# FCA 3D rules - why isn't an 'x' worth 11 or 12?



## TCF (Aug 8, 2007)

It seems odd that the FCA rules for 3D recognize the 'x' for just 10 points rather than 11 or 12 points. In an age of high tech equipment enabling many talented archers to hit the 'x' consistently, why not recognize the bonus score? Many shooters can direct the arrow somewhere in the 10 most of the time. Especially when shooting speed. When a talented shooter can hit the 'x' consistently, how is it possible that its counts for the same as the 10. 
It escapes me.
Cheers, TCF


----------



## pintojk (Jan 31, 2003)

*easier to do math that way .....*



PBean


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2007)

Ya I thuoght the same thing as well, the FCA is supposed to be useing IBO rule mostly and they count it as 11,the OAA has counted centre 12's for nearly 15 years


----------



## Summerfeldt (Oct 19, 2006)

pintojk said:


> PBean


Only if you don't shoot 8's and 5's like me I shot lots of them

Grant


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

How many perfect rounds were shot at this event?  

If ties with perfect scores become an issue, sure, use the smaller scoring rings. But for now, it seems to me this is more realistic if you're still one of those who believes that 3D is supposed to be hunting simulation. The kill area on a deer is bigger than the 11 or 12 or 14-ring. 

What difference does it make? The best shooters won, and will continue to win whatever scoring system is used.


----------



## Bowzone_Mikey (Dec 11, 2003)

because the better(more consistant) archer will win the way the FCA does it counting 11s or 12s .... potentially if one drops an 8 one can make up those 2 points with a few shots ..to get back to to "even" and potentially beat someone thats shoots nothing but 10s all day. 

whereas the X count if 2 or more people hang 10s all day the "better 10s' will count as Xs ... the most Xs win 

Its not the best system but I beleive it rewards the better consistant shooter more than the IBO rules do


----------



## Big F (Aug 20, 2004)

*3D and X's*

Personally I feel that *not* getting points for X's in 3D is stupid. Heres an example: On a 27 target loop when one archer has a 260 with 16X's and another archer has a 260 with 5X's, these archers are considered tied heading into the next two days....thats ridiculous. 

The arguement that the best shooter will win when not scoring X's in 3D is balony. The best shooter is the archer that hits the center of the target consistently throughout the given time during the given tournament...not the one that shoots arrows all over the place around it.

Its the same as taking an indoor fita face and scoring the entire yellow as ten. A guy that shoots inside out 60 baby X's would be tied with someone who shot outer yellow all day. 


FCA 3D rules of scoring is a unique one...some people may like it...some may not...on this side of the computer screen after shooting 7 of these tournaments all over this country I feel we'd be better off if somthing was changed.


----------



## coptor doctor (Aug 25, 2003)

*X ring*

I am all with ya Andrew. Once again the FCA has to have thier own little glitch. Maybe it's an identity thing. I like the 11 ring scoring even though I did not shoot many. I still feel that the guy that shoots a 6" group versus the guy that shoots a 2" group yet end up with the same score? should not be considered as tying each other going to the final day. If we are following IBO rules then lets follow IBO rules. The other thing is what is with no electronics IE: a light? I can shoot one at the IBO and feel I should be able to shoot one at the FCA? Holy in MBF we can shoot 10 stabilzers and 15 pins with a lense? Makes no sense as well. I am glad they adopted the less than 9 power bino rule as I already got burned on a 10 power pair thanks to the IBO and do not need to lose another pair.. All In all awesome shooting Ya big goof.. Buy you a beer next time had to leave in a hurry long Drive back to the Ottawa flood plain.. maybe the FCA named that i still have yet to see a Valley? It's on the Quebec side!!:darkbeer::darkbeer::zip:


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

260 is 260, whether it was 26 dead center 10s and a miss, or 22 linecutter 10s and 5 8s. The top score is the most points according to the rules, and if you're tied with the top score it doesn't matter how you scored them.

If you tie in a round of golf with an even par round of 72, you're tied whether or you shot 18 pars or had 4 birdies, 13 pars and a quadruple bogey. 

A football game is tied 21-21 and it doesn't matter if one team has 3 touchdowns and the other has 7 field goals.

We hear this type of complaint elsewhere on a regular basis:

-Vegas, where the inner 10 is not used as a tiebreaker.

-The NFAA indoor champs where the X is used, but quite a few people shoot clean so it's pretty much the same idea. 

My point is this: everyone knows the rules beforehand, but you never hear complaints until after the fact. (Please don't jump on me if there was any sort of irregularity such as the the organizing committee changing the rules without authorization or prior notification - I wasn't there and don't have any details.)


