# You might find this interesting



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Interesting......

I know that I usually shoot higher hunter halfs then I do field.....:noidea:

I like shooting the field round more though.:wink:


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

Actually my best half is on a Field round. My "old eyes" can just "focus" better on the Field targets. :wink:


----------



## mdbowhunter (Oct 22, 2002)

pragmatic_lee said:


> And "who says" the Hunter round is "that much easier" than the Field round? :wink: Pros actually averaged lower on the Field round.


I don't know. I guess removing those two shots at 80 yards is supposed to make it a whole bunch easier. 

I too have shot my best scores on the Hunter Round. Guess I like gaping with pins on that black face. :tongue:


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

mdbowhunter said:


> I don't know. I guess removing those two shots at 80 yards is supposed to make it a whole bunch easier.
> 
> I too have shot my best scores on the Hunter Round. Guess I like gaping with pins on that black face. :tongue:


2 arrows shot a few yards closer doesn't make it easier....I actually think the hunter 70 is easier JUST because the shots are closer together....you can get in more of a groove. But when I miss on that target 95% of the time it's just the 80. But I wish there was an actual 80 and a 70 yd station.:wink:

But overall the hunter round is shot from closer distances and to me the hunter face is less distracting...therefore I score higher on it.


----------



## rudeman (Jan 25, 2006)

I'm sure someone already wrote the answer somewhere, but what target did Jesse "miss" on the Field??!? Just curious.


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

rudeman said:


> I'm sure someone already wrote the answer somewhere, but what target did Jesse "miss" on the Field??!? Just curious.


I "think" it was the 35' on the birdie, but don't quote me on that.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

rudeman said:


> I'm sure someone already wrote the answer somewhere, but what target did Jesse "miss" on the Field??!? Just curious.



The close one:wink:

That bunny gets everyone sooner or later:doh:


----------



## mdbowhunter (Oct 22, 2002)

Brown Hornet said:


> 2 arrows shot a few yards closer doesn't make it easier....I actually think the hunter 70 is easier JUST because the shots are closer together....you can get in more of a groove. But when I miss on that target 95% of the time it's just the 80. But I wish there was an actual 80 and a 70 yd station.:wink:
> 
> But overall the hunter round is shot from closer distances and to me the hunter face is less distracting...therefore I score higher on it.


I hear ya. Just not sure why the Hunter Round is considered easier. To me, it has a lotta give and take shots which make it equally difficult. The 53 WU and 32 Fan feature the longest yardage per spot size of any NFAA round ...but the 58 WU gives you that nice big 65 cm dot at 45 yards. :tongue: And, that 32 Fan is one of the most maddening targets you can shoot.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

mdbowhunter said:


> I hear ya. Just not sure why the Hunter Round is considered easier. To me, it has a lotta give and take shots which make it equally difficult. The 53 WU and 32 Fan feature the longest yardage per spot size of any NFAA round ...but the 58 WU gives you that nice big 65 cm dot at 45 yards. :tongue: And, that 32 Fan is one of the most maddening targets you can shoot.


I think you will see why I like that round more once you complete the switch.:wink:


----------



## sharkred7 (Jul 19, 2005)

I find the hunter round more challenging because I don't "gap" pins. I like to focus on a spot and there are more reference points on the field face.

I averaged almost 9 points higher on field rounds than hunter rounds in competition this year. One of the reasons is the other reason this round is not as easy as it seems. There are MORE opportunities to make a mistake and mis-set sights, shoot wrong targets and use the wrong pin:embara: I shot 2 zeros at our state shoot on the hunter round. Thats 10 points you can never get back.
John


----------



## Hinkelmonster (Oct 25, 2004)

Here's the difference per target face:

65cm face

80 70 60 50 - 260 vs. 70 65 61 58 - 254
65 65 65 65 - 260 vs. 64 59 55 52 - 230
60 60 60 60 - 240 vs. 58 53 48 45 - 204
55 55 55 55 - 220

TOTAL - 980 TOTAL - 688 

50 cm face

50 50 50 50 - 200 vs. 53 48 44 41 - 186
45 45 45 45 - 180 vs. 48 48 48 48 - 192
45 40 35 30 - 150 vs. 44 44 44 44 - 176
40 40 40 40 - 160 vs. 40 40 40 40 - 160
35 35 35 35 - 140 vs. 36 36 36 36 - 144

