# 2010 NFAA Agenda Items



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

I hope everyone will take a few minutes to go to the Great and Wise Pimp Daddy's New York field Archer's and Bow hunters website and look at the 34agenda items for the Annual meeting he has posted there. I have no clue if they are up on the Nfaa site yet......


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Here it is so it is easy on everyone to find :wink:

http://www.fieldarchery.com/depot/documents/857-20091019-2010 Agenda Items.pdf


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

No to #6..... DO NOT change the game for 2 arrows....there are a handful of shooters in those classes that shoot any form of target archery......other then 3D as most are stirctly hunters anyway. Don't modify the game to accommodate a few....if they don't want to shoot that far then fine don't shoot it if your not comfortable.

It is going to confuse those that do like it and think they only have to shoot 50yds.....then go to a bigger shoot and be in for a surprise

#8....exactly what we need....MORE CLASSES ukey: they are shot the same way....with a hand, an arrow and a bow....

#18...it isn't gonna speed anything up....surely not on a field round...what are you going to save on a hunter round? Maybe 15-20 mins at most..... Every group I am in actually shoots the WUs and the fan faster then the other targets....I don't know what they are doing in Texas :noidea:

although I would like to see an 80 yd target...and turn the 45 wu into a 70 yd target


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

The pimp tells me that there are twenty items listed on the Field archery.com site, but there are 34 in the notebook that Yankton sent him....:secret:


----------



## GATOR-EYE (Jun 30, 2006)

#7....remove crossbows, just what we (the NFAA)needs to do, send more people packin.ukey:

If they enjoy shooting a crossbow this year maybe they'll try a up right bow next.


----------



## south-paaw (Jul 3, 2006)

Unclegus said:


> The pimp tells me that there are twenty items listed on the Field archery.com site, but there are 34 in the notebook that Yankton sent him....:secret:




```

```
the NFAA site has the info listed, albeit slightly hard to find... there was a direct link and heading a cpl of weeks ago, now its listed..

from the left hand column... " news updates, 2010 NFAA Directors meeting,

pdf proposals...." ..... what is listed on the NFAA site is also 20 items... same 

items as listed in the above link... 

so what might be the addtl 14 items..??
==========

ok.. i just found out that the above link_ is _the NFAA's website... who new ??

fieldarchery.com and nfaaarchery .com.... same thing...

sorry if i caused any confusion..


----------



## titanium man (Mar 5, 2005)

GATOR-EYE said:


> #7....remove crossbows, just what we (the NFAA)needs to do, send more people packin.ukey:
> 
> If they enjoy shooting a crossbow this year maybe they'll try a up right bow next.


Exactly! What a narrow minded solution to a problem that shouldn't even involve the NFAA, at all!! Geez!! Unbelievable! We just got our state to accept Crossbows, which has made a nice addition, and now this! The FITA side, adopted them quite awhile ago.


----------



## south-paaw (Jul 3, 2006)

exposure,exposure,exposure..... if that's what it takes for participation and 

membership, i'm all for it.... it's a win-win ..shoot what you bring...

====

a lot of the agenda items do seem to be proactive...


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

Unclegus said:


> The pimp tells me that there are twenty items listed on the Field archery.com site, but there are 34 in the notebook that Yankton sent him....:secret:


Is it possible that there are 34 "agenda" items with 20 of them being constitution/by-laws proposed changes?


----------



## south-paaw (Jul 3, 2006)

*maybe...*

here's the new york link... 

http://members.localnet.com/~archery1/index.html


----------



## erasmu (Oct 15, 2005)

Brown Hornet said:


> #18...it isn't gonna speed anything up....surely not on a field round...what are you going to save on a hunter round? Maybe 15-20 mins at most..... Every group I am in actually shoots the WUs and the fan faster then the other targets....I don't know what they are doing in Texas :noidea:


I had no idea of the submission, so my Texas residence is coincidence only. I think there would be a significant increase in speed for the field round and a greater one for the hunter. Take the field bird target, you have the freestylers changing their sights and repositioning four times instead of one. Some time savings on their 45 WU as well although probably not as much. On the 80 WU, there would be time saved, but with 10 yard increments I would leave it alone. My complaint for both the field and hunter courses (walkups and fans) is where you shoot one arrow move up a couple steps or to the side one step. Then you change your sight rearrange your footing and shoot only to make additional changes again and again. If there is an insignificant change in distance or position, let's shoot all four arrows from one spot and move to the next target, not the next arrow.


----------



## Bob_Looney (Nov 17, 2003)

If anybody is really worried about saving time so they can go do something else, by all means, go do something else.

