# Tidbits from the NFAA Meeting in Vegas



## sweet old bill

Why year after year dow the NFAA lose members. Maybe this is why, the board in years past seemed to be the true sounding board to develop and suggest changes to the shooting rules as shooting tools change and or change to compound bows technology.

I sure was hoping to see some type of shoots that reduce the total targets to get you in and out within 2 hours. 

I also being 68 years young and just a hunter sure would love to see the yardage shot to 45 yards or under. 

I also use to love when in the older days of big following we had just very simple rules etc. 

I feel tha since the law now states Male / Female are equal.
There should be not special groups, lets shoot head to head with male and female.I also would like to see you just group by average after 3 shoots
no matter what you shoot. I just want to shoot with people that have my own skill level. I could care less if they in the past shot FS open FSBH or BH, change to having the groups by A class, B class , or C Class.

I use to love in the 1970's when we would finished a shoot there could be several shooters tied and have shoot off. Sure made you feel special.

Maybe have a final that at the end of the normal shoot any archer within 5 points of the top score gets to shoot off on 3 targets in the practice area so all the other archers can see the skilled archers shoot off for top shooter of the day.

The nearest NFAA club to me now is 1 1/2 away Oxford NY. Just check NY records from 1970 number of NFAA clubs to what you have last year. 80% or more less clubs.

Sure seems the changes that have made have not been the best for our sport.

Bill


----------



## Spoon13

Unclegus said:


> Just a couple of things I learned last nite....
> 
> 1. The agenda item to change the pro scoring to 6 for an X was defeated, then brought back up, defeated again. There MAY be a chance that it will come up again today, but to change the scoring for an X to count 6 for everyone.
> 2. The agenda item to do away with the walk ups quickly disappeared.
> 3. Our fearless leader had his own agenda item to do away with the yearly meetings because they were so costly, and let him and the council just run everything and use the directors as a sounding board was seen as nothing more than a power grab and defeated.


Thanks for the update. Please keep them coming.

Glad that 2 & 3 got knocked down. 

Personally the ONLY way the X=6 would be in the possibilty of a shoot-off. I think it would be exciting to see the top 5 have a shoot-off and you could use the X=6 then. But ONLY then if at all.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Unclegus said:


> 3. Our fearless leader had his own agenda item to do away with the yearly meetings because they were so costly, and let him and the council just run everything and use the directors as a sounding board was seen as nothing more than a power grab and defeated.


I had this figured out years back....


----------



## Jbird

*Agenda*

Glad 1 and 3 got voted down. Some of the walkups should be changed to single yardage because they are a waste of time. That's why most of the people I know prefer the Field over the Hunter round even though the Hunter face is easier to aim at.
Jbird


----------



## mag41vance

Jbird said:


> Glad 1 and 3 got voted down. Some of the walkups should be changed to single yardage because they are a waste of time. That's why most of the people I know prefer the Field over the Hunter round even though the Hunter face is easier to aim at.
> Jbird


 I like the walk-ups as is. It brings variety to a shoot especially shooting hunter class. It makes those Black face targets challenging. Separates the shooters that prepare and practice from the ones that get lucky.


----------



## Unclegus

Just goes to prove that you'll NEVER please everyone.....


----------



## frank_jones

*bhfs*



mag41vance said:


> I like the walk-ups as is. It brings variety to a shoot especially shooting hunter class. It makes those Black face targets challenging. Separates the shooters that prepare and practice from the ones that get lucky.


you should know by now that archery revolves around the freestylers.:smile:


----------



## frank_jones

*nfaa*

why not bring back the international round? should save some time..... once again ,when did america get in a hurry?


----------



## deadlyjest

*I'm glad*

I'm glad that all 3 were defeated and as far as the walkups it is the name of the game. I also believe that if we give the powere to the directors then dropping out of the NFAA is the only way we will ever get the power back, just like Penn. did


----------



## Unclegus

You bet. Once you give up something, you NEVER get it back unless it ends up in a fight. And when did America get in such a hurry? I wonder the same thing when I let off the gas when I see a red light ahead and every one around me has the pedal to the metal and runs up onto it and slams on their brakes.....Reminds me of lemmings mindlessly going over a cliff...


----------



## rock monkey

ok, a question or few about the leadership agenda item.....was this done as a 15 signature thing that was tried to be snuck under the radar?


----------



## Spoon13

rock monkey said:


> ok, a question or few about the leadership agenda item.....was this done as a 15 signature thing that was tried to be snuck under the radar?


Had to be. It wasn't in ANY of the lists of Agenda Items that I saw. Darn sure wasn't on the list posted on the NFAA website.


----------



## Jbird

*Walkups*

I'm not for eliminating ALL walkups, just the ones that add nothing to the round like the 19/17, 15/14, etc. Keep the 70 yard, 45 yd, etc. walkups. If you think moving from 19 to 17 yeards instead of shooting all 4 from 19 yards adds interest to the round then I guess I'm missing something that the "hunter class" has found. I have been perfectly happy shooting the rounds "as is" for 9 years and will continue to do so. That doesn't mean that the rules shouldn't be simplified and the rounds couldn't be tweaked to reflect the changes in equipment. The rules and format were developed back in the day where everyone shot barebow and fingers. 
Jbird


----------



## rock monkey

instead of eliminating them, why not change them?

with the speed factor of bows making the short game less sensitive to sight settings on the 15/14 and even the 19/17 and instead make it a 24/17 and a 19/13 on the 25cm hunter face.. you still have the walk-ups that people like in the game but takes the broad fudge factor thing out of the game. the appearance of the dot at the closer yardage gives the new to the game archers a mental positive and confidence booster.

just an idea for the next year.




