# Why barebow should be eliminated.



## Warbow

An excellent, if modest, proposal.


----------



## Greysides

1. Newbs are good. Newbs bring money into archery clubs so they can pay for coaching and targets for the elite OR archers so even those that can't shoot in the wet have someone to look down on.

2. Here, we only have two sets of rules, WA and IFAA, so we don't have to worry about rules too much, we just go shoot and have fun. We love watching all those OR archers hauling their long rods and twins around briars and trees looking for TV reception. As far as OR goes, the same kit will suit both WA and IFAA so the archery elite don't have to worry about understanding, or literacy.

3. The US may not have enough Dewaynes and Demmers (although in fairness there's no lack of good BB archers over your side, you're just trolling on the wrong forum ) but we have the Swedes, the Italians, the Spanish, a good scattering of Eastern European and Baltic state BB archers which all set the standard for your boys to aim at. Sometimes they even embarrass the OR elite.



> Warning, feathers may be ruffled by this thread


Do you need a brush yet?


----------



## GBUSA

I believe it's the lack of baubles to color match on a bare bow rig that turns off the OR guys.

If we could just get some BB weights in something other than boring stainless, it would better attune with the metro sexual need to accessorize their Oly equipment.

😂😜


----------



## Warbow

GBUSA said:


> I believe it's the lack of baubles to color match on a bare bow rig that turns off the OR guys.
> 
> If we could just get some BB weights in something other than boring stainless, it would better attune with the metro sexual need to accessorize their Oly equipment.
> 
> &#55357;&#56834;&#55357;&#56860;


I need a bow I can shoot *ironically* :dontknow:


----------



## Greysides

GBUSA said:


> If we could just get some BB weights in something other than boring stainless,
> 
> &#55357;&#56834;&#55357;&#56860;


I've seen black BB weights... goes well with all colours.


----------



## GBUSA

Greysides said:


> I've seen black BB weights... goes well with all colours.



And will make your bow look skinnier too 😉


----------



## Greysides

Those longrods and twins make a decent bow look like a size zero model.


----------



## High Plains

May as well, the Rocky Mountain State Games got rid of Barebow.


----------



## huckleberg

This thread makes me smile. :smileinbox:


----------



## Warbow

GBUSA said:


> And will make your bow look skinnier too &#55357;&#56841;


Now I'm gonna need a pin stripe quiver...


----------



## GBUSA

Greysides said:


> Those longrods and twins make a decent bow look like a size zero model.


What, all delicate and easy to break? 😉







🙉🙈🙊


----------



## Greysides

GBUSA said:


> What, all delicate and easy to break? &#55357;&#56841;



.............needing a bit of weight around the middle.


----------



## Warbow

Greysides said:


> .............needing a bit of weight around the middle.


Wait, are you saying those barebows are old and fat? :dontknow:


----------



## D_Winslow

Why stop with eliminating just the barebow. Since "everyone" is already using triggers the next logical step is to go ahead and eliminate the arrow and replace it with a barrel and a bullet for near instant gratification in the ability to shoot perfect scores;-)


----------



## Ten_Zen

LAZERS!!!!! Pew Pew!


----------



## _JR_

Ten_Zen said:


> So I am gonna play a little devils advocate here and offer up a few reasons why it makes sense to eliminate the barebow class.


Et tu, Decem_Zen?

. . . (or should that be "Et tu, X_Zen")?


----------



## FlyingWatchmake

Re - baubles, this is my wife's Barebow rig.. 
Plenty of opportunity to decorate stuff

;-)


----------



## Mr. Roboto

One reason, so all the Olympic style shooters can quit crying when I routinely spank them at 900 rounds. It is utterly amazing how cranky they get. Granted they are no Brady, but they just cant stand it when I dance with them and beat them. And I am just using a wood bow.


----------



## limbwalker

GBUSA said:


> I believe it's the lack of baubles to color match on a bare bow rig that turns off the OR guys.
> 
> If we could just get some BB weights in something other than boring stainless, it would better attune with the metro sexual need to accessorize their Oly equipment.
> 
> &#55357;&#56834;&#55357;&#56860;


I think I just spit beer through my nose.  LMAO...!


----------



## limbwalker

Ten_Zen said:


> So I am gonna play a little devils advocate here and offer up a few reasons why it makes sense to eliminate the barebow class. Warning, feathers may be ruffled by this thread.
> 
> 1) Too many newbs. Barebow is the fastest growing archery division for good reasons .It is the only division featured prominently in hollywood, it has the lowest entry cost, and most new archers want to keep it simple and just learn form before they start worrying about a myriad of gear options. Consequently, the division is absolutely overwhelmed by inexperienced archers that come to competition to "just have fun" or "for the experience." Meaning they could care less what they score or how they place. In an outdoor competition this just spells disaster when you have a line full of people who can barely keep the arrow on the rest through the draw trying to hit something that they cant even aim at because their poundage is too low.
> 
> 2) Too many rules. As it stands now barebow is the only class that people still have arguments about the definition of. Until you, the barebow archer community, agrees on a universal classification, why should anyone go out of their way to accomodate your whining about stabilizers or no stabilizers, or touch or no touch, or wheels or no wheels. Figure out what you are before you ask why no one wants you around.
> 
> 3) Not enough Demmers and DeWaynes. If we had a large group of pro BB shooters or even a competitive group that regularly scores impressively, people might just start paying attention. As it is now watching most barebow shooters just makes me wanna shake my head...
> 
> Looking forward to hearing all your wonderful feedback!


I'll take the bait.

1) We have a lot of newb's in archery right now. And a lot of them want to be the next Brady or Khatuna, but are shooting all the way out to 70 meters with no coaching or practice, and 24# "Olympic" recurves that are poorly tuned. There will be archers in the Olympic recurve division that are consistenly missing the target, esp. on windy days. There will even be some compound archers new to the sport that are missing the target. If we cannot tolerate the thought of archers missing the target, then every division needs to have qualifying criteria to get into major events. Absent of that, let everyone shoot. One could even argue that it's faster to pull arrows from the grass than to score them and do math at the bale. 

2) Not an issue since every official event has a clear set of rules for every division. Some may not like those rules, but they will conform to them or just not shoot at all.

3) I could say the same about watching most Olympic recurve archers.


----------



## itbeso

Ten_Zen said:


> So I am gonna play a little devils advocate here and offer up a few reasons why it makes sense to eliminate the barebow class. Warning, feathers may be ruffled by this thread.
> 
> 1) Too many newbs. Barebow is the fastest growing archery division for good reasons .It is the only division featured prominently in hollywood, it has the lowest entry cost, and most new archers want to keep it simple and just learn form before they start worrying about a myriad of gear options. Consequently, the division is absolutely overwhelmed by inexperienced archers that come to competition to "just have fun" or "for the experience." Meaning they could care less what they score or how they place. In an outdoor competition this just spells disaster when you have a line full of people who can barely keep the arrow on the rest through the draw trying to hit something that they cant even aim at because their poundage is too low.
> 
> 2) Too many rules. As it stands now barebow is the only class that people still have arguments about the definition of. Until you, the barebow archer community, agrees on a universal classification, why should anyone go out of their way to accomodate your whining about stabilizers or no stabilizers, or touch or no touch, or wheels or no wheels. Figure out what you are before you ask why no one wants you around.
> 
> 3) Not enough Demmers and DeWaynes. If we had a large group of pro BB shooters or even a competitive group that regularly scores impressively, people might just start paying attention. As it is now watching most barebow shooters just makes me wanna shake my head...
> 
> Looking forward to hearing all your wonderful feedback!


Some college types can do tongue in cheek if they are smart enough to know how. Apparently Humboldt state has pretty low entrance standards.:lol3:


----------



## lksseven

Mr. Roboto said:


> One reason, so all the Olympic style shooters can quit crying when I routinely spank them at 900 rounds. It is utterly amazing how cranky they get. Granted they are no Brady, but they just cant stand it when I dance with them and beat them. And I am just using a wood bow.


Several times you've alluded to this - you giving the Olympic Recurve guys in your neck of the woods a beat-down with your barebow. I'm curious - what is a representative 900round score for them, and what is a representative 900round score for you?


----------



## limbwalker

> all the Olympic style shooters can quit crying when I routinely spank them at 900 rounds.


Yup, there are some lousy Olympic style shooters just like there are some lousy compound shooters and some lousy barebow shooters.


----------



## Mr. Roboto

And I am a lousy barebow shooter. 732 is my best


----------



## Ten_Zen

limbwalker said:


> One could even argue that it's faster to pull arrows from the grass than to score them and do math at the bale.


HAHAHAHA! Sad but true.
By the way I dont actually think barebow should be eliminated, I only started this thread to keep you from being bored


----------



## Ten_Zen

itbeso said:


> Some college types can do tongue in cheek if they are smart enough to know how. Apparently Humboldt state has pretty low entrance standards.:lol3:


Also Sad but true.

Although to be fair, I did place second in the state championship. But I did so with a 1030, so Im not sure if I should be happy with myself or disappointed with the state of California. :confused3:


----------



## itbeso

Ten_Zen said:


> Also Sad but true.
> 
> Although to be fair, I did place second in the state championship. But I did so with a 1030, so Im not sure if I should be happy with myself or disappointed with the state of California. :confused3:


Be happy with yourself, you can't control who shows up. 2nd is a good showing.