Saving 30 minutes on a Hunter round won't magically fill the range.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Bob_Looney said:


> If anybody is really worried about saving time so they can go do something else, by all means, go do something else.
> 
> Saving 30 minutes on a Hunter round won't magically fill the range.


I do think that with today's technology and changes to the game that the days of the "fans" and Walkups are over. Just my opinion.

I don't see the NEED for a full 80 yard target, however....I'd rid the round of that one all together...and maybe, go with a 70 yarder (all four shots) in its stead.

Some say eliminate the "bunny"...but I've seen that bunny target cost many a perfect half, a perfect round, and/or lose many a tournament for many a shooter, myself included.

I see NO NEED anymore for "fan" targets as all they seem to do is cause a lot of equipment damage from clattering arrows...and in today's world of CARBON arrows...that can be fractured and the shooter not even be aware of it...the FANS create a SAFETY HAZARD for not only the shooter, but those around him as a result of impact fractures that go unseen until it it soo late.

Sure, you can have impact fractures on the 20 or any target...but....at least the arrows are all going in at the same angle....on a fan...you have different angles, and on some fans...severely different angles.

I'd sure go along with having a 35 yarder or the 36 yarder or the 28 yarder and do away with "fanning them"...and let everyone shoot their own stake and all four arrows from that stake into the SAME TARGET...as in their own target!

The 80 yarder takes up a huge amount of real estate, not only for the target itself, but for the safety angle behind and to the side of it as well. Doing away with the 80 yarder and moving it even 10 yards closer to make it a 4-shot 70 yarder would be just fine.

Cutting the round down to 10 targets, IMHO would be a wasteful thing. The old PAA round was only 10 targets and 3 arrows per target...and unfortunately, it didn't last very long. Fun round, but not much of a REAL challenge.

I'm wondering just WHAT those other 14 agenda items we aren't seeing are relating to? Doesn't the MEMBERSHIP have a right to see those items? Or am I missing something here?

field14 (tom D.)


----------



## rock monkey (Dec 28, 2002)

there's quite a few pro agenda items that dont apply to the non-pros, they may have left those out on the nfaa link. i havent looked at the nfaa site. i tried last night, but as per normal nfaa procedure, it was skillfully placed.

i dont quite understand the logic behind trying to shave 10 or 15mins off a round. yes, you have to change your sights on the walkups, but why does it have to wait till you're AT the stake? you have the time to adjust it while the other half of the group is shooting, whats wrong with that time period for adjustment? sorry, i applied common sense. yes, i know.....target presentation isnt the same from one stake to the next, but the major adjustment can be accomplished in less than a minute....less than the time it takes to shoot one arrow.

it's not 3d, you dont have to look, adjust, reconsider, re-adjust, look, contemplate the previous adjustments, draw, let down, draw again, shoot, hit in in the hindquarters-even with the high value ring, glass, evaluate the lane, and come up with the excuse that you misjudged......even tho you're at the proper level with the high value ring.......in the hind quarters.

NFAA lanes are measured with a tape across the ground. last i checked, a yard was 36 inches in ohio. so a target should not be more than a foot different from one coast to another in measured distance. cuts and angles...whole other discussion.

other agenda items i agree with are 2, 3, 4, 5, part of 6, 14 and 17. why part of 6? because i do understand the difference in equipment limitations of the non-sighted 'traditional' (longbow, recurve, single string unit barebow) shooters. what i dont quite understand is why create a separation and possible competitor issue when someone that only knows the state/sectional way and goes to a national tournament with a 'different' way. i think that disparity with the rules will then chase off the newer shooters from the states. if that change is to be made, make it so that it becomes a 2 distance walk-up for them. 60 and 50yds and make it apply to all levels from state up to national.

two items i heavily disagree with is #10 and #11. it just rubs me the wrong way because of the 'nobody is a loser' thing. you still have young cubs that havent gotten to the level of the older cubs. you will always have that scoring and award disparity. it's a fact of life, not entitlement.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

erasmu said:


> I had no idea of the submission, so my Texas residence is coincidence only. I think there would be a significant increase in speed for the field round and a greater one for the hunter. Take the field bird target, you have the freestylers changing their sights and repositioning four times instead of one. Some time savings on their 45 WU as well although probably not as much. On the 80 WU, there would be time saved, but with 10 yard increments I would leave it alone. My complaint for both the field and hunter courses (walkups and fans) is where you shoot one arrow move up a couple steps or to the side one step. Then you change your sight rearrange your footing and shoot only to make additional changes again and again. If there is an insignificant change in distance or position, let's shoot all four arrows from one spot and move to the next target, not the next arrow.