Jbird said:


> I'm not for eliminating ALL walkups, just the ones that add nothing to the round like the 19/17, 15/14, etc. Keep the 70 yard, 45 yd, etc. walkups. If you think moving from 19 to 17 yeards instead of shooting all 4 from 19 yards adds interest to the round then I guess I'm missing something that the "hunter class" has found. I have been perfectly happy shooting the rounds "as is" for 9 years and will continue to do so. That doesn't mean that the rules shouldn't be simplified and the rounds couldn't be tweaked to reflect the changes in equipment. The rules and format were developed back in the day where everyone shot barebow and fingers.
> Jbird


----------



## rock monkey

this is one of the reasons why i wanted the 15signature thing removed.

every year we hear of an agenda item that's been tried to slip in under the radar.

i would like to know who was on the 15 signature list for this one. to me, that reeks of special interest politics.



Spoon13 said:


> Had to be. It wasn't in ANY of the lists of Agenda Items that I saw. Darn sure wasn't on the list posted on the NFAA website.


----------



## Jbird

*Makes Sense*



rock monkey said:


> instead of eliminating them, why not change them?
> 
> with the speed factor of bows making the short game less sensitive to sight settings on the 15/14 and even the 19/17 and instead make it a 24/17 and a 19/13 on the 25cm hunter face.. you still have the walk-ups that people like in the game but takes the broad fudge factor thing out of the game. the appearance of the dot at the closer yardage gives the new to the game archers a mental positive and confidence booster.
> 
> just an idea for the next year.




I like this idea.
Jbird


----------



## rock monkey

oooops, i made a typo.........

it should have been the 35cm face, not 25cm. there is no 25cm face.

sorry bout that. :doh:


----------



## JPE

rock monkey said:


> ok, a question or few about the leadership agenda item.....was this done as a 15 signature thing that was tried to be snuck under the radar?


I assumed he was talking about this item:

2. Constitution page 16. Submitted by Finance Committee code FC-1
Rationale: The cost of the annual meeting rises each year. If every other annual meeting could be held by
electronic means, or by mail voting the savings to the organization would be approximately $60,000 each time.
This could be done by e-mail, conference calls, mail voting or a secure webpage with password protection.

Proposed change: Annual Meeting. Revise to read:
1. The Board of Director shall meet at least annually, either in a physical meeting or electronic meeting at a
time and location designated by the Council. The meeting shall be set at a site most economical and prudent
to the members and state organizations. The Executive Secretary may solicit bids as necessary.


----------



## psargeant

rock monkey said:


> this is one of the reasons why i wanted the 15signature thing removed.
> 
> every year we hear of an agenda item that's been tried to slip in under the radar.
> 
> i would like to know who was on the 15 signature list for this one. to me, that reeks of special interest politics.


I'd like to know too...


----------



## rock monkey

no, my interpretation of point #3 from the OP was this one:
_3. Our fearless leader had his own agenda item to do away with the yearly meetings because they were so costly, and let him and the council just run everything and use the directors as a sounding board was seen as nothing more than a power grab and defeated.
_


i understand the need to be prudent with the funds and the use of a remote video&voice meeting thru a secure site be it a private room in skype, yahoo msgr or any commercial meeting software would be cheaper in the long run than buying plane tickets, room&board and the attendees making arrangements of their own personal schedules.

i'd even go for the buying of webcams&mics OR even a netbook on loan to the state reps from the home office to allow the state reps to conduct their nfaa business. yeah, i know.....the netbook idea leaves plenty of open doors for abuse.

i do think the yearly meeting in vegas is a no excuses, must attend event.






JPE said:


> I assumed he was talking about this item:
> 
> 2. Constitution page 16. Submitted by Finance Committee code FC-1
> Rationale: The cost of the annual meeting rises each year. If every other annual meeting could be held by
> electronic means, or by mail voting the savings to the organization would be approximately $60,000 each time.
> This could be done by e-mail, conference calls, mail voting or a secure webpage with password protection.
> 
> Proposed change: Annual Meeting. Revise to read:
> 1. The Board of Director shall meet at least annually, either in a physical meeting or electronic meeting at a
> time and location designated by the Council. The meeting shall be set at a site most economical and prudent
> to the members and state organizations. The Executive Secretary may solicit bids as necessary.


----------



## KStover

I don't mind the walk-ups but the fans seem like a waste of time. They are just a good way to screw up your arrows.

Keith


----------



## GOT LUCKY

rock monkey said:


> no, my interpretation of point #3 from the OP was this one:
> _3. Our fearless leader had his own agenda item to do away with the yearly meetings because they were so costly, and let him and the council just run everything and use the directors as a sounding board was seen as nothing more than a power grab and defeated.
> _
> 
> 
> i understand the need to be prudent with the funds and the use of a remote video&voice meeting thru a secure site be it a private room in skype, yahoo msgr or any commercial meeting software would be cheaper in the long run than buying plane tickets, room&board and the attendees making arrangements of their own personal schedules.
> 
> *i'd even go for the buying of webcams&mics OR even a netbook on loan to the state reps from the home office to allow the state reps to conduct their nfaa business. yeah, i know.....the netbook idea leaves plenty of open doors for abuse.*
> i do think the yearly meeting in vegas is a no excuses, must attend event.



*OHHHHH PLEEAASEEE HONEY....NICE TRY...but we just got them using the internet in the past two years...

Let's see how they "butcher" or "postpone" My Agenda Item #4 to "Create a Membership Committee" to promote the growth of the NFAA...

