# There will be a official arrow caller on the pro range



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

JimmyP said:


> Bow junky just posted it on face book


So no more line pushing its in ???


----------



## jimb (Feb 17, 2003)

bhtr3d said:


> So no more line pushing its in ???


sounds like it will only be for disputed calls. Chances are if it is disputed then it is out, I'd call them out for making me walk to the target.


----------



## JimmyP (Feb 11, 2006)

I guess my problem is I have to be close enough to be judged


----------



## buckbuster31 (Dec 3, 2009)

Interesting for sure


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

A few things a "judge" should never do:
1. Never ask who owns the arrow!
2. Never ask what the group called.
3. Never ask who made "protest".

I've had line judges ask who's arrow it is, how it was originally called and who is making the "protest". None of which is relevant to the judge making his call. However, those questions could give the "appearance" of possible influence.


----------



## Supermag1 (Jun 11, 2009)

Kstigall said:


> A few things a "judge" should never do:
> 1. Never ask who owns the arrow!
> 2. Never ask what the group called.
> 3. Never ask who made "protest".
> ...


100% Agree.

Maybe it the ASA is going to keep using shot up targets, they need to develop a set of stencils or something that are the same size as the 12 rings so that they can lay them on the target and get a better idea where the line is.


----------



## lknchoppers (Jun 13, 2008)

Why doesn't everybody think like this? You are 100% correct. If a judge doesn't do this he needs to be booted.




Kstigall said:


> A few things a "judge" should never do:
> 1. Never ask who owns the arrow!
> 2. Never ask what the group called.
> 3. Never ask who made "protest".
> ...


----------



## J-Dubyah (Mar 6, 2010)

Kstigall said:


> A few things a "judge" should never do:
> 1. Never ask who owns the arrow!
> 2. Never ask what the group called.
> 3. Never ask who made "protest".
> ...


Without a doubt!


----------



## Bucks (Jul 27, 2005)

My question is why do the pro's have to shoot at shot up targets in the first place? how hard would it be to change the bad cores each day for these guys? many people make the golf analogy, but at least they roll the greens after every round.


----------



## treeman65 (Nov 24, 2005)

Bucks said:


> My question is why do the pro's have to shoot at shot up targets in the first place? how hard would it be to change the bad cores each day for these guys?


Actually nobody should have to shoot shot up targets. We spend a lot of money to travel to these shoots period


----------



## Pincher (Jul 20, 2013)

considering what the entry fees are and the payouts for most classes, I agree, noone should have to shoot shot up inserts.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

Just a week ago I shot a local shoot that has a old moose target that was bought by this club 5 years ago and it was a used old target when they got it. Every time we shoot at this club it is a practice day and we don't even turn in score cards and we use the moose as a 60 t0 70 yard closeset to the center gets a free steak shot. Then we usually stand there and shoot 20 arrows each at the target from 70 yards and just have fun and we do this every time we shoot there. The foam on this old makenzie target has not got one chunk missing and you can see all of the lines and it self heals and it has to be over 10 years old with thousands of shots in it.

They are making the foam poorly on purpose so that we have to buy more replacement cores, it is that simple. The tournament targets only get a few hundred shots into them and they are simply ruined, it is a joke to buy a range because within a few days your target has deteriorated to the point where you really cant aim at the 12 anymore.


----------



## Bo Bob (Feb 12, 2004)

Kstigall said:


> A few things a "judge" should never do:
> 1. Never ask who owns the arrow!
> 2. Never ask what the group called.
> 3. Never ask who made "protest".


Good point!


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Supermag1 said:


> Maybe it the ASA is going to keep using shot up targets





Bucks said:


> My question is why do the pro's have to shoot at shot up targets in the first place? how hard would it be to change the bad cores each day for these guys?





treeman65 said:


> Actually nobody should have to shoot shot up targets. We spend a lot of money to travel to these shoots period





Pincher said:


> considering what the entry fees are and the payouts for most classes, I agree, noone should have to shoot shot up inserts.


You guys do realize that they put new targets out at each shoot. They also replace inserts between days if needed (not saying they are perfect at getting them all). 

The problem is the quality of the foam. The targets should last long enough to get through a round....they aren't.


----------



## Supermag1 (Jun 11, 2009)

tmorelli said:


> You guys do realize that they put new targets out at each shoot. They also replace inserts between days if needed (not saying they are perfect at getting them all).
> 
> The problem is the quality of the foam. The targets should last long enough to get through a round....they aren't.