----------



## Ten_Zen

Greysides said:


> 1. Newbs are good. Newbs bring money into archery clubs so they can pay for coaching and targets for the elite OR archers so even those that can't shoot in the wet have someone to look down on.
> 
> 2. Here, we only have two sets of rules, WA and IFAA, so we don't have to worry about rules too much, we just go shoot and have fun. We love watching all those OR archers hauling their long rods and twins around briars and trees looking for TV reception. As far as OR goes, the same kit will suit both WA and IFAA so the archery elite don't have to worry about understanding, or literacy.
> 
> 3. The US may not have enough Dewaynes and Demmers (although in fairness there's no lack of good BB archers over your side, you're just trolling on the wrong forum ) but we have the Swedes, the Italians, the Spanish, a good scattering of Eastern European and Baltic state BB archers which all set the standard for your boys to aim at. Sometimes they even embarrass the OR elite.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you need a brush yet?


I need some ointment for that burn LOL! 

My favorite is, "Is that a shotgun or a barebow? I cant tell by looking at your target." 

But in all seriousness, I think that barebow is by far the most challenging form of archery to master and I have tons of respect for those that choose to go that route. This thread is only meant to stir the pot a little. No one ever talks about WHY barebow is on the chopping block. Maybe its time we started asking that question.


----------



## toj

I see most of your reasons for banning it as good reasons for keeping it.
Whats wrong with going to competitions to enjoy yourself, isn't that why we all go?


----------



## Greysides

Ten_Zen said:


> But in all seriousness, I think that barebow is by far the most challenging form of archery to master and I have tons of respect for those that choose to go that route. This thread is only meant to stir the pot a little. No one ever talks about WHY barebow is on the chopping block. Maybe its time we started asking that question.



I'm not sure it is 'on the chopping block', at least not in Europe, but it's definitely a 'little sister'. Probably for the same reason that underpins most archery.... money. Compound and Olympic style are more easily sponsored as they are currently more visible. They compete officially in most archery disciplines (no OR in 3D) whereas BB is only recognised in 3D and field. Things could be worse, we could be like the longbow archers... only recognised in 3D.


----------



## MartinOttosson

There´s only one solution to this issue. You americans have to realize that the world actually doesn´t begin in San Fransisco and end in New York. If you go there, and think to see an edge, that is actually not an edge, but what we in the rest of the world call an ocean. It´s water (like the thing they make Coca Cola of). We know you know what it is, since you put too much in it in your beer. If you cross that ocean, you will find other countries where there is a lot less mess than in your own. 

Where I live and shoot there is just one set of rules. Barebow is barebow. Compound is compound. Recurve is recurve. Done. It´s you that mess things up with divisions like Masters Men Compound Limited Bowhunters Half-Barebow Max 3 Pin On The Sight But With Lens In The Peep And Poop Hole In The Pants. Your result lists just looks ridiculous. Everyone gets to win, since everybody have their own class. No, dear United States of North Mexico, it´s time to get down from your limping horse and adapt to the rest of the world. Hunt with one bow, compete with another. It can't be THAT hard?


----------



## Mulcade

Ten_Zen said:


> No one ever talks about WHY barebow is on the chopping block. Maybe its time we started asking that question.


The reason barebow is/was on the chopping block is lack of participation in major events. You'd have stacks and stacks of oly and compound archers at Outdoor Nationals, but barely a handful of barebow archers across all the divisions. So the question became, "why do we continue to have a class that no one seems interested in being a part?" So, they eliminated it. 

A few of the dedicated handful started to campaign to get it added back to the class list. An agreement was struck to allow it back into Outdoor Nationals this year on somewhat of a trial basis. If the barebow archers show up and participate, they'll keep the class. If the people don't show up, there won't be much point in keeping the class out side of field.

The good news is that barebow has seen a ridiculous surge of late thanks in large part to the coverage at the 2012 Olympics and numerous films from Hollywood featuring bow wielding heros! The reasons they're going barebow instead of oly or compound have already been discussed here, but I suspect that a fair number of these new folks are going to start migrating over to the other disciplines in the not too distant future.


----------



## Sanford

Mulcade said:


> The good news is that barebow has seen a ridiculous surge of late thanks in large part to the coverage at the 2012 Olympics and numerous films from Hollywood featuring bow wielding heros! The reasons they're going barebow instead of oly or compound have already been discussed here, but I suspect that a fair number of these new folks are going to start migrating over to the other disciplines in the not too distant future.


I think that eventually, the relative score becomes less important to many new single stringers than the perceived raw score that can be had, which is still relative in reality but more satisfying. It's just a matter of how we are individually wired. It takes a special personality, a minority personality, to ignore a major trend for something less trendy. All in all, though, that's where the numbers play out - not in any rules. If it came down to being all compound classes, I would still show with a barebow. It's part of that wiring.


----------



## SBills

MartinOttosson said:


> There´s only one solution to this issue. You americans have to realize that the world actually doesn´t begin in San Fransisco and end in New York. If you go there, and think to see an edge, that is actually not an edge, but what we in the rest of the world call an ocean. It´s water (like the thing they make Coca Cola of). We know you know what it is, since you put too much in it in your beer. If you cross that ocean, you will find other countries where there is a lot less mess than in your own.
> 
> Where I live and shoot there is just one set of rules. Barebow is barebow. Compound is compound. Recurve is recurve. Done. It´s you that mess things up with divisions like Masters Men Compound Limited Bowhunters Half-Barebow Max 3 Pin On The Sight But With Lens In The Peep And Poop Hole In The Pants. Your result lists just looks ridiculous. Everyone gets to win, since everybody have their own class. No, dear United States of North Mexico, it´s time to get down from your limping horse and adapt to the rest of the world. Hunt with one bow, compete with another. It can't be THAT hard?


Martin from the top rope and spot on.

Oh and can we please convert to the metric system? The Europeans have mastered it. It can’t be that hard. :wink:


----------



## limbwalker

Mr. Roboto said:


> And I am a lousy barebow shooter. 732 is my best


Keep at it. You'll get there.


----------



## Bigjono

MartinOttosson said:


> There´s only one solution to this issue. You americans have to realize that the world actually doesn´t begin in San Fransisco and end in New York. If you go there, and think to see an edge, that is actually not an edge, but what we in the rest of the world call an ocean. It´s water (like the thing they make Coca Cola of). We know you know what it is, since you put too much in it in your beer. If you cross that ocean, you will find other countries where there is a lot less mess than in your own.
> 
> Where I live and shoot there is just one set of rules. Barebow is barebow. Compound is compound. Recurve is recurve. Done. It´s you that mess things up with divisions like Masters Men Compound Limited Bowhunters Half-Barebow Max 3 Pin On The Sight But With Lens In The Peep And Poop Hole In The Pants. Your result lists just looks ridiculous. Everyone gets to win, since everybody have their own class. No, dear United States of North Mexico, it´s time to get down from your limping horse and adapt to the rest of the world. Hunt with one bow, compete with another. It can't be THAT hard?


Great Post Martin, that hits the nail right on the head. This "must have class to please everyone" mentality is just killing archery here. I turn up at shoots where there are about 12 different class sign in sheets and only 50 archers, it's just stupid. It seems like some federations cave in to the loudest lobbyists. Can't win longbow, never mind, change the rules until I can, or add another class so I can win that, ***????


----------



## limbwalker

MartinOttosson said:


> There´s only one solution to this issue. You americans have to realize that the world actually doesn´t begin in San Fransisco and end in New York. If you go there, and think to see an edge, that is actually not an edge, but what we in the rest of the world call an ocean. It´s water (like the thing they make Coca Cola of). We know you know what it is, since you put too much in it in your beer. If you cross that ocean, you will find other countries where there is a lot less mess than in your own.
> 
> Where I live and shoot there is just one set of rules. Barebow is barebow. Compound is compound. Recurve is recurve. Done. It´s you that mess things up with divisions like Masters Men Compound Limited Bowhunters Half-Barebow Max 3 Pin On The Sight But With Lens In The Peep And Poop Hole In The Pants. Your result lists just looks ridiculous. Everyone gets to win, since everybody have their own class. No, dear United States of North Mexico, it´s time to get down from your limping horse and adapt to the rest of the world. Hunt with one bow, compete with another. It can't be THAT hard?


Epic.


----------



## limbwalker

> No one ever talks about WHY barebow is on the chopping block. Maybe its time we started asking that question.


Participation is a big reason, but not the only reason it's on the so-called "chopping block", off and then on again...

Barebow is simply an area that a majority of our archers and leadership within our archery organizations are unfamiliar with. More and more now, archers have little or no experience learning to shoot barebow before they move on (they say "up", but I say on) to compound and Oly. recurve. Where the idea that moving on to compound or Oly. recurve is a step UP came from, I don't know, but that's the stereotype we deal with. 

Part of it is indeed the culture we live in. Accessories are viewed as cool. Shooting 10's is viewed as much more cool than 8's. The appreciation for pure archery simply doesn't exist as much as it used to, but we are at time right now when we have a chance to move the needle in the other direction because all these kid's heroes are shooting BAREBOW in the movies. So we need to take advantage of this now.

The message to the archery organizations should also be to SERVE the membership that wants to shoot barebow! Telling our young enthusiastic barebow archers that they must switch to compound or recurve to be taken seriously is insulting and frankly, disrespectful of the wishes of those members!

I've told this story 100 times, but this issue first hit home with me when my oldest daughter - a talented and very enthusiastic barebow archer - topped out in our JOAD program because there were NO barebow achievements and she was forced to shoot to the recurve achievement standards. She tried shooting recurve, but just didn't like it. Eventually she quit JOAD, just as many other kids that shot barebow did. Why bother when there is no achievement program, and no division at indoor or outdoor nationals? 

