIDE MONEY! Truck companies, lawn mower companies, Lowes, Home Depot, etc... True that these companies have nothing to do with archery but the demographic that attends the tournaments are most likely the same that supports these other companies....


----------



## markdenis (Sep 7, 2010)

Jay-J said:


> No doubt MONEY is the answer. The problem is besides entry fees the only money involved is coming from within the archery industry. The industry NEEDS OUTSIDE MONEY! Truck companies, lawn mower companies, Lowes, Home Depot, etc... True that these companies have nothing to do with archery but the demographic that attends the tournaments are most likely the same that supports these other companies....



Sponsors are the answer no doubt. It takes a tremendous amount of work and dedication by many people to get and retain sponsors. Some sports have done it and many are very successful because of it. High individual entry fees have never worked as far as I know...it takes much more!


----------



## WhitBri (Jan 30, 2007)

And to get the outside money you have to have enough of an audience to make it work for their dollars. ROI is king. Sad that here in Iowa there are some pretty hardcore local 3ders that don't know what ASA and IBO are


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

i couldn't tell from the names, but have any pros jumped in here yet with an opinion?


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

Jay-J said:


> No doubt MONEY is the answer. The problem is besides entry fees the only money involved is coming from within the archery industry. The industry NEEDS OUTSIDE MONEY! Truck companies, lawn mower companies, Lowes, Home Depot, etc... True that these companies have nothing to do with archery but the demographic that attends the tournaments are most likely the same that supports these other companies....


Best reply yet...... But remember ASA is private and Mike and the Crew like their cash cow and living 20 years in the past.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Alpha Burnt said:


> All of the pro archers are scared of Levi, no one wants to be dominated...they just drop back to MBR or AHC in IBO where they can steal a buckle from the working man...


I doubt that all of the Pros are scared of Levi. If they were there wouldn't be a Pro class. And it ain't like some stock car race. Know one Pro knows who's leading during shooting. End of the day, yeah, scores are posted. I sort of laugh when I see "Levi came clawing back or fighting back" to win. He doesn't have the slightest idea if someone is X number of points ahead of him. He knows one thing to do and does it the best he can, and that's shoot the best he can. He knows he can't let up. He can't coast. Too many dang good shooters are right there to collect if he doesn't.


----------



## markdenis (Sep 7, 2010)

SonnyThomas said:


> I doubt that all of the Pros are scared of Levi. If they were there wouldn't be a Pro class. And it ain't like some stock car race. Know one Pro knows who's leading during shooting. End of the day, yeah, scores are posted. I sort of laugh when I see "Levi came clawing back or fighting back" to win. He doesn't have the slightest idea if someone is X number of points ahead of him. He knows one thing to do and does it the best he can, and that's shoot the best he can. He knows he can't let up. He can't coast. Too many dang good shooters are right there to collect if he doesn't.



You are right of course, but at the end of the day Levi and a small handful of other pros are who takes home the money nearly every shoot. Its no secret and the other pros know it. Attendance suffers because of the same winners in any sport but only if the payouts are not good enough for places further back.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Jay-J said:


> No doubt MONEY is the answer. The problem is besides entry fees the only money involved is coming from within the archery industry. The industry NEEDS OUTSIDE MONEY! Truck companies, lawn mower companies, Lowes, Home Depot, etc... True that these companies have nothing to do with archery but the demographic that attends the tournaments are most likely the same that supports these other companies....


Yes.



WhitBri said:


> And to get the outside money you have to have enough of an audience to make it work for their dollars. ROI is king. Sad that here in Iowa there are some pretty hardcore local 3ders that don't know what ASA and IBO are


Exponentially YES!

There was a thread here awhile back about Hoyt lowering its contingency payout in 3-D (and maybe otherwise). Without re-hashing it all, manufacturers generally are not seeing the ROI in 3-D. They can't continue (at least if they want to make smart business decisions) to support a market that does not give them a return. Where they are getting a return (at least in the US) is in the hunting market, sponsoring hunting shows, that have really cool personalities. For every one person that walks into the local shop wanting a bow like Levi's or Chance's or Dan's, or Jesse's, etc, there's 100 that are asking about Michael's or Lee's bow. If I were a manufacturer, I know where my advertising money is going.

To bring in outside advertising, the exposure has to be there. The exposure has to be beyond the shoot itself. It has to resonate in print, net and tv exposure. Untiol archery gets that, outside money, if any, is going to be fairly limited.

A plug for Bowjunky...I think they are on to something, and if they keep building on it...

With the expanded market, will likely come outside money. The natural reaction to this, will be increased participation in all classes, increased pay-outs, and probably increased support from the endemic sponsors. But until that happens, it will probably stay the same...and as long as the participants wait for the providers to get the money and sponsors, it's very unlikely things will change...


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

Everyone keeps talking about the "Pro's" and getting money in to the game. Well here's a news flash, getting money into the game is NOT about the Pro's. You could dissolve the "Pro" division completely and it would not hurt participation at the next ASA event!! If you want the sport of archery to grow then forget about the "Pro's"......... I dare someone to find a sport where there is a lot of money, a large Pro division, large purses and has as few participants as target archery. Ok, maybe something like Polo where large sums of old money is thrown around for fun.

Folks big purses come from a large customer base. Quadruple the number of archers shooting Youth, Young Adult, Open B, Open A, Open C, Known and Hunter classes at local clubs and state championships and you will eventually have more Pro archers shooting for more money. The money follows amateur participation levels. You will be hard pressed to get the money into the game and then grow the sport. Grow the popularity and the money will follow....... 

Name one popular professional sport where the "pro's" built the game? There were very popular local amateur (or supposedly amateur) football, baseball and basketball leagues long before there was an NFL, MLB or NBA. For there to be a modestly successful Pro level there must be a popular amateur level. A lot of people were doing a lot of fishing and spending a lot of money on fishing long before there was a high dollar B.A.S.S. tournament trail.


----------



## edgerat (Dec 14, 2011)

So the little leader board that is brought around the course is invisible to them?


----------



## markdenis (Sep 7, 2010)

Kstigall said:


> Everyone keeps talking about the "Pro's" and getting money in to the game. Well here's a news flash, getting money into the game is NOT about the Pro's. You could dissolve the "Pro" division completely and it would not hurt participation at the next ASA event!! If you want the sport of archery to grow then forget about the "Pro's"......... I dare someone to find a sport where there is a lot of money, a large Pro division, large purses and has as few participants as target archery. Ok, maybe something like Polo where large sums of old money is thrown around for fun.
> 
> Folks big purses come from a large customer base. Quadruple the number of archers shooting Youth, Young Adult, Open B, Open A, Open C, Known and Hunter classes at local clubs and state championships and you will eventually have more Pro archers shooting for more money. The money follows amateur participation levels. You will be hard pressed to get the money into the game and then grow the sport. Grow the popularity and the money will follow.......
> 
> Name one popular professional sport where the "pro's" built the game? There were very popular local amateur (or supposedly amateur) football, baseball and basketball leagues long before there was an NFL, MLB or NBA. For there to be a modestly successful Pro level there must be a popular amateur level. A lot of people were doing a lot of fishing and spending a lot of money on fishing long before there was a high dollar B.A.S.S. tournament trail.



You are describing the natural progression of any sport. Archery is no exception. Participation was there at one time because of ample attendance from all categories of archers, but it has fallen backwards and is not moving forward. Any successful sport has a thriving pro division and if they ignore that part of it, attendance falls by he wayside eventually.


----------



## J Whittington (Nov 13, 2009)

I shot pro 1 yr, I sucked, got laid off from my job (yes, teachers/state budgets get cut) IF I could afford it, I would return.....I really enjoyed shooting in that class...


----------



## WhitBri (Jan 30, 2007)

Kstigall said:


> Everyone keeps talking about the "Pro's" and getting money in to the game. Well here's a news flash, getting money into the game is NOT about the Pro's. You could dissolve the "Pro" division completely and it would not hurt participation at the next ASA event!! If you want the sport of archery to grow then forget about the "Pro's"......... I dare someone to find a sport where there is a lot of money, a large Pro division, large purses and has as few participants as target archery. Ok, maybe something like Polo where large sums of old money is thrown around for fun.
> 
> Folks big purses come from a large customer base. Quadruple the number of archers shooting Youth, Young Adult, Open B, Open A, Open C, Known and Hunter classes at local clubs and state championships and you will eventually have more Pro archers shooting for more money. The money follows amateur participation levels. You will be hard pressed to get the money into the game and then grow the sport. Grow the popularity and the money will follow.......
> 
> Name one popular professional sport where the "pro's" built the game? There were very popular local amateur (or supposedly amateur) football, baseball and basketball leagues long before there was an NFL, MLB or NBA. For there to be a modestly successful Pro level there must be a popular amateur level. A lot of people were doing a lot of fishing and spending a lot of money on fishing long before there was a high dollar B.A.S.S. tournament trail.


Need to do this starting with integrating in local clubs from around the nation all playing the same game with same rules with courses set similar to the national events. The big sports you mention all played same rules same game to grow from small backyard stuff to national events. What are there maybe 5 big events each for two org that don't have the same rules then 1000s local clubs that vary widely.


----------



## Arrcon (Feb 24, 2013)

I don't know anything about 3d archery but kstigall sounds like he knows what he's talking about


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

Arrcon said:


> I don't know anything about 3d archery but kstigall sounds like he knows what he's talking about


Please don't encoourage him.....LOL


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

WhitBri said:


> Need to do this starting with integrating in local clubs from around the nation all playing the same game with same rules with courses set similar to the national events. The big sports you mention all played same rules same game to grow from small backyard stuff to national events. What are there maybe 5 big events each for two org that don't have the same rules then 1000s local clubs that vary widely.


Could not have said it better, until everyone follows a set standard of rules from local level to national level the sport is just a backyard hobby no big sponsor will take seriously!


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

bhtr3d said:


> Kody.....the 50k was a long time ago.....and a different way money came in.....and how sponsorship / advertising dollars....but with the market having changed...maybe some outside sponsors will open up the monies they have...and need to spend


Agreed the $50k was years ago and the market has changed......but turning away big name companies just based on products they sell who are willing to pour money into the archery tours isnt the answer either....the sport is showing growth once again shouldn't be 30-45 entries in the pro class when numbers once peeked at 100 or more

ASA does a great job yes, but as any company should take leanings and apply them to improve them self, seeing a dip in pro class should toss a red flag and force them to say how do we get these numbers up?

I know some say Levi is so dominant no one wants to shoot...that's BS as stated Hopkins was as dominant if not more dominant than Levi then before him Randy Ulmer so that theory isn't the problem

Get a big sponsor from outside to toss money into the mixs and sit back and watch the fire burn as the numbers will go up


Getting a event on ESPN wouldn't be a bad idea either - like the old outdoors games they use to broadcast it had archery on it, get a weekend shoot on some sort of TV ESPN, Outdoor Channel, etc get the sponsors some airtime and see there sells go up on products and in return offer more money up for sponsorship cash - You guys have a great chance right now with Bow Junky doing his thing (doing it very well I might add) get him hooked up and get these events on national TV



Easier said than done but the Pro class seems to on the decline times for the powers at be to make a move


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

markdenis said:


> You are describing the natural progression of any sport. Archery is no exception. Participation was there at one time because of ample attendance from all categories of archers, but it has fallen backwards and is not moving forward. Any successful sport has a thriving pro division and if they ignore that part of it, attendance falls by he wayside eventually.


Exactly correct but people can't wrap their head around this......


----------



## WhitBri (Jan 30, 2007)

cenochs said:


> Could not have said it better, until everyone follows a set standard of rules from local level to national level the sport is just a backyard hobby no big sponsor will take seriously!


Heck right now backyard games like cornhole/bags have more consistent rules and bar arcade games like golden tee have bigger payouts at national events. Until we get consistency down and the word out that this 3d game is played with this set of rules then it will be no more then it is.


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

WhitBri said:


> Heck right now backyard games like cornhole/bags have more consistent rules and bar arcade games like golden tee have bigger payouts at national events. Until we get consistency down and the word out that this 3d game is played with this set of rules then it will be no more then it is.


Well said 

I honestly think this is about getting as much cash in the big mans or should I say big men (you know who you are) pockets before the thing is either sold off or folds up.......


----------



## J Whittington (Nov 13, 2009)

please don't make those comments about kent, If he thinks he is smart and correct, we will never hear the end of it. He will literally ship crow pie to a few of us on A.T.


----------



## Tallcatt (Jul 27, 2003)

WhitBri said:


> Need to do this starting with integrating in local clubs from around the nation all playing the same game with same rules with courses set similar to the national events. The big sports you mention all played same rules same game to grow from small backyard stuff to national events. What are there maybe 5 big events each for two org that don't have the same rules then 1000s local clubs that vary widely.


This does not address the declining Pro class issue, but it does address the comment above.

We have tried our best to grow sport of 3D here in Texas. Not knowing any other way to do it....we have simply "taken the bull by the horns" and worked really hard to promote and organize. We go to the shoots. We are the tournament directors. This creates consistency. We enforce the rules.

We have done this by getting most of the Texas clubs into the ASA program. When my wife and I took over as state directors in 2006 we had 9 ASA clubs. This year (2013) we have 29 ASA clubs. We are hosting 21 state qualifiers and a state championship. One of our state qualifiers was a regional 3 state qualifier (Texas, Oklahoma and Arkansas). Another shoot coming up will be a two state qualifier (Texas and Arkansas). The "trickle up effect" has resulted. The popularity of the ASA format in Texas at the state level has created new shooters at the Pro/Am level. Back in the early 2000's you could count the Texas shooters at an ASA Pro/Am on ten fingers. The attendance of Texas as well as Oklahoma and Arkansas shooters has greatly increased in the last 6 or 7 years.

In the big picture maybe what we are trying to do is not that big of deal....but if you want our sport to grow...you got to start somewhere....you got to do something.

Here is the practice bale line from Sunday morning at our Texas ASA 2012 state Championship......kinda looks like a national event.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

WhitBri said:


> Need to do this starting with integrating in local clubs from around the nation all playing the same game with same rules with courses set similar to the national events. The big sports you mention all played same rules same game to grow from small backyard stuff to national events. What are there maybe 5 big events each for two org that don't have the same rules then 1000s local clubs that vary widely.





cenochs said:


> Could not have said it better, until everyone follows a set standard of rules from local level to national level the sport is just a backyard hobby no big sponsor will take seriously!