If you want something done about it, don't whine for a few weeks after the shoot and forget about it until next year and then whine some more. Do something about it NOW so the rule can be changed beforehand, according to the established democratic procedure.

Then, if it's had a chance for fair discussion and a fair decision, accept the rule as it stands or as it has been changed, and either shoot without complaint, or don't show up. 


Big F: I'm still waiting to hear the scores, but I don't think anyone shot clean, so as far as I know, and the best shooter still won. And I still think the best shooter would have won if the scoring had been with 11s, 12s or 14s.

Oh, by the way, congratulations. :wink:

(And remember, they're not using the X as a tiebreaker at the FCA Field/Target Nationals, so if you're shooting them, you've been warned...  )


----------



## Big F (Aug 20, 2004)

*3d and X's*

Yes your right Stan...in golf if a player shoots a bogey and on the next hole he shoots a birdie...their still at even par.

The FCA 3D is set up so if an archer shoots an X (Birdie) he is not rewarded for it. Relating to golf if a person hit 3 strokes on a 4 stroke par hole, according to the FCA they should be given a score of 4 strokes (with an X lol)...it wouldn't matter that he hit less than par...par is the best possible score on the hole. So therefore the winner of the weekend/week of golf would be the person who shot the least amount of bogey's. We should try to run that by Woods, who hits his fair share of bogey's on good rounds (2, 3 or 4)...but nails 8 birdies on 18 holes. 

I'm not trying to whine or complain...everyone knew the rules comming in, and for that reason when shooting within the FCA people need to think about how to make the 'safe' shots on the course and not necessarily go barreling for the X everytime. I just think it would be better off to reward pin point accuracy like other organizations. 

Thanks Stan. The warning is taken. I won't be at the fields...but will be at the fita.


----------



## coptor doctor (Aug 25, 2003)

Still like the x's right or wrong. I know where someone can put a putter. I just wish If we were going to follow so called IBO rules follow the damn things not some half bottomed (there i just about sweared) set of rules. We deal with this as well in Quebec. So called Modified IBO where you can't shoot MBR with a Long stab. Sometimes not even a level..I knew the rules Stan and one way or the other the 11's maybe this time did not make a differance but some times they do and the if you don't like it stay home attitude is maybe why I don't do the field.. Over and out finny!!!


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Golf is not a perfect analogy, but my point is that the top score according to the rules of the shoot is the top score.

If you're going to count Xs or 11s, then the next step is the guy who's going to complain that he's shooting inside-out Xs, so he's clearly a better shot than the guy who's getting linecutter Xs.

At what point do we draw the line? Well, we don't have to draw it in the same place for every different tournament. Archery would get pretty boring if it was always then same.

The 10-8-5 3D scoring is just one way of doing things, no better or worse than any other. Sure, the guy who pounds Xs all day is probably a better shot in general than the guy who just keeps monotonously plugging away 10s the whole round, but someone has to be the winner. And sometimes it's not the "best" archer. 

In the NFAA indoor round, a mediocre 45X 300 beats a brilliant but flawed 299 59X every time, and at Vegas a workmanlike 45X 900 gets you in the shootoff, but an awesome 89X 299 doesn't.


----------



## Summerfeldt (Oct 19, 2006)

coptor doctor said:


> Still like the x's right or wrong. I know where someone can put a putter. I just wish If we were going to follow so called IBO rules follow the damn things not some half bottomed (there i just about sweared) set of rules. We deal with this as well in Quebec. So called Modified IBO where you can't shoot MBR with a Long stab. Sometimes not even a level..I knew the rules Stan and one way or the other the 11's maybe this time did not make a differance but some times they do and the if you don't like it stay home attitude is maybe why I don't do the field.. Over and out finny!!!


You swear now thats something I never heard before.

See ya at North Bay:wink:

And the way FCA scores 3D sucks. I think they should take 3D more serious and use all IBO rules. 

Grant


----------



## Reed (Jun 18, 2002)

Summerfeldt said:


> You swear now thats something I never heard before.
> 
> See ya at North Bay:wink:
> 
> ...


Grant, why IBO, why not ASA or the 3dI rules. It is not that hard to have one set and follow them. When the nat's were in calgary a few years back, the FCA should have threw out the womens fist day scores. Nearly half the women shot from the wrong stake. the excuse was "well we don't shot from that stake in our province." This was when FCA had there own set and alot of the provinces were going by IBO rules adn they did not bother to look up what the rules were, but like today everyone wants there own set that they know is right and best:wink:

you could always approach your 3d rep and ask for a motion to fully adopt what ever set of rules you feel is best.