So the "participation" excuse was a self-fulfilling prophecy for those who ignored or looked down their noses at barebow archers.

The resurrection of "traditional" archery in the 80's and 90's didn't help that much either, further driving a wedge between serious target archers and those who shot "barebow." The wish by target archery elitists to view barebow archers as knuckle-dragging, stuck-in-the-past heathens was fulfilled when the flannel shirt army took over "barebow" in the U.S. 

Finally, say what you want about us Americans Martin, (and I largely agree that you are spot-on) but it doesn't help matters on this side of the pond when World Archery relegates barebow to field only. If WA would include barebow in the Indoor and Outdoor world championships, I GUARANTEE YOU that USArchery would take barebow more seriously. So, I'll throw the ball back to your side of the pond, and challege the Europeans to get WA to step up on this one.


----------



## Greysides

MartinOttosson said:


> Where I live and shoot there is just one set of rules.


Don't worry, when the ice caps melt we'll send up some IFAA rules to confuse you.....


----------



## Bigjono

Greysides said:


> Don't worry, when the ice caps melt we'll send up some IFAA rules to confuse you.....


Lol


----------



## wfocharlie

MartinOttosson said:


> There´s only one solution to this issue. You americans have to realize that the world actually doesn´t begin in San Fransisco and end in New York. If you go there, and think to see an edge, that is actually not an edge, but what we in the rest of the world call an ocean. It´s water (like the thing they make Coca Cola of). We know you know what it is, since you put too much in it in your beer. If you cross that ocean, you will find other countries where there is a lot less mess than in your own.
> 
> Where I live and shoot there is just one set of rules. Barebow is barebow. Compound is compound. Recurve is recurve. Done. It´s you that mess things up with divisions like Masters Men Compound Limited Bowhunters Half-Barebow Max 3 Pin On The Sight But With Lens In The Peep And Poop Hole In The Pants. Your result lists just looks ridiculous. Everyone gets to win, since everybody have their own class. No, dear United States of North Mexico, it´s time to get down from your limping horse and adapt to the rest of the world. Hunt with one bow, compete with another. It can't be THAT hard?


I agree with all of this just please don't eliminate Master's men. lmao


----------



## limbwalker

One other important point that is too obvious to ignore...

Major archery organizations "think" they depend on sponsor support. Therefore, they cater to the wishes of those sponsors to a great degree. And frankly, archery manufacturers don't LIKE barebow archers because we don't buy enough crap. So there is pressure from the manufacturers of that crap put on (whether directly or overtly) those in the organizations to view barebow as a "beginner" or "fringe" discipline.

It's total nonsense IMO, and is driven by nothing other than the almighty dollar.

Walk into an archery shop in the US with a barebow sometime and see what kind of reception you get. 9 times out of 10 the owner will roll their eyes because they know at best, they might sell you some range time, and a lot of days they don't even want you taking up space on their range.


----------



## Greysides

limbwalker said:


> Telling our young enthusiastic barebow archers that they must switch to compound or recurve to be taken seriously is insulting and frankly, disrespectful of the wishes of those members!


From an outsiders perspective:
A little more publicity for the achievements of the US BB archers in the US might help. Mark Applegate, Ty Pelfry, Skip Trafford, Harold Rush, Becky Nelson-Harris, Zane Smith, among others have shot well for the US in field competitions but without getting the accolade they deserve, outside of those already in the know. The promotion of field archery in its entirety will help achieve that status. If for no other reason than that you have to have a BB archer on a country team. You have a crop of BB archers at the moment that are well capable of carrying that torch both in 3D (very popular in the US, I believe, and which is shot over distances similar to WA 3D) and in field.

To get them there, financially, some sort of fund needs to be organised. Bar some very large European federations, most Euro archers will be at least partially funding their own travel. It's completely disgraceful in a country the size of the US that they even have to buy the shirt they wear.



> Finally, say what you want about us Americans Martin, (and I largely agree that you are spot-on) but it doesn't help matters on this side of the pond when World Archery relegates barebow to field only. If WA would include barebow in the Indoor and Outdoor world championships, I GUARANTEE YOU that USArchery would take barebow more seriously. So, I'll throw the ball back to your side of the pond, and challege the Europeans to get WA to step up on this one.


Our local clubs recognise BB and a lot of competitions will have a BB section in indoor archery. Outdoors over the longer distances, well that's a different matter. The IFAF/IFAA federation also support indoor archery.

(However, it's also true that most of our BB archers don't want to shoot longer than 50m as evidenced by the paucity of cross-over WA BB archers shooting the longer IFAA field distances. They might be a little better 'up north' but the southern response to the dropping of inter-federation obstacles has been a little disappointing.)


----------



## limbwalker

On the 50-meter question... USArchery was wanting the adults and masters to shoot at 50 meters, because that's the max distance they shoot in field. However, I quickly reminded them that in field, they are shooting 50 meters on *an 80 cm face*, not a 122! The equivalent of an 80cm face at 50 meters, is actually a *122cm face at 70 meters*! 

When I pointed that out, they were like "Oh yea. you're right! okay, 60 meters it is..." 



> From an outsiders perspective:
> A little more publicity for the achievements of the US BB archers in the US might help. Mark Applegate, Ty Pelfry, Skip Trafford, Harold Rush, Becky Nelson-Harris, Zane Smith, among others have shot well for the US in field competitions but without getting the accolade they deserve, outside of those already in the know.


This is a true chicken-or-the-egg argument. If there are no celebrity barebow archers shooting at major events, there are no stories to promote and heroes for the younger ones to look up to. So putting the responsibility strictly on the archers to show participation numbers is really taking the easy way out. The two have to go hand in hand - promotion by the organizations, AND participation by the archers. It's unfair to simply say we archers must produce numbers, while the only faces on the websites are Erika Jones and Brady Ellison.

Stories like this one that Tereasa Iaconi did recently on one of my barebow archers, will most certainly help. This is what we need to draw in participation. But it's just the first step. Kids look up to Erika Jones, Brady, Jenny and Khatuna because of their Olympic and World Championship accomplishments. Sure, we can highlight what Demmer, Eagleton, Rogers, Nelson-Harris and others are doing with barebow, but it still doesn't quite match the profiles of the archery superstars that shoot the biggest events on earth. We need to continue to fight for barebow inclusion in the world championships. Then we will see the trickle-down effect that this will have on our national and local governing bodies.

John


----------



## 2413gary

You must remember we are AMERICAN"S that's why we moved over here:wink:


MartinOttosson said:


> There´s only one solution to this issue. You americans have to realize that the world actually doesn´t begin in San Fransisco and end in New York. If you go there, and think to see an edge, that is actually not an edge, but what we in the rest of the world call an ocean. It´s water (like the thing they make Coca Cola of). We know you know what it is, since you put too much in it in your beer. If you cross that ocean, you will find other countries where there is a lot less mess than in your own.
> 
> Where I live and shoot there is just one set of rules. Barebow is barebow. Compound is compound. Recurve is recurve. Done. It´s you that mess things up with divisions like Masters Men Compound Limited Bowhunters Half-Barebow Max 3 Pin On The Sight But With Lens In The Peep And Poop Hole In The Pants. Your result lists just looks ridiculous. Everyone gets to win, since everybody have their own class. No, dear United States of North Mexico, it´s time to get down from your limping horse and adapt to the rest of the world. Hunt with one bow, compete with another. It can't be THAT hard?


----------



## Demmer

2413gary said:


> You must remember we are AMERICAN"S that's why we moved over here:wink:


Speak for yourself. You are probably the last of the group to have moved over here. The rest were born here.   lol


----------



## lksseven

Demmer said:


> Speak for yourself. You are probably the last of the group to have moved over here. The rest were born here.   lol


Now _THAT'S_ funny! :banana:


----------



## 2413gary

You forget Sandy's an American Indian I'm doing my part to Assimilate :shade:


Demmer said:


> Speak for yourself. You are probably the last of the group to have moved over here. The rest were born here.   lol


----------



## J. Wesbrock

I thought Dana was an American Indian.


----------



## Azzurri

Let's see......
My 70/50 scores are lockstep with the different faces, interesting point.

I think there should be indoor and outdoor grand slams (USAT covers outside, but not in....and Lancaster and Vegas would be BB indoor legs). That includes BB even if you have to set up something outside of USAA (if only to start) to do it. Having a step between local events and nationals might promote BB participation at Nats. 

I think there should be regional qualifiers for the national indoor and outdoor events, combining aspects of how those events are run now. Qualify locally -- decide it nationally -- among the best qualifiers. Elites and plebes alike happy and involved. Maybe more outdoor shooters would try to qualify if they could do so locally. Maybe the indoor would have more oomph if there was one showdown someplace and not just shooting for score in several places over several weekends.

You have reason to be concerned about numbers b/c I know at least one shooter nominally BB right now competing at nationals who's asking me about sights not long after mentioning tournament numbers. And it does risk being a self fulfilling catch 22 of sorts. So I wouldn't be turning away people putting arrows in the grass, for now at least. The elite BB shooter is a selling point but the numbers need to be good for viability. You need the plebes.