I know TONS of people that don't adjust their sight to shoot the bunny.....this year was actually the first year that I actually shot multiple marks.....and it still doesn't take that long. Sorry but it takes on avg about 2-3 mins to shoot that target......I shoot it in about the same amount of time as I do the hunter one which you don't move.

The fan is ridiculous.....but it still doesn't take any time to shoot that target. That is probably the fastest shot target on the course since most groups every one shoots at the same time anyway.....so your not saving time......

The Hunter round will speed up....but really not by much. We always take the same amount of time to shoot the hunter round as the field round....seriously how much extra time does it take for you to walk 3 or 4 yds and move your sight?

Still faster then a 3D round most times.......when I go shoot I am not trying to figure out how I can get home 20mins faster....these changes aren't going to get you off the course an hour faster.....

You don't want to move....shoot FITA or indoors.....leave the format alone.....the changes to the hunter round would pretty much turn the round into a field round on a different face.


----------



## JPE (Feb 1, 2004)

Be sure to let your NFAA State Directors know how you feel about these proposed changes. It's as simple as a cut & paste job from your posts here to their email address.

http://www.nfaa-archery.org/about/directors.cfm


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Just my opinion, but as a tournament chairman for a pretty large indoor event, and having run many, many other indoor events over the years....

The proposal to "graduate" the youths to 15 yards instead of the full 20 yards adds yet another bottleneck and planning nightmare to the matrix for an indoor tournament...especially in a venue that doesn't have a lot of room.

As it now stands, we have the CUBS at 10 yards, and frankly I fully agree with that distance. As it now stands, it is very difficult to plan for how many CUBS you are going to get at a tournament....you "hold open" a certain amount of space for them in hopes of "filling a bale" of 4 cubs to filling two bales with 8 cubs...BUT....it never pans out to where you get the two full bales. You even try to get that complement of 8 filled by offering two line times for CUBS to shoot...and once again...still don't get beyond six CUBs...

Now...as far as YOUTHS shooting only 15 yards goes....take a look at the YOUTH scores...Presley's 2009 for Example:

Y-F-FS	Katie	Karssen	IL	256	231	487
Y-M-FS	Chase	Wilson	MO	355	321	676
Y-M-FS	Shelby	WaggonerIN 359	314	673
Y-M-FS	Danny	Button	WI	355	308	663
Y-M-FS	Josh	Ryan	WI	332	303	635
Y-M-FS	Hunter	Berry	MO	316	273	589
Y-M-FS	Ely	Botkins	MO	314	267	581
Y-M-FS	Andy	Santarelli	IL	305	274	579
Y-M-FS	Michael	Doublin	IL	293	269	562
Y-M-FS-L	Devan	Wiss	MO	309	278	587


The YOUTH Total scores...BEAT the adults in the Male FS...and took home the Overall HIGH SCORE bowcase!!! Those Youths shot FULL DISTANCE...and with few exceptions...their scores at full distance ARE competitive indoors. Shelby Waggonner TIED the high score in the Amateur division with his fine 359 out of 360 at FULL distance. Danny Button beat his father Jeff, by a point...at FULL DISTANCE....

WHY would anyone want to make THREE distances involved in hosting an INDOOR event, when handling just the 10 yards for the CUBS and the full distance 20 yards is a planning quirk already...never knowing HOW MANY CUBS will sign up...and holding back slots...that are NEVER filled...add to this you won't know how many YOUTHS will come (giving them a special distance), and host clubs will be scratching their heads even more.

Then comes VEGAS...and the problems arise once again....everyone needs to be on the same shooting line...so the TARGETS are staggered. Once again, HOW MANY TO PLAN FOR...and how to make sure you maximize your participation?

I'm OPPOSED to this 15 yard graduation for YOUTHS or anyone else...._save for the *SENIOR CUBS DIVISION* that needs to be created for persons over 60 whose wives accuse them of being into their second childhood...BRING ON THE SENIOR CUB DIVISION>....and let's have them shoot at 15 yards!!!_
field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## rock monkey (Dec 28, 2002)

my district guy knows how i feel, he reads AT.

now, the more difficult question is are the state guys going to vote by membership consensus, 'party lines' or by special interest?

the one item i so heavily agree with is #3, the 15 signature game. being able to get your little group of cool kids to submit a secret squirrel agenda item is not just wrong, but it is also indicative of the 'us and them' way of politics. i still would like to see an accountability of votes during the 'arrow size' fiasco. find out who played their little leverage game and who didnt. find out who was opposed and who sat at the 'cool kids table'

do i need to know EVERYTHING that goes on about how the NFAA is run, no. but when you have an organization that preaches that everything comes form the membership, then turns around and has a secret squirrel session, the 'do as i say, not as i do' politics comes into play. an organization managed like that, i have no need for or no desire to be a part of.