Yep but the ASA put themselves over the barrel by swearing against Rineharts and now McKenzie can put out whatever junk they want because everyone wants the targets they shoot at the Pro Ams. If it's even possible, it'll keep getting worse with Easton owning D-M and pumping so much money into the ASA. Until Mike is ready to eat some crow (not likely), you guys will keep getting junk targets at the Pro Ams and clubs will keep having to shell out thousands of dollars for a substandard product.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Supermag1 said:


> Yep but the ASA put themselves over the barrel by swearing against Rineharts and now McKenzie can put out whatever junk they want because everyone wants the targets they shoot at the Pro Ams. If it's even possible, it'll keep getting worse with Easton owning D-M and pumping so much money into the ASA. Until Mike is ready to eat some crow (not likely), you guys will keep getting junk targets at the Pro Ams and clubs will keep having to shell out thousands of dollars for a substandard product.


I don't disagree. The Rinehart foam is superior... The targets in general....superior. 

The scoring lines.....worse. The way rhinehart molds the lines is vague. So from a scoring perspective, I don't know that it would be any better just by a target change.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

It's kind of interesting that a "Professional" sports business with supposedly professionals involved use unequivocally second rate, at best, materials (McKenzie targets). It's not unlike a pro football team playing on a second rate small time high school field that is beat down or Nascar running on poorly built and maintained small time tracks.

The Pro archers and organizations can talk all they want about growing archery overall but knowingly and willingly using an inferior target, which is the basis of the game, reflects poorly on the ASA, the Pro archers and the game in general. The fact is the targets are a key ingredient to this game and the targets are much worse than they were just 6 or so years ago!!!!! This makes no sense. We've been hearing "talk" about improving for how long now? They KNOW the foam that needs to be used but they don't want to use it. The ASA might ought to look into producing their own targets or at least specifying the target material and other specifications.


----------



## Bucks (Jul 27, 2005)

tmorelli said:


> You guys do realize that they put new targets out at each shoot. They also replace inserts between days if needed (not saying they are perfect at getting them all).
> 
> The problem is the quality of the foam. The targets should last long enough to get through a round....they aren't.


new targets... yes
replace... obviously not enough
durability... big or small, maybe one reason why ibo went to Rinehart?

I think its ludicrous that the pro's who are shooting for big money and their livelihood should be put in a position to have any argument whatsoever because they cant even see the lines. the targets are failing after only how many shots? in this case, using a judge for these is a bandaid for a simple fix. not that a judge present in the area isn't a bad idea, but this could easily have been avoided.


----------



## J Whittington (Nov 13, 2009)

amen



Padgett said:


> Just a week ago I shot a local shoot that has a old moose target that was bought by this club 5 years ago and it was a used old target when they got it. Every time we shoot at this club it is a practice day and we don't even turn in score cards and we use the moose as a 60 t0 70 yard closeset to the center gets a free steak shot. Then we usually stand there and shoot 20 arrows each at the target from 70 yards and just have fun and we do this every time we shoot there. The foam on this old makenzie target has not got one chunk missing and you can see all of the lines and it self heals and it has to be over 10 years old with thousands of shots in it.
> 
> They are making the foam poorly on purpose so that we have to buy more replacement cores, it is that simple. The tournament targets only get a few hundred shots into them and they are simply ruined, it is a joke to buy a range because within a few days your target has deteriorated to the point where you really cant aim at the 12 anymore.


----------



## cenochs (May 2, 2007)

Kstigall said:


> It's kind of interesting that a "Professional" sports business with supposedly professionals involved use unequivocally second rate, at best, materials (McKenzie targets). It's not unlike a pro football team playing on a second rate small time high school field that is beat down or Nascar running on poorly built and maintained small time tracks.
> 
> The Pro archers and organizations can talk all they want about growing archery overall but knowingly and willingly using an inferior target, which is the basis of the game, reflects poorly on the ASA, the Pro archers and the game in general. The fact is the targets are a key ingredient to this game and the targets are much worse than they were just 6 or so years ago!!!!! This makes no sense. We've been hearing "talk" about improving for how long now? They KNOW the foam that needs to be used but they don't want to use it. The ASA might ought to look into producing their own targets or at least specifying the target material and other specifications.


Exactly!!! Like it


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Speaking as someone who exclusively shoots World Archery or NFAA 3D where targets are not mandated by the organization I find the quality of the D-M targets is horrible when I'm forced to shoot them. Sure they look just a little bit better when new but they are sticky in the cold and fall apart after very little use. Seems simple enough that the ASA should be able to set a standard for the materials, after all if they weren't using them then very few people would be buying them.