As a low DW intermediate, I view signing up for big events as motivational. You don't have to think you're Ellison or going to be in the Olympics to view preparing for serious events as a means of encouraging yourself to do the hard work to put up an eventual performance somewhat worthy of the event. Some people have more of a "game" mentality where they thrive on the experience of the event, don't have pressure problems because of their jock backgrounds but maybe need to improve technically to compete within the pack. In the process of chasing your ambitious schedule and doing that hard work, the side effect is you pick up dozens of points and move up the local table. Not saying I'm all that good but it's been working for me. And I look at my scores versus prior tournament scores and give thought to whether I am at least within the bandwidth of what people scored last year.


----------



## Bigjono

2413gary said:


> You forget Sandy's an American Indian I'm doing my part to Assimilate :shade:


Gary, even the American Indians moved here from Asia, you must remember seeing that surely


----------



## Bigjono

J. Wesbrock said:


> I thought Dana was an American Indian.


Lol 
He's known as the wolf whisperer now Jason.


----------



## Warbow

limbwalker said:


> One other important point that is too obvious to ignore...
> 
> Major archery organizations "think" they depend on sponsor support. Therefore, they cater to the wishes of those sponsors to a great degree. And frankly, archery manufacturers don't LIKE barebow archers because we don't buy enough crap.


Maybe B Stinger could make USAA endorsed BB weights? :dontknow:


----------



## limbwalker

Warbow said:


> Maybe B Stinger could make USAA endorsed BB weights? :dontknow:


Only if they thought they could sell them for $100 ea. and have Jennifer Lawrence shooting them in competition. LOL.


----------



## wanemann

Why barebow should be eliminated. 

1.being that it a class dominated by stringwalkers, that is the hardest and most complicated way to accurately get an arrow down range.
2.there is already a sighted recurve category 
3.the trad folks get very upset when you default to there category and win because the compound people think all recurves without a sight on it is the same thing. 
4.takes forever to get good at it, who has that patience these day?

take it easy wasn't me that asked the question  lol

wayne


----------



## steve morley

I totally agree, I also think it should be banned in Sweden, Finland, Italy, Spain and France, I might have a chance at winning something at WA Euro Field champs in Poland :wink:


----------



## Chris1ny

Ten_Zen said:


> So I am gonna play a little devils advocate here and offer up a few reasons why it makes sense to eliminate the barebow class. Warning, feathers may be ruffled by this thread.
> 
> 1)...Barebow is the fastest growing archery division...


Sounds like barebow needs to be expanded.


----------



## limbwalker

After the way I shot today, I may eliminate barebow in my own hands soon. LOL.


----------



## steve morley

J. Wesbrock said:


> I thought Dana was an American Indian.


No just Indian

Although in the past he has been mistaken for American Indian, Cuban and a Woman :wink:


----------



## lizard

i need a lesson from you!



Mr. Roboto said:


> One reason, so all the Olympic style shooters can quit crying when I routinely spank them at 900 rounds. It is utterly amazing how cranky they get. Granted they are no Brady, but they just cant stand it when I dance with them and beat them. And I am just using a wood bow.


----------



## lizard

You should see the new list that is growing for USA Archery! It is starting to look similar to NFAA, at least on the Indoor Nationals applications! Certain ages only for certain divisions...maybe even a division if you have a hang nail...who knows. Too much fall-de-rall
I gotta agree, RECURVE, COMPOUND then Traditional Bare bow. 

So a bit of history on me, if you don't know...I began shooting recurve, then I tried crossbow, then compound, then TNC Crossbow (didn't compete), then after I figured out, on compound and especially xbow, in the middle is your territory, and since I didn't want to put in the hours, since I had a small child. I thought, BAREBOW (FITA or Olympic style) would be the ticket! I FELL IN LOVE with this shooting. Not only because it was gratifying to hear the arrow hit, but I found it is rather more an art form that nobody, from the outside, really quite understands. I was hooked, and have won many state , and a few national titles, and am upset because of this blatant attempt to eliminate my CHOSEN discipline. 

We are a different breed, us BB shooters! 



Bigjono said:


> Great Post Martin, that hits the nail right on the head. This "must have class to please everyone" mentality is just killing archery here. I turn up at shoots where there are about 12 different class sign in sheets and only 50 archers, it's just stupid. It seems like some federations cave in to the loudest lobbyists. Can't win longbow, never mind, change the rules until I can, or add another class so I can win that, ***????


----------



## Mr. Roboto

Long Live the Barebow


----------



## HikerDave

MartinOttosson said:


> There´s only one solution to this issue. You americans have to realize that the world actually doesn´t begin in San Fransisco and end in New York. If you go there, and think to see an edge, that is actually not an edge, but what we in the rest of the world call an ocean. It´s water (like the thing they make Coca Cola of). We know you know what it is, since you put too much in it in your beer. If you cross that ocean, you will find other countries where there is a lot less mess than in your own.
> 
> Where I live and shoot there is just one set of rules. Barebow is barebow. Compound is compound. Recurve is recurve. Done. It´s you that mess things up with divisions like Masters Men Compound Limited Bowhunters Half-Barebow Max 3 Pin On The Sight But With Lens In The Peep And Poop Hole In The Pants. Your result lists just looks ridiculous. Everyone gets to win, since everybody have their own class. No, dear United States of North Mexico, it´s time to get down from your limping horse and adapt to the rest of the world. Hunt with one bow, compete with another. It can't be THAT hard?


We have good beer here in the U.S.A. We drink the good stuff ourselves and export the rest.


----------



## limbwalker

HikerDave said:


> We have good beer here in the U.S.A. We drink the good stuff ourselves and export the rest.


Shhhhh! Let them think we only have cheap watered down beer.


----------



## Bigjono

You're fooling yourself guys, you don't have decent beer. I think you should all try a Bishops Finger or a nice Cock Puncher, it will put hairs on your chest


----------



## limbwalker

Bigjono said:


> You're fooling yourself guys, you don't have decent beer. I think you should all try a Bishops Finger or a nice Cock Puncher, it will put hairs on your chest


Okay. Cool. One less customer to take my beer. 

BTW, the month I spent in Saskatchewan left me wondering if Canadians even drank beer. All I tasted was skunk water.


----------



## limbwalker

Uh oh. A barebow thread just ended up in a discussion about beer. Well, that seals it. The rumors are true. We cannot possibly be serious archers now. ROTF!


----------



## Bigjono

limbwalker said:


> Okay. Cool. One less customer to take my beer.
> 
> BTW, the month I spent in Saskatchewan left me wondering if Canadians even drank beer. All I tasted was skunk water.


I'm a Brit import though, not a Canadian


----------



## Bigjono

Barebow and beer, both should be taken seriously, though not at the same time


----------



## limbwalker

LOL. I completely agree.


----------



## vabowdog

Bigjono said:


> You're fooling yourself guys, you don't have decent beer. I think you should all try a Bishops Finger or a nice Cock Puncher, it will put hairs on your chest





Jon, REAL men have hair on their chest...from the age of 12...LOL


Dewayne Martin


----------



## Ten_Zen

Since we're on the topic: Lost Coast, Mendocino, Mount Shasta, Booneville, Deschutes, Six Rivers, Humboldt, and Lagunitas are all breweries within 200 miles of where I live that will beat the pants off any euro import. We may not know what lies beyond the great world edge (or "ocean" as you foreigners call it) but we the people of North Mexico are FLUENT in the art of getting drunk.


----------



## Bigjono

vabowdog said:


> Jon, REAL men have hair on their chest...from the age of 12...LOL
> 
> 
> Dewayne Martin


Lol


----------



## Bigjono

Ten_Zen said:


> Since we're on the topic: Lost Coast, Mendocino, Mount Shasta, Booneville, Deschutes, Six Rivers, Humboldt, and Lagunitas are all breweries within 200 miles of where I live that will beat the pants off any euro import. We may not know what lies beyond the great world edge (or "ocean" as you foreigners call it) but we the people of North Mexico are FLUENT in the art of getting drunk.


I think Ale from Britain and beer from Belgium may disagree with that


----------



## Ms.Speedmaster

limbwalker said:


> Walk into an archery shop in the US with a barebow sometime and see what kind of reception you get. 9 times out of 10 the owner will roll their eyes because they know at best, they might sell you some range time, and a lot of days they don't even want you taking up space on their range.


That's certainly not the case at X10 Archery. We have found a niche with trad and target archery, and archers are flocking. We're more interested in building relationships and providing great customer service to create return customers, rather than high pressure add-on sales at the risk of putting someone off. 

We're embracing the barebow. 

Hmm... maybe my CNC buddy can design some custom weights...


----------



## rsarns

J. Wesbrock said:


> I thought Dana was an American Indian.


WOw.. not from my tribe.. LOL


----------



## _JR_

Ten_Zen said:


> Since we're on the topic: Lost Coast, Mendocino, Mount Shasta, Booneville, Deschutes, Six Rivers, Humboldt, and Lagunitas are all breweries within 200 miles


Don't forget Russian River Brewery (Santa Rosa) - they make the the #4 and the #16 beers in the ratebeer.com "top 50" list:
http://www.ratebeer.com/beer/top-50/

So anyway, come shoot with us on April 11 in our "Wine Country / SSU 900 Open and Fun Shoot"! Barebow, Compound, or Recurve.
https://webpoint.usarchery.org/wp15/Events2/ViewEvt.wp?EventID=3667

After you're done, stop by the aforementioned Russian River Brewery - it's 9 only miles north.
Going the other way? - 9 miles south is Lagunitas Brewery, winners of Gold and Silver medals for several years at the Stockholm beer competition.