You two are forgetting something. The reason the local, grass roots archery clubs exist and do well is because of the shooters that don't compete on the state and national level. These shooters have no desire to compete and you can't force them to.

I know of NFAA clubs that have IBO classes. I know of ASA clubs that have NFAA classes. One ASA club had Club classes, bowhunter and special equipment classes took care of the majority of their shooters.

These same clubs don't enforce any speed limit.

Only one club I know of has a Bow Novice class. Some clubs don't have senior classes. Two clubs don't have classes. They hand you a score card only for you to keep score. One of these clubs have numbered shooting lanes and maybe two shooting stakes, Adults and kids.

Plain fact is; Clubs don't need a set of organized rules to survive. Another fact; The only reason these clubs are affilated with a archery organization is for insurance needs. If the strangle hold of the archery organizations over insurance was every broken there'd a lot less clubs belonging to organizations.

I shoot at 3 to 4 clubs per month, all ASA clubs. If, and a big IF, they have 10 ASA members within their club it's only because of the required 10 membership certificates. It was no different when our club was with the NFAA. 5 Officers were selected to fulfill the 5 members required. I never saw the time when we had more than 8 NFAA members...if that.

At one time clubs required their members to become member of the affiliated archery organization. That was crushed years back and no club I know of today requires a member to join the affiliated organization.


----------



## WhitBri (Jan 30, 2007)

SonnyThomas said:


> You two are forgetting something. The reason the local, grass roots archery clubs exist and do well is because of the shooters that don't compete on the state and national level. These shooters have no desire to compete and you can't force them to.
> 
> I know of NFAA clubs that have IBO classes. I know of ASA clubs that have NFAA classes. One ASA club had Club classes, bowhunter and special equipment classes took care of the majority of their shooters.
> 
> ...


But I don't believe that going by common rules wouldn't hurt them either and if all clubs had a benefit for using a set of standard rules all would benefit by the increased interest. But since the big org have only gave insurance which you can get elsewhere too as the only benefit there is no reason to conform. The big orgs should cater to the local clubs not the other way around. They have the members that shoot. The org need to grow their big nation shoots from a grassroots approach. Get state directors to help and put some of the money to back the state level stuff. Expand and they would see rewards tenfold. Like I said a lot of hardcore locals around me that go to local shoots every weekend don't know what ASA.


----------



## hoytxcutter (Sep 1, 2003)

Well said. The pros do not keep the IBO or ASA afloat. It is the average Joes that enjoy getting out and competing with other fellow archers.


Kstigall said:


> Everyone keeps talking about the "Pro's" and getting money in to the game. Well here's a news flash, getting money into the game is NOT about the Pro's. You could dissolve the "Pro" division completely and it would not hurt participation at the next ASA event!! If you want the sport of archery to grow then forget about the "Pro's"......... I dare someone to find a sport where there is a lot of money, a large Pro division, large purses and has as few participants as target archery. Ok, maybe something like Polo where large sums of old money is thrown around for fun.
> 
> Folks big purses come from a large customer base. Quadruple the number of archers shooting Youth, Young Adult, Open B, Open A, Open C, Known and Hunter classes at local clubs and state championships and you will eventually have more Pro archers shooting for more money. The money follows amateur participation levels. You will be hard pressed to get the money into the game and then grow the sport. Grow the popularity and the money will follow.......
> 
> Name one popular professional sport where the "pro's" built the game? There were very popular local amateur (or supposedly amateur) football, baseball and basketball leagues long before there was an NFL, MLB or NBA. For there to be a modestly successful Pro level there must be a popular amateur level. A lot of people were doing a lot of fishing and spending a lot of money on fishing long before there was a high dollar B.A.S.S. tournament trail.


----------



## markdenis (Sep 7, 2010)

Plenty of good comments and opinions so far, but few really address the "Men's Pro is Dying On the Vine!" situation. Every thriving and successful sport has a pro section that does very well. I think archery needs the same.


----------



## Kighty7 (Feb 7, 2004)

I by no means am a pro, I love competing against others in anything. It would be nice to see some more money paid out in all the classes. I am no where near even placing in the top 20 scores in MBR but knowing I could win some $$$ would make it all the better. I feel like I just donate my money to the IBO every time I come to a National Shoot. My .02 cents.


----------



## bowtexan (Oct 26, 2010)

Tallcatt said:


> This does not address the declining Pro class issue, but it does address the comment above.
> 
> We have tried our best to grow sport of 3D here in Texas. Not knowing any other way to do it....we have simply "taken the bull by the horns" and worked really hard to promote and organize. We go to the shoots. We are the tournament directors. This creates consistency. We enforce the rules.
> 
> ...


Hey look!!! Theres Marvin Mullen.


----------



## eads81 (Jun 22, 2010)

at a IBO or ASA event for one to shoot in the pro class, does one only need to pony up the fees to participate for that particular class?


----------



## Daniel Boone (May 31, 2002)

More money would attract more to shoot the event.

Shame if not for contengency money mostly from Mathews we wouldnt have a pro class.

More manufacuers step up and support the true top shooters would help. Always amazed at those who dont want to see big prize money in pro class. Always felt that is the person that could never touch the class regardless. These archers are the best of the best and deserve good payouts to do what they do.
DB


DB


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

Is it fair for companys to offer only $5000 to its winner in a class when years ago they offered in the $50k range???? That is a major gap in money offered up for the bow company top rank Pro shooters isnt it? Whats funny is bow prices are higher than ever in the shops all around the World but yet they offer less and less money each year it seems to its staff shooters if they win in the PRO class. I dislike Mathews bows myself but will say they still take care of there staff shooters and offer $10k for a win in the PRO class......hard for a man to pack up a car and drive to florida when he knows the very most he can win if he shoots Hoyt is $5000 when a fellow compeitor who shoots Mathews will get $5000 more....doesnt add up to me but I was never good at math


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Babyk said:


> Is it fair for companys to offer only $5000 to its winner in a class when years ago they offered in the $50k range???? That is a major gap in money offered up for the bow company top rank Pro shooters isnt it? Whats funny is bow prices are higher than ever in the shops all around the World but yet they offer less and less money each year it seems to its staff shooters if they win in the PRO class. I dislike Mathews bows myself but will say they still take care of there staff shooters and offer $10k for a win in the PRO class......hard for a man to pack up a car and drive to florida when he knows the very most he can win if he shoots Hoyt is $5000 when a fellow compeitor who shoots Mathews will get $5000 more....doesnt add up to me but I was never good at math


I little bit different question...Is it fair to expect manufacturers (or any business) to keep investing in something if they are not receiving a return on the investment? Yes, 25 years ago, the pay-outs were exponentially high. But, the market and demographic has changed. In the States, the market is hunting. That's where an abundance of the dollars go. That's where the best return on investment is reached. In Europe and Asia...its the target market, and that's where the investment is made, because that is where the return is realized. I don't blame or fault a business for investing its money in what it deems to be a wise decision. If it isn't the business will fail. Such is the way of the world.

Would it be great if manufacturers were able to pay the contingencies of yester-year...absolutely. (Even in the AM ranks too). But I don't think it is fair to expect the manufacturers to foot the bill, the entire bill. There is no reason that the various orgs, or potential associations could not have developed a foot-print and plan for more sponsors and more money, and more participation, and more everything. But, expecting the manufacturers to continue 'as was' with limited, if any, ROI, and dis-organized efforts, at best, to make the sport grow (be it 3-D or target) by those wanting the additional money, seems more unfair...


----------



## varmintvaporize (Feb 9, 2010)

Market the spectators! 
No other professional sport survives buy entry fees & contingency money alone. Archery Pro should be expected to shoot in front of a crowd of spectators that pay to watch. Professional Archery should work like NASCAR, PGA Golf, NFL Football, MLB Baseball, etc..
If the Professional Archers would do this the endorsement list would be much bigger & broader than archery manufactures alone. Imagine a Professional Archer being sponcered by Pepsi, Coke, Nike, Lowes, etc...


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

Rolo said:


> I little bit different question...Is it fair to expect manufacturers (or any business) to keep investing in something if they are not receiving a return on the investment? Yes, 25 years ago, the pay-outs were exponentially high. But, the market and demographic has changed. In the States, the market is hunting. That's where an abundance of the dollars go. That's where the best return on investment is reached. In Europe and Asia...its the target market, and that's where the investment is made, because that is where the return is realized. I don't blame or fault a business for investing its money in what it deems to be a wise decision. If it isn't the business will fail. Such is the way of the world.
> 
> Would it be great if manufacturers were able to pay the contingencies of yester-year...absolutely. (Even in the AM ranks too). But I don't think it is fair to expect the manufacturers to foot the bill, the entire bill. There is no reason that the various orgs, or potential associations could not have developed a foot-print and plan for more sponsors and more money, and more participation, and more everything. But, expecting the manufacturers to continue 'as was' with limited, if any, ROI, and dis-organized efforts, at best, to make the sport grow (be it 3-D or target) by those wanting the additional money, seems more unfair...



Thank you for the post.....you are correct when the $50k payouts were being issued the market was targert/3-D archery with time that has changed, it would be like me accepting a investment in my 401K that was providing me 0 ROI no one in thier right mind would do so. Sad to say but maybe the best days for targer/3-D archery is behind us as far as the PRO class and the big money payouts!


----------



## Hallsway (Jan 16, 2009)

In the 90's you did not have: The Outdoor Channel, The Sportsman Channel, The Pursuit Channel, and the FSN. You had to advertise somewhere now money can go to commercials, air time, and hunting show sponsors rather than the 3D shoots. Its all about the money, and it is still there, just redirected to a new media.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Babyk said:


> Thank you for the post.....you are correct when the $50k payouts were being issued the market was targert/3-D archery with time that has changed, it would be like me accepting a investment in my 401K that was providing me 0 ROI no one in thier right mind would do so. Sad to say but maybe the best days for targer/3-D archery is behind us as far as the PRO class and the big money payouts!


I'm not sure about that. World Archery is doing a bang up job, and there's a ton of non-endemic sponsors. But, that's a world market, and a venue that is practiced everywhere (for the most part at least).

In the States, I still think it is possible, but there will have to be a lot of work by those who want the higher pay-outs, and maybe investment by them personally, and some concessions will be necessary from various interests, but I think it is do-able. Maybe not quickly, but possible. I think the pro ranks getting organized as one collective group, for the good of the whole, would be a great starting point. A group of pros going to a non-endemic sponsor is going to carry more weight than 1...

I think it starts, for everyone, with a question of what can I do...instead of what are they going to do for me...


----------



## Supermag1 (Jun 11, 2009)

The mention of World Archery's success brings up another point. There are only Pro's at those events and no Amateurs. Maybe the fact that the Pros and only Pros are put on display there helps point out the market to their sponsors (by the number of spectators and people watching the videos). Where as with 3D you have everyone there and shooting so they can't tell the difference between the spectators and shooters who are just killing time. Maybe the orgs should make the big shoots more exclusive and only have the Pros and maybe a select few Amateurs that qualify to go up against them. Maybe then they could focus on bringing in some big sponsors because people would either have to go and pay to watch them at the event or watch video of it. With more sponsors could come bigger checks and paying deeper in the field; and paying deeper will draw more high scoring amateurs into trying out the Pro class.

Or you could boost the money and possibly the participation in the Pro classes by taking all the prize money away from the amateurs and putting it in the Pro's money pool so that if people thought they needed to be paid to shoot, they could suck it up and go against the big boys.


----------



## asa3dpro (Dec 31, 2002)

Bring Pennzoil, Budwieser,etc back. Pay Wayne Pearson for some consulting...


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

asa3dpro said:


> Bring Pennzoil, Budwieser,etc back. Pay Wayne Pearson for some consulting...


Shame on you ass3dpro.......you know we cant have Budwieser come back cause they sell products that the current ASA doesnt suppourt!!!!

Eventhough budwieser has donated millions upon millions of $$$ to orgainzations such as Delta Waterfowl, Ducks Unlimited etc. No way can they be a sponsor of ASA eventhough the CEO is a very avide hunter and outdoorsman


Paying for alittle consulting wouldnt be a bad idea at this point I dont think, problem is I dont think there be much time to fit in a meeting to discuss anything due to the fact that the POWERS AT BE (you know who you are) are out spending the boat load of cash they have made off the many many many amature classes that bring in the big dough!!! Why worry about the Pro class when you have a full range and 6 men on a stake at $45 a wack at each and every tournment you set up......I think here is the real problem what I just said above:mg:


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

Kighty7 said:


> I by no means am a pro, I love competing against others in anything. It would be nice to see some more money paid out in all the classes. I am no where near even placing in the top 20 scores in MBR but knowing I could win some $$$ would make it all the better. I feel like I just donate my money to the IBO every time I come to a National Shoot. My .02 cents.


in both asa and regions you at least stand a chance to make some of your money back.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

the pros and their supporters should be out in front on this issue and not rely on someone else to carry their water. i can't say that i know any of the pros, even though i've shot with several in the asa pro ams. i have yet to have a pro that i wouldn't be happy to shoot with anytime. i liked and respected all of them. 

but i don't shoot the pro ams in order to increase the money they make because there's very little i can do to affect how much they do make. i do think non-pro shooters showing up at these events helps the pros because it is an indicator of interest in the sport. drawing 1500+ people to a small town like London is actually a pretty big deal, and most of those attending were non-pro shooters.

imho it comes back to the pros themselves. how many of these pros have an agent? even the lowest paid guy on a professional sports team retains an agent who has the job of getting the pro's name and face out there before the public. a good agent does all the heavy lifting when it comes to making the public aware of who the guy or gal is. in turn he negotiates the contracts for the pro. these agents are experts and understand what it takes to market a professional to the markets beyond the sport. i guess that means the pros need to take a more professional approach to selling themselves and the sport to the public.

i'm betting the big names in the archery hunting community, like lee and tiffany have agents. i'm betting the robertson family does too.

just saying...