The elephant in the room for me is arrow size. How much less damage would result if they were limited to 23xx series shafts like World Archery or even smaller? What if 3D moved towards inside-out scoring?

-Grant


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

grantmac said:


> The elephant in the room for me is arrow size. How much less damage would result if they were limited to 23xx series shafts like World Archery or even smaller? What if 3D moved towards inside-out scoring?
> 
> -Grant


Smaller arrows would help. Manufacturers don't support it. 

Inside out only drives scores down. It doesn't reduce the subjectivity.


----------



## jimb (Feb 17, 2003)

I would like to see a 23 series arrow rule.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

grantmac said:


> Speaking as someone who exclusively shoots World Archery or NFAA 3D where targets are not mandated by the organization I find the quality of the D-M targets is horrible when I'm forced to shoot them. Sure they look just a little bit better when new but they are sticky in the cold and fall apart after very little use. Seems simple enough that the ASA should be able to set a standard for the materials, after all if they weren't using them then very few people would be buying them.
> 
> The elephant in the room for me is arrow size. How much less damage would result if they were limited to 23xx series shafts like World Archery or even smaller? What if 3D moved towards inside-out scoring?
> 
> -Grant


Why would they change? - record crowds every week. Levi touched on it earlier in the podcast


----------



## nccrutch (Feb 26, 2003)

As President of our local club, i'd love to see an arrow size restriction. My targets take a beating!


----------



## Bucks (Jul 27, 2005)

As a minimum, D-M could easily simply make just the cores out of a better material. If a guy is having trouble reading the shot up lines between a 5 and an 8, that's fine. He is only in contention for bragging rights with his friends, not for the winners circle.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

nccrutch said:


> As President of our local club, i'd love to see an arrow size restriction. My targets take a beating!


KUDOS to you for bringing it up! I mentioned this on the "other thread" about the controversy...they were complaining about torn up targets making scoring difficult.
The rest of the planet, other than the USA has a size restriction of 2315...and it has been that way for a long time. It isn't ALL about line cutting...it had a lot do do with the fact that those FAT SHAFTS tear up the target stops quickly. Target bales and 3-D animals do NOT come cheap.
If four XXX or even any shaft from 25 diameter on up into the 12 or 14 ring and the targets are going to get torn up quickly.

The shaft size limit would obviously apply to EVERYONE...so what is the big deal about having a shaft size restriction? Nobody would have any more advantage after the restriction than anyone else, and the 3-D animals would last a heckuva lot longer.
The manufacturers would NOT lose money either...they'd still sell the heck out of the 23's. If the size restriction was "phased in" over a period of say 3-4 years...that is to say, for example, they announce a date when the shaft size restriction applies effective January 1, 2017, then the manuf have time to sell of their stock of FAT shafts and gear up for the smaller ones and the archers have time to use up their supply of FAT SHAFTS and be ready for the smaller shafts.

To do it all in one big whack wouldn't float well, especially with the big "E".

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

The McKJunks are here to stay. You don't here talk about making them better. The ASA has even stopped making excuses for the McKJunks. It is what it is. 
Seriously, it has been blatantly obvious the ASA is not going to do anything about their customers disappointment. It is blatantly obvious D-M has no intention of fixing their inferior product. For the last few years all they have done is try different ways of making us accept the marginal product. Let us not forget, the current product is vastly inferior to what that had previously produced. They know EXACTLY how to make a better product. They have gone years now choosing to make an inferior product.

The fact is the *ASA* is responsible for the crummy targets we spend a lot of money to shoot at *ASA* venues! A lot of people spend hundreds if not many thousands of dollars to participate in ASA tournaments. It is the *ASA's* responsibility to satisfy their customers. It is Delta-McKenzies responsibility to meet their customers (ASA) expectations. I'm fairly certain I don't pay anyone to be a Delta-McKenzie member!!!! If you have a problem with the product the *ASA* provides then let the _ASA _know as that is the entity that takes your money not Delta-McKenzie.

What if on the very last target on Sunday we all pulled out our pocket knives and butchered the targets? Just kidding!


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

It was a sad day for me when I heard that Delta bought McKenzie. lain:


----------



## JimmyP (Feb 11, 2006)

I personal like shooting targets that have holes were the 12 is ,and I like to look at were the patters are low or high ,I am not taking them home with me just shooting them three days there fine for that


----------



## Pincher (Jul 20, 2013)

How much will he make an hour?


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

Pincher said:


> How much will he make an hour?


Obama is raising the minimum wage to like $14/hr.