It should be coming up today.....*


----------



## Bruce K

Wouldn't it be better to start the changes to the international round IFAA , first , then change your rounds to suit , or do you guys just want to change things to suit yourselves ?

I can't understand why the nfaa has so many rules different to the IFAA .

Surely it would be better to keep both body's in line with each other


----------



## Unclegus

psargeant said:


> I'd like to know too...


I didn't look on the NFAA website for the agenda Items. I get mine from the NYFAB website and it's the first one on the list. Makes you wonder If it isn't on the NFAA webpage 

Just as a side note, yesterday at the meeting, when there was a roll call vote on an agenda item. The votes as counted by the secretary showed it passed. There were others keeping a tally too. Both had the same voting and they showed it failed. This was corrected from what I understand. Draw your own conclusions.........


----------



## KStover

*Item #4*

I agree with GOT LUCKY. Item #4 is to important to screw up. We must find a way to improve our attendance.

GOT LUCKY if this was your idea, then THANK YOU. 

Keith





GOT LUCKY said:


> *
> 
> Let's see how they "butcher" or "postpone" My Agenda Item #4 to "Create a Membership Committee" to promote the growth of the NFAA...
> 
> It should be coming up today.....*


----------



## rock monkey

we need to specify which items by their source because what the NFAA has is in a different order than what the NYFAB has listed. the NYFAB also lists the pro agenda items that are not part of the rank&file NFAA issues.


----------



## Spoon13

Unclegus said:


> I didn't look on the NFAA website for the agenda Items. I get mine from the NYFAB website and it's the first one on the list. Makes you wonder If it isn't on the NFAA webpage
> 
> Just as a side note, yesterday at the meeting, when there was a roll call vote on an agenda item. The votes as counted by the secretary showed it passed. There were others keeping a tally too. Both had the same voting and they showed it failed. This was corrected from what I understand. Draw your own conclusions.........


The item in question was submitted by the Finance Committee. FC-1 suggests that the cost of the annual meeting is approximately $60,000 and that the NFAA would like to consider an electronic meeting to cut costs.

It makes a lot of sense but the Agenda Item doesn't read "Dismantle the BOD and let us make the decisions."


----------



## GOT LUCKY

KStover said:


> I agree with GOT LUCKY. Item #4 is to important to screw up. We must find a way to improve our attendance.
> 
> GOT LUCKY if this was your idea, then THANK YOU.
> 
> Keith


*
Yes it was and I have been promoting it all year in my signature line below....:wink:

Sorry you missed a "Hummmm-Dinger" of a thread I started in GenPop last year after the Annual Meeting.....

Here you go.....when you have a few spare days to read...
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=856365*

.


----------



## Brown Hornet

frank_jones said:


> you should know by now that archery revolves around the freestylers.:smile:


Well when FS out # everyone by a landslide margin....:wink:


----------



## Spoon13

GOT LUCKY said:


> *
> Yes it was and I have been promoting it all year in my signature line below....:wink:
> 
> Sorry you missed a "Hummmm-Dinger" of a thread I started in GenPop last year after the Annual Meeting.....
> 
> Here you go.....when you have a few spare days to read...
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=856365*
> 
> .


It will take at LEAST that long to read it all. It was a rather engaging thread. Made me excited to come to work everyday for a while.


----------



## Unclegus

Spoon13 said:


> The item in question was submitted by the Finance Committee. FC-1 suggests that the cost of the annual meeting is approximately $60,000 and that the NFAA would like to consider an electronic meeting to cut costs.
> 
> It makes a lot of sense but the Agenda Item doesn't read "Dismantle the BOD and let us make the decisions."


Sorry I got that a little mixed up over the phone at four in the morning. I'll try to pay a little more attention, any way, It failed.....


----------



## GOT LUCKY

Unclegus said:


> Just a couple of things I learned last nite....
> 
> 1. The agenda item to change the pro scoring to 6 for an X was defeated, then brought back up, defeated again. There MAY be a chance that it will come up again today, but to change the scoring for an X to count 6 for everyone.
> 2. The agenda item to do away with the walk ups quickly disappeared.
> 3. Our fearless leader had his own agenda item to do away with the yearly meetings because they were so costly, and let him and the council just run everything and use the directors as a sounding board was seen as nothing more than a power grab and defeated.


*Gus this was rumored after the meeting last year and there were "assurances" given that they needed the State Director's input and this would never happen.....
""Give them an inch---You just lost a Mile""....can you say Dictator-Party of ONE?*

.


----------



## GOT LUCKY

Unclegus said:


> Sorry I got that a little mixed up over the phone at four in the morning. I'll try to pay a little more attention, any way, It failed.....


*We need a webcam at this meeting....Does Bruce have a boo-boo lip now?*

.


----------



## rock monkey

dont forget there's that emergency meeting trump card that likes to get played. remember that whole stink about arrow restrictions?


----------



## Unclegus

Yes, I remember the rumor. Maby that's where I got it from. I know the people in Vegas I talked to last nite just don't really trust the Yankton connection to give a fair accounting on the voting in an "electronic meeting".ukey:
I think just a matter of good business....But also pretty damn sad....


----------



## GOT LUCKY

*You put your right vote in,
You put your right vote out,
You put your vote in
And you shake it all about.
You do the Hokey Pokey
And you turn yourself around,
That's what it's all about....*

.


----------



## frank_jones

*score*

lets see if I understand this, an "x"=6 a possible score of 24 for a four "x" target. 24x28= 672 for a pefect score. a 672 sounds kinda funny to me. I like the idea of only using a six = "x" during a shoot off


----------



## Kstigall

Unclegus said:


> I didn't look on the NFAA website for the agenda Items. I get mine from the NYFAB website and it's the first one on the list. Makes you wonder If it isn't on the NFAA webpage
> 
> Just as a side note, yesterday at the meeting, when there was a roll call vote on an agenda item. The votes as counted by the secretary showed it passed. There were others keeping a tally too. Both had the same voting and they showed it failed. This was corrected from what I understand. Draw your own conclusions.........