JPE said:


> Be sure to let your NFAA State Directors know how you feel about these proposed changes. It's as simple as a cut & paste job from your posts here to their email address.
> 
> http://www.nfaa-archery.org/about/directors.cfm


----------



## south-paaw (Jul 3, 2006)

the listing on the New York link, has a proposal for changing the scoring of a Field Round where as the X=6 ...for all shooters;

and on the Hunter round, X=6 only for the pro's...( this might be a misprint...where as X=6 for all shooters...hard to say ) 

what is needed is clarification of the two docs that are not entirely the same proposals i.e. the one on the NFAA web site may be lacking some items...
====


and yes on #3 as well.... and i like everything Field explained so well too ..


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

Quoting the the rationale for #6:

"Rationale: Many of the traditional archers do not shoot field archery because of the 80 yard distance...There are many traditional and
bowhunting archers who don’t participate in the state shoots and this would be a way to get them involved in outdoor field archery."

I shoot in the trad class and I disagree. Anyone who claims that two arrows out of 112 is the deciding factor is masking his real reason(s) for not shooting field. If I'm having an off day, I might just skip the 80 - I don't let it get in the way of enjoying the rest of the round.


----------



## Rattleman (Jul 6, 2004)

If you all wnt to save time then try 3D...oh wait a minute they take just as long as we do. Leave it all alone is my vote. If you only want to shoot for 3 hours then leave early. You will still shoot more arrows then the 3ders. Just leave the game alone.


----------



## Rattleman (Jul 6, 2004)

I am also very much against the use of crossbows in our sport. I know what kind of damage they do to the butts and what kind of penetration they achieve. Allowing the crossbows will only make more work and cost more money for the clubs that will have to keep maintaining the butts. We already have arrows that go up to the nocks now when the butts get shot but those 18 inch bolts will have a greater chance of burying up to the nock but not thru the material. So ban the crossbows or invite them to join the NAA or NRA.


----------



## erasmu (Oct 15, 2005)

Well, I am glad you all like the slow pace of field tournaments because I guess that is what you will continue to have. If I shoot a practice round by myself, or with a buddy, it takes 3 to 3-1/2 hours. While it does not keep me out of all field tournaments, I certainly do not enjoy taking 5+ hours to shoot the same courses. I am glad for you that you do. Taking 20-30 minutes out of the round is not worth the effort for all of you. Ok, I can accept that. However, you better not complain about slow rounds. You have a chance to take a small step in the direction of faster play, but choose not to do so. That is your decision. We will all have to live with it.


----------



## Hammer X (May 20, 2008)

Arcus said:


> Quoting the the rationale for #6:
> 
> "Rationale: Many of the traditional archers do not shoot field archery because of the 80 yard distance...There are many traditional and
> bowhunting archers who don’t participate in the state shoots and this would be a way to get them involved in outdoor field archery."
> ...


Well said Arcus! I don't know why some want to keep changing what is about as perfect a round as you can have. A round where 560 is obtainable, but your not going to shoot it all the time( or maybe never) but you can get close. They tried to change back to the 5,3 scoring system to "bring back archers" that they lost when they went to the 3,4,5 scoring. Didn't happen. Stop changing for sack of changing, or you just might run off more than you supposedly bring back. Just my 2 cents


----------



## TNMAN (Oct 6, 2009)

*Proposed Changes*

jm2, but do not think any of the current yardages/targets should be changed as they are traditional, and all records are so based. I love a challenging walkup in rough terrain, because that's "field". Time saved not having walkups would be negligible. The 35 fan can be made safer through better range design. Changing the game as proposed won't make it more popular; it will help kill it.


----------



## capemaybowman (Aug 13, 2008)

Arcus said:


> Quoting the the rationale for #6:
> 
> "Rationale: Many of the traditional archers do not shoot field archery because of the 80 yard distance...There are many traditional and
> bowhunting archers who don’t participate in the state shoots and this would be a way to get them involved in outdoor field archery."
> ...


----------



## bowhunter_va_28 (Apr 28, 2003)

*not in a hurry to mow the grass*



erasmu said:


> Well, I am glad you all like the slow pace of field tournaments because I guess that is what you will continue to have. If I shoot a practice round by myself, or with a buddy, it takes 3 to 3-1/2 hours. While it does not keep me out of all field tournaments, I certainly do not enjoy taking 5+ hours to shoot the same courses. I am glad for you that you do. Taking 20-30 minutes out of the round is not worth the effort for all of you. Ok, I can accept that. However, you better not complain about slow rounds. You have a chance to take a small step in the direction of faster play, but choose not to do so. That is your decision. We will all have to live with it.