----------



## Supermag1 (Jun 11, 2009)

I see now that they're back pedaling when they realize that they might have to pay a few people to do this. Looks like now they're just going to have some challenge system and use the existing range officials to mediate it, so nothing is really going to be solved.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

I agree the McK target can't match the Rinehart foam.

Having said that, when we saw how the sticking arrows were messing up the targets we went some arrow lube and that helped a ton.

Plus it made the arrows far easier to remove.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

I've been shooting CXLs for years and Muddy Outdoors HT3s are the same size, .354"/.355". 

Can't see the restriction happening, but would add those tiny Nanos need to also... Hypodermic needles... Brand new 3Ds and them Nanos get to off side....

Gotta agree with, Carlos, that lube keeps the foam from getting fried to the arrow.......


----------



## Deer Slayer I (Feb 21, 2010)

So tired of hearing how good rinehart targets are. Here is a pic from one of the targets I shot at gem city last year huge tapping hole between insert and body


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

My reasoning behind inside it scoring wa to drive towards thinner shafts. Although now that you don't need a 23 series alloy to get the spine required for your bow I don't see why going to a more ICS-sized arrow would be inappropriate. Then again I'm of the same opinion for indoor games as well. I wouldn't complain one bit if i could shoot the same arrows for everything, but the arrow manufacturers might.

Grant


----------



## JimmyP (Feb 11, 2006)

I like my 27 series shafts I may even sand the last 4 inches and I am man enough to pull them all day don't put lube on my I want to pull the line


----------



## n2bows (May 21, 2002)

tmorelli said:


> You guys do realize that they put new targets out at each shoot. They also replace inserts between days if needed (not saying they are perfect at getting them all).
> 
> The problem is the quality of the foam. The targets should last long enough to get through a round....they aren't.



Tony,

They are using targets at more than one shoot now. And they are not always replacing the cores after the first days round either. This is something that started this year.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

n2bows said:


> Tony,
> 
> They are using targets at more than one shoot now.....This is something that started this year.


Ouch.


----------



## n2bows (May 21, 2002)

Deer Slayer I said:


> So tired of hearing how good rinehart targets are. Here is a pic from one of the targets I shot at gem city last year huge tapping hole between insert and body


I agree.


----------



## hoytxcutter (Sep 1, 2003)

For every Rinehart you show there are 10 McK targets. Rinehart is more superior than McK. The R&W targets are much better the McK junk targets.


Deer Slayer I said:


> So tired of hearing how good rinehart targets are. Here is a pic from one of the targets I shot at gem city last year huge tapping hole between insert and body


----------



## jtelarkin08 (Nov 24, 2009)

Deer Slayer I said:


> So tired of hearing how good rinehart targets are. Here is a pic from one of the targets I shot at gem city last year huge tapping hole between insert and body


I don't think that hole is where the pros are shooting lol


----------



## bsharkey (Apr 27, 2009)

Deer Slayer I said:


> So tired of hearing how good rinehart targets are. Here is a pic from one of the targets I shot at gem city last year huge tapping hole between insert and body


I agree one of the clubs I belong to bought all rineharts right after the IBO switched and I couldn't believe how fast they looked shot up. Not as fast as the makenzies but didn't last near as long as what they had hoped.i didn't see the quality we were promised.


----------



## Bubba Dean (Jun 2, 2005)

n2bows the only targets that were reused were on the practice and Sims. No used targets were used on the competition ranges(other than the targets that were shot in the team shoot if you call those used).


----------



## J Whittington (Nov 13, 2009)

Ive been a life long McKenzie target fan.However, I have to agree with Kent, they are Mc Junks. R&W makes a tuff target. Problem is I don't think they have the ability to manufactor enough targets to be major player. Rinehardts are better made too...I just don't like shooting them because I'm not familiar with them.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Deer Slayer I said:


> So tired of hearing how good rinehart targets are. Here is a pic from one of the targets I shot at gem city last year huge tapping hole between insert and body


That center seems wrong to begin with. And one instance? I'll take one over what McKenzie has put out for the last two years....


----------



## reylamb (Feb 5, 2003)

Deer Slayer I said:


> So tired of hearing how good rinehart targets are. Here is a pic from one of the targets I shot at gem city last year huge tapping hole between insert and body


Not being there.....it does look like one of the deer inserts was put in the cinnamon bear or medium brown bear, or whatever Rinehart calls that thing.


----------



## n2bows (May 21, 2002)

Bubba Dean,

From what we were told in the rep meeting in Florida. There is the posibility of having used targets on every range.