I hope you're kidding! 

It's not over until the fat guy sings................... He can always call an "emergency" meeting after the nay votes have left Vegas. It's not like it hasn't been done before!


----------



## Spoon13

Unclegus said:


> Sorry I got that a little mixed up over the phone at four in the morning. I'll try to pay a little more attention, any way, It failed.....


I wasn't busting your stones. I may have quoted the wrong person in that reply. 

I was trying to clarify that there WAS an Agenda Item that referred to the Directors meeting but it was not in the same language of the one you said Bruce introduced.

I have no reason to believe that you are wrong. Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## Spoon13

Unclegus said:


> I didn't look on the NFAA website for the agenda Items. I get mine from the NYFAB website and it's the first one on the list. Makes you wonder If it isn't on the NFAA webpage
> 
> Just as a side note, yesterday at the meeting, when there was a roll call vote on an agenda item. The votes as counted by the secretary showed it passed. There were others keeping a tally too. Both had the same voting and they showed it failed. This was corrected from what I understand. Draw your own conclusions.........





rock monkey said:


> dont forget there's that emergency meeting trump card that likes to get played. remember that whole stink about arrow restrictions?





Unclegus said:


> Yes, I remember the rumor. Maby that's where I got it from. I know the people in Vegas I talked to last nite just don't really trust the Yankton connection to give a fair accounting on the voting in an "electronic meeting".ukey:
> I think just a matter of good business....But also pretty damn sad....





Kstigall said:


> I hope you're kidding!
> 
> It's not over until the fat guy sings................... He can always call an "emergency" meeting after the nay votes have left Vegas. It's not like it hasn't been done before!


ONE would think that with the current amount of distrust from the Directors and the Membership towards the Executive Council, that they would make extra sure that nothing could be construed as dishonest. 

Things that make you go, hmmmm.


----------



## GOT LUCKY

Spoon13 said:


> ONE would think that with the current amount of distrust from the Directors and the Membership towards the Executive Council, that they would make extra sure that nothing could be construed as dishonest.
> 
> Things that make you go, hmmmm.



*There you goooo....thinking again 

Now be a good little boy and go sit in the corner...:wink:*

.


----------



## Chequamegon

GOT LUCKY said:


> *You put your right vote in,
> You put your right vote out,
> You put your vote in
> And you shake it all about.
> You do the Hokey Pokey
> And you turn yourself around,
> That's what it's all about....*
> 
> .


That about sums up last years meeting:mg:

I have not even made 1/3 the way through this thread and my eyes are tearing up from laughing!


----------



## GOT LUCKY

Chequamegon said:


> That about sums up last years meeting:mg:
> 
> I have not even made 1/3 the way through this thread and my eyes are tearing up from laughing!


*WELCOME BACK...How Ya Been??....the whole gang is just about here waiting for the outcome of the meeting....*

.


----------



## 6X60

Bruce K said:


> Wouldn't it be better to start the changes to the international round IFAA , first , then change your rounds to suit , or do you guys just want to change things to suit yourselves ?
> 
> I can't understand why the nfaa has so many rules different to the IFAA .
> 
> Surely it would be better to keep both body's in line with each other


Perhaps it would be better but the NFAA, being some 30 or 40 years older than the IFAA, just isn't set up to run that way.

For decades before the IFAA was born the NFAA had a constitution and bylaws as an association of member states run by the state directors and councilmen.

There's no way they will ever give up that autonomy and fall in lock step with the IFAA.


----------



## 6X60

Unclegus said:


> Just a couple of things I learned last nite....
> 
> 1. The agenda item to change the pro scoring to 6 for an X was defeated, then brought back up, defeated again. There MAY be a chance that it will come up again today, but to change the scoring for an X to count 6 for everyone.
> 2. The agenda item to do away with the walk ups quickly disappeared.
> 3. Our fearless leader had his own agenda item to do away with the yearly meetings because they were so costly, and let him and the council just run everything and use the directors as a sounding board was seen as nothing more than a power grab and defeated.


I'm not keen on the x=6 for everyone but I think it sure would make sense for the pros.

It's time to do something to the round for the pro class. Something along the lines of championship stakes as in golf or the x=6 scoring is long overdue. Something to make it tougher so there's some give and take for the week. As it is now, especially with the do-over rounds, about all that matters for them is the animal round.


----------



## Jbird

*Really?*

"It's time to do something to the round for the pro class" 

And why is that?
The last time field archery changed because it "would help the pros" it cost us half our membership. There are any number of ways to handle who wins and how without another cluster like we had in the late 70's. Do you seriously think that the Nationals is not easily handled with counting X's and the dots on the animals? If not, take the 5 high scores at the end of the week and let them shoot off like the 3-D people do or the WAF does at Vegas. I really don't think we are close to having "too many 560's" be a problem with less than 5 per year being shot, do you? JMHO
Jbird

P.S. I used to look with disdain at the problems the Directors presented in getting anything meaningful done in the NFAA. But much like separation of powers in our government, they at least make it hard for a small group of people to screw up
the game we all love.


----------



## Brown Hornet

6X60 said:


> I'm not keen on the x=6 for everyone but I think it sure would make sense for the pros.
> 
> It's time to do something to the round for the pro class. Something along the lines of championship stakes as in golf or the x=6 scoring is long overdue. Something to make it tougher so there's some give and take for the week. As it is now, especially with the do-over rounds, about all that matters for them is the animal round.