----------



## Mr. Roboto

I want to earn a spot on the US Field Archery team in 2016. The first thing I will do in Ireland is get me a Guinness. I love that beer here in America, and I hear rumors that the junk Guinness is what is sold in the US, and the good stuff stays in Ireland. If what I am drinking here in the US is the bad stuff, I can only imagine what the good stuff tastes like.


----------



## limbwalker

Mr. Roboto said:


> I want to earn a spot on the US Field Archery team in 2016. The first thing I will do in Ireland is get me a Guinness. I love that beer here in America, and I hear rumors that the junk Guinness is what is sold in the US, and the good stuff stays in Ireland. If what I am drinking here in the US is the bad stuff, I can only imagine what the good stuff tastes like.


If you think Guiness is good, you have a lot to learn about what good beer is. Sorry, but that's the truth.


----------



## Mr. Roboto

I am a big customer of the microbrews where I live, and I got a Blue Moon in my hand right now. A few years ago, I was visiting family in the Houston area (the wife's family) and Uncle Dennis asks me what kind of beer I like, and I said Guinness, and his response was, "Down here we don't drink that fancy stuff" so he orders us a Miller. Well the way I looked at this situation was: a free beer is always a good beer.

And if I am in Ireland, I will still get me a Guinness


----------



## Mr. Roboto

Since we barebow shooters like beer (except Ben - which I totally respect his decision), how come we cant get the beer companies to sponsor us? I wouldn't have a problem wearing one of those red or gold colored team shirts that everyone wears at tournaments if it had beer sponsors written all over them.


----------



## Ten_Zen

limbwalker said:


> If you think Guiness is good, you have a lot to learn about what good beer is. Sorry, but that's the truth.


a major +1 to that


----------



## Greysides

limbwalker said:


> If you think Guiness is good, you have a lot to learn about what good beer is. Sorry, but that's the truth.


Guiness is a stout.


----------



## Bigjono

Greysides said:


> Guiness is a stout.


Thank you Aidan. Stout and Porter is not beer, ale or lager.


----------



## Ms.Speedmaster

It's true that the Guinness here in the US is nothing like real Guinness. It's altered for the American palette. 

It's like Cadbury chocolate being made by Hershey. You guys wouldn't notice the difference, but I do.


----------



## limbwalker

Greysides said:


> Guiness is a stout.


Ah. Must be why I think it tastes like... well... ahem.


----------



## TER

Stout is a style of beer. Stout is very dark, heavy, and strong. Stout beer is delicious. North American Guinness is not a very good stout.

Blue Moon is owned by MillerCoors. Blue Moon is not an independent craft brewer.


----------



## Ten_Zen

Bigjono said:


> Thank you Aidan. Stout and Porter is not beer, ale or lager.


Oh good lord, and fig newtons are fruit and cake. Ale, Lager, Porter, and Stout are all beers. you want a good stout? Booneville Oatmeal stout will stand up to any other stout including a Guiness poured straight from the beating heart of an Irishman.


----------



## Eriks

Bigjono said:


> Gary, even the American Indians moved here from Asia, you must remember seeing that surely [emoji16]


Are you kidding? Gary helped build the land bridge.


----------



## Nick1959

How about a good bourbon stout?


----------



## grantmac

Put me down for a Black Butte, I love a real porter.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker

Ten_Zen said:


> Oh good lord, and fig newtons are fruit and cake. Ale, Lager, Porter, and Stout are all beers. you want a good stout? Booneville Oatmeal stout will stand up to any other stout including a Guiness poured straight from the beating heart of an Irishman.


Now you're talking!


----------



## Greysides

What I've heard, and I don't drink enough to know much on the subject, is that Irish Guinness is made completely at the brewery and transported as liquid. Some of the taste is due to the water source used, a river coming off a bog, I believe. Guinness for export is exported as a concentrate and watered down with local water on arrival to cut down transportation costs. Hence the difference in taste. In any event, my brother-in-law, who's much more accomplished than me on this subject, is always keen to get some draught Guinness when he visits as he reckons it tastes a lot better. Me, I like a cider!


----------



## Mr. Roboto

Yeah, I like Black Butte also. The wife hates it.

Grant, the next time you are in Bellingham, check out Boundary Bay Brewery and get their Scotch Ale. I discovered that one when I was at a restaurant a few years ago when I was at a field shoot at Darrington. Since then I make my brother in-law bring me a case when ever he comes to visit.

Pete


----------



## Bigjono

Eriks said:


> Are you kidding? Gary helped build the land bridge.


[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]


----------



## Bigjono

Greysides said:


> What I've heard, and I don't drink enough to know much on the subject, is that Irish Guinness is made completely at the brewery and transported as liquid. Some of the taste is due to the water source used, a river coming off a bog, I believe. Guinness for export is exported as a concentrate and watered down with local water on arrival to cut down transportation costs. Hence the difference in taste. In any event, my brother-in-law, who's much more accomplished than me on this subject, is always keen to get some draught Guinness when he visits as he reckons it tastes a lot better. Me, I like a cider!


Proper Irish Guiness tastes totally different to the crap we get here that's for sure.


----------



## 2413gary

How are you guys ever going to get Barebow rules right when you can't agree on what's good beer ?


----------



## Warbow

2413gary said:


> How are you guys ever going to get Barebow rules right when you can't agree on what's good beer ?


Or whether or not the beer should have a stabilizer... :embara:


----------



## John_K

Last time I visited Ireland, my Irish friends were horrified that I expressed an interest in having Guinness. They dismissed it as mass-manufactured crap.

They made me do a blind taste test with four half-pints of stout (oh, the hardship!). My least favourite was the Guinness: very little depth of flavour. Murphy's and Beamish were joint second, and by far the best was the small brewery O'Hara's stout.

Irish Guinness may be better than the Guinness you get elsewhere, but it's far from the best Irish stout


----------



## Bigjono

Warbow said:


> Or whether or not the beer should have a stabilizer... :embara:


If I drink enough I need a stabilizer that's for sure [emoji16]


----------



## Bigjono

John_K said:


> Last time I visited Ireland, my Irish friends were horrified that I expressed an interest in having Guinness. They dismissed it as mass-manufactured crap.
> 
> They made me do a blind taste test with four half-pints of stout (oh, the hardship!). My least favourite was the Guinness: very little depth of flavour. Murphy's and Beamish were joint second, and by far the best was the small brewery O'Hara's stout.
> 
> Irish Guinness may be better than the Guinness you get elsewhere, but it's far from the best Irish stout


x 2 on O'Hara's. Fullers London Porter is really special too.


----------



## Azzurri

2413gary said:


> How are you guys ever going to get Barebow rules right when you can't agree on what's good beer ?


How about you get all the right people in the same place and ply them with these beverages and then have them work on the rules.


----------



## Bigjono

Azzurri said:


> How about you get all the right people in the same place and ply them with these beverages and then have them work on the rules.


Now there's a man with a plan [emoji16]


----------



## 2413gary

If Dana was an American Indian he would be a Republican !!


rsarns said:


> WOw.. not from my tribe.. LOL


----------



## TER

Barebow should be eliminated because it has too many grumpy old men.


----------



## chrstphr

TER said:


> Barebow should be eliminated because it has too many grumpy old men.


lol. best post yet. 


Chris


----------



## Mr. Roboto

So what is the difference between being grumpy and standing firm on an opinion?


----------



## chrstphr

Perhaps Olympic recurve had this same bickering and animosity. Perhaps thats why it took from 1920 to 1972 for archery to return to the Olympics. 52 years of grumpy old archers / grumpy old countries bickering about who's set of rules has it right. who's tournament is right. 

maybe barebow should look to World archery. After 52 years, they finally figured it out. Or perhaps they just waited until all the grumpy old opponents died off. 

Chris


----------



## TER

Mr. Roboto said:


> So what is the difference between being grumpy and standing firm on an opinion?


Do you really believe I'm going to fall for playing that game? I know how this will play out. I will sincerely explain the difference between standing firm on an honestly held opinion and just disagreeing with whatever anyone else posts/picking useless fights. Then you will claim I'm saying strange things that cannot possibly be meant by the words I arranged into sentences. I will explain even more clearly, using the simplest words I can use. You will insist I mean something completely unrelated to what I'm actually saying. You aren't like itbozo; you do seem to be a good-natured person, but you do seem to believe some of his paranoid nonsense. So now I've ended up describing what I mean by grumpy: refusing to comprehend what others are saying, twisting other people's words into crazy stuff they obviously are not saying and don't mean, insisting others are just out to get you and destroy whatever you like, just being completely dishonest, unreasonable and irrational.


----------



## limbwalker

LOL. 

Ah, yes Chris, I'm sure you're right. I'm sure there was probably 50 years of bickering among grumpy old men before the 72 games. I just had hoped we could improve on that number and pray it takes the barebow community less than 50 years to get there. 

I'll say it again though - this is WHY barebow is relegated to the margins of every major target event. PRECISELY why. Nobody wants to watch a bunch of angry old men shoot and then snipe at each other afterwards. 

This is not how we grow barebow either. The more bickering that goes on by the angry old me, the fewer women and youth will want to participate. The women get enough of this at home, and the kids don't want their role models to be angry old men. 

It really is that simple folks. Either get on board with the idea, or be pushed aside yet again.


----------



## Ms.Speedmaster

So, let's come up with a good line that can be shared with the new archers when they ask when they can have all the bells and whistles that they see on the other bows. 

I tell them that shooting barebow is a great skill to have, it's way more fun and is... original archery. 

Here's how it rolls. On my range, the barebow/trad shooters come in on their lunch break during the week. One guy is retired. If I have a homeschool lesson at the same time, the student stays interested in barebow. After all, that's what Katniss shoots, right? 