----------



## TheScOuT (May 9, 2011)

I am just a back yard archer and have never shot an ASA event...just a few small local shoots. The sport needs spectators and to put on a show just like every other sport. Money and endorsments will follow which has the potential to grow all shooting clasees. 

I live a few miles from Uchee Creek and went to the ASA event as a spectator but there was nothing to do...I only stayed about an hour. I watched people shoot on the practice line...nowhere for me to even watch really. I walked down the trail to watch some targets being shot...all the shooters looked at me like I was stupid and lost. There is nothing to see if you are not a shooter! Maybe others saw it different but that's how I felt.

Maybe make some kind of small single shot competetions off to the side....like shoot the turkey target in the head at 80 yards and win $30! Some small things like that would give normal people like me something to do there and make it stimulating. Maybe put a small set of bleachers for people to watch.

Archery is a tough nut to crack as a sport...you're either all in and shooting or you don't even know about there is a tournament just a few miles from your house.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

TheScOuT said:


> I am just a back yard archer and have never shot an ASA event...just a few small local shoots. The sport needs spectators and to put on a show just like every other sport. Money and endorsments will follow which has the potential to grow all shooting clasees.
> 
> I live a few miles from Uchee Creek and went to the ASA event as a spectator but there was nothing to do...I only stayed about an hour. I watched people shoot on the practice line...nowhere for me to even watch really. I walked down the trail to watch some targets being shot...all the shooters looked at me like I was stupid and lost. There is nothing to see if you are not a shooter! Maybe others saw it different but that's how I felt.
> 
> ...


There it is............. A potential customer that checked out the game and couldn't find anything of interest at a BIG shoot. 

Show an Amsoil, Ford or a Russel Outdoors a big enough crowd of potential customers with money to spend and they will pay to get their attention. 

I've shot the LAS Classic a few times. The first couple of shoots they had flip cards for displaying the score on every bale for every archer. It made the game more interesting to watch because you could see up and down the line what was happening after each 3 arrow end. It also made it more "exciting" to play because of the added pressure you might put on yourself. The score charts were removed because they said it slowed things down too much but I also know a lot of the archers absolutely despised seeing the scores while they were competing! Basically they couldn't handle the pressure (stress) or do not have the confidence to manage knowing what is going on while they shoot. Wimps!!!

Implementing a process for having a live leader board should be seriously considered. Money will have to be spent to figure it out and deliver it but I believe current technology can make it happen and it would not be outrageously expensive. Part of the "leader board" system would have each archer wearing a number which could be their ASA number. I'm betting the Pro course would draw a fair number of spectators.


----------



## archerydude21 (Sep 20, 2010)

Kstigall said:


> There it is............. A potential customer that checked out the game and couldn't find anything of interest at a BIG shoot.
> 
> Show an Amsoil, Ford or a Russel Outdoors a big enough crowd of potential customers with money to spend and they will pay to get their attention.
> 
> ...


Now we're getting somewhere! If its not something somebody wants to watch your wasting your breath. Spectators are potential customers for sponsors and that's it. Bring in spectators and money will follow. There were big payouts in the past because there was potential growth with archery, especially 
3d, but it failed to grow to its potential. Mostly, I believe, because of the organizations that were(and still are) running national level shoots. No cooperation with each other, and no willingness to please the shooters, spectators, or sponsors.


----------



## TheScOuT (May 9, 2011)

I just wanted to share my experience as a third party looking in on the sport of archery. Like I said above...there is nothing for a spectator to do, if your not shooting people will not go. 

Also...I know the Uchee Creek shoot was not publicized around the Columbus or Fort Benning area at all to draw a crowd. Sure, on a site like this everybody knows about it but that's about as far as it goes. I work with an office of about 50 people...over a dozen are hard core bow hunters! I was talking about the shoot the following week...not a single person in my office knew it even happened in their back yard here at Fort Benning. I think the ASA could market/advertise better and take steps to draw a fan base or some kind of crowd. That would grow interest which would result in more people shooting in all classes.

Maybe have raffle drawings targeted at families or spectators, maybe get a couple bouncy houses for families with kids to attract attention, maybe get some local restaurants to set up food places and advertise the shoot. There are thousands of ways to just draw people.

People = crowds = interest in the event = event grows = sport grows = more money


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Kstigall said:


> There it is............. A potential customer that checked out the game and couldn't find anything of interest at a BIG shoot.
> 
> Show an Amsoil, Ford or a Russel Outdoors a big enough crowd of potential customers with money to spend and they will pay to get their attention.
> 
> ...





archerydude21 said:


> Now we're getting somewhere! If its not something somebody wants to watch your wasting your breath. Spectators are potential customers for sponsors and that's it. Bring in spectators and money will follow. There were big payouts in the past because there was potential growth with archery, especially
> 3d, but it failed to grow to its potential. Mostly, I believe, because of the organizations that were(and still are) running national level shoots. No cooperation with each other, and no willingness to please the shooters, spectators, or sponsors.


Yep...and to give them something to watch, there has to be an interest to watch. To give people an interest in watching (beyond the folks who are archery-centrics) there has to be a 'story' created, and a 'relationship' with the people who are participating. A 'root for/against' issue to a certain degree. Characters and a knowledge of the people who are participating...marketable figures beyond the small little archery world.

Look at other professional sports and the participants...they market themselves in such a way that people can relate to them and aspire to be 'like' them. Beyond their natural abilities, they are personalities, or at least marketed as personalities. This allows them to cross lines...and promote products and brands that have nutt'n to do with the sport...watches, clothes, phone companies, you name it...all because the individual marketed themselves in such a way that allowed them to connect with the audience.

If pro archery wants to grow beyond what it is (and assuming that is a 'good' thing) then the people who want it to grow, and certainly those individuals who have the most to gain) are going to have to get proactive about doing it, and not wait for others to do it, or for the money and sponsors (within and without archery) to come to them...


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

It all goes back to re-forming or at least re-organizing a Professional Archers group that can initiate this strong marketing push. I cannot understand why this is not currently in the works. Somebody with something to gain from this should be pro-active and make it happen.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

shootist said:


> It all goes back to re-forming or at least re-organizing a Professional Archers group that can initiate this strong marketing push. I cannot understand why this is not currently in the works. Somebody with something to gain from this should be pro-active and make it happen.


Yes. But right now...what is the incentive for those at the 'top' to take part in this? At least short term, they will have to sacrifice something in order for this to happen. Which generally, is my understanding of why the PAA failed in the first place...or at least the beginnings of the failure...we're a selfish lot by nature.


----------



## archerydude21 (Sep 20, 2010)

I understand what your saying but what exactly are they supposed to market? There currently is no marketable product in archery. No company, archery industry or otherwise, is gonna throw money at an event that nobody sees. That's the bottom line.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

archerydude21 said:


> I understand what your saying but what exactly are they supposed to market? There currently is no marketable product in archery.  No company, archery industry or otherwise, is gonna throw money at an event that nobody sees. That's the bottom line.


Interest. That's where it all begins. An interest in the sport and an interest in the players. Not to be confused with the sport being interesting.

Probably the most relevant example is golf. An incredibly sorry thing to watch, at least as far as watching people hit a little white ball with a club, and hope it goes in a little hole. But the 'story' of the game, and the drama that unfolds between the participants is what holds people. The possibility that each shot could lead to failure or success of a given participant. The fact that 1 errant shot, or one incredible one may be all the difference. Drama that can be related to by everyone. The personalities of the people playing the game, and their story. All marketed.

But this is a new evolution. Golf had always been a rich white man's game. The masses didn't relate to the pros. They were the elite. But along comes a few personalities, and a few people with vision, and they marketed the personalities and the game. The drama between Jack and Arnie, and a few others. The access that they allowed into their world. Getting to 'know' them, people other than the elite getting to know them and being able to relate to their stories. Hard work, dedication, reaching a goal, all of it riding on a single shot. Golf went from an elite, rich white man's game, to a game of the masses in short order, all because of how the marketing of the game and the individuals changed.

Why not with archery? Open the window into the drama and the lives of the people. Take it from a ******* activity (perception) to something more than that. Don't change the personalities of the participants, market the personalities, and open the door to them. Tell the story of the failures, dedication and success that everyone can relate too. Tell the story and the drama.

Then, much like golf, the boredom of watching an arrow hit its target is replaced by the drama of the story that is unfolding...


----------



## TheScOuT (May 9, 2011)

Rolo said:


> Interest. That's where it all begins. An interest in the sport and an interest in the players. Not to be confused with the sport being interesting.
> 
> Probably the most relevant example is golf. An incredibly sorry thing to watch, at least as far as watching people hit a little white ball with a club, and hope it goes in a little hole. But the 'story' of the game, and the drama that unfolds between the participants is what holds people. The possibility that each shot could lead to failure or success of a given participant. The fact that 1 errant shot, or one incredible one may be all the difference. Drama that can be related to by everyone. The personalities of the people playing the game, and their story. All marketed.
> 
> ...


If archery did that...the sport would explode with interest!


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Rolo said:


> Yes. But right now...what is the incentive for those at the 'top' to take part in this? At least short term, they will have to sacrifice something in order for this to happen. Which generally, is my understanding of why the PAA failed in the first place...or at least the beginnings of the failure...we're a selfish lot by nature.


The APA failed because they made hats like this....










Glad I could add value to this thread. My thoughts have been voiced by others mostly but I'm a subscriber to the "demoralization by Levi" group for the most part. Its aggravated by a retraction of sponsor support.... then you can take the why's of that as far..... as you have.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

Oh yes, the days of heavy cotton polos - made heavier by patches!


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

tmorelli said:


> The APA failed because they made hats like this....


Yeah...I can see how that would cause a problem.

As far as the demoralization by Levi (or Jeff, or Randy in their time)...it's kinda like when Tiger was in his prime...everyone wanted him to win, but everyone also wanted him to lose, and wanted the underdog to succeed. It was the marketing of the drama and the story...not the game.

Sponsors paring things down obviously sucks...for everyone actually. But, I'd rather see the support pared from the pro ranks, than pared from the shoots themselves. (*disclaimer* This should not be interpreted as some sort of dig, knock, hatred, uncaring, whatever at the pro division, it isn't. :wink Lose the support for the shoots, and the support for everything else goes away too.

But likewise, the support from the manufacturers has been there for a long, long time...and generally the only support there was. Hell, without the manufacturers support, where would we be? But they cannot be expected, and should not IMO be expected, to always be the primary supporters. Complacency, lack of 'unification' and vision by the participants (all of them) has left us where we are now. 

It's the antithesis of golf in that way...archery has always been available to the masses...


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> The APA failed because they made hats like this....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I am amazed you are brave enough to show yourself wearing the APA hat.... The quiver was ok........


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

tmorelli said:


> The APA failed because they made hats like this....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The good thing about that hat is that you always would have a rope handy (the one across the bill of course) in case of an emergency. And, you always had an extra compartment, a glove box if you will, above you head but below the top of the hat for storing other necessities. If that wasn't enough storage, you had to use your fanny pack.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

shootist said:


> If that wasn't enough storage, you had to use your fanny pack.


My knack for self defamation is only rivaled by Will Ferrell but that's a low blow. I've never stooped to a fanny pack!



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## bowtexan (Oct 26, 2010)

Just a question, but have the powers that be in the ASA ever employed someone in marketing? Someone who was skilled in getting sponsors and money into the sport. Someone who could take the business and money side to another level.


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

tmorelli said:


> My knack for self defamation is only rivaled by Will Ferrell but that's a low blow. I've never stooped to a fanny pack!
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


Oh, you misunderstood. If I was going to stir you up, I'd make comments about known distance 3d or something of that nature. I wasn't referring to you personally, it was more a comment about the times. I never, for a single moment, suspected you of owning a chartreuse yellow fanny pack with the name of your parent's local bank embroidered on it.


----------



## Bee Man (Feb 22, 2013)

Ill shoot pro for ya if u pay mr


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

shootist said:


> Oh, you misunderstood. If I was going to stir you up, I'd make comments about known distance 3d or something of that nature. I wasn't referring to you personally, it was more a comment about the times. I never, for a single moment, suspected you of owning a chartreuse yellow fanny pack with the name of your parent's local bank embroidered on it.


LOL. Nice.

I had (or have???  ) Velcro shoes that match it too.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Daniel Boone (May 31, 2002)

Always proud to see manufactuers like prime sponsoring pros. There sales have been tremendous and with the signing of more pros in the future I see this helping. They just signed Randy Hendricks who is a buckmasters champion and good archer to sponsor. 

Pros sales allot of bows whether anyone wants to admit it or not. I remember when bear/Jennings signed Jeff Hopkins they rose right to the top. Everyone likes to shoot a winner. Mathews has proven supporting pro archers works.
DB


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

Best thread about 3D archery I have read in sometime. All these ideas are great but why would the ASA and IBO want to improve the sport for the Pros or shooters in general when they are satisfied with the cash and living they are making doing the same thing? For the ASA and IBO to improve the shoots they would have to work harder and they are not going to that they are satisfied with the money they are making...

They only way to get the changes we have discussed is either start a new organization, a few people buy the ASA or Regions is young enough to do things right and not follow in the path of the other organizations and run the same dog and pony show just at different locations.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

Daniel Boone said:


> Always proud to see manufactuers like prime sponsoring pros. There sales have been tremendous and with the signing of more pros in the future I see this helping. They just signed Randy Hendricks who is a buckmasters champion and good archer to sponsor.
> 
> Pros sales allot of bows whether anyone wants to admit it or not. I remember when bear/Jennings signed Jeff Hopkins they rose right to the top. Everyone likes to shoot a winner.  Mathews has proven supporting pro archers works.
> DB


They definitely put good money into the 3D game!!! I don't shoot Mathews but I respect what that have done and are doing. You also have to admit their marketing/advertising is second to none as well.
It annoys me a bit that BowTech seems to do just the opposite of Mathews in the area of supporting target archery.
I don't own a Prime bow (yet) but I am sure glad to see them putting some $$ back into the game. I am much more likely to one day own a Prime bow than I am a BowTech.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

cenochs said:


> Best thread about 3D archery I have read in sometime. All these ideas are great but why would the ASA and IBO want to improve the sport for the Pros or shooters in general when they are satisfied with the cash and living they are making doing the same thing? For the ASA and IBO to improve the shoots they would have to work harder and they are not going to that they are satisfied with the money they are making...
> 
> They only way to get the changes we have discussed is either start a new organization, a few people buy the ASA or Regions is young enough to do things right and not follow in the path of the other organizations and run the same dog and pony show just at different locations.