Really......make it tougher. Just shot the first PERFECT round EVER....and it needs to be harder....and he shot his score on Wed and Thurs....didn't even shoot on Sun so he didn't use a do over :chortle: 

It is obviously tough enough for everyone other else....there was ONE 560 field......2 559s and 3 558s......and 2 560 hunter rounds....which has been done by several.

Like I said before.....your crazy if you think making the X is a 6 is going to change anything. :chortle:

This reminds me of when everyone thought golf was too easy for Tiger so they made all the courses longer and the greens faster and the rough deeper.....that worked real well also :chortle:


----------



## 6X60

Jbird said:


> "It's time to do something to the round for the pro class"
> 
> And why is that?
> The last time field archery changed because it "would help the pros" it cost us half our membership. There are any number of ways to handle who wins and how without another cluster like we had in the late 70's. Do you seriously think that the Nationals is not easily handled with counting X's and the dots on the animals? If not, take the 5 high scores at the end of the week and let them shoot off like the 3-D people do or the WAF does at Vegas. I really don't think we are close to having "too many 560's" be a problem with less than 5 per year being shot, do you? JMHO
> Jbird
> 
> P.S. I used to look with disdain at the problems the Directors presented in getting anything meaningful done in the NFAA. But much like separation of powers in our government, they at least make it hard for a small group of people to screw up
> the game we all love.


Read my post again. I didn't say anything about changing anything for the amatuers.

I'm not suggesting this because we have too many 560's being shot. I'm saying this because I've talked to several pros and what they've said to me is that the way things are you have to be perfect constantly. There is no room for error and no give and take. It's not good for the competition in the pro division.

Toughening the round up a bit to the point that no one could be perfect could give a guy a chance to get back in the game and make things interesting.

You're not ever going to have Joe Nobody winning Nationals but if you toughen the round a bit you could get a nice back and forth dogfight at the top.

Here's what Cuz said on his Facebook page earlier:

*Way to go NFAA keep living in the stone age! The pros need to use the X as 6 points on field and hunter rounds it's the international standard! Use the entire TARGET!!! But no they vote to keep it the same. Awesome can't wait for another 28 arrow nationals! IDIOTS*


----------



## 6X60

Brown Hornet said:


> Really......make it tougher. Just shot the first PERFECT round EVER....and it needs to be harder....and he shot his score on Wed and Thurs....didn't even shoot on Sun so he didn't use a do over :chortle:
> 
> It is obviously tough enough for everyone other else....there was ONE 560 field......2 559s and 3 558s......and 2 560 hunter rounds....which has been done by several.
> 
> Like I said before.....your crazy if you think making the X is a 6 is going to change anything. :chortle:
> 
> This reminds me of when everyone thought golf was too easy for Tiger so they made all the courses longer and the greens faster and the rough deeper.....that worked real well also :chortle:


Well, you can tell Dave it's a stupid idea. I agree with him.

And, the golf analogy is a good one. The pros have never used the same tees as the club members. Heck some, besides the standard white tees, use blue, black, gold and who knows what else. I don't see why having the pros shoot a pro round is a bad thing at all.


----------



## south-paaw

Keep me updated Lucky... you got my addy !! i'm not on AT enough anymore to follow this, but i am going to do my best.... but i don't want to miss any more ..." good voting "... or is it accounting..??... counting...???

and i applaud those that were listening last year... usage of the electronic age.... Kudos !!!


----------



## Jbird

*Riddle Me This*

What about having *everyone* shoot the expert round in place of the animal round and use the x's to sort everyone out?


----------



## Spoon13

Why not take a page out of the 3D book?? Take the top five shooters in the Pro class and have them shoot a five target shootdown. Use the X=6 then. That would allow shooters that were a point or two back to gain ground. Provided that the Leader doesn't shoot an X. Not only would it add another part that they have worry about, it might just give Field Archery the shot in the arm it needs by making the Pro Finals something that people WANT to see and creating excitement. 

But what do they know?? They only get 1300+ shooters at 7 events throughout the year.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## rock monkey

stop tryin to reinvent the wheel.

so a pro shot a clean field round. good, isnt that why they're on someone's staff? i'd like to see it more often. i'd like to see the shoot-off done. there's nothing wrong with the target, the scoring, the format or the rules. equipment is better, archers have more talent and can dedicate the time needed to get to the pinnacle they deserve. that is the only thing that HAS changed. the goal to shoot to the best of one's ability and to out shoot the others who have put the best of their ability on paper. that's what competitive archery is about.



the only reason i can figure out why they want to change it is because someone's feelings got hurt, someone who still is involved with the nfaa. someone said it would NEVER be possible to clean the 'new' targets. just like they said it would NEVER be possible to clean a vegas face.


----------



## GOT LUCKY

south-paaw said:


> Keep me updated Lucky... you got my addy !! i'm not on AT enough anymore to follow this, but i am going to do my best.... but i don't want to miss any more ..." good voting "... or is it accounting..??... counting...???
> 
> and i applaud those that were listening last year... usage of the electronic age.... Kudos !!!



*Will do Paaw....only problem is all I am hearing is the sound of **crickets** coming from the West....

I guess it is more of the usual ...""Tell them only what we want them to know, when and where we want them to know it...:sad:""

But heyyyyyyy....I'm a verrryyyyyy patient lady.....persistent.....but patient *
.