Reed


----------



## russ (Jul 29, 2002)

x's are a method of scoring - just because it's not expressed as a number does not mean it's not part of the score. Back to the 260 5x vs the 260 15x, it's quite obvious which archer is better, I don't even think these 2 are close to tied and unless the FCA has changed it's 3D format since I attended last (and it's been quite a while) they're not even close to tied going into the forth round. The number's are the same but X counts the killer.


----------



## hoody123 (Aug 11, 2004)

I think the X should definitely be acknowledged as a higher scoring area, be it either an 11 or a 12, there should definitely be a premium. I think 11 is the way to go, so that if you miss the 10, you need two 11's to bring you back to par.

I like Andrew's analogy that it's like a the golfer that shoots the fewest bogies winning, it shouldn't be like that...


----------



## russ (Jul 29, 2002)

Hey Stash - here's the link to the results as posted.  Very informative :wink:


----------



## Reed (Jun 18, 2002)

russ said:


> Hey Stash - here's the link to the results as posted.  Very informative :wink:


fun thing is the FCA have updated scores from a fita shot on the 6th, but no national results not sure if it is a club problem or Al is away on has not had a chance to update the web page?

Reed


----------



## Viper04 (Feb 8, 2006)

russ said:


> x's are a method of scoring - just because it's not expressed as a number does not mean it's not part of the score. Back to the 260 5x vs the 260 15x, it's quite obvious which archer is better, I don't even think these 2 are close to tied and unless the FCA has changed it's 3D format since I attended last (and it's been quite a while) they're not even close to tied going into the forth round. The number's are the same but X counts the killer.


Day 1 

Shooter a 260 5x Shooter b 260 15x

Day 2

Shooter a 260 3x Shooter b 258 17 x

Guess what shooter a wins this tourney even though he does not have near the precision in his shooting as shooter b. That's why not rewarding the x as a point or two allows less able shooters to compete with the big dogs.


----------



## russ (Jul 29, 2002)

You're definitely correct about the equalizing effect of the way the FCA does it. The 260 5x vs the 260 15x is a good example. After all scoring 11's would give the 2 shooters a 265 & 275 respectively.

To be honest I think the only reason the FCA clings to the X vs. +1 or +2 is that some of the targets that some clubs use don't have the X rings marked. It's the only reasonable explanation I can think of. Are there any FCA rep's that care to comment?


----------



## coptor doctor (Aug 25, 2003)

Now don't get all bent out a shape.. But here is a reply.. LOL for those not able to compete in 3D there is a sport called Fita!!:wink:


----------



## coptor doctor (Aug 25, 2003)

Wow Only club I know that has targets with no 12 ring would be Apsley I think they are still shooting 2D.. ukey:


----------



## Flipper T (May 10, 2005)

I think that X's should count as a higher score. At our local shoots I always score in the 190's and have at least 10-15X, but yet if some one that is having a "lucky" day might have cought the ten ring all day and have close or more then the score I have but yet only 4 or 5 X.


----------



## russ (Jul 29, 2002)

coptor doctor said:


> Wow Only club I know that has targets with no 12 ring would be Apsley I think they are still shooting 2D.. ukey:


:lol:

I know we still run into the odd target here but I'd say it's time to move on.


----------



## russ (Jul 29, 2002)

coptor doctor said:


> Wow Only club I know that has targets with no 12 ring would be Apsley I think they are still shooting 2D.. ukey:


Tell them to buy a drafter's compass :wink:


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Viper04 said:


> Day 1
> 
> That's why not rewarding the x as a point or two allows less able shooters to compete with the big dogs.


I guess that's the main philosophical difference.

As a "less able shooter" I kind of like having the chance, albeit a small one. Someone else might not think that's a good idea. 

But then, why bother showing up if Big F is there for a 3D or Dietmar is there for a spot round?


----------



## coptor doctor (Aug 25, 2003)

Because when the Big f Stumbles.. You could be all over him Like a fat kid on a smartie!! Hey why do I now think of Timmer!! LOL I was going to pick on a hortons Tim bit but better lay off him..:darkbeer:


----------



## thunderbolt (Oct 11, 2002)

coptor doctor said:


> Wow Only club I know that has targets with no 12 ring would be Apsley I think they are still shooting 2D.. ukey:


That's funny Apsley was the first place I thought of as well:darkbeer:


----------



## Lionel (Jul 16, 2002)

Another angle.

If I shot a clean round of 10s, I would not like to be beat by a shooter that shot three 8s but made a higher total score using an 11 or 12 ring. I would think that on that day my shooting and distance judging was better and more consistant than his.

I don't mind the different systems at different shoots. It adds a little something. I read the rules before hand and play the game we are given.

Lionel


----------