I don't look at the pros who do this for a living with envy. Respect, but not envy. Maybe as a result of that, I don't see a need for more of them which is primarily what these ideas lead to.

I do want to see our sport healthy and accessible. I enjoy the fact that I can make it almost pay for itself by performing well. I have no desire to use it to make my mortgage payment or even fund my retirement. 

There are things that can be better but I definitely don't think its systematically broken as is (except that i think target cost and unknown yardage must change). But that's said as a guy who knows I'll probably be paying my own entry fees and travel for years to come.... perhaps even in the pro class. I do it because I want to, at the level I want to....

What's the end game if I'm wrong? Why do we need more money in the game? What would we do with it? Pay more (see above) to an elite few? Pay deeper.... why?

I'm not against it per se but I just don't see the need. Its enjoyable now and that's all I want from it I suppose.


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

cenochs said:


> Best thread about 3D archery I have read in sometime. All these ideas are great but why would the ASA and IBO want to improve the sport for the Pros or shooters in general when they are satisfied with the cash and living they are making doing the same thing? For the ASA and IBO to improve the shoots they would have to work harder and they are not going to that they are satisfied with the money they are making...
> 
> They only way to get the changes we have discussed is either start a new organization, a few people buy the ASA or Regions is young enough to do things right and not follow in the path of the other organizations and run the same dog and pony show just at different locations.


In my experience...no one is ever satisfied with how much wealth they have...they always seem to want more. 

I think for it to work, it is going to have to start with a unified pro org with the motivation to get things on track. After that, whatever org, be it ASA, IBO, NFAA, or Regions, who signs on first is going to be in the catbird seat. Whoever ends up with the prize initially, will likely survive, while those who don't will likely fail...which is where a huge amount of risk comes into play.

But I don't think 3 or 4 orgs will be able to survive together if this all happens (however big of pipedream it may be). There will likely have to be incorporation and/or merger. And this is really only on a national scale. If we throw in international considerations, World Archery is in the driver's seat by a long margin.

A new org...maybe, or a come to minds meeting within the current orgs that results in their willingness to let by-gones be by-gones. Of course, for that to happen, the pro ranks and Am ranks are going to have to demand it from their respective orgs.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

tmorelli said:


> I don't look at the pros who do this for a living with envy. Respect, but not envy. Maybe as a result of that, I don't see a need for more of them which is primarily what these ideas lead to.
> 
> I do want to see our sport healthy and accessible. I enjoy the fact that I can make it almost pay for itself by performing well. I have no desire to use it to make my mortgage payment or even fund my retirement.
> 
> ...


Interesting thoughts...and it does seem to come down to whether the 'end game' is to greatly expand participation through all the ranks or not, and whether that is a good idea or not. My jury is still out.

What is the most interesting is the enjoyment aspect of it, and whether that is the real reason that a majority of folks do it or not. It's why I do, and winning some cash here or there is a bonus. Obviously different for the small few who rely on winnings (though I think few , if any of the pros, regardless of affiliation) rely on contingencies and winnings to survive. I'm fairly certain the full-timers are getting paid regardless.

But the end result of shooting for the enjoyment of it for the masses, supports the position that the endemic manufacturers have no reason to up their level of support for individuals, or even keep it the same. They certainly have a great interest in sponsoring the venues and associations that draw the masses, but that doesn't necessarily mean the same as supporting members of a certain class. Whether that is right, wrong or indifferent.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Rolo said:


> What is the most interesting is the enjoyment aspect of it, and whether that is the real reason that a majority of folks do it or not. It's why I do, and winning some cash here or there is a bonus. Obviously different for the small few who rely on winnings (though I think few , if any of the pros, regardless of affiliation) rely on contingencies and winnings to survive. I'm fairly certain the full-timers are getting paid regardless.


I'm convinced that the majority do it purely for enjoyment and perhaps the social aspect. Perhaps it just the pursuit of some personally-defined success for others. I go to compete but I also especially value getting to make and see friends from all over the nation at a big event.

Look at it mathematically. < 20% of the people who show up at an ASA event will get a check. In most classes, an average of about 1-2 people will win enough to break even for the trip. Over a year's time, the vast majority of the winnings will go to repeats.... its most often the same people in the $ at each shoot. I have enough faith in the average shooter to believe they are doing it for something other than the $.

Those who aren't in the list of winners might want deeper payouts. Those who are will want higher payouts. Me, I just want to play the game and be thankful when I get a little $ for having done well at it. 

Don't let me undervalue that little $ though. The fact that IBO pays almost nothing and NFAA pays nothing outside the pro classes is why I repeatedly opt to burn my $ and vacation in support of the ASA. If there was no cash, I wouldn't travel nearly as much. 



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## markdenis (Sep 7, 2010)

The right kind of marketing firm can market almost anything successfully. Interest and profit is what drives it. However, there are some significant differences in other sports that helps make success easier.

The biggest thing I see with archery is many have mastered or nearly mastered the game. When Jessie, Reo, and many more pros attend an indoor shoot, they never miss. They shoot every arrow in the "X" for the regular event...*BORING* for any kind of full event TV coverage. 3-D is probably not far behind. 

When a pro basketball player or any player takes a shot, it may or may not go in....every time a football player has the ball and tries to score, it might not happen....when Tiger or regular guy plays a hole in golf, the score is liable to be anything. 

The scoring system in archery is closely related to that of trap or skeet shooting. You have to shoot a perfect score and never miss just to get to a shootoff even if there is a shootoff. Many times just a flip of the coin determines the winners afters ties....*BORING*

I don't know of any successful pro sport where most everybody participating either completes the challenge perfectly or close to perfect. All the ones I am aware of (baseball, basketball, soccer, golf, etc.) anything is liable to happen at any time. That is what makes it interesting to watch.

The present format and scoring system in archery even for me is boring to watch, and I shoot and compete in tournaments all the time.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

tmorelli said:


> I'm convinced that the majority do it purely for enjoyment and perhaps the social aspect. Perhaps it just the pursuit of some personally-defined success for others. I go to compete but I also especially value getting to make and see friends from all over the nation at a big event.
> 
> Look at it mathematically. < 20% of the people who show up at an ASA event will get a check. In most classes, an average of about 1-2 people will win enough to break even for the trip. Over a year's time, the vast majority of the winnings will go to repeats.... its most often the same people in the $ at each shoot. I have enough faith in the average shooter to believe they are doing it for something other than the $.
> 
> ...


I agree with 99% of all of that. Personally, I gave up going to win a long time ago. Going to enjoy myself, have fun and the camaraderie that goes along with it are the drivers.

Yeah, money back s a bonus, but hell, even if I went to an ASA and won whatever class, the winnings still wouldn't pay for the trip in everything but the pro class...and I ain't going there...it's a LOFT thing. Locally, and unless it's a side pot, I don't take the cash anyway.

The 1% of disagreement comes with the NFAA (well actually WAF) pay-outs for Vegas. Those are fairly handsome.

But, coming full circle, your motivations, mine, and likely the motivations of the majority of folks, support the position that the manufacturers should focus less on the sponsored pros, and more on the masses. I know that statement will cause a-systole for some, but if I were a manufacturer, I'd certainly be taking a hard look at the masses, and what I could do to enhance their experiences, and of course, earn their business. That would obviously come at a cost somewhere else.

The simple business analysis is whether a dedicated pro staff and contingency payments that go along with it, regardless of venue, is a greater benefit, or positive ROI, when compared to other investments. Some manufacturers believe a strong presence is a benefit. Others believe that a small presence is. Others, none at all.

Heck, several years ago, PSE was one of the kings...then Pete retired...then the Pro staff went away...then PSE was on the brink, and Pete un-retired...and it now has a strong presence in the Pro ranks across all divisions. (I don't think the issues were solely or primarily related to the pro staff...the products at the time were crap IMO, which is definitely not the case today). But presently, the market shift, largely because of hunting shows, has dramatically shifted to that arena (something that didn't exist during 3-D's heyday. I can certainly understand why the resources go there, especially in NA. 

So, I think this focus on manufacturer support of the pro division is myopic, and misguided. If the decision is that massive growth and participation is what is best, it ain't the manufacturers that are able to drive it...they'll benefit from it, but they got nowhere near the means to make it happen...except maybe 1, and I don't think it's portfolio compares to those of the non-endemics.


----------



## hoytxcutter (Sep 1, 2003)

First and foremost both the ASA and IBO need to come up with a set of common regulations. They need to work together. It sure would be nice to see them come up with qualifying tournaments that concluded each year with a major world championship. The tournaments could be held once a month starting in March and ending in August. The world championship could then be held in September. We once had the AFL and the NFL. We all know how pro football is doing. Both organizations need to work together to grow this sport. It would also be nice to see the IBO switch to different locations for the national triple crown every couple of years. I believe this would breath some life into it by exposing its self to new locations and archers. It sure is getting old going to Bedford and Erie every year.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

draw29 said:


> Tie Levi's hands behind his back and someone else might have a chance. Almost total domination. I would get out of that class ASAP.


X2........Unless one enjoys being spanked


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

SonnyThomas said:


> I doubt that all of the Pros are scared of Levi. If they were there wouldn't be a Pro class. And it ain't like some stock car race. Know one Pro knows who's leading during shooting. End of the day, yeah, scores are posted. I sort of laugh when I see "Levi came clawing back or fighting back" to win. He doesn't have the slightest idea if someone is X number of points ahead of him. He knows one thing to do and does it the best he can, and that's shoot the best he can. He knows he can't let up. He can't coast. Too many dang good shooters are right there to collect if he doesn't.


Sorry Sonny but Levi does know exactly where he is in the standings since bow junky is running up and down the range relaying the info. At the last ASA in London they had a leaderboard setup on the pro ranges for all to see. It was updated after each target.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

IRISH_11 said:


> Sorry Sonny but Levi does know exactly where he is in the standings since bow junky is running up and down the range relaying the info. At the last ASA in London they had a leaderboard setup on the pro ranges for all to see. It was updated after each target.


They sure did and do.

Besides they are peer grouped!

Sent from my Motorola Electrify using Tapatalk 2


----------



## J Whittington (Nov 13, 2009)

In a response to Rolo regarding PSE: IMHO, here is why so much interest in PSE

In the pro class:
1.Their contingency pay is the best in all the pro classes : Open Pro, "Chick Pro" and Sr. Pro
2. This may be the best reason that's going to sale bows... PSE bows are awesome! Their bows are fast, accurate and very well made..... 

Open Classes....Open A has been dominated by pse bows this year...PSE is paying a contingency for this class and those boys are buying their bows.
back again to quality....pse is making a dang good bow.....dominator, 3D, supra, and phenom are awesome


I'm not a pse sponsored person...im just giving an honest opinion......Ive been in this sport since day 1 of asa


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

J Whittington said:


> In a response to Rolo regarding PSE: IMHO, here is why so much interest in PSE
> 
> In the pro class:
> 1.Their contingency pay is the best in all the pro classes : Open Pro, "Chick Pro" and Sr. Pro
> ...



Agree with you that PSE is a great bow company and make hight quality items, and in the MENS Pro Class they do have a lot of very respected shooter - Nathan Brooks - Chris Hacke - Chance I mean any of these guys have a chance to win at ever event they attend!

I know in Vegas if you win the Pro Class shooting a PSE staff shooter or not you will be written a VERY LARGE check by Pete himself!!!! Now thats saying something for how bad that man wants to have his bows winning VEGAS


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

I suggestions I always thought would draw more shooters to the PRO class is to expand the shoot off to 10 shooters and have all the scores for the shoot off go back to 0.....have a 10 target shoot off and the person with highest score takes home the bacon.....I know for a guy who tore it up on the course this format would not seem far but if I was looking at it as a potential OPEN PRO shooter I would say hey all I got to do is get in the TOP 10 then shoot a 10 target shoot off and hope my arrow finds the rings I need to take home some serious cash, If this format was to be implimented it would at least see the numbers jump in the class by 35-40% the first year

what you guys think??


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

J Whittington said:


> In a response to Rolo regarding PSE: IMHO, here is why so much interest in PSE
> 
> In the pro class:
> 1.Their contingency pay is the best in all the pro classes : Open Pro, "Chick Pro" and Sr. Pro
> ...


Um...as I said, the quality of their bows is great. The quality of their bows during the dark times was crap IMO. Now that we have that out of the way, and we can avoid a product / brand bash fest, which was never implied or intended...I mean I did say that I didn't think they were crap today. Not sure where the recitation of the quality came from actually.

Yes, PSE has a great contingency program. Yes, its Pro Line bows are very well represented in all the classes (the Supra and Freak are great bows IMO, and PSE continues to make bows that are in the specs that I like for things like hunting, unlike other companies).

But, the question remains whether PSE is getting the ROI on the investment that it wants. By the looks of it, I would say it believes they are (I have no actual knowledge of what PSE is hoping for in return). Great for them if they are. Great for them for investing where they want. But beyond 3-D and target venues...where is PSE's bread buttered? The hunting market. It also should be remembered that PSE's marketing platform and sales is quite a bit different than Mathews or Hoyt, and a few others. Nothing wrong with selling bows at Walmart. Also going to go out on a limb and say that PSE's investment in its hunting staff, and marketing in that venue exceeds that in the foam and paper worlds. Also going to bet that the ROI is exponentially better.

So, now that we have established that PSE currently makes some pretty fine bows, that aren't crap, and that it is active in supporting its Pro staff in foam and paper venues...how does that relate to expanding participation in the pro class or any other class for that matter?


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

IRISH_11 said:


> Sorry Sonny but Levi does know exactly where he is in the standings since bow junky is running up and down the range relaying the info. At the last ASA in London they had a leaderboard setup on the pro ranges for all to see. It was updated after each target.


First I've heard of it. Even so, what do think Levi was thinking about, the score or his next shot?