----------



## mdbowhunter

GOT LUCKY said:


> *Will do Paaw....only problem is all I am hearing is the sound of **crickets** coming from the West....
> 
> I guess it is more of the usual ...""Tell them only what we want them to know, when and where we want them to know it...:sad:""
> 
> But heyyyyyyy....I'm a verrryyyyyy patient lady.....persistent.....but patient *
> .


Morning MS LUCKY...any word on your agenda item?


----------



## Brown Hornet

6X60 said:


> Well, you can tell Dave it's a stupid idea. I agree with him.
> 
> And, the golf analogy is a good one. The pros have never used the same tees as the club members. Heck some, besides the standard white tees, use blue, black, gold and who knows what else. I don't see why having the pros shoot a pro round is a bad thing at all.


Dave knows how I feel :wink: 

They need to start all shooting better scores before they need to change the rules....we all laughed at Nationals when Jesse shot the FIRST clean round knowing that someone would want to make a change now to try and keep up....many a PRO told me that. Now there is a new king on the block and there is crying.... Just like the people that are crying about Jesse throwing his arrows into the FITA ring....

Stop missing and making dumb mistakes and others could shoot the better scores.:wink: Let's say that they counted an X as a 6...and say Dave actually shot enough Xs to be one back or tie Jesse...guess what he would have still finished 2 back because he dropped two more dots on the animal round :doh: 

Yes they have different tees in golf....but they all score the same and the # for par doesn't change...and the rules are the same....

If the X is counted as a 6 it needs to be counted as a 6 for everyone.


----------



## The Hood

has anything been changed? 


is it all about Pro's and no Joe's


The NFAA isn't Mathews Solo Cam and no matter what they try to do with the Pro's They will never Catch up....Inless they start working with the Thousands of Joe's on the WWW.

and that is so easy to do!


----------



## GOT LUCKY

mdbowhunter said:


> Morning MS LUCKY...any word on your agenda item?



*NOPE....the crickets are still chirping out there....

I fired off a couple of e-mails this morning to two Directors who have been involved....will let you know what I hear...

You would think that they would be past Item #4 by now??...but maybe not...I might have stumped them and they are still :kev:*

.


----------



## GOT LUCKY

The Hood said:


> has anything been changed?
> 
> 
> is it all about Pro's and no Joe's
> 
> 
> The NFAA isn't Mathews Solo Cam and no matter what they try to do with the Pro's *They will never Catch up....Inless they start working with the Thousands of Joe's on the WWW.*
> and that is so easy to do!



*HOOD.....open a window...those paint fumes are getting to you.....*

.


----------



## The Hood

it's cold to open the windows!


NFAA MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE is all it would take to get the web rolling with the Joe's.........


----------



## 6X60

Brown Hornet said:


> Dave knows how I feel :wink:
> 
> They need to start all shooting better scores before they need to change the rules....we all laughed at Nationals when Jesse shot the FIRST clean round knowing that someone would want to make a change now to try and keep up....many a PRO told me that. Now there is a new king on the block and there is crying.... Just like the people that are crying about Jesse throwing his arrows into the FITA ring....
> 
> Stop missing and making dumb mistakes and others could shoot the better scores.:wink: Let's say that they counted an X as a 6...and say Dave actually shot enough Xs to be one back or tie Jesse...guess what he would have still finished 2 back because he dropped two more dots on the animal round :doh:
> 
> Yes they have different tees in golf....but they all score the same and the # for par doesn't change...and the rules are the same....
> If the X is counted as a 6 it needs to be counted as a 6 for everyone.


Actually, that's not true at all. It's not unusual for a hole that is a par 5 for members to be played as a par 4 for the pros.

Yes, the rules of golf are the same for everyone. But, the course is quite different for the pros. The length of the course, the length of the rough, the speed of the greens all tougher. Often the course bears little remsemblence to the course the members play. Why should field archery be any different? 

Even the 3Ders are bright enough to have the pros shoot longer distances than the amatuers.


----------



## rock monkey

anything new from the mushroom factory today/last night?


----------



## steve morley

Bruce K said:


> Wouldn't it be better to start the changes to the international round IFAA , first , then change your rounds to suit , or do you guys just want to change things to suit yourselves ?
> 
> I can't understand why the nfaa has so many rules different to the IFAA .
> 
> Surely it would be better to keep both body's in line with each other


I agree, some Americans obviously want to take part in IFAA international Field and Bowhunter events, if the NFAA make changes to far removed from the IFAA rules your guys will be at a disadvantage in international shoots.

An example being Longbows not shooting past 50y in NFAA, will be a big shock when they go to an IFAA event and presented with the the 70 and 80 yard walkup lol


----------



## Brown Hornet

6X60 said:


> Actually, that's not true at all. It's not unusual for a hole that is a par 5 for members to be played as a par 4 for the pros.
> 
> Yes, the rules of golf are the same for everyone. But, the course is quite different for the pros. The length of the course, the length of the rough, the speed of the greens all tougher. Often the course bears little remsemblence to the course the members play. Why should field archery be any different?
> 
> Even the 3Ders are bright enough to have the pros shoot longer distances than the amatuers.


What the heck kind of courses do you play? Yes there may be a few holes on certain courses that maybe a 4/5 but the vast majority are just stretched out....I know the PGA courses I have been on have been. The yardage thing your harping on is a bit silly really....you can't expect a 65 year old guy to play from the same tees as Sergio and Phil...arrows from my bow goes as far as or farther then Bradens do. 

3D has different yardages because of the hunter mentality that they can only shoot 30yds....and sorry but your not 100% correct the amatures can and do shoot the same yardages as the PROs...ASA Pros share a course with Open A :wink: Open B shoots with the kinda Pros :wink: 

Either way the scoring is still the same....just like in golf....is a TD worth 8 points in the NFL and 6 in college?