In the evenings, when the OR and compound crowd come in, the students are asking about the "things on those bows".

Interesting dynamic. Monkey see, monkey do?


----------



## Azzurri

Ms.Speedmaster said:


> So, let's come up with a good line that can be shared with the new archers when they ask when they can have all the bells and whistles that they see on the other bows.
> 
> I tell them that shooting barebow is a great skill to have, it's way more fun and is... original archery.
> 
> Here's how it rolls. On my range, the barebow/trad shooters come in on their lunch break during the week. One guy is retired. If I have a homeschool lesson, the student stays interested in barebow. After all, that's what Katniss shoots, right?
> 
> In the evenings, when the OR and compound crowd come in, the students are asking about the "things on those bows".
> 
> Interesting dynamic. Monkey see, monkey do?


I wouldn't doubt it for a second, that plus self-selection. If I take my trad bow to one range in town it's seen as a hunting thing and I'm left alone. If I go to another range, a sight would be put on it within one session or if I showed up with it for league, I'd be shown the house bow OR rack. Some top-down and yes some down imitating top. It varies from range to range and it's cultural. I've been the only OR I've seen for months at some ranges that are heavy compound or traditional. Yours would be unusual in that no style dominates and all are encouraged so it would kind of be an organic growth of what people find interesting, which would include some copying.

In fairness put me with OR people and I will ask about what they have, if they let me try their things I'll see what it's like. Some is natural curiosity. Some is following.


----------



## itbeso

TER said:


> Do you really believe I'm going to fall for playing that game? I know how this will play out. I will sincerely explain the difference between standing firm on an honestly held opinion and just disagreeing with whatever anyone else posts/picking useless fights. Then you will claim I'm saying strange things that cannot possibly be meant by the words I arranged into sentences. I will explain even more clearly, using the simplest words I can use. You will insist I mean something completely unrelated to what I'm actually saying. You aren't like itbozo; you do seem to be a good-natured person, but you do seem to believe some of his paranoid nonsense. So now I've ended up describing what I mean by grumpy: refusing to comprehend what others are saying, twisting other people's words into crazy stuff they obviously are not saying and don't mean, insisting others are just out to get you and destroy whatever you like, just being completely dishonest, unreasonable and irrational.


Ter. D. on't tread on anyone. Talk about paranoia and condescention!! You are exactly what is wrong with these forums. Your comprehension skills are severely lacking and your analysis of people you have never met shows me you are one lonely, downtrodden puppy looking for acceptance from this forums most prolific poster. I'm sure you will get it for bashing me but the reality is that your opinion doesn't mean squat to the archers who actually compete in our division and know the difference between who has their back and who is desperately wanting to be included. You should try shooting in our group some time, you might actually enjoy a tournament for the first time. Meanwhile, in my simplest words, don't talk about things you know nothing about.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

limbwalker said:


> I'll say it again though - this is WHY barebow is relegated to the margins of every major target event. PRECISELY why. Nobody wants to watch a bunch of angry old men shoot and then snipe at each other afterwards.
> 
> This is not how we grow barebow either. The more bickering that goes on by the angry old me, the fewer women and youth will want to participate. The women get enough of this at home, and the kids don't want their role models to be angry old men.
> 
> It really is that simple folks. Either get on board with the idea, or be pushed aside yet again.


John,

For what it’s worth, I spent last weekend at the NFAA Indoor Nationals shooting Adult Male Barebow and hanging around all the unaided classes – Barebow, Bowhunter, and Traditional. Between Friday practice and the following two days of competition, everyone seemed to be helping and encouraging each other. I couldn’t begin to tell you how many times I saw people rooting for the person ahead of them on the board.

Even the rules violation incident on Sunday that resulted in a formal protest and an archer being reassigned to another class was handled in a friendly, polite manner with both parties shaking hands and parting on good terms. That was probably the most contentious thing that happed in the unaided classes, and there was no sniping involved.

I did have the pleasure of hanging around a bunch of “old men.” They were shooting Master Senior Barebow (70+) and were some of the friendliest people I’ve ever met. I even spent a few hours over dinner at a restaurant afterwards picking one’s brain and learning about the history of the unaided classes in the NFAA. It was a rare treat, and one I hope to experience again next year.


----------



## Azzurri

I also wouldn't conflate debate on AT with how people act real life practicing/ shooting.


----------



## limbwalker

I agree Jason. That's the same experience I've always had at that event, and I can't tell you how many TRAD shooters welcomed me with open arms in 2013 when I shot that division. I was pretty blown away they would even care.

So, I guess all the mean spirited comments are saved for this and other trad internet forums then? 

I don't get it either. I had to leave the Leatherbrawl and Trad Talk because of the haters. This place has been a peaceful respite from that until, as our mod pointed out, a few new "barebow" guys showed up. 

I think it's really just a few bad apples with a chip on their shoulder. Unfortunately, they either don't realize - or worse yet - don't care that they are giving barebow a black eye in the process, and very likely running off new barebow archers who are seeing these barebow threads on this forum and hoping to learn something. 

Just imagine if the grumpy old men were as encouraging and helpful here as those shooters you interacted with at Louisville! 

John


----------



## 2413gary

Jason I was thinking the same thing. I have seen nothing but Happy and smiles from all the Barebow groups. just a lot of helping and good fun. Don't know where you see this John but it's not where I shoot.


----------



## limbwalker

Gary, I'm just telling you what the perception is, particularly by some within USArchery. They do lurk here. Believe me. And when they see these kinds of silly arguments and personal attacks by some of the most well-known barebow archers in the U.S., including those they recognize from major events, well, it makes it all too easy for them to justify the way they treat us.


----------



## 2413gary

Thanks


limbwalker said:


> Gary, I'm just telling you what the perception is, particularly by some within USArchery. They do lurk here. Believe me. And when they see these kinds of silly arguments and personal attacks by some of the most well-known barebow archers in the U.S., including those they recognize from major events, well, it makes it all too easy for them to justify the way they treat us.


----------



## limbwalker

I hope USArchery learns a lot about their customers who choose to compete in barebow this summer. And I hope what they learn is all positive, because there are some in positions of influence who would just as soon see barebow eliminated completely from the USArchery schedule of events. Whining, complaning about the rules or format, inability to navigate registrations or follow simple instructions, etc. will only support the case of those who wish to see barebow be relegated to field only, or worse - removed totally.

I will continue to post as much up-to-date information as I can here, to avoid as much confusion as possible.


----------



## High Plains

John, have you seen this blog from USAA?

http://www.teamusa.org/USA-Archery/...-USA-Archery-Restructures-Outreach-Department

How do you think it may help Barebow?

Jeff


----------



## grantmac

limbwalker said:


> I had to leave the Leatherbrawl and Trad Talk because of the haters
> John


I dunno which TT you are talking about, but I sure haven't seen it there. Considering the extremely WIDE mix of interests and equipment that place is a calm lake of contentment.

Personally I like WA BB rules, so I would choose to shoot WA BB equipment in the future and just make it fit whichever class it happens to fit at the time. I think if more people took that approach (like Demmer) and made it work for them competitively then perhaps we could see a concerted move towards a common set of rules. However those who wish to maximize equipment for one particular class are welcome to do it.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker

High Plains said:


> John, have you seen this blog from USAA?
> 
> http://www.teamusa.org/USA-Archery/...-USA-Archery-Restructures-Outreach-Department
> 
> How do you think it may help Barebow?
> 
> Jeff


Jeff, I'm not sure. Time will tell. USArchery has made strides in opening doors to barebow archers. Including barebow in the JOAD and Adult programs was HUGE. This is the pipeline through which many of our better barebow shooters will come. The next step is opening up Nationals. This summer, Outdoor Nationals will be open to barebow archers, and I hope that next winter, Indoor Nationals will be open to all barebow archers, not just the adults. 

It would help tremendously if USArchery had on it's staff, archers who shot barebow. Heck, just archers in general, but especially some who shot barebow. 

Again, time will tell. I never speculate with USArchery because I've found it's a foolish thing to do.


----------



## limbwalker

Grant, TT has changed over the years. There was a period where a very visible and well known member and their groupies were on the attack, and I found no value in participating after a while. Hopefully those days have passed.

I also think my interest in all things "trad" has run it's course after 27 years of messing with it, and I'm now more interested in teaching, preparing archers for events, running a JOAD/AA program and organizing target events than I am in selecting wood for my next bow, crafting wood arrows, or debating whether single or double-bevel broadheads penetrate better.


----------



## target1

Just for the record, I am not anti-BB/trad. The reason I mod both is because.........I shoot both.

Some days it is my oly rig, other days it is my trad bow. I love, admire and respect both.

I think open honest, intelligent discussion on styles, rules and disciplines are healthy.

What I won't put up with childish "school yard bullies" on here. There is a reason that just about every pro or elite shooter steers clear of AT.

We are missing out on alot of good help and input due to a antics of a few. Don't be one of the few, Be one of the helpers.


----------



## Mr. Roboto

I am hoping I am not one of those "bad apples"

One of the best things I really like about the Trad/Barebow group is their ability to help one another even if they don't see eye to eye on everything. For example, I am pushing to take Gary's stab away from him in the desiring that the NFAA Trad division become WA Barebow compliant, and yet he is still spending time to help me with improving my shooting techniques. Or my friend Dan Croft who has won many Trad national championships and utterly hates the idea of allowing stringwalking, and yet still made me some strings for my new bow even when I told him it was for a stringwalking bow.