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

SonnyThomas said:


> First I've heard of it. Even so, what do think Levi was thinking about, the score or his next shot?


Someone posted in another thread that last year in Kentucky at about target 35 ge asked where someone else was, then stated i better hit some 14s and proceeded to rip off 3or4 of the last 5

Sent from my Motorola Electrify using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

SonnyThomas said:


> First I've heard of it. Even so, what do think Levi was thinking about, the score or his next shot?


Sonny

I agree with you - I think the top shooters in the PRO class just try to get a good number and hold steady the rest will take care of itself, play thr course not the shooters kinda deal


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

Masses follow and do what Pros do and Use Fact..And if marketed correctly the Pros make the companies allot of money!!

Jordan shoes made Nike - Average Joes didnt they did what Jordan did
Tiger made Nike golf - Average weekend golfers didn't they did what tiger did
Who would know what under armour was if not advertised by Pro athletes

These companies had a good product and went and found a face to sell it and look what happened!! 

3D archery needs and has to use the Pros to advertise and grow, once this is done correctly the masses will follow in record numbers. The companies will see a ROI....

I am one of the few that shoots for fun I work 12 hour rotating shifts and have a 16 month old boy so you can say I stay busy and archery is just something to do for fun.... I would like to see the sport be larger that it is with unified rules, targets, and a True Card Carrying Earned Pro Class that Produces excitement and interest for young shooters.


----------



## J Whittington (Nov 13, 2009)

ROLO to be direct, I think its the lack of $ 
1.Less amount of $ to sponsor shooters, ex Hoyt...rumor is Mathews will be cutting back some to next year
2. Unless one podiums to receive contingency money, the payouts are low in the pro class..
3. Economy, job cuts, salaries frozen/cut,,, cost of GAS People don't have the money to pay the entry fees and cost (non sponsored shooters)
4. No interest by companies that have $'s to spend for advertisements. there is no promotion of archer...Bow Junky is it now.


----------



## Crow Terminator (Jan 21, 2003)

If I ever get sponsored I want to be sponsored by Texas Roadhouse. I would proudly wear a shooter shirt with their main logo on it  Heck yeah....Raceway gas stations, Texas Roadhouse, and MicroTel hotels....if they paid for my food, gas, and lodging I would be one happy camper. 

I wonder what Levi could do with a Dominator Pro in his hands?


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

Crow Terminator said:


> If I ever get sponsored I want to be sponsored by Texas Roadhouse. I would proudly wear a shooter shirt with their main logo on it  Heck yeah....Raceway gas stations, Texas Roadhouse, and MicroTel hotels....if they paid for my food, gas, and lodging I would be one happy camper.
> 
> I wonder what Levi could do with a Dominator Pro in his hands?


if rumors are to be believed, we should know by next year.


----------



## J Whittington (Nov 13, 2009)

Carlos, I hope the rumors are correct. But I have my doubts


----------



## Tallcatt (Jul 27, 2003)

J Whittington said:


> ROLO to be direct, I think its the lack of $
> 1.Less amount of $ to sponsor shooters, ex Hoyt...rumor is Mathews will be cutting back some to next year
> 2. Unless one podiums to receive contingency money, the payouts are low in the pro class..
> 3. Economy, job cuts, salaries frozen/cut,,, cost of GAS People don't have the money to pay the entry fees and cost (non sponsored shooters)
> 4. No interest by companies that have $'s to spend for advertisements. there is no promotion of archer...Bow Junky is it now.


Your 3000th post was a good one. 

That is a very good assessment of the situation.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

J Whittington said:


> ROLO to be direct, I think its the lack of $
> 1.Less amount of $ to sponsor shooters, ex Hoyt...rumor is Mathews will be cutting back some to next year.


Maybe, or just a re-allocation to different markets. Look at the growth in the hunting side of things, and international efforts. Europe and Asia have potential to be incredible markets, have the ability to make NA look like a blip. Allocate the resources to where the growth is the most exponential, and a bigger ROI is returned.




J Whittington said:


> 2. Unless one podiums to receive contingency money, the payouts are low in the pro class..


True, but not the sole responsibility of the manufacturers either...there is responsibility for the members of the class to do something proactive too...no?



J Whittington said:


> 3. Economy, job cuts, salaries frozen/cut,,, cost of GAS People don't have the money to pay the entry fees and cost (non sponsored shooters)


Quite possible...but those same increased costs are also faced by the various manufacturers too. More actually. So, raise contingencies and/or contracts, possibly at the expense of the job(s) of the people on the line building the items; or, save the jobs of your employee, and reduce the contribution by way of contingency? Overly simplistic...sure, but general analyses that companies make every day. And, not sure it is up to the manufacturer to make up for things that are out if its control



J Whittington said:


> 4. No interest by companies that have $'s to spend for advertisements. there is no promotion of archer...Bow Junky is it now.


There's some promotion of some archers...though limited, and sequestered. The bulk of the promotion, in NA is in the hunting market, which has a lot bigger target audience, than paper or foam. A lot bigger public personas too, which helps with the promotion. The hunting personalities work because of the personalities. Are there really any personalities of the foam or paper pros that really compare from a marketing standpoint? No a nock on the pros at all, but their personalities by nature are what make them really good at the things they do...as far as marketable to the masses...not even close to the top hunting personalities.

Yes, Bowjunky does a hell of a job promoting archery. The biggest hurdle they face is the exposure to people beyond those who 'care'. Hopefully, they keep building, and find an avenue. They're at least trying a novel approach, and I think everyone in the sport appreciates the effort.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

cenochs said:


> Masses follow and do what Pros do and Use Fact..And if marketed correctly the Pros make the companies allot of money!!
> 
> Jordan shoes made Nike - Average Joes didnt they did what Jordan did
> Tiger made Nike golf - Average weekend golfers didn't they did what tiger did
> ...


Cart before the horse.

Archery has to be accepted by the 'mainstream' before the masses will follow what the pros do. Basketball, golf, football, baseball, hell, even soccer came before the stars. The foundation was laid, long before Michael shot his first basket, or Tiger hit his first golf ball. In order for the masses to follow the pros, the market (masses) have to be there first.

As far as archery in NA is concerned...the masses are in hunting, and a large majority of the people influenced by what the pros are using, are looking for Lee's or Michael's bow...not Levi's or Reo's or Jesse's. Internationally however, they are looking for the bows that Liam, Peter, Chris, and to the extent possible, Reo and Jesse and Dave and Braden shoot.


----------



## varmintvaporize (Feb 9, 2010)

One way to get more business's involved in our sport would be to lower the cost for venders to setup at the shoots. I know most of the archery venders pay out the nose for spots on vender row, like $500++ for the weekend. How about doubling or tripling the numbers of venders by cutting the cost to setup. Also inviting more non-archery venders to setup to bring in more spectators. Charge the spectators who are not members of the archery organization a small entry fee much like a gunshow, or flea market and advertise it as such.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

Lots of good ideas and comments in this thread. It shows people are concerned about the future of archery in the U.S.


----------



## LongTime (Feb 17, 2005)

Drop the entrance fee to 150-200 and make it all marked yards


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

LongTime said:


> Drop the entrance fee to 150-200 and make it all marked yards


If you look at scores most the time Mens Open Pro shoot higher than K50 shooters.......


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

carlosii said:


> Lots of good ideas and comments in this thread. It shows people are concerned about the future of archery in the U.S.


Yup it does show that a lot of people care!!! We can only hope the powers at be care as much as we do carlosii


----------



## archerydude21 (Sep 20, 2010)

That hope hasn't gotten us anywhere in the past.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

cenochs said:


> Masses follow and do what Pros do and Use Fact..And if marketed correctly the Pros make the companies allot of money!!
> 
> Jordan shoes made Nike - Average Joes didnt they did what Jordan did
> Tiger made Nike golf - Average weekend golfers didn't they did what tiger did
> ...


I do not understand your reasoning. The Pro athletes you mention are selling products to a HUGE customer base. Archery does not have that level of popularity. 
Jordan was an NBA basketball player, hugely charismatic and a face recognized around the world. Jordan played high school, youth league and collegiate basketball before playing in the NBA. Nike is NOT the NBA. _After_ he became recognizable he was/is paid handsomely to sell t-shirts and underwear to the general population. 
Tiger is a highly recognized person that is one of the all time great golfers. He also did not make Nike. Nike had millions of dollars to throw at Tiger long before Tiger was a valuable advertising tool.

For every Jordan, Magic, Bird, Nicklaus, Tiger and Arnold there are 10's of thousands of avergae joe's, millionaire joes, high school athletes, collegiate athletes and rec league kids playing the games.
If one day the majority of Americans either compete or watch high school, college or rec league archery then a Levi, Reo or an up and coming Dean Pridgen will make a heck of living slinging arrows. If the right personality comes along they might even get paid a lot of money to sell underwear.

Archery in general simply needs to be more popular to have a bigger more robust adult archery scene.

If someone that is hugely charismatic, slick willie charismatic, has a very popular hunting show AND does well competing in target archery then that person could increase the popularity of competition archery. I now the kids movies that featured characters shooting a bow brought a lot of young kids into archery shops.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

I am very aware that I am not and never will be considered near the best. My very best "potential" archery years are well behind me. For me to compete in archery with any thought other than challenging myself and enjoying the game would be a mistake. To operate under the pretense that I may one day be as successful in archery as a Levi or Reo would be delusional. That is not to say I don't have any confidence or hope that I may one day win a national archery tournament. I just KNOW it will not be in Open Pro or even Senior Pro! OK, I _might _sometimes think I could make the podium in Senior Open. 

- I enjoy the personal challenge of improving. 
- I actually enjoy the stress, energy and pressure that comes from competing against my peers at a fairly high level. I _know _it is not the highest level.
- I enjoy meeting folks that enjoy archery and competition. I respect the same folks.
- I have really enjoyed playing the game with my father. We have hunted together for over 38 years and bow hunted together for over 33 years and still do. But I only began competing 6 years ago.
- I really enjoy when someone I know does real well. There are lot of good people in archery. I have a few close friends that have won a few national indoor championships and I enjoy being a small part of what they did.
- I love helping new friends obviously up their game a level or two. It feels like being a part of a successful team.


----------



## ThunderEagle (May 11, 2011)

Part of the problem with increasing interest is what was brought up earlier with a lot of 3D being not spectator friendly. Even BowJunky videos don't do enough to raise interest.

I've personally become more of a fan of Field and Indoor archery than 3D. Videos of Indoor shoots, or some of the World Cup matches I enjoy watching, but I get to see several shots by top archers, a clear shot of the target, and we see how the match progresses.

What could change to maybe help this?

Well, if instead of 30-40 distinct target lanes, what if each stake had 4 targets at it. They can all be different shots and distances, but one stake, shoot 4 arrows. 

1. This gives someone filming an easier time, as they get 4 shots per archer per setup.
2. If trying to film an entire 40 target course, instead of needing 80 cameras (both shooter and target) you can now have 20 cameras. This is still probably too many.
3. Using this kind of layout, you can do more of a golf playoff like shoot down. I personally think more of a bowling style tournament would work best. You shoot the first couple of days to get a seeding. Say top 5. Then 5vs4, to face 3, then 2, then 1. If you are 5th seed, you have to win four matches to be champ, if you are 1st, just one. IMO, this is filmable, one on one competition, and would generate interest.

Would this take some of the yardage estimation out of it because you could make some corrections? Sure it would, but honestly, yardage estimation isn't marketable or interesting.

The point is to make 3d, notably, major 3d more interesting, increase attendance, both participant and spectator, which then makes it more appealing to both archery and non archery related industries. This is where the money comes from, making the Pro class bigger.

Just a thought.


----------



## rsw (May 22, 2002)

What is the incentive to become a pro archer? 3D is virtually dominated by a very few shooters and is an expensive recreation. Many are supported by sponsors so the expense is heavily mitigated and they can afford to play as pros. A few continue to play at their own expense but most archers can't afford to do that. When the paydown is only one place for five entries, there is very little incentive to become a pro - unlike tennis or golf where a large number of participants receive a large payback and they can become "real pros". Pro archery will only grow when it can attract large TV contracts which is quite unlikely. Unfortunately, archery is destined to remain a recreation, thus an expense, for 98% of the participants.


----------



## markdenis (Sep 7, 2010)

rsw said:


> What is the incentive to become a pro archer? 3D is virtually dominated by a very few shooters and is an expensive recreation. Many are supported by sponsors so the expense is heavily mitigated and they can afford to play as pros. A few continue to play at their own expense but most archers can't afford to do that. When the paydown is only one place for five entries, there is very little incentive to become a pro - unlike tennis or golf where a large number of participants receive a large payback and they can become "real pros". Pro archery will only grow when it can attract large TV contracts which is quite unlikely. Unfortunately, archery is destined to remain a recreation, thus an expense, for 98% of the participants.


I would almost agree with you about archery is destined to remain a recreation if it wasn't for the fact that TV, promotion and marketing can influence any audience it seems. All these reality shows proves that. For the life of me, I can't in a million years, see why some of them could be interesting to anyone on this planet....but they are! 

So, IMO archery is not dead and all it takes is the right minds and the right timing to move it forward.


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

Lol


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

I didn't write "lol" like it says. I'm not sure how it got there???


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

If there is no real money in the class....which there isn't. Why turn Pro? 

If you don't finish in the top 3 your loosing money....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

shootist said:


> I didn't write "lol" like it says. I'm not sure how it got there???


I thought you were laughing at yourself again. I was. 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

tmorelli said:


> I thought you were laughing at yourself again. I was.
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


Actually, truth be told, I was thinking about your tall hat and chartreuse fanny pack.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

*Re: Men's Pro is Dying On the Vin*



Brown Hornet said:


> If there is no real money in the class....which there isn't. Why turn Pro?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I tend to think the answer to that is as a status symbol or in pursuit of some sponsorship pipe dreams.