You can make the course different/harder on a golf course....you can make the MLB fields bigger....you can change the oil pattern on a PBA lane....but the scoring is still the same.

The best archer is gonna kick everyones but on a tough course or an easy course....scoring the X or not scoring the X. This isn't tee ball were everyone gets a chance to win just because they paid their money. Counting the X as a 6 isn't going to change anything....it will just give a couple of guys a new record to set. 

Speaking of 3D....do you like how they added a 14 ring to give guys a chance....what happened Levi, Jeff and Dan still beat the chit out of everyone and now there back to normal. :doh:

The person complaining the most for the X to be a 6 screwed the pooch by not setting his sight and shooting a 3 then doing it again the next day and shot a 4....then not shooting enough animal dots....counting Xs as 6 wouldn't have done anything to his position or chances...

There is no 11 in FITA...guess he will want that after his indoor record goes down....

Like he said....times change yep they do and don't get mad Cuz your not the Big Dawg on the porch anymore. Get out there and practice more....you still have the talent to win. Do it....


----------



## BOWGOD

Even if they did adopt the X=6 rule how long would it take for SOME pro's to cry foul because they lost to someone who shot two 4's, and a 3, but had a higher X count.

Just doesn't make any sense that way. He who misses the dot the least wins. Jesse has proved you can shoot clean. Cuz could do it, Reo could do it, Braden could do it, ect...... Time for these other boys to step up their game. We all know that any of the top pros are capable. Jesse doesn't have magic pixi dust he sprinkles on his arrows. 

I for one would be more pissed about loosing an event in which I shot a clean 560 to a guy who shot a 558, but shot 3 more X's than I did. ( After all he MISSED the dot twice so is he really the better shooter?) Than loosing because I shot a 559, and someone else shot a 560.

The game is simple he who makes the least amount of mistakes wins. There isn't anyone shooting at the top of the pro ranks who isn't capable of shooting a 560 field round.


----------



## mw31

6X60 said:


> I'm not suggesting this because we have too many 560's being shot. I'm saying this because I've talked to several pros and what they've said to me is that the way things are you have to be perfect constantly. There is no room for error and no give and take. It's not good for the competition in the pro division.


This is no different than indoor nationals where if they miss an x they are pretty much out of it, or vegas by missing a ten.


----------



## Scott.Barrett

How about we get some longer "tees" in Field for the Pros? Maybe add 5 or 10 yards to everything....then you just have to put a few more stakes in the ground and we're good to go....


----------



## BOWGOD

Scott.Barrett said:


> How about we get some longer "tees" in Field for the Pros? Maybe add 5 or 10 yards to everything....then you just have to put a few more stakes in the ground and we're good to go....


Don't matter who ever shoots the week with the least mistakes is still going to win. Do you think just because you add 5 yards all of a sudden Jesse isn't going to be able to hit the dot?

I think it is hilarious that the NFAA has been shooting this same format for the last 30+ years, now all of a sudden since 1 person shot clean it's now too easy. Hell Jesse was on fire that week, and even he couldn't clean the field round the second attempt.

Heck while they're at it might as well shrink the Vegas face by 30% that round has gotten way too easy with the way everyone has been cleaning it. Might as well just drop the 5 spot face while they're at it. I don't know a pro alive who can't shoot 60X with their eyes closed so that format has become waaaaaaay to easy.

As far as I am concerned none of these games are easy. They all take discipline, and extreme amounts of talent to master. As for the comment of "the way things are you have to be perfect constantly. There is no room for error" I thought that was the name of the game. If your not trying to shoot perfect consistently then you need to get the hell out of the pro ranks, because you don't belong there.


----------



## rock monkey

yeah, make em pink




Scott.Barrett said:


> How about we get some longer "tees" in Field for the Pros? Maybe add 5 or 10 yards to everything....then you just have to put a few more stakes in the ground and we're good to go....


----------



## GOT LUCKY

*Just a update for today folks.....

I have sent 3 e-mails out to try and get us some news...any news....heck.....check to see if they are all still alive out there and haven't heard back yet.

Hoping they have not enforced a gag rule and taken everyone's cells and blackberrys...:sad:

Just as soon as I get any news....you will hear it first right here...:wink:

Do I dare ask for the membership numbers???....*

.


----------



## Ron Meadows

All of this just because no one can beat Jesse. If I were him I'd be off somewhere laughing my arse off, or lamenting the fact that no one wants to put in the work to give me a run for it at Nationals.


----------



## reylamb

Brown Hornet said:


> 3D has different yardages because of the hunter mentality that they can only shoot 30yds....and sorry but your not 100% correct the amatures can and do shoot the same yardages as the PROs...ASA Pros share a course with Open A :wink: Open B shoots with the kinda Pros :wink:
> .


Close, but not exactly. 

Pros shoot A/B. and they are the only ones on those ranges now, plus the K-50 guys.

Sorta Pro and Open A shoot C/D. They also re-stake to keep the Open A guys at their 45 yard-ish max.

Your point remains, change things and the top dogs will still be the top dogs......


----------



## Brown Hornet

reylamb said:


> Close, but not exactly.
> 
> Pros shoot A/B. and they are the only ones on those ranges now, plus the K-50 guys.
> 
> Sorta Pro and Open A shoot C/D. They also re-stake to keep the Open A guys at their 45 yard-ish max.
> 
> Your point remains, change things and the top dogs will still be the top dogs......


oh yeah I forgot they added the K50 and K45 and changed things a touch it's been a while since I was on the trail


----------



## GOT LUCKY

*Just got word.....