My wife tells me that I am a curmudgeon.


----------



## vephyr

This thread is incredibly insightful,

Just throwing my own perspective here as a total archery noob!
I have to admit, the idea of going barebow seemed like a straightforward approach to archery with the added versatility of being able to change up your rig whenever you wanted to.

I would've never known there was so much debate & discussion in the details...


----------



## limbwalker

vephyr said:


> This thread is incredibly insightful,
> 
> Just throwing my own perspective here as a total archery noob!
> I have to admit, the idea of going barebow seemed like a straightforward approach to archery with the added versatility of being able to change up your rig whenever you wanted to.
> 
> I would've never known there was so much debate & discussion in the details...


The variability of the rules invites debate and discussion. There is very little argument in the Olympic and Compound divisions about whether the rules are correct or not. They are accepted and everyone abides by them, with minor personal modifications or adjustments - again, within the rules.

It's the fact that barebow is a word used to describe everything from primitive archery to high-tech target archery shot without sights, that introduces the angst.

It reminds me of the never-ending "instinctive" arguments on traditional archery forums all over the world. There is no "official" definition, therefore there is endless debate. 

Instead of just saying "barebow" we probably should be saying "NFAA Barebow" or "NFAA Trad" or "IBO Recurve" or "WA Barebow" instead.


----------



## Houngan

limbwalker said:


> The variability of the rules invites debate and discussion. There is very little argument in the Olympic and Compound divisions about whether the rules are correct or not. They are accepted and everyone abides by them, with minor personal modifications or adjustments - again, within the rules.
> 
> It's the fact that barebow is a word used to describe everything from primitive archery to high-tech target archery shot without sights, that introduces the angst.
> 
> It reminds me of the never-ending "instinctive" arguments on traditional archery forums all over the world. There is no "official" definition, therefore there is endless debate.
> 
> Instead of just saying "barebow" we probably should be saying "NFAA Barebow" or "NFAA Trad" or "IBO Recurve" or "WA Barebow" instead.


Yep, it's easy to define Olympic "recurve with everything you want on it, except a peep or release" and compound "everything, period, with a speed ceiling" but barebow is the massive Other category. That's why I'm looking at trad bows, because my rest and plunger seemed iffy for a proper trad fest bow.


----------



## vephyr

limbwalker said:


> The variability of the rules invites debate and discussion. There is very little argument in the Olympic and Compound divisions about whether the rules are correct or not. They are accepted and everyone abides by them, with minor personal modifications or adjustments - again, within the rules.
> 
> It's the fact that barebow is a word used to describe everything from primitive archery to high-tech target archery shot without sights, that introduces the angst.
> 
> It reminds me of the never-ending "instinctive" arguments on traditional archery forums all over the world. There is no "official" definition, therefore there is endless debate.
> 
> Instead of just saying "barebow" we probably should be saying "NFAA Barebow" or "NFAA Trad" or "IBO Recurve" or "WA Barebow" instead.


Haha, now I find myself out in open sea again! There's just so much to... learn & figure out (?) about shooting barebow? I guess one way to look at it is I can't go wrong...?
I guess I'll have to see what one club says vs the other. 

Having those classifications certainly would help though!

Judging from these responses though, maybe it might be a bit more straightforward to see what olympic shooting is like than figuring out what counts as barebow :tongue:


----------



## limbwalker

> maybe it might be a bit more straightforward to see what olympic shooting is like than figuring out what counts as barebow


I actually think this (and the fact that it's the bow used in the Olympics) is a major reason why many choose the Olympic bow. Because the rules are straightforward and don't change from event to event. Olympic is an easily recognized division. 

Olympic is the "compromise bow", with some of the aids of a compound for added accuracy, but the extra "challenge" of the recurve for those who want to feel they are doing more of the work themselves. Barebow is just not accurate enough for some when they start out, so they switch to recurve or compound. This is why you see a lot of barebow shooters who are older - because they've perfected their technique enough to shoot barebow accurately, and they are looking for an extra challenge beyond what the Olympic bow offers.

For me personally, the Olympic bow is the easiest of the three to shoot. And I shot barebow and compound for many years before I ever shot Olympic.


----------



## Mr. Roboto

Houngan said:


> Yep, it's easy to define Olympic "recurve with everything you want on it, except a peep or release" and compound "everything, period, with a speed ceiling" but barebow is the massive Other category. That's why I'm looking at trad bows, because my rest and plunger seemed iffy for a proper trad fest bow.


Its funny how you use the word "Other"

When you are registering for an event on the USAA website, and the drop down menu choice for bow, you get three choices, Recurve (they mean the olympic recurve), Compound, and Other. Even the USAA registrar calls us Other.


----------



## limbwalker

Mr. Roboto said:


> Its funny how you use the word "Other"
> 
> When you are registering for an event on the USAA website, and the drop down menu choice for bow, you get three choices, Recurve (they mean the olympic recurve), Compound, and Other. Even the USAA registrar calls us Other.


Give it time...

USArchery just might be shocked at how many barebow archers show up in Decatur this July.


----------



## vephyr

limbwalker said:


> Olympic is the "compromise bow", with some of the aids of a compound for added accuracy, but the extra "challenge" of the recurve for those who want to feel they are doing more of the work themselves.


That's certainly a clear and nice way to put it!



limbwalker said:


> I actually think this (and the fact that it's the bow used in the Olympics) is a major reason why many choose the Olympic bow. Because the rules are straightforward and don't change from event to event. Olympic is an easily recognized division.


From the looks of it, it certainly does seem like everything is clearly defined for you. Definitely give me a direction to go. 

Shooting barebow still seems very interesting though, it has a certain appeal to it! Perhaps I just like the idea of it being a challenge. (Although at this stage of the game everything in archery is still a challenge to me!)

I'll certainly take your word for it though, I'd love to give both a try


----------



## Mr. Roboto

vephyr said:


> Haha, now I find myself out in open sea again! There's just so much to... learn & figure out (?) about shooting barebow? I guess one way to look at it is I can't go wrong...?
> I guess I'll have to see what one club says vs the other.
> 
> Having those classifications certainly would help though!
> 
> Judging from these responses though, maybe it might be a bit more straightforward to see what olympic shooting is like than figuring out what counts as barebow :tongue:


Don't let the confusion push you towards the Olympic style. If you want to shoot that style, fine, go for it and enjoy it.

The big issue within the barebow class really comes down to 2 things. Stabilizers and finger placement on the string.

Some organizations allow the use of either a full length stabilizer, a 12" stabilizer, or no stab at all. If you don't use one, then none of the rules about this apply to you because none of the make it a requirement.

Probably the biggest sticky point is where you place your fingers. i.e. "aiming" technique. Some require the finger to touch the arrow, others allow string walking.

There are some very loud and vocal people that think string walking is cheating because your can put the arrow tip on the target, and they say its no different that using a sight. But to them, gapping is perfectly okay.

What is the difference with gapping 1 inch at the arrow tip verses a 1 inch crawl at the string? none. and yet the anti-string walkers think there is some sort of a competitive advantage.

As Ben Rogers puts it - there are too many self righteous people that want to impose their aiming technique onto everyone else. Let the rules define the equipment, not how you choose to use it.

For me, I don't use a stab, and my finger touches the arrow, and I use a gapping technique. With this, I can shoot any barebow class out there. In fact I can even shoot in the Olympic style classes because the Oly style does not require a stab, sight, or clicker, and it doesn't require that I shoot under my chin with a shelf tab.


----------



## midnight8681

MartinOttosson said:


> There´s only one solution to this issue. You americans have to realize that the world actually doesn´t begin in San Fransisco and end in New York. If you go there, and think to see an edge, that is actually not an edge, but what we in the rest of the world call an ocean. It´s water (like the thing they make Coca Cola of). We know you know what it is, since you put too much in it in your beer. If you cross that ocean, you will find other countries where there is a lot less mess than in your own.
> 
> Where I live and shoot there is just one set of rules. Barebow is barebow. Compound is compound. Recurve is recurve. Done. It´s you that mess things up with divisions like Masters Men Compound Limited Bowhunters Half-Barebow Max 3 Pin On The Sight But With Lens In The Peep And Poop Hole In The Pants. Your result lists just looks ridiculous. Everyone gets to win, since everybody have their own class. No, dear United States of North Mexico, it´s time to get down from your limping horse and adapt to the rest of the world. Hunt with one bow, compete with another. It can't be THAT hard?


Wow I sense a lot of animosity.


----------



## Greysides

midnight8681 said:


> Wow I sense a lot of animosity.


Tongue-in-cheek. Same way this thread was started.


----------



## midnight8681

Greysides said:


> Tongue-in-cheek. Same way this thread was started.


I guess my comment didn't come across the same.[emoji53]


----------



## 2413gary

Don't forget we are just a bunch of Cowboys !!!!!!


midnight8681 said:


> I guess my comment didn't come across the same.[emoji53]


----------



## Mr. Roboto

2413gary said:


> Don't forget we are just a bunch of Cowboys !!!!!!


I wear an Aussie Outback Hat everywhere I go. Does that count towards being a cowboy?