I still consider myself new to the sport, but if you're shooting alone or with a single buddy, then I would expect it to less time to complete a practice round. Some folks let down more than others, recording scores for 4 folks takes longer than recording for 2 (if you even do that in your practice rounds), pulling arrows takes longer, etc. What about the fact that some folks aren't as spry as others and may take a little longer to get where they are going or read their notes? They may be in front of you and slow your group down. I don't think changing the game will speed that up any.

Maybe there's a need for a new class, the Speed Class. You get 2 minutes to shoot 4 shots X 2 lines for 112 minutes. Add 38 minutes to pull arrows, score and get to the next lane, now you're up to 150 minutes. Add 5 minutes for a practice target and pulling arrows and you're up to 2 hours and 35 minutes. Go over that amount and your score doesn't count. Now you can shoot, eat lunch and still be home in time to mow the grass. That sounds like a friggin' blast.


----------



## Rattleman (Jul 6, 2004)

Why arre some against the fans and walkups. Every stake has a potential of different footing, different lighting (Sun is eyes), and the possibility of the archer not shooting the correct target. The game is not only shooting but paying attention to detail like shooting the correct target. Bunny targets can cause dropped points and many times walk ups are missed because sights were never moved. The way some of you are thinking makes me feel that we should just stand at 1 distance and shoot. Oh yeah that is what indoors is about. If you all think that changing these rounds will draw more shooters then I have a ocean front property in Arizona that is FOR SALE.


----------



## rock monkey (Dec 28, 2002)

lets bring this to the top to encourage some healthy debate for the few state guys that read this section.

in light of the Vegas Lucky Dog thing, keep in mind the only NFAA part of Vegas is the equipment and shooting style rules. the WAF is the for profit part of the NFAA. the state directors do have input to the WAF, but it is not open to the membership for comment or policy changes like normal NFAA stuff like the agenda items.


----------



## Rain Man (Dec 13, 2007)

Changing the WU and fans are worthless as time savers if we have to start counting x's. We do this at our state shoot and it takes forever to score arrows. In my opinion we would save ourselves AT LEAST 30-45 minutes per round if we don't count x's with only 75 people at the tournament. The backups at a national tournament would be like a 3D shoot.


----------



## south-paaw (Jul 3, 2006)

i believe counting x's are already part of the game, it sets the staus of flights or bracketing or whatever the proper heading is, for that day s' shooting, and staus for the next day.


----------



## rock monkey (Dec 28, 2002)

i'm sitting here going over the list that i printed out. and i'm going to ask a question before i give my opinion. please dont tie my tongue to an exhaust pipe and go racing over broken glass. i just want to know before i bring up a discussion about a certain item. it may also change how i think about it too.

what exactly are the duties and responsibilities of the Excecutive Secretary?


----------



## south-paaw (Jul 3, 2006)

rock monkey said:


> i'm sitting here going over the list that i printed out. and i'm going to ask a question before i give my opinion. please dont tie my tongue to an exhaust pipe and go racing over broken glass. i just want to know before i bring up a discussion about a certain item. it may also change how i think about it too.
> 
> what exactly are the duties and responsibilities of the Excecutive Secretary?




```

```
ARTICLE V
Duties of Officers and the Executive Secretary
A. Officers of the NFAA shall be President and Vice-President.
B. The positions of Executive Secretary and Treasurer are not officers of the NFAA.
C. Duties:

1. and 2. are for pres and vice... 

copied from NFAA Constitution and By-Laws : 

3. Executive Secretary:
3.1 The Executive Secretary shall conduct the affairs of the NFAA in accordance with
the programs, policies and budgets as established by the Board of Directors.
3.2 Organize, operate and supervise the administrative office of the NFAA and its
employees.
3.3 Coordinate the activities and programs of the NFAA.
3.4 Supervise the fiscal affairs of the NFAA in accordance with the budget adopted by
the Board of Directors.
3.5 Assure proper publication of official notices and reports, attest documents, and
keep the archives of the NFAA.
3.6 Assure the proper publication of promotional literature.
3.7 Assure the proper publication of any officially adopted publications by the Board
of Directors.
3.8 Assure an adequate book of accounts of the NFAA.
3.9 Furnish a monthly financial statement to the NFAA Council and a quarterly
financial statement to the Board of Directors.
NFAA
2009/2010
15
3.10 Deposit all monies to the credit of the NFAA.
3.11 Obtain the approval of the NFAA Council on any expenditure not incident to the
prepared budget and all items which are not outlined in the policies and procedures
of the annual meeting.
3.12 Promptly notify the appropriate state secretary and the sectional pro committeeman
of the name and effective date upon issuance of an NFAA Professional Division
membership; and promptly notify the appropriate state secretary of the name and
effective date upon issuance of an NFAA Bowhunter membership (noncompetitive),
or upon issuance of an NFAA Life Membership.
3.13 Forward all changes in the Constitution and By-laws to State Association NFAA
Directors and Secretaries within 90 days of action to change.
3.14 Be the custodian of all prizes and trophies of the NFAA and shall keep a record of
them including the names of the donors, the conditions of competition governing
the awards, and the names and scores of those who win them.