----------



## Bubba Dean (Jun 2, 2005)

Kelly trusted me there were no used targets on the ranges in Alabama. All 12 ranges were brand new.


----------



## Babyk (Jul 5, 2011)

ASA is getting record numbers of shooters to show up and they are using some used targets left from the last shoot??

Mike T must be feeling the pitch all that money rolling in from the lower class bottom feeders must not be enough so let's cut some corners and used some used targets 
Seems like to me ASA only cares about the Pro Classes only


----------



## bowjoe1800 (Sep 8, 2008)

Babyk said:


> ASA is getting record numbers of shooters to show up and they are using some used targets left from the last shoot??
> 
> Mike T must be feeling the pitch all that money rolling in from the lower class bottom feeders must not be enough so let's cut some corners and used some used targets
> Seems like to me ASA only cares about the Pro Classes only


What is wrong with used targets as long as there is a new core each tournament. Seems like a cost effective way to keep the entry fees down for all.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

J Whittington said:


> Ive been a life long McKenzie target fan.However, I have to agree with Kent, they are Mc Junks. R&W makes a tuff target. Problem is I don't think they have the ability to manufactor enough targets to be major player. Rinehardts are better made too...I just don't like shooting them because I'm not familiar with them.


Of course you do Jerry!W
Now lets get a group together and buy R&W. We then crank up production and get them spread across the Southeast. We then make a run at the ASA contract. We'll start by teaming with Sims and turn the Sims range into the Sims/R&W range. Basically make zero dollars and then sell R&W to the ASA for what we have in it with each owner getting two life time rights (free) to all ASA events plus $1000 for every event shoot we attend. I expect if R&W made enough targets McKenzie would buy them out and shut them down......... It's a no win situation, Delta McKJunk has Mike T. by the short hairs which means the ASA's customers just have to suck it up! There is zero we can do about it. The "Pro's" are not or rather can not complain due to McKJunks ties to the ASA and sponsors.

The fact is the ASA can't really put but so much, if any, pressure on such MAJOR sponsor. They pretty much have a partnership relationship with McKjunk have much greater resources.


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

The owners of Delta/McKenzie could be Half Of Your Trouble. lain:


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Kstigall said:


> Of course you do Jerry!W
> Now lets get a group together and buy R&W. We then crank up production and get them spread across the Southeast. We then make a run at the ASA contract. We'll start by teaming with Sims and turn the Sims range into the Sims/R&W range. Basically make zero dollars and then sell R&W to the ASA for what we have in it with each owner getting two life time rights (free) to all ASA events plus $1000 for every event shoot we attend. I expect if R&W made enough targets McKenzie would buy them out and shut them down......... It's a no win situation, Delta McKJunk has Mike T. by the short hairs which means the ASA's customers just have to suck it up! There is zero we can do about it. The "Pro's" are not or rather can not complain due to McKJunks ties to the ASA and sponsors.
> 
> The fact is the ASA can't really put but so much, if any, pressure on such MAJOR sponsor. They pretty much have a partnership relationship with McKjunk have much greater resources.


While we're being hypothetical...

Let's lobby for the two organizations to get together on some equipment rules that promote portability between them.

Then, let's get them to agree on a standard set of targets built from the same molds. ASA and IBO go together and design their own molds and make them (or their plans) available for purchase along with paint specs and material requirements for "official" targets. Manufacturers can buy the molds and all companies who own them can compete for the contracts. We could then buy different brands of targets that "look" the same. To play both games competitively, a man only needs to own one set of targets....and he would have different outlets to by the same target from. Let the best manufacturer win.

I'm dreaming.



sagecreek said:


> The owners of Delta/McKenzie could be Half Of Your Trouble. lain:


I feel similarly about their all-carbon arrows.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

McKenzie, Hoyt, East on....all the same company, right? 

Probably some others I don't know about.


----------



## reylamb (Feb 5, 2003)

sagecreek said:


> The owners of Delta/McKenzie could be Half Of Your Trouble. lain:


But Hoyt is owned by Easton.....so that is where the buck stops....so to speak.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Yesterday, Mike T announced;
" There are no new rules for ASA competition. We have a couple of new procedures on the pro range which only affects them.
[email protected] "


----------



## Pincher (Jul 20, 2013)

Deer Slayer I said:


> So tired of hearing how good rinehart targets are. Here is a pic from one of the targets I shot at gem city last year huge tapping hole between insert and body


 a last year model delta/mackenzie 10 ring area would have chunks out of it by now


----------