My Agenda Item to "Create a Membership Committee for the growth of the NFAA" came out of the Council Committee on Sunday with a recommendation of "No Action".

It came to the floor of all the Directors on Monday and it Failed for the lack of a 2nd.

I have been told that I would have to resubmit in 2 years as the meeting has now been changed to every 2 years due to the cost.

Got news for them...I can not/ will not support a Organization that will not create a membership committee to promote it's own growth...*

.


----------



## rock monkey

http://www.nfaa-archery.org/about/info.cfm
The NFAA is dedicated to the conservation and preservation of game and its natural habitat. The organiation is very active in cooperating with federal and state agencies and sportsmen and conservation organizations. _*It is resolved to foster, perpetuate and preserve*_ "the use of the bow in accordance with its ancient and honorable traditions.


lyin sacks of ****. they cant even figure out if they want to promote themselves let alone how. congratulations, you've just turned a fine game into a joke because of pinheaded management. the directors that have the aggots to get a feel from the bill paying public, not included.


learn it, know it, fear it.
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/22900.html


----------



## rock monkey

how many secret squirrel votes were there this time?


----------



## GOT LUCKY

*Thanks for posting that RM....I am going to use it as I'm starting a new thread over in GENPOP...

The NFAA has declined to Create a Membership Committee to Promote it's Growth....let the discussion begin....

I'll post the link back over here once I have it up....

Truly a Sad Day....:sad:...as I had hopes that they would do the right thing....*

.


----------



## GOT LUCKY

*Here is the link to my thread over in GENPOP for discussion...

The NFAA has declined to “Create a Membership Committee” to Promote its Growth.....

I have requested the membership numbers provided at the meeting.....*

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1057059226#post1057059226

.


----------



## bowsmith

> 7. To be considered for the office of President or Vice President, the candidate must have
> served as NFAA State Director or NFAA Councilman.


Where's OBT when ya need him.....


----------



## rock monkey

a secret squirrel, 15signature agenda item with an emergency meeting can change that " 7. To be considered for the office of President or Vice President, the candidate must have served as NFAA State Director or NFAA Councilman." to '7. To be considered for the office of President or Vice President, the candidate must have served as NFAA President.'

funny how the changing of just a couple of words can make a real big difference in how things work. if they snuck it in there, it would be denied as an editing error.


----------



## knarrly

Same rules for everyone, lets you see how much you can improve. Bell shaped curves suck.


I shoot because I like it and want to get better, Will I ever clean a field round...............unlikely but that doesn't mean I should stop trying, It could happen


----------



## The Hood

bowsmith said:


> Where's OBT when ya need him.....


he told me how he felt yesterday...not to happy with how things are ran


----------



## rock monkey

i bet i know who he was on the phone with and about what time that was :set1_rolf2:


The Hood said:


> he told me how he felt yesterday...not to happy with how things are ran


----------



## GOT LUCKY

bowsmith said:


> Where's OBT when ya need him.....



*Remember....he walked away from that table in Vegas shaking his head in dismay...:sad:*

.


----------



## Hutnicks

Unclegus said:


> Just a couple of things I learned last nite....
> 
> 1. The agenda item to change the pro scoring to 6 for an X was defeated, then brought back up, defeated again. There MAY be a chance that it will come up again today, but to change the scoring for an X to count 6 for everyone.
> 2. The agenda item to do away with the walk ups quickly disappeared.
> 3. Our fearless leader had his own agenda item to do away with the yearly meetings because they were so costly, and let him and the council just run everything and use the directors as a sounding board was seen as nothing more than a power grab and defeated.



Tough Break, and after it worked so well in Germany in 1933.


----------



## alphabet

*Changes to the field round.*

I don't see any reason to change anything on the Field/Hunter rounds. Why would you want them shorter? Why eliminate targets? Every target at the end of the day has 4's and 3's on it so we are all not that great, and if you hit the close ones all the time it shouldn't take that long to shoot them and it's a good confidence booster.

I wouldn't change the walk ups at all. No matter how close or how far. It gives you different footing and you need to remember to change your sight. This is a DISCIPLINE sport isn't it. 

Whats the longest it takes, 5 hours at the most. If you can't spend that kind of time doing something you enjoy then you need to ask if you really enjoy doing it. 

And changing the X to a 6. I'm not allowed to type what I think of that


----------



## field14

alphabet said:


> I don't see any reason to change anything on the Field/Hunter rounds. Why would you want them shorter? Why eliminate targets? Every target at the end of the day has 4's and 3's on it so we are all not that great, and if you hit the close ones all the time it shouldn't take that long to shoot them and it's a good confidence booster.
> 
> I wouldn't change the walk ups at all. No matter how close or how far. It gives you different footing and you need to remember to change your sight. This is a DISCIPLINE sport isn't it.
> 
> Whats the longest it takes, 5 hours at the most. If you can't spend that kind of time doing something you enjoy then you need to ask if you really enjoy doing it.
> 
> And changing the X to a 6. I'm not allowed to type what I think of that


There ya go! In addition every shooter gets to shoot 112 scoring shots...in LESS TIME than in some other venues it takes to shoot 40 shots!

Of course...."they" in the other venues ain't in no hurry...they are there to chat with their friends and have fun, so what's the RUSH? 

That is UNTIL it is about shooting "field"...and then, suddendly those same folks want to SHORTEN IT UP and shoot FEWER arrows, cuz "it takes too long" to shoot a field round of 112 arrows in 5 hours or less."

Isn't it a bit hypocritical...40 shots in 6 hours time on the range vs. 112 shots in 5 hours...and the 112 arrow round "takes too long."/???

field14 (Tom D.)


----------