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## mack25 (Jan 31, 2013)

as i see it :since the pro's are that accurate have moving targets, take away some of the add-on's that are bolted on some of the bows, to get more people viewing the shoots redesign the coarse to something like a golf coarse so spectators can actually see the shooters at work, get a consistant package of rules/bylaws for all classes across all organzations, to get tv time there would be a need for an advertiser on the line of gm or ram trucks or cabella's etc,etc,etc, to want to be a the title sponser. the ruling bodies (asa,ibo) need to be out front of this and be actively persuing to grow the competition side of archery with the help of the various mfgs (i dont see this at all here in pa if it wasnt for me stumbling across the web and seeing ibo on an archery web site i would never knew it existed and the same with asa, and psaa). i believe that the 3d side of competition archery could be really huge but it seems there is a real disconect between the mfgs and the organisations running the show. its seems like what was mention above that the organisations are content with the current revenue stream may be accurate if they are not truly trying to attract new people to this sport. if you cant find new money you cant get more money.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

shootist said:


> I didn't write "lol" like it says. I'm not sure how it got there???


it was probably some guy at the NSA...


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

carlosii said:


> it was probably some guy at the NSA...


Remember , Orwell told us all about this in 1948 - in 1984 that BIG BROTHER is watching.


----------



## rsw (May 22, 2002)

Tennis pros were in the same sort of situation many moons ago. Fortuately, many of them were wealthy and they pooled a large amount of money, hired a big name PR consultant (rumor was about 10 grand apiece) who had the right connections with TV and big business looking for an opportunity. Corporate money and TV took the risk and look at tennis today. Any pros wanting to ante up? 100 grand would probably be a good start - otherwise, pro archery is destined to remain a recreation for 98% of the archers. Corporate money is the only path to real professional archery because that is the only way to bring in mainstream TV. If NASCAR and bass fishing can attract TV money, archery would be a shoo in!!


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

rsw said:


> Tennis pros were in the same sort of situation many moons ago. Fortuately, many of them were wealthy and they pooled a large amount of money, hired a big name PR consultant (rumor was about 10 grand apiece) who had the right connections with TV and big business looking for an opportunity. Corporate money and TV took the risk and look at tennis today. Any pros wanting to ante up? 100 grand would probably be a good start - otherwise, pro archery is destined to remain a recreation for 98% of the archers. Corporate money is the only path to real professional archery because that is the only way to bring in mainstream TV. If NASCAR and bass fishing can attract TV money, archery would be a shoo in!!


Ain't disagreeing that money talks, but action seen is a requirement. Tennis ball bounces. Stock cars make noise, go fast and crashes sure make a spectical. Placing that lure, bass hammering the lure and end result hung right in the camera. We got what?
We'd stand a better chance with Laura and a few other archery hotties and Women's Archery Shoot Out (swim suits optional of course or should that be required?).

What's his name is always repeating the same stuff, so I will to. We need the archer at full draw and the sound of a Double A Fueler staged and ready to haul azzz. The arrow released we need the deafing roar of that Double A Fueler. And when the arrow hits the target we need the sound of the awfulest wreck ever. Target flopping over and smoke rolling would help (fireworks optional).


----------



## VAN DAM (Feb 16, 2010)

Although I would feel a sense of accomplishment if I won out into pro class, I would not be excited about spending $250 at every shoot, especially when your shooting against the best in the world. Its kind of pointless to shoot pro class unless you have the time to invest in practicing.


----------



## Daniel Boone (May 31, 2002)

VAN DAM said:


> Although I would feel a sense of accomplishment if I won out into pro class, I would not be excited about spending $250 at every shoot, especially when your shooting against the best in the world. Its kind of pointless to shoot pro class unless you have the time to invest in practicing.


That's why most don't! No fun donating to guys like Levi!
DB


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

SonnyThomas said:


> Ain't disagreeing that money talks, but action seen is a requirement. Tennis ball bounces. Stock cars make noise, go fast and crashes sure make a spectical. Placing that lure, bass hammering the lure and end result hung right in the camera. We got what?
> We'd stand a better chance with Laura and a few other archery hotties and Women's Archery Shoot Out (swim suits optional of course or should that be required?).
> 
> What's his name is always repeating the same stuff, so I will to. We need the archer at full draw and the sound of a Double A Fueler staged and ready to haul azzz. The arrow released we need the deafing roar of that Double A Fueler. And when the arrow hits the target we need the sound of the awfulest wreck ever. Target flopping over and smoke rolling would help (fireworks optional).


I shot with Laura saturday......she is really considering coming to metropolis.

Was interesting hearing her thoughts on her past experiences shooting 3D on the circuits 

Sent from my Motorola Electrify using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Supermag1 (Jun 11, 2009)

rsw said:


> Tennis pros were in the same sort of situation many moons ago. Fortuately, many of them were wealthy and they pooled a large amount of money, hired a big name PR consultant (rumor was about 10 grand apiece) who had the right connections with TV and big business looking for an opportunity. Corporate money and TV took the risk and look at tennis today. Any pros wanting to ante up? 100 grand would probably be a good start - otherwise, pro archery is destined to remain a recreation for 98% of the archers. Corporate money is the only path to real professional archery because that is the only way to bring in mainstream TV. If NASCAR and bass fishing can attract TV money, archery would be a shoo in!!


Bull riders did it to and that's how the PBR was created and look at it now in comparison to PRCA.


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

The real problem I think is this

PGA tour you must be top caliber player to make the TV events
MLB gotta be a good ball player to be a PRO
NBA better make baskets or no PRO title for you

ASA/IBO step right up pay your entey fee of $250-$300 and now your a PRO
No sanctions to who can shoot PRO and who can't just pay your cash amd your in


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

Babyk said:


> The real problem I think is this
> 
> PGA tour you must be top caliber player to make the TV events
> MLB gotta be a good ball player to be a PRO
> ...


Exactly correct !


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Babyk said:


> The real problem I think is this
> 
> PGA tour you must be top caliber player to make the TV events
> MLB gotta be a good ball player to be a PRO
> ...


For ASA, I've heard some Semis grumble about having won out and paying that extra cash. And then face Levi and Jeff, Jack, Chance and others? Yeah, I'd groan too.
Why not leave Semis, Semis? As far as that goes, why not leave Open As, Open As? Here's the thing, how many would dominant either class and for how long? Let them win and gain courage to move up. How many Semis and Open A shooters shoot every event?

And where would you draw the line for Pros? Hey, Chance might be good, but how many times has he won in ASA events or others for that matter? I mean if you want to close up the field to really hi-lite the top shooters.... They've got to win or place sometime or they're just the "house dog" in a dog race, a fill in to make a field. And isn't there a lot of stock car drivers who are just that, fill ins to make a field?


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

SonnyThomas said:


> For ASA, I've heard some Semis grumble about having won out and paying that extra cash. And then face Levi and Jeff, Jack, Chance and others? Yeah, I'd groan too.
> Why not leave Semis, Semis? As far as that goes, why not leave Open As, Open As? Here's the thing, how many would dominant either class and for how long? Let them win and gain courage to move up. How many Semis and Open A shooters shoot every event?
> 
> And where would you draw the line for Pros? Hey, Chance might be good, but how many times has he won in ASA events or others for that matter? I mean if you want to close up the field to really hi-lite the top shooters.... They've got to win or place sometime or they're just the "house dog" in a dog race, a fill in to make a field. And isn't there a lot of stock car drivers who are just that, fill ins to make a field?


I've been thinking the same thing. But I know that I do not know it all. There would have to be some serious discussion and study. I would need a LOT more information and to do solid evaluating before really getting behind it. One thing to consider would be raising the bar for being required to move up in these classes. Possibly even creating a standard for being or staying in these classes.

One thing the ASA does that no other archery org does much of or at all is to evaluate their "product", the market and their customers (current _and potential_). They have proven to be proactive unlike any other national or even international archery org. For example, the NFAA chose to ignore the 3D game, that indoors spots is the only product they have that is popular with possible growth potential and also that their business "model" is fundamentally dysfunctional. The IBO has chosen to ignore the proven fact that "Known" distance class IS popular. They have chosen to ignore that their tournament structure is prone to cheating by competitors and makes it hard to manage "challenges" that may appear. I believe the ASA's biggest hurdle right now is the fact that their chosen target manufacturer is giving them junk AND their customers know it and resent it! 

Businesses that do not move forward, evolve or fail to manage "problems" ultimately fail or shrivel to the point of being virtually irrelevant............... Unless big brother bails them out. Which is not going to happen in archery. Though it appears that Easton has decided to at least keep the NFAA alive.


----------



## archerydude21 (Sep 20, 2010)

Sure is start it and park it.


----------



## archerydude21 (Sep 20, 2010)

I've thought a lot about the elimination of the semi pro class. I shoot it, but I wouldn't be opposed to it. Make it amateur or pro nothing in between. Drop the pro entry fee to $200 and I would still play. increase payout depth which shouldn't be that big of a deal with the increased participation in the class. That's just my opinion I dont know how others feel. Just a thought.


----------



## ThunderEagle (May 11, 2011)

Kstigall said:


> the NFAA chose to ignore the 3D game, that indoors spots is the only product they have that is popular with possible growth potential


This is a shame too. Not the 3D part, but the indoor spots being the only product that is popular with growth potential. After the first time I shot a legit field round, I was hooked. I digress, since this is the 3D Forum though.


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

SonnyThomas said:


> For ASA, I've heard some Semis grumble about having won out and paying that extra cash. And then face Levi and Jeff, Jack, Chance and others? Yeah, I'd groan too.
> Why not leave Semis, Semis? As far as that goes, why not leave Open As, Open As? Here's the thing, how many would dominant either class and for how long? Let them win and gain courage to move up. How many Semis and Open A shooters shoot every event?
> 
> And where would you draw the line for Pros? Hey, Chance might be good, but how many times has he won in ASA events or others for that matter? I mean if you want to close up the field to really hi-lite the top shooters.... They've got to win or place sometime or they're just the "house dog" in a dog race, a fill in to make a field. And isn't there a lot of stock car drivers who are just that, fill ins to make a field?




Not to say your not 100% right about the house dog comment but about Chance hes won a few IBO events in last 3 years I an thinking


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

Babyk said:


> Not to say your not 100% right about the house dog comment but about Chance hes won a few IBO events in last 3 years I an thinking


Dont worry, _sonny_ doesn't know what hes talking about...hes old and senile. I don't even know if he has even shot a national 3d shoot in this century. let alone this decade.


----------



## Supermag1 (Jun 11, 2009)

archerydude21 said:


> I've thought a lot about the elimination of the semi pro class. I shoot it, but I wouldn't be opposed to it. Make it amateur or pro nothing in between. Drop the pro entry fee to $200 and I would still play. increase payout depth which shouldn't be that big of a deal with the increased participation in the class. That's just my opinion I dont know how others feel. Just a thought.


See, here is a potential addition to the Pro class that makes my point exactly!

Take at least some of the money out of the lower classes and put it into the pro class. By definition, professional means someone who engages in an activity for compensation. The problem is that the archery orgs pay the amateurs enough that they have no incentive to move up. Realistically, there are only a handful of Pros that are going to finish in the top 5 regularly so unless you know you can consistently beat Levi, Jeff, Chance, Nathan, Tim, etc. you're just giving them money. Looking at the ASA payouts from Kentucky, the winning Semi Pro had a higher payout than the 4th Place Open Pro (he would've tied Tommy Gomez with 422/15 for 6th) and the winning Open A shooter had a higher payout than the 7th Place Open Pro shooter (he would've been 14th behind Jeff Hopkins, who had $0, with a 414/13). Until they either cut the money in the Amateur classes and/or jack up the money in the Pro classes, it will continue to be like it is.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

*Re: Men's Pro is Dying On the Vi*



Supermag1 said:


> See, here is a potential addition to the Pro class that makes my point exactly!
> 
> Take at least some of the money out of the lower classes and put it into the pro class. By definition, professional means someone who engages in an activity for compensation. The problem is that the archery orgs pay the amateurs enough that they have no incentive to move up. Realistically, there are only a handful of Pros that are going to finish in the top 5 regularly so unless you know you can consistently beat Levi, Jeff, Chance, Nathan, Tim, etc. you're just giving them money. Looking at the ASA payouts from Kentucky, the winning Semi Pro had a higher payout than the 4th Place Open Pro (he would've tied Tommy Gomez with 422/15 for 6th) and the winning Open A shooter had a higher payout than the 7th Place Open Pro shooter (he would've been 14th behind Jeff Hopkins, who had $0, with a 414/13). Until they either cut the money in the Amateur classes and/or jack up the money in the Pro classes, it will continue to be like it is.


No "incentive" (interesting name for your prescribed punishment to the amatuers) is required to make people move up. There are very low win out thresholds every where but the semi-pro class and even it is proven to be attainable by 3-4 every year. If a shooter can't win out where he is, what would make you think he belongs at a higher level.... or that he is winning too much? Those who do win, move on.

Why again do we want more money in the pro class to the point we'd take it from others?

Let me see if I get what you are saying right.....

Take money from the amatuers.
Give it to the pros.
It will make the sport grow as a whole.

Sounds a lot like Washington and seems like a good way to cut attendance. Its worked great for NFAA. 

You do realize that comparing the scores of Open A and Semi to that of the Pro Class and assigning places or quantifying talent doesn't work right? 

I guess as an aspiring pro, I should get on the other side of this fence and stick my hand out in waiting. Or not....maybe I could try to add value knowing that without a thriving amateur rank, there is nothing to be professional at.



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

tmorelli said:


> I guess as an aspiring pro, I should get on the other side of this fence and stick my hand out in waiting. Or not....maybe I could try to add value knowing that without a thriving amateur rank, there is nothing to be professional at.
> Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


Tony,

I don't agree with them taking money out of the amateur classes to fund the pro classes, but clearly something isn't working. The amateur ranks ARE thriving. Each of the last two years, numbers are at all-time highs, and yet the pro class keeps shriveling up. Anybody that is an aspiring pro has a tough road ahead. At the most recent ASA tournament, 7th place in Men's Pro could have broken even or come out slightly ahead (if he is as cheap as you and I are), and 8th place lost money. Whereas is Semi Pro, the top 10 all had a chance to break even or make money (again, if they keep their expenses low). It is a heckuva lot easier to get in the top 10 in Semi Pro than it is to get in the top 10 in Men's Pro. So financially, it doesn't make sense for anybody to shoot in the pro class. This creates a vicious cycle where people that cannot compete quit coming and payouts even get worse. With 23 Men's Pro shooters in the last IBO, I would hate to see how low the payouts are.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> No "incentive" (interesting name for your prescribed punishment to the amatuers) is required to make people move up. There are very low win out thresholds every where but the semi-pro class and even it is proven to be attainable by 3-4 every year. If a shooter can't win out where he is, what would make you think he belongs at a higher level.... or that he is winning too much? Those who do win, move on.
> 
> Why again do we want more money in the pro class to the point we'd take it from others?
> 
> ...