end quote.
================
looking at x.6 ?? ... i think i see where your ?? are going to be directed...


----------



## rock monkey (Dec 28, 2002)

ok, so marihelen is the executive secretary.

instead of making her job a little more hectic and broad spectrum the first agenda item wants to add to her list of responsibilities.

being a tournament director is a headache and a half for just that one job. instead of piling onto the alphabet of responsibilities she already has.

why cant there be made a position of national tournament director? the director would be responsible for the tournament from concept to finish. securing the location, arranging facilities and accommodation specials, registration and awards within the guidelines of the constitution. the nfaa staff will work under and with them during the tournament. this way, there is only one point of contact and one primary focus in a time period.

the same would apply for the sectionals. the sectional group appoints a tournament director and the same deal applies.

this allows the executive secretary to worry about their current job and all that goes along with it. keeps from being overwhelmed with everything and then some. let the tournament director carry that burdon while the general operating stuff can still be managed. how many times has someone who is involved with large responsibilities at their job forget something that started out as trivial and it blossomed into a major issue? the executive secretary is busy enough, dont make the job harder than it already is.


----------



## south-paaw (Jul 3, 2006)

are these responsinbilties all ready involved for the councilmen... sectionals.. and any nat'l that would reside in their area ? what's/whom the current personel taking on these duties that already exist... 

putting this, or redirecting this, onto a current singl person ( position ) could be overwhelming....


----------



## rock monkey (Dec 28, 2002)

i dont think making one person's job harder would work for the better. if something as crazy as getting a tournament setup and run can be done by a dedicated position and with the assistance of the NFAA staff and the state the shoot is in, it lessens the chance for the 'oh crap!' episodes on the secretary's side.

thats my reasoning.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

I kinda miss OBT's input on the annual NFAA agenda items discussion. He was one guy who had his head screwed on straight.
(Not saying anyone involved in the present discussion doesn't have their head screwed on straight.:wink


----------



## south-paaw (Jul 3, 2006)

carlosii said:


> I kinda miss OBT's input on the annual NFAA agenda items discussion. He was one guy who had his head screwed on straight.
> (Not saying anyone involved in the present discussion doesn't have their head screwed on straight.:wink




```

```
straight..?? !.... me..?? !!.... anyone seen my boots..??? 

:tongue:
========


who currently takes care of these items-duties and responsibilities... are they asking for help or pushing it to someone else..??


----------



## rock monkey (Dec 28, 2002)

i think, there i go again....using tools i have little experience with, that they are trying to establish a function of position that they dont need to be begging and pleading for volunteers to perform.

that much i understand, but the part of making a busy person's job more busy would seem counter-productive.


----------



## GATOR-EYE (Jun 30, 2006)

Rattleman said:


> I am also very much against the use of crossbows in our sport. I know what kind of damage they do to the butts and what kind of penetration they achieve. Allowing the crossbows will only make more work and cost more money for the clubs that will have to keep maintaining the butts. We already have arrows that go up to the nocks now when the butts get shot but those 18 inch bolts will have a greater chance of burying up to the nock but not thru the material. So ban the crossbows or invite them to join the NAA or NRA.




The new speed bows are putting out the same speeds as a lot of crossbows....do you want to ban speed bow cause they cause to much damage to the target butts? What about the new sharp target points they have more penetration than the round style, should they be banned??

If a club had more shooters, more member, maybe they could afford to replace those worn out butts.


----------



## Spoon13 (Feb 20, 2007)

I just got done reading both versions of the Agenda Items. The difference between the 34 Items on the NY site and the 20 on the NFAA site is not really that much. There were several items that dealt with the Pro class as well as several items that dealt with the elimination of the duplicate rules in the NFAA 3D that were condensed to form the Item #20.