TOTAL - 830 TOTAL - 858

30 cm face

30 30 30 30 - 120 vs. 32 32 32 32 - 128
25 25 25 25 - 100 vs. 28 28 28 28 - 112
20 20 20 20 - 80 vs 23 23 20 20 - 86
15 15 15 15 - 60 vs. 19 19 17 17 - 72
15 15 14 14 - 58 

TOTAL - 360 vs. TOTAL - 456 

20 cm face

35 30 25 20 - 110 vs. 33 33 33 33 - 132


2206 total yards for FIELD 

2046 total yards for HUNTER

but the breakdown by target size shows that the Hunter face is typically further than Field


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

Dang, I have to write a computer program to come up with a few "interesting" numbers. Hinky justs sits down and pulls "factual" numbers out of his head.
:wink:

Maybe it's his "facts" that made my numbers "interesting" (to me anyway).


----------



## psargeant (Aug 1, 2004)

I tend to shoot the Hunter round better, but it isn't because of the shorter distance (as Hinky illustrated, on the smaller faces, its actually further)...for me, I tend to be more relaxed aiming at the whiter dot than the black...I just seem to focus on it better, and therefore seem to have an easier time drilling it...I shoot better x-counts on the hunter as well...


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

psargeant said:


> *I tend to shoot the Hunter round better*, but it isn't because of the shorter distance (as Hinky illustrated, on the smaller faces, its actually further)...for me, I tend to be more relaxed aiming at the whiter dot than the black...I just seem to focus on it better, and therefore seem to have an easier time drilling it...I shoot better x-counts on the hunter as well...


So THAT'S why S+W is going to be set up with Hunter targets "again". J/K - I know you got a lot to do between now and Sat. and changing 14 targets is probably one of the least important. :wink:


----------



## psargeant (Aug 1, 2004)

pragmatic_lee said:


> So THAT'S why S+W is going to be set up with Hunter targets "again". J/K - I know you got a lot to do between now and Sat. and changing 14 targets is probably one of the least important. :wink:


Actually I think we are on the schedule Saturday with a field round...(thank goodness...that is what is already hanging)...with soccer camp this week and kick off day Saturday, not sure when I would have had time to hang new targets...just gotta check for shot up targets now....


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

psargeant said:


> Actually I think we are on the schedule Saturday with a field round...(thank goodness...that is what is already hanging)...with soccer camp this week and kick off day Saturday, not sure when I would have had time to hang new targets...just gotta check for shot up targets now....


You're correct - schedule says "Field" - my badd. Want to make the "same" crispy wager as last time I was at S+W? :tongue:


----------



## psargeant (Aug 1, 2004)

pragmatic_lee said:


> You're correct - schedule says "Field" - my badd. Want to make the "same" crispy wager as last time I was at S+W? :tongue:


I let you sandbag one...it ain't happening again...now if you want to spot me 20...I'll take it...I may be bringing out a different bow (If I can get it put together in time)...so I might just need the points...


----------



## WrongdayJ (May 22, 2008)

psargeant said:


> . . .I tend to shoot the Hunter round better...for me, I tend to be more relaxed aiming at the whiter dot than the black...I just seem to focus on it better, and therefore seem to have an easier time drilling it...I shoot better x-counts on the hunter as well...


Me too. I don't know why. I shoot about 8-10 points better on the Hunter half than the Field half. 

Odd.


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

psargeant said:


> I let you sandbag one...it ain't happening again...now if you want to spot me 20...I'll take it...*I may be bringing out a different bow* (If I can get it put together in time)...so I might just need the points...


Shoot what you bring, but no excuses. :wink: BTW: You're the one that set the "crispy rules" at that first meeting - I was just happy to oblige you. :tongue:

Now get on the phone and get some folks to commit to being there - sure hate to beat you and no one else be there to witness it.


----------



## Rattleman (Jul 6, 2004)

Hinkelmonster said:


> Here's the difference per target face:
> 
> 65cm face
> 
> ...





pragmatic_lee said:


> No, I didn't plug in all the numbers from the NFAA final National's results. I'm a computer programmer by trade, so I wrote a little program to do some analysis of the scores.
> 
> And "who says" the Hunter round is "that much easier" than the Field round? :wink: Pros actually averaged lower on the Field round.
> 
> ...


DO YOU GUYS EVER DO ANY WORK???? By the way great shooting at the Nats Mr. Hinkleman:wink:


----------



## Hinkelmonster (Oct 25, 2004)

Rattleman said:


> DO YOU GUYS EVER DO ANY WORK???? By the way great shooting at the Nats Mr. Hinkleman:wink:


NO and Thanks !!!!!!