:darkbeer:

Tony, it seems some folks just can't get it through their heads that overall growth of archery is what matters. Some folks refuse to realize that forcing membership to pay more or to take a members money and give it to the "Pro's" will hurt membership/participation NOT help it! :doh:

Some folks are so focused on the "symptom" (lack of money for the Pro's, IF that is a problem) that they can't see the problem that is causing the symptom. It is real hard to offer up constructive ideas to "fix" something when you can't comprehend the actual problem. Consequently we keep reading the same brilliant suggestion, take money from members/participants and give it to the Pro's. To these folks I say, the problem is not that the nozzle or hose is too small. The problem is that there is not enough water pressure!


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

shootist said:


> Tony,
> 
> I don't agree with them taking money out of the amateur classes to fund the pro classes, but clearly something isn't working. The amateur ranks ARE thriving. Each of the last two years, numbers are at all-time highs, and yet the pro class keeps shriveling up. Anybody that is an aspiring pro has a tough road ahead. At the most recent ASA tournament, 7th place in Men's Pro could have broken even or come out slightly ahead (if he is as cheap as you and I are), and 8th place lost money. Whereas is Semi Pro, the top 10 all had a chance to break even or make money (again, if they keep their expenses low). It is a heckuva lot easier to get in the top 10 in Semi Pro than it is to get in the top 10 in Men's Pro. So financially, it doesn't make sense for anybody to shoot in the pro class. This creates a vicious cycle where people that cannot compete quit coming and payouts even get worse. With 23 Men's Pro shooters in the last IBO, I would hate to see how low the payouts are.


It is a vicious cycle but who that has not won out at their current level belongs at the next.... with a worst case scenario of a one year lag time?

More money in the pro class regardless of the source doesn't fix the "problem" of domination by a few. 

Should the pro class pay deeper than others? There have been several AT'rs calling for increased scrutiny on who can be a pro which is only going to reduce the pot even further. 

I also wonder how many of the pros with winnings below break even got their travel and entry paid.... or other upfront money?.... several is the answer. People seem to think that the only money in the pro class is what gets written on a big check for all to see. 

I'm not concerned about the pro class. If its a concern, what are the pros doing about it?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

bhtr3d said:


> Dont worry, _sonny_ doesn't know what hes talking about...hes old and senile. I don't even know if he has even shot a national 3d shoot in this century. let alone this decade.


Old, busted up and hacked on more times than I want to think about, but not quite senile. And I must be in the ball park of things because Levi and Jeff hold more SOYs than all others combined.

Shot Metro in 2010 and was this year, but flood waters put a dampener on that. Garage just now back in shape and waiting on creek crossing to be repaired (supposedly start later this afternoon). The old story; Mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy. Well, my wife's disposition isn't the best beings she has to walk a 100 yards to the house.

Chance won once in 2008. Had a couple of 2nds and a 3rd. Of records showing he's placed 13 times in the top 10 and 27 times didn't make the top 10, and all of this over the last 10 years. And quite a few tournaments he didn't shoot.
So like I said, Chance is good and I think (opinions count) more of it comes from his Vegas records and he does have them. Holds records all over the place we probably aren't aware of. Holds Presley's Indoor record (s). Met him there once and a alright, standup guy. And does one bang up job of telling people the hows and whats of archery stuff.

Still, someone wanted to cut the field of Pros to make Top Ranked Pros stick out. And the question I asked; "And where would you draw the line for (these) Pros?"


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

I think having the Semis shoot on the Pro Range would help prepare them better for the Pro Class. I have heard from a few semi's that have won a few semi Pro Ams that the semi courses are a joke sometimes. 

If semi's could get the feel of the Pro Range the next step would not be as bad...

If you take a look at the Semi's that moved up last year most or all of them were young guys and what else do they have to do with their time but shoot? They don't have a career yet, married or kids so they are taking advantage of the Free Time but that entry fee isn't easy for them to come up with

I thought it would be more exciting to have the Pros shoot Saturday make a cut kinda like golf take the top 20 or anyone within 10 points of the leader and anyone whom makes the cut gets a payout kind of like golf. Have the last place payout equal entry fee no less.

Could add to the drama and pressure of shooting Saturday.


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

Didn't Chance win Bedford in 2011?????


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Babyk said:


> Didn't Chance win Bedford in 2011?????


He did this year.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Babyk said:


> Didn't Chance win Bedford in 2011?????


I just went by ASA records.


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

SonnyThomas said:


> I just went by ASA records.


So Sonny are you saying that you do not reconize IBO as a fourm of 3-D archery that has a Pro Class?? I know that some sit and crown ASA as the top dogs in the 3-D world and this may be true but done sell IBO short they still get monster turnouts and I feel they can take control of the foam game if they would assign target times and do away with the show up and shoot method! 

Chance is a heck of a 3-D shooter, I think we forget how good these guys really are almost anyone in the Pro class can win at any giving tournment. The margin for error in there class is very very slim. I know Levi does take home the bacon a lot of the time but hes been beatin many times by men. Look at some of the guys who transition from Semi Pro to Pro they fair well shooting with the big boys all these guys can shoot its just who has it that weekend and who doesnt really. Misjudge one target shoot and 5 and bang just like that you got yourself in a hole to dig out of and could drop you out of the top 10. 

Selling Chance short and saying hes not able to shoot in Pro Class is a wrong statement!!! You know I got love for you Sonny but gotta call this one like I see it!!!!


----------



## reylamb (Feb 5, 2003)

cenochs said:


> I think having the Semis shoot on the Pro Range would help prepare them better for the Pro Class. I have heard from a few semi's that have won a few semi Pro Ams that the semi courses are a joke sometimes.
> 
> If semi's could get the feel of the Pro Range the next step would not be as bad...
> 
> ...


I am 99% sure the semi's are shooting the pro ranges, and have for a few years....

The only problem with having a cut is that it could have bad affects on the shooter of the year standings.....potentially....if Levi weren't shooting anyway.

As for payouts, ASA changed it a few years back due to the members asking for paying back deeper in the field. So, now the money is spread thinner, but more folks get a piece of the pie. Personally, I think they should just end the pyouts to whichever place at least gets equal to the entry fees and stop......but that is just me.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

reylamb said:


> I am 99% sure the semi's are shooting the pro ranges, and have for a few years....


Not normally in the ASA. I do agree with Charlie that it would be advantageous to the Semi's to do so though.




Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

In ASA the only shooters that shoot the Pro Range are the Pros and K50! Semi shoot with Open A and Unlimited sometimes and the crazy thing is they have different max yardages!!!


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Babyk said:


> So Sonny are you saying that you do not reconize IBO as a fourm of 3-D archery that has a Pro Class?? I know that some sit and crown ASA as the top dogs in the 3-D world and this may be true but done sell IBO short they still get monster turnouts and I feel they can take control of the foam game if they would assign target times and do away with the show up and shoot method!
> 
> Chance is a heck of a 3-D shooter, I think we forget how good these guys really are almost anyone in the Pro class can win at any giving tournment. The margin for error in there class is very very slim. I know Levi does take home the bacon a lot of the time but hes been beatin many times by men. Look at some of the guys who transition from Semi Pro to Pro they fair well shooting with the big boys all these guys can shoot its just who has it that weekend and who doesnt really. Misjudge one target shoot and 5 and bang just like that you got yourself in a hole to dig out of and could drop you out of the top 10.
> 
> Selling Chance short and saying hes not able to shoot in Pro Class is a wrong statement!!! You know I got love for you Sonny but gotta call this one like I see it!!!!


Like I said I pulled up ASA scores and mainly because the IBO scores aren't all that friendly. Last I checked all I could get was team results way back when up to today.

Where did I sell Chance short? I said he was good. I gave his record. He's placed and won, just not to the degree others have, but this does not disqualify him as a Pro.

Here was what I was looking at and should have replied with a quote; "cenochs;" "Easy way to fix the pro class!! Make it FREE and have sponsors pay the winnings! *But the catch would be you must qualify to be a Pro and must meet certain requirements (point system to stay a pro). *ASA has the sponsors, each Pro Am is sponsored by one or more manufactures. *The class gets no respect when they let anyone pay and shoot who has not qualified or earned their way in...*

Where do you draw the line, what criteria? X number of wins, X number times placed, X number of times shot per year or put a point value to each listed?


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

SonnyThomas said:


> Like I said I pulled up ASA scores and mainly because the IBO scores aren't all that friendly. Last I checked all I could get was team results way back when up to today.
> 
> Where did I sell Chance short? I said he was good. I gave his record. He's placed and won, just not to the degree others have, but this does not disqualify him as a Pro.
> 
> ...


I got where you are coming from now!!!

I think having a cut after the first day would be a great idea!!!!

take the top 50% of the guys who have the chance to shoot for the spots in the shoot off

then take the bottom 50% of the guys and the 2nd round highest score out of them could be the equilient of the lucky dog they have in Vegas and give them a shoot off spot but with the stipulation that in the shoot off if they hit anything lower than a 12 they are out of the shootoff - so this would force them to shoot 12s or 14s only!!!

what you guys think???


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

Babyk said:


> I got where you are coming from now!!!
> 
> I think having a cut after the first day would be a great idea!!!!
> 
> ...



shoot off still be top 5 scores plus the 1 lucky dog entry so


----------



## Supermag1 (Jun 11, 2009)

tmorelli said:


> No "incentive" (interesting name for your prescribed punishment to the amatuers) is required to make people move up. There are very low win out thresholds every where but the semi-pro class and even it is proven to be attainable by 3-4 every year. If a shooter can't win out where he is, what would make you think he belongs at a higher level.... or that he is winning too much? Those who do win, move on.
> 
> Why again do we want more money in the pro class to the point we'd take it from others?
> 
> ...


Funny, you call it a punishment but forcing someone to move up for having a good shoot is not a punishment? How many people have we seen either switch to K45 or stop shooting Pro Ams because they were going to get forced into moving into the Pro or Semi class (which of course also bumps them into that class in every other organization)? Not everyone wants to donate a couple hundred bucks to the top pros just so they can say they are a professional archer. Another funny part is you saying that my idea (it's just than an idea) sounds like Washington when the forced move up list is basically Obamacare in archery.

Since you're doing a nice job of trying to be condescending because you don't understand the point, I'll try to explain it again. Unless it pays more to be a Pro, the Pro class will keep "dying on the vine". The money has to come from somewhere and since the all the orgs seem afraid to chase any big sponsors, the amateur ranks are the simple answer of where to get it. The fair answer, no, but when is life fair?

Also, I know it's hard for some of you big tournament guys to comprehend but there are a lot more people in this world and country that go out and shoot just for the honor of being called the winner than there are people that shoot to collect a check and what happens to attendance at a few national level has little impact on a thriving amateur rank.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Supermag1 said:


> Funny, you call it a punishment but forcing someone to move up for having a good shoot is not a punishment?.


Sorry, in my condescending tone, you missed my point. I'm an advocate of the system already forcing move up after every year and every tournament in the case of the novice classes. I am not advocate of decreasing payouts in the amateur classes to fund pro classes. 




Supermag1 said:


> How many people have we seen either switch to K45 or stop shooting Pro Ams because they were going to get forced into moving into the Pro or Semi class (which of course also bumps them into that class in every other organization)?


Zero switch to K45 from above....it is a mid level class. You can't move to K45 after winning out of Open A or higher. You can't drop down to K45 from A, Semi, 50 or Open Pro if you've won money recently (not sure how long that period is but it may be a couple of years) either. I am sure there are people who drop out after winning at Semi or Open A to avoid moving up. More winnings in the Pro class wouldn't make the difference.... they have a lack of something else (funding, time, commitment, talent, gumption, etc)

It just so happens that I can use myself as an example of a working win-out system here. I won out of K45 last year (my first year since the 90's as a Young Adult). I moved to K50 this year, I've won money. I'm moving back to judging and requested clarification on where I could go because after a K45 win out, it clearly says Open A is an option. Well, ASA says I'm only allowed to go to Semi-pro or higher. I haven't judged since the 90's- That's a tough entry fee to pay while working on my judging. I can roll with the punches but if I'm not proof of a working move-up system, what is?



Supermag1 said:


> Not everyone wants to donate a couple hundred bucks to the top pros just so they can say they are a professional archer. Another funny part is you saying that my idea (it's just than an idea) sounds like Washington when the forced move up list is basically Obamacare in archery. Since you're doing a nice job of trying to be condescending because you don't understand the point, I'll try to explain it again. Unless it pays more to be a Pro, the Pro class will keep "dying on the vine". The money has to come from somewhere and since the all the orgs seem afraid to chase any big sponsors, the amateur ranks are the simple answer of where to get it. The fair answer, no, but when is life fair?


Nope, you're arguing the wrong point. Again, my beef is with your suggestion of reducing payouts to the amateurs..... not a forced move-up. Why is it the amateur's problem that it doesn't pay more to be a pro? It isn't. How many of the amateurs do you think care about the woes of the pro class? 

Why on earth would major sponsors care about a class "that gets no respect" as was stated earlier on here? Or that isn't doing something about this on their own?




Supermag1 said:


> Also, I know it's hard for some of you big tournament guys to comprehend but there are a lot more people in this world and country that go out and shoot just for the honor of being called the winner than there are people that shoot to collect a check and what happens to attendance at a few national level has little impact on a thriving amateur rank.


Are you telling me that you aren't a "big tournament guy"?... but you're suggesting cutting the paybacks from the amateurs at the big shoots? Those people who shoot "just to be called a winner" aren't the ASA customer base. I shoot a lot of local shoots as I travel for work. I enjoy them greatly but most of the guys that are there, will never go any further. They'll never know who the pro's are.... much less care enough about one to get on board with funding him in any way (buy Levi Morgan jerseys).