Here's my take on the items:

#1: Running a National Tournament should be the responsibility of the Host site AND the ENTIRE NFAA Staff. This is the NATIONAL TOURNAMENT. Why would the entirety of the NFAA Staff not want to put it's best foot forward?? The Nationals should be an "All Hands on Deck" kind of effort and no ONE person should be saddled with ALL the responsibility. VOTE=NO

#2: I like the idea of reducing the cost of the Annual Meeting. As long as the Directors have ample opportunity to "discuss" the items in question, the savings will be noticeable. VOTE=YES

#3: 15 signature items can create a bit of a hostile environment and do not allow Directors to get the opinions of their States. I would like to see the 90 day waiting period between item submission and meeting reduced to allow Directors to submit items that come up last minute, but think that a 30 Day period should work. VOTE=YES w/amendments

#4: I think this is a GREAT idea. I personally don't understand why it requires an Agenda Item to get the NFAA Officers and Directors to help support the local level, but whatever it takes. VOTE=YES

#5: Kinda goes without saying. If it's wrong, fix it. VOTE=YES

#6: Not being a "Traditional Archer", I really hate to speak for them, but if you don't want to shoot that far, DON'T. These rounds were designed before the equipment became what it is today and the majority of shooters were shooting "Traditional". Why should it change now?? VOTE=NO

#7: While I understand the controversy around the crossbow, I must say that the class already exists. With several States (NC included) considering expanding the use of the Crossbow, it opens up the possibility that MORE people may become interested in participating in and joining the NFAA. I feel as though this is not a subject that can be decided now and will take some more time to work it's way out. Leave it as it is, for now. VOTE=NO

#8: The continual addition of classes to sub-classify people who are already shooting is counter-productive to me. VOTE=NO

#9: This one is interesting for me. Being a Chewie by nature I looked at the ASA structure since that is what I am most familiar with. The youth classes in ASA also neglect to make special accommodations for pin sights. I can not disagree with the formation of these classes for the kids, however, do kids really shoot barebow?? How about we replace barebow with Bowhunter Freestyle?? VOTE=YES w/amendments

#10: This is just another version of #9, only worded worse. I HATE the phrase "perceived as a disadvantage". That being said, I understand the rationale but would like to see it limited to Bowhunter Freestyle. Start small. If the class needs to be expanded later, do it then. VOTE=YES w/amendments

#11: In a perfect world it would be nice to be able to say absolutely. However the world I live in just ain't that way. Requiring EVERY facility to accommodate yet another shooting position just isn't practical. At my home range, we have the kids either shoot early or shoot with everybody else because we CAN NOT stagger the shooting lanes to facilitate different shooting distances. I am sure we are not alone in this predicament. VOTE=NO

#12: Just kinda makes sense to me. Finishing places should be determined by finishing scores. How hard is that?? VOTE=YES

#13: Makes sense to me. VOTE=YES

#14: As per the way it is written, it makes sense. Even though it is a Sectional Event, what would happen if someone were not an NFAA member and wanted to shoot for the experience and to find out more about the NFAA?? Should they not be allowed to shoot in the guest class?? It isn't written that way though. Just leaves room for an amendment next year. VOTE=YES

#15: Makes it a little better. VOTE=YES

#16: Seems easy enough. VOTE=YES

#17: ABSOLUTELY!!! VOTE=YES

#18: While learning where to shoot from and what target to shoot to can be tricky when you first start, it really isn't that hard once you've done it a time or two. Leave the game alone. Quit trying to dummy everything down. VOTE=NO

#19: Makes sense to me. VOTE=YES

#20: No need to repeat yourself over and over. No need to repeat yourself over and over. No need to... well you get it by now. VOTE=YES

In some cases my opinion may be changed based on additonal information (namely the Traditonal stuff) but this is what I think as of right now.


----------



## Rain Man (Dec 13, 2007)

south-paaw said:


> i believe counting x's are already part of the game, it sets the staus of flights or bracketing or whatever the proper heading is, for that day s' shooting, and staus for the next day.