----------



## tabarch (Sep 20, 2006)

I have to agree with the SARGE, I seem to focus better or see the hunter targets better than I do the field targets,[ my eyes are getting a little weak] where ever I shoot I almost always come out and shoot a better round on the Hunter targets.
Terry


----------



## jarlicker (Jul 29, 2002)

Prag I guess you little calculations were the 15 top scores, not 15 top shooters.

Cause if 547 average in AMFS is depressing me.

Those averages are some amazing scores.

Hinky loves the Hunter round. He averages like 2-3 point less on Field.
So any of you young wipper snappers out there want a shot at the man. Bring it shooting Field. Cause you dont got a shot in hell of getting him on hunter. LOL.

Jarlicker likes the Field Round better. This years averages for each are about the same.

I shot nine dots on the animals last night on 14 targets. That tied my best dot score.


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

jarlicker said:


> Prag I guess you little calculations were the 15 top scores, not 15 top shooters.
> 
> Cause if 547 average in AMFS is depressing me.
> 
> ...


Yes, I used the numbers for the archers that turned in the top 15 scores. 

And as far as those 9 dots on the animals, was anyone else there to witness it. :wink: Heck, wasn't it 8 you hit last Sat.?


----------



## The Swami (Jan 16, 2008)

I will venture a guess to why the hunter might be more difficult for some and why your math says what it says...

There are more long walkups in the hunter round than in the field round. Does that make it easier for the average archer? It may not and I will explain why below...

Depending on how the course is designed and how the terrain is, you could be taking a very different shot on each yardage of a walkup target in a field or hunter round. Just because each shot is on the same target doesn't mean you shoot all of them the same, especially at longer ranges. You might have more of an angle to shoot or less. One yardage, you may have to give it some bubble, the next shot you don't. You may have different lighting for each shot too. There are other things too.

In a field round, you are shooting all 4 arrows from one yardage a lot of the time, so you can learn from your first shot. Most of the time you shoot the same shot 4 times except for maybe when you have wind or rain that may change how you shoot etc. 

There are more things to factor into your shot in field archery other than the yardage.

I am not a very experienced field archer, but I am using what I have experienced with some Swami Logic to come up with my explanation.


----------



## PA Dutch (Jan 27, 2003)

*Another way to look at it...*

Here's another way to look at it based solely on numbers, and not other intangibles. I simply took the target distance over the target face diameter for each arrow to develop a "difficulty rating" for each arrow. The higher the number the more difficult. The rating (3rd highest across Field and Hunter rounds) for the 32 yard fan on the Hunter round confirms what we already know, it's a tough target.


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

PA Dutch said:


> Here's another way to look at it based solely on numbers, and not other intangibles. I simply took the target distance over the target face diameter for each arrow to develop a "difficulty rating" for each arrow. The higher the number the more difficult. The rating (3rd highest across Field and Hunter rounds) for the 32 yard fan on the Hunter round confirms what we already know, it's a tough target.


But you didn't factor in the diameter of the arrow :wink:

Good job - at least when we're at work and not able to shoot we can play the numbers game - it's more fun than arguing over who got 3rd place (and how they got it) :tongue::zip:


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

The Swami said:


> I will venture a guess to why the hunter might be more difficult for some and why your math says what it says...
> 
> There are more long walkups in the hunter round than in the field round. Does that make it easier for the average archer? It may not and I will explain why below...
> 
> ...



Your logic is spot on there Swami....at least it makes sense to me. I used to struggle with the hunter round because I never shot it in "practice". The change ever other shot always got my goat....then I found my way around that problem....it was all mental....I just didn't like moving because the fan and the 45wu are my worst targets on the field round. I love the 80 wu because it is 80 yds so that one never bothered me. 

But since I have started focusing on just making the best shot I can with each arrow....even with ZERO practice on the hunter....I have shot a higher round ever time this year then I do on the field half.


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

All these numbers, so how many perfect scores have been recorded?

Field ?
Hunter?
Animal? 

how about FITA???


----------



## 60Xbulldog60X (Mar 12, 2005)

Bees said:


> All these numbers, so how many perfect scores have been recorded?
> 
> Field ?
> Hunter?
> ...