----------



## Tmaziarz (Mar 16, 2008)

Need to look at if someone wins a class they have to move up and keep going, no more moving back down after a year or two out of the class, to many people moving back and fourth to hunter and AHC.


----------



## rcrhoyt/mathews (Aug 11, 2008)

I can just see Levi sitting at home with a big ole grin where all these comments seem to be where everyone is scared to shoot against him. We all know that all these pro's put in their time on a range between the Natl, shoots. We all need to practice.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Well, we don't watch the local stock car dirt track races on TV. We don't watch baseball farm clubs play on TV. We don't watch amatuer boxing on TV. We don't watch the qualifying rounds of golf on TV.

Archery is one of the rare sports where the backyard kid and Pro shoot the same event. Competition firearms shooting (I've been there) has the same thing, the amatuer and Pro shooting the same event. And like archery you don't see firearms competition on TV.
For those who don't know, the Grand is the largest Trap Shooting event in the world (moved to Illinois a couple of years back). Something on the order of 7,000,000 targets are thrown. That's one big bunch of competitors to shoot that many targets and makes Vegas look like a Cub Scout overnight sleep out. It's not shown on TV.

Noted above is, "move up." It isn't "move up," it's move out. These move outs do have a end. Unlimited is a end class. Any Open class or Semi Pro can move to the Known classes. Known 50 is a end class. Of course, Seniors are seniors and each class is a end class, I think. At least wise there is no "win out" given for them.


----------



## jimb (Feb 17, 2003)

Back when the payout for a ProAM was 10,000 and the classic was 50.000 there were more people in the pro class. I also don't think that anyone should be forced to move into a Pro class. I will never have that problem, but I would not move to a pro class. I don't have the time or money.


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

SonnyThomas said:


> Well, we don't watch the local stock car dirt track races on TV. We don't watch baseball farm clubs play on TV. We don't watch amatuer boxing on TV. We don't watch the qualifying rounds of golf on TV.
> 
> Archery is one of the rare sports where the backyard kid and Pro shoot the same event. Competition firearms shooting (I've been there) has the same thing, the amatuer and Pro shooting the same event. And like archery you don't see firearms competition on TV.
> For those who don't know, the Grand is the largest Trap Shooting event in the world (moved to Illinois a couple of years back). Something on the order of 7,000,000 targets are thrown. That's one big bunch of competitors to shoot that many targets and makes Vegas look like a Cub Scout overnight sleep out. It's not shown on TV.
> ...





Sonny - I need to correct you again.......Amateur golf rounds are on TV......the US Amateur is always on National TV every year along with Golf Longest day which is the day men attempt to qualify for the US Open.......both these events are on National TV........hate 2 check you down but just making nsure we got facts correct


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

SonnyThomas said:


> Noted above is, "move up." It isn't "move up," it's move out. These move outs do have a end. Unlimited is a end class. Any Open class or Semi Pro can move to the Known classes. Known 50 is a end class. Of course, Seniors are seniors and each class is a end class, I think. At least wise there is no "win out" given for them.


In the cases where it should be move up, it absolutely is a move up. 

Where would you have someone go from K50? I can tell you that after winning money there, the only current option is Semi or above. 

Where should someone go from unlimited?

Where should someone go from the senior classes?

The only way an Open A or Semi can move to K45 is if they haven't won money and they have permission from the ASA. They can always move to K50..... a class open to anyone.... even pros with big wins. It seems appropriate to me.

Forcing people up/out too quickly is a great way to dumb down the sport.... not grow pro's. I think the win-out thresholds are aggressively low already.

People's circumstances change. Not allowing shooters to move back after an appropriate review would be a tragedy. 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Babyk said:


> Sonny - I need to correct you again.......Amateur golf rounds are on TV......the US Amateur is always on National TV every year along with Golf Longest day which is the day men attempt to qualify for the US Open.......both these events are on National TV........hate 2 check you down but just making nsure we got facts correct


Excuse me. I forgot about that one. However, that is for the US Open and yet, it isn't on TV every weekend like the big golf tournaments.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

tmorelli said:


> In the cases where it should be move up, it absolutely is a move up.
> 
> Where would you have someone go from K50? I can tell you that after winning money there, the only current option is Semi or above.
> 
> ...


I noted "end classes." There is no "win out" attached to Known 50, Unlimited, or Senior classes. You can stay there as long as you want.


----------



## rohpenguins (Dec 2, 2012)

Lots of great posts on this subject. I don't think there is a silver bullet that fixes it. I think there are too many classes. I shoot IBO so I can only speak to that but the majority of the shooters are shooting HC and there are some good shooters in that group. What can be done to get some of those shooters to start shooting MBO? Most hunter class shooters shoot the same equipment they hunt with. To move up to MBO they would have to spend about 1-2k in all new equipment and then learn how to shoot it. Why not have a pro hunter class. Wasn't 3D started by hunters to get some more practice in. Back in the 90's when the sport was at it's peak the bow hunters were the ones who helped expand the sport. Make a PBH Pro bow hunter class and put cash in it just like the PMR class and I bet things change... or do away with open classes all together. Make it all HC rules and stretch out the distances as shooter progress. The best shooters can shoot everything anyhow. I am sure Levi and Chance would do as well shooting fixed pins. Just a thought from the lunatic fringe!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

SonnyThomas said:


> Excuse me. I forgot about that one. However, that is for the US Open and yet, it isn't on TV every weekend like the big golf tournaments.


Yes you are correct that is isnt on TV every weekend like the big golf tournaments but it is on TV and your first post stated that golf at the amature level had no TV events at all.....I was only correcting your statement to ensure you knew all the facts of the matter

I think if ASA or IBO would let Bow Junky due his thing and buy some air time on say ABC or NBC you would see not only the PRO class with guys who think they are good enough come out and take there shots at beating Levi, Hopkins,Wallace, Evans, Hacker, Gomez etc. then not counting the the growth at the other class levels that could possiably grow due to seeing the sport on TV. 

Remember when the hunger games came out and how much of a growth in numbers local shoots and bow shops were seeing just from that movie alone? 

Its worth a shot!!! Hopefully Mike T and LD Falk can take time from eatting thier steak dinner all us lower class shooters have put on there table from our hard earn money going to entry fees and shell out some cash and try to get the sport on National TV.


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

SonnyThomas said:


> Excuse me. I forgot about that one. However, that is for the US Open and yet, it isn't on TV every weekend like the big golf tournaments.


http://www.amateurgolf.com/7418-GolfNews-USGA-announces-TV-schedule-for-2012



I think amateur golf is on TV more thatn you think Sonny


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

I'm on regular TV stations. No cable, no satellite. We're lucky to have the pipe line that carries sun light to us.
Dial up gets any slower I'm going to smoke signals.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I posted on the first page of this thread one time and had no idea it had grown this much.

I shot around 4 hours a day this week and I am still getting better as a archer so when the time comes I will jump at the chance to shoot in my next class which will be the semi pro class and I will pay the entry fee with pride that I earned the right to do so. To you guys who do nothing but ***** at everything I have loved my second season of the ASA experience and my 4 hours per day of training instead of griping is going to pay off.


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

Padgett said:


> I posted on the first page of this thread one time and had no idea it had grown this much.
> 
> I shot around 4 hours a day this week and I am still getting better as a archer so when the time comes I will jump at the chance to shoot in my next class which will be the semi pro class and I will pay the entry fee with pride that I earned the right to do so. To you guys who do nothing but ***** at everything I have loved my second season of the ASA experience and my 4 hours per day of training instead of griping is going to pay off.




I must say that your work of 4hr per day of practice is impressive and you will see great improvement if you keep it up!!! It is a great feeling when you get good enough to move classes but understand this that I dont practice at all and for a cool $150 I can call myself a Semi Pro archer because the system is flawed, I think many have offered up good ideas on how to fixs this by making these classes such as Semi Pro and Mens Pro have requirements of performance to keep yourself in them if not your dumped back down to amature level until you can shoot your way back upto the Pro classes.......Were not *****ing we are just tryin to make the point that the system is flawed.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

SonnyThomas said:


> I'm on regular TV stations. No cable, no satellite. We're lucky to have the pipe line that carries sun light to us.
> Dial up gets any slower I'm going to smoke signals.


Smoking is bad for ya.....

Sent from my Motorola Electrify using Tapatalk 2


----------



## STRICNINE (Oct 22, 2012)

I would rather shoot 10 great shots in a day than spend 4 hours practicing. Unless it takes me 4 hours to execute 10 great shots. lol


----------



## proXarchery (Apr 9, 2004)

all the money in the world can be put in and that doesnt make the others that are not winning ,win. practice and talent win money. agreed a little more money gives the lower placing pros get paid a little more


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

STRICNINE said:


> I would rather shoot 10 great shots in a day than spend 4 hours practicing. Unless it takes me 4 hours to execute 10 great shots. lol


If I had the free time to practice four hours a day I would shoot for a hour maybe and the rest of the time would be traveling to ranges practicing judging


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Garceau said:


> Smoking is bad for ya.....


Could be that I should cut back. I barely got through this 3D today. Crawling up the hills (one ranked 7th tallest in the world) and 90 degrees with humidity hovering around the same, 86, and some parts of valley was just plain dead for air I had a kind of a work out that I didn't want. I think the club was trying to kill off us old guys (only 64, so not a geezer yet). Luckily, I was held up by these two young shooters and I got to have a drink of water and a cigarette before "killing" the next few targets. My 288/300 score was said best. Now if I had Pall Malls (non-filtered please) instead of Marlboros maybe I could have picked up a few more points.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

cenochs said:


> If I had the free time to practice four hours a day I would shoot for a hour maybe and the rest of the time would be traveling to ranges practicing judging


Keep slacking off cenochs and that guy shooting in General Discussion who shoots 4,000 arrows a month will be beatin' ya sure as shooting


----------



## reylamb (Feb 5, 2003)

Babyk said:


> Yes you are correct that is isnt on TV every weekend like the big golf tournaments but it is on TV and your first post stated that golf at the amature level had no TV events at all.....I was only correcting your statement to ensure you knew all the facts of the matter
> 
> I think if ASA or IBO would let Bow Junky due his thing and buy some air time on say ABC or NBC you would see not only the PRO class with guys who think they are good enough come out and take there shots at beating Levi, Hopkins,Wallace, Evans, Hacker, Gomez etc. then not counting the the growth at the other class levels that could possiably grow due to seeing the sport on TV.
> 
> ...


Do you have any idea what it would cost for 30 minutes of paid programming on any of the big 4 networks? 

Just for reference, 30 minutes in a small market, local window, overnight (think 2am here) is going to run you $2500.......again, that is overnight, local station (probably independent and not even one of the "big4" local stations........and then consider that none of the national networks have paid programming windows............but hey, it is just their dinner right?

Besides, as soon as standards and practices gets ahold of the crappy video that bowjunky shoots.....as in apparently they don't know what the focus nob does or what a tripod is.....the likelihood that his videos would make it on a national network are slim and none.

You would be better off going for the scraps of broadcasting, ie outdoor channel , etc.....that would probably only run about $25k for a 30 minute window.....and they will accept any video at all.....of course the net result would be the same, no one would really watch, but hey, it is on TV......

I remember the Hunger games.....but I don't remember any growth out of it, at least not in my area.


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

reylamb said:


> Do you have any idea what it would cost for 30 minutes of paid programming on any of the big 4 networks?
> Just for reference, 30 minutes in a small market, local window, overnight (think 2am here) is going to run you $2500.......again, that is overnight, local station (probably independent and not even one of the "big4" local stations........and then consider that none of the national networks have paid programming windows............but hey, it is just their dinner right?
> 
> Besides, as soon as standards and practices gets ahold of the crappy video that bowjunky shoots.....as in apparently they don't know what the focus nob does or what a tripod is.....the likelihood that his videos would make it on a national network are slim and none.
> ...





You need to put your crack pipe down........BowJunky does a great job with his videos and that is just his style of shooting the videos......essy to be a arm chair quaterback and say his work is junk.....if you think you can do better get out there and try big boy

As far as growth from the Hunger Games do a search if your smart enough to figure our how to do that on here and look up results for Hunger Games there are pages and pages of posters saying how their shops snd shoots seen major growth right after the movie release


And yes people watch TV sir so your statement that no one will watch it is crap.....go look at how many hits the bow junky videos have on them on YouTube alone....there is a interest here, ans yes its just dinner for ol Mike T and LD Falks and I am sure from all our lower amateur class entry fees with shooters stacked 6 deep on a stake and targets being blown out on ranges due to so many shooters am sure they both can afford to have a PBJ for dinner a few nights to ensure there is cash on the table to get this sport we love on TV and a attempt to see it grow


Go back under the rock you crawled out from under


----------



## Crow Terminator (Jan 21, 2003)

I don't think archery would do so well on national TV. The excitement/intense factor just ain't there. I love shooting bows but I absolutely hate watching other people shoot and not being able to. It is actually rather boring to watch. This year when ASA started making some classes shoot both rounds on Saturday...it killed the weekend fun for me. I was in the category of shooting both rnds on Saturday...which had me at the range early Sat morning...finishing up around 11...then having to linger around until my evening round. I walked around and watched some of the other ranges shooting on midday...bored out of my mind. I think the best you could do is to just show the "shoot downs" and maybe do a bit of a brief recap of their overall weekend shoot. 

I liken this somewhat to bass fishing....the big Bassmaster Elite series tournaments just show the last day's fishing and recaps the previous couple of days fishing. Now that in itself would be a change of format...but there are already so few Pro's shooting, that it wouldn't really make a difference. If the field was 100+, they could do a 3 day tournament...shoot Friday and Saturday and then Sunday you have a narrowed field of about 10 that make it to the finals to shoot. But even that wouldn't work because there wouldn't be a good shoot down for everyone to watch.


----------



## proXarchery (Apr 9, 2004)

Pros pros pros - lets see 100 pros 1500 other shooters . who pays to keep playing the game. a lot of people would watch any class relevant to them to see how others shoot. believe me there is a lot of people out there that can shoot a bow.


----------