X's are not counted at a national field shoot or at the mid-atlantics either


----------



## south-paaw (Jul 3, 2006)

*i'm lost.....*

help me out with this( open to one and all)...i havent shot in a Natl or Sectional, so i don't know if it has been done or not... but.... (the last entry of this section says t doesn't apply to the Pro Division), all otheres it can, and or does.... and the way i'm interpreting, this is decided upon before the tourny.. i.e. in the reg form and shooter paperwork given to them at the event.....

copied from the NFAA : 

ARTICLE IV
Tournaments

F. Flighting for National and Sectional Tournaments:
The method of determining flights at National and Sectional tournaments shall be printed in the
contracts and on the registration forms.
1. The NFAA flight system will be used at National and Sectional tournaments.
1.1 Flights will be provided in each division and shooting style as follows: 1 to 15
shooters, one flight; 16 to 30 shooters, two flights; 31 to 45 shooters, three flights;
46 to 60 shooters, four flights; 61 or more shooters, five flights; and so forth.
1.2 An optional alternate flight system for tournaments with 200 shooters or less (see
Appendix 1).
2. For Outdoor Nationals archers may be arranged in flights by their total score and X count
at the end of the first round for three day tournaments, and at the end of the second
round for five day tournaments. When an optional 3/5 day Outdoor National is
held, archers may be arranged in flights based on their high 28 target Field Round
Score. For Outdoor Sectionals archers may be arranged in flights by their total
score and X count at the end of the first round.
3. For Indoor Nationals and Sectionals, archers shall be arranged in flights according to total
score and X count shot in the first round. When multiple sites are used for Sectional
tournaments, flighting may be done as if it were a mail in. Flighting in these instances will
be by final score and final X count.
NFAA
2009/2010
44
4. Equal division of the number of archers in each flight will be maintained, except that the
last flight will record a lesser number (for two flights) or an unequal number (for three or
more flights) as may be required. When two or more tie scores appear at the flight break,
the archers tied will be placed at the bottom of the upper flight, without disturbing the
remaining flights as originally established.
5. The flight system does not apply to the Professional Division.

end quote


----------



## rock monkey (Dec 28, 2002)

for the pros, it's just one big shark tank. pay the entry and go directly to the deep end. no lifeguards, no floaties, no water wings. just the class rules in print.


item #12 is proposing dynamic flighting. instead of being flighted by only the first day's score, you reduce the potential for sandbagging.

for example....... i'm a honest 599&100+x avg tournament shooter. say i bag the first day of the indoor nats with a 294 and 40+ x count. that would put me down around the middle of 11th flight. after the breakdowns are made, that's it....i'm locked into the 11th flight. on sunday, i bang out a 300 and 58x score. and the 2nd place guy shoots his tourny avg of 295 high 40's x count. that's all he can do. is it fair that i finish with a 594&104x's? while the rest of the 11th flight can only top out at 590 and 80+ x's? is it fair that the winners of flights 10 and 9 won with scores lower than mine? no, it isnt.

by going to dynamic flighting, you go up or down with your score. is it fair to the others that shot their hearts out and shot personal bests each day while you bagged it just to get the medal?, hell no. is it totally fair?, no. there is only so much you can do to level the playing field.




south-paaw said:


> help me out with this( open to one and all)...i havent shot in a Natl or Sectional, so i don't know if it has been done or not... but.... (the last entry of this section says t doesn't apply to the Pro Division), all otheres it can, and or does.... and the way i'm interpreting, this is decided upon before the tourny.. i.e. in the reg form and shooter paperwork given to them at the event.....
> 
> copied from the NFAA :
> 
> ...


----------



## rsw (May 22, 2002)

Tom: I don't agree that a change to the International Round replacing the field and hunter rounds wouldn't be exciting (regarding your comment on the old PAA round which was essentially that except on colored faces as I remember). In fact, the Big Sky is a very good shoot and moved into the woods as a field and hunter round would be even better and a superb improvement for the reasons you stated regarding 80 yarders, walk-ups, and fans. Much quicker, much less expensive to build and maintain, much less land required, and just as exciting as a traditional field or hunter round without the old traditional goofy targets that were great for the 40s and 50s long bowmen.

I have been suggesting this for several years now, but tradition will continue to rule until we old dinosaurs are gone and the new generation can bring about the needed changes to field archery.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

GATOR-EYE said:


> The new speed bows are putting out the same speeds as a lot of crossbows....do you want to ban speed bow cause they cause to much damage to the target butts? What about the new sharp target points they have more penetration than the round style, should they be banned??
> 
> If a club had more shooters, more member, maybe they could afford to replace those worn out butts.


The only crossbows I have seen in NFAA competition are WCSA bows that are limited to a 95 pound draw weight (which means bolt speeds of 200 FPS). The 400 FPS jobs do not meet the rules the NAA/WCSA/TNC/NFAA have adopted. The idiotic reason behind the proposal is that by allowing the crossbow class in target competitions (using strictly target xbows) the NFAA upsets the whiners who don't like xbow archers with HUNTING RIGS sharing the woods with people shooting mechanically released compound bows. They claim mere recognition of the bow for target somehow promotes it for hunting (does anyone hunt with an olympic recurve rig these days btw?)


----------