Field ? 0
Hunter? 5-8???
Animal? 0

how about FITA??? 0


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Alright, I'm afraid I'm going to have to move this one to the GEEK forum:


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Hutnicks said:


> Alright, I'm afraid I'm going to have to move this one to the GEEK forum:


Don't go moving anything to the White Pants Forum:wink:


----------



## swerve (Jun 5, 2005)

Hutnicks said:


> Alright, I'm afraid I'm going to have to move this one to the GEEK forum:


Hutty you should be just getting comfortable


----------



## Dave T (Mar 24, 2004)

LOL - If you guys would go back to shooting real bows with your fingers and no sights you wouldn't worry so much about all those numbers. You could just relax and shoot. (smiley face goes here)

Dave
Barebow Recurve Shooter


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

Dave T said:


> LOL - If you guys would go back to shooting real bows with your fingers and no sights you wouldn't worry so much about all those numbers. You could just relax and shoot. (smiley face goes here)
> 
> Dave
> Barebow Recurve Shooter


If you'd get a real computer you could just click the smiley icon instead of typing "(smiley face goes here)" :tongue:

J/K Dave, but I got to wonder, are you on an IBM mainframe?


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

pragmatic_lee said:


> If you'd get a real computer you could just click the smiley icon instead of typing "(smiley face goes here)" :tongue:
> 
> J/K Dave, but I got to wonder, are you on an IBM mainframe?


PDP/11 get's my vote:


I'm telling you guys if the boneheads at the Manufacturing Reigns ever clue in and start marketing to the GEEK crowd we wont have to hear all this nonsense about recruiting from bowhunting to fill the sport. We are drawn to archery like physicsts to bicycles, no wait the Groves Spitfire was designed with the help of Oppenheimer & Co. at Los Alamos.

*LOOK OUT BUBBA, GEEKS RULE!*


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

Hutnicks said:


> PDP/11 get's my vote:
> 
> 
> I'm telling you guys if the boneheads at the Manufacturing Reigns ever clue in and start marketing to the GEEK crowd we wont have to hear all this nonsense about recruiting from bowhunting to fill the sport. We are drawn to archery like physicsts to bicycles, no wait the Groves Spitfire was designed with the help of Oppenheimer & Co. at Los Alamos.
> ...


PDP-11???? Man you're showing your age. The first computer I ever worked with was built by a group of renegades from DEC. They built a 6 bit system with 16K RAM and converted some PDP-11 software to run on it. Biggest issue was that a complied program (HIBOL) could be no larger than 64K. My wireless mouse driver today is over 4 MEG. 

And if it wasn't for NASA, Sticky would have a buckle on his new release instead of Velcro.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

pragmatic_lee said:


> PDP-11???? Man you're showing your age. The first computer I ever worked with was built by a group of renegades from DEC. They built a 6 bit system with 16K RAM and converted some PDP-11 software to run on it. Biggest issue was that a complied program (HIBOL) could be no larger than 64K. My wireless mouse driver today is over 4 MEG.
> 
> And if it wasn't for NASA, Sticky would have a buckle on his new release instead of Velcro.


Binging back memories. Dec's original CPM or MSDOS Rainbow, and the oh so powerful PRO 350.

Sent a guy looking all over an internationally renowned university up here looking for a Novell server. They were running Netware VMS


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

Hutnicks said:


> Binging back memories. Dec's original CPM or MSDOS Rainbow, and the oh so powerful PRO 350.
> 
> Sent a guy looking all over an internationally renowned university up here looking for a Novell server. They were running *Netware VMS*


Any OS/2 systems attached to it? We still have 4 or 5 OS/2 systems up and running - as a matter of fact, a core portion of our business is run on those systems. They just sit there and do their thing 24/7.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

pragmatic_lee said:


> Any OS/2 systems attached to it? We still have 4 or 5 OS/2 systems up and running - as a matter of fact, a core portion of our business is run on those systems. They just sit there and do their thing 24/7.


That was pre OS2 by a ways (Netware 86 days). However funnily enough when I was at Campbell Soup for a while we were part of the beta experiment with OS/2 back when Compaq was part of the development cycle. Made me laugh when I called IBM over a problem with our database server and they referred me to the guy who worked in the office next to me cause "he had the same problem and he's fixed it" Poor tech support ain't a new thing:

Then there was OS2/Warp:wink:


----------



## Dave T (Mar 24, 2004)

pragmatic_lee said:


> If you'd get a real computer you could just click the smiley icon instead of typing "(smiley face goes here)" :tongue:
> 
> J/K Dave, but I got to wonder, are you on an IBM mainframe?


p_l,

Actually I have a fairly new iMac. I could click on the smiley icon but I think they look stupid. I've hated that idiot smiley face since it came was first introduced. Typing my "smiley face goes here" indicator is just my own little bit of rebellion. Just like never shooting a compound. No harm intended. Sure didn't mean to rile anyone up with what was just poking fun.

Dave


----------