----------



## vephyr

Mr. Roboto said:


> Don't let the confusion push you towards the Olympic style. If you want to shoot that style, fine, go for it and enjoy it.
> 
> The big issue within the barebow class really comes down to 2 things. Stabilizers and finger placement on the string.
> 
> Some organizations allow the use of either a full length stabilizer, a 12" stabilizer, or no stab at all. If you don't use one, then none of the rules about this apply to you because none of the make it a requirement.
> 
> Probably the biggest sticky point is where you place your fingers. i.e. "aiming" technique. Some require the finger to touch the arrow, others allow string walking.
> 
> There are some very loud and vocal people that think string walking is cheating because your can put the arrow tip on the target, and they say its no different that using a sight. But to them, gapping is perfectly okay.
> 
> What is the difference with gapping 1 inch at the arrow tip verses a 1 inch crawl at the string? none. and yet the anti-string walkers think there is some sort of a competitive advantage.
> 
> As Ben Rogers puts it - there are too many self righteous people that want to impose their aiming technique onto everyone else. Let the rules define the equipment, not how you choose to use it.
> 
> For me, I don't use a stab, and my finger touches the arrow, and I use a gapping technique. With this, I can shoot any barebow class out there. In fact I can even shoot in the Olympic style classes because the Oly style does not require a stab, sight, or clicker, and it doesn't require that I shoot under my chin with a shelf tab.


Well you certainly took some of that confusion away!
I'll still test the waters for both styles, I'm sure I'll enjoy both 
No one's saying I have to choose one right? 




Mr. Roboto said:


> I wear an Aussie Outback Hat everywhere I go. Does that count towards being a cowboy?


+1


----------



## limbwalker

vephyr said:


> Well you certainly took some of that confusion away!
> I'll still test the waters for both styles, I'm sure I'll enjoy both
> No one's saying I have to choose one right?


I certainly hope not, since most days I shoot both.


----------



## cpnhgnlngct

If everyone bringing in a new BB shooter would keep it simple and push the new archer toward the WA rules, then they are guaranteed to meet all organizations rules right?

Elevated rest, plunger, finger release, fits through 12.2cm circle... Done.

That's the baseline. As the new shooter gets obsessed with the class, then they will naturally start to learn about the stab rules and idiosyncrasies of the various orgs.

Keep it in the circle dudes.

(We should make those a T-shirt)


----------



## Kendric_Hubbard

Obeying the WA barebow rules will put you into NFAA barebow if you stringwalk. That means you will be shooting against compound shooters with long stabilizers.


----------



## centershot

Ten_Zen said:


> So I am gonna play a little devils advocate here and offer up a few reasons why it makes sense to eliminate the barebow class. Warning, feathers may be ruffled by this thread.
> 
> 1) Too many newbs. Barebow is the fastest growing archery division for good reasons .It is the only division featured prominently in hollywood, it has the lowest entry cost, and most new archers want to keep it simple and just learn form before they start worrying about a myriad of gear options. Consequently, the division is absolutely overwhelmed by inexperienced archers that come to competition to "just have fun" or "for the experience." Meaning they could care less what they score or how they place. In an outdoor competition this just spells disaster when you have a line full of people who can barely keep the arrow on the rest through the draw trying to hit something that they cant even aim at because their poundage is too low.
> 
> 2) Too many rules. As it stands now barebow is the only class that people still have arguments about the definition of. Until you, the barebow archer community, agrees on a universal classification, why should anyone go out of their way to accomodate your whining about stabilizers or no stabilizers, or touch or no touch, or wheels or no wheels. Figure out what you are before you ask why no one wants you around.
> 
> 3) Not enough Demmers and DeWaynes. If we had a large group of pro BB shooters or even a competitive group that regularly scores impressively, people might just start paying attention. As it is now watching most barebow shooters just makes me wanna shake my head...
> 
> Looking forward to hearing all your wonderful feedback!


If you do get rid of Barebow then, quality shooters can never happen. As for 2. It's a little confusing, but what needs to happen is consistency between the sanctioning bodys. This thread sounds like an Oly guy got beat by a quality Barebow guy........


----------



## limbwalker

Kendric_Hubbard said:


> Obeying the WA barebow rules will put you into NFAA barebow if you stringwalk. That means you will be shooting against compound shooters with long stabilizers.


Yes, unfortunately there is no such thing as a universal set of "barebow" rules. That is why some of us are fighting for this. This to me, and many others, is an unwelcome distraction on the path of barebow archery.


----------



## TREESTANDSNYPER

Yeah the idea of having to compete against compound shooters with a full set of stabs isn't even remotely fair. To be honest completely puts me off to the idea of barebow.


----------



## Supermag1

NFAA barebow is actually the only true barebow class. No sights, fingers on the string and anything else goes. If you think that a WA barebow setup can't compete against a full on NFAA barebow rig then go check out the Vegas results from this year or even compare recurve unaided and men's compound unaided in IBO.


----------



## Greysides

Kendric_Hubbard said:


> Obeying the WA barebow rules will put you into NFAA barebow if you stringwalk. That means you will be shooting against compound shooters with long stabilizers.


In IFAA you would be Barebow Recurve. Much more appropriate seeing as we're not all Dewayne.


----------



## Warbow

Supermag1 said:


> *NFAA barebow is actually the only true barebow class. * No sights, fingers on the string and anything else goes. If you think that a WA barebow setup can't compete against a full on NFAA barebow rig then go check out the Vegas results from this year or even compare recurve unaided and men's compound unaided in IBO.


There is no "true" barebow class, but if there was one that was most congruent to the name "barebow" it wouldn't be the one that allows long rod stabilizers and levels.

What does "barebow" mean to you such that you think that a bow with everything (or close enough) other than a sight should count as the only "true" barebow?


----------



## centershot

Unfortunately, for many of us there is so little target shooting other than 3d, that it really makes little difference........


----------



## Supermag1

Warbow said:


> There is no "true" barebow class, but if there was one that was most congruent to the name "barebow" it wouldn't be the one that allows long rod stabilizers and levels.
> 
> What does "barebow" mean to you such that you think that a bow with everything (or close enough) other than a sight should count as the only "true" barebow?


I pretty much said it earlier; no sights and fingers on the string just like they do in Vegas. I see all this talk about the WA barebow class and just see another traditional class with the only difference being string walking is allowed. One small change like that isn't worth making a whole new class for and certainly not worth throwing a bunch of shooters out the door to achieve.


----------



## Kendric_Hubbard

Limbwalker,
I entirely agree with you, this is the wrong direction to be taking this conversation. Do you have any suggestions for bridging the gap between nfaa and world archery barebow rules?


----------



## Warbow

Supermag1 said:


> I pretty much said it earlier; no sights and fingers on the string just like they do in Vegas. I see all this talk about the WA barebow class and just see another traditional class with the only difference being string walking is allowed. One small change like that isn't worth making a whole new class for and certainly not worth throwing a bunch of shooters out the door to achieve.


I'm still not getting why you think it is "true" barebow, were there to be such a thing. Certainly, NFAA barebow is the most *permissive* equipment class. But what makes that "true"? I get that you like the class but what is "true" about it, and what is "bare" about it? I'm not criticizing your enjoyment of the class, mind you, but wondering why you think it is the essence of "bare"bow. I'm not getting that, not at all.


----------



## Ten_Zen

Kendric_Hubbard said:


> Limbwalker,
> I entirely agree with you, this is the wrong direction to be taking this conversation. Do you have any suggestions for bridging the gap between nfaa and world archery barebow rules?


I still think there needs to be a class division between sighted and unsighted archery. That is the main point we can all agree on, barebows dont have sights. Beyond that there could be further subdivisions into freestyle, limited, and traditional barebow. I STILL dont think that string walking (or any shooting style) should be moderated in any way (so long as it doesnt interfere with other archers on the line). But I am not the archery dictator, so I can only gripe about it and wait for someone with authority to do something...


----------



## TREESTANDSNYPER

Exactly, you either have a sight or you don't. That's a huge difference, and should be the thing that divides the two.


----------



## Supermag1

Warbow said:


> I'm still not getting why you think it is "true" barebow, were there to be such a thing. Certainly, NFAA barebow is the most *permissive* equipment class. But what makes that "true"? I get that you like the class but what is "true" about it, and what is "bare" about it? I'm not criticizing your enjoyment of the class, mind you, but wondering why you think it is the essence of "bare"bow. I'm not getting that, not at all.


Mainly because there is no better term for it with the possible exception of unaided (like IBO uses and they split recurve and barebow unaided classes but both shoot from the same stake and score very similar, same with traditional). I think it would be a better idea to get the NFAA to allow string walking (and maybe get rid of stabs) in the traditional class since the WA barebow is nothing but another traditional class and it would be inclusive to people instead of excluding archers from the sport.


----------



## Supermag1

TREESTANDSNYPER said:


> Exactly, you either have a sight or you don't. That's a huge difference, and should be the thing that divides the two.


I'm all for that and have shot in a couple of shoots that have the classes divided by no sight, fixed pins and moveable (then split based on age and sex too). It's fun, it's easy to figure out and it's still competitive.


----------



## Warbow

TREESTANDSNYPER said:


> Exactly, you either have a sight or you don't. That's a huge difference, and should be the thing that divides the two.


More significant than whether you have wheels or not? :dontknow:


----------



## TREESTANDSNYPER

Now that's a tough one! I would call it equal on that. Personally I would take a recurve with no sight over a compound with no sight.


----------



## grantmac

Warbow said:


> More significant than whether you have wheels or not? :dontknow:


Depends on whether you are indoors or out really.

Either way I'd call the stabs and clicker the biggest problem with comparing NFAA to WA barebow.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker

> Either way I'd call the stabs and clicker the biggest problem with comparing NFAA to WA barebow.


Yup. Wheels don't mean that much to an archer who is in shape. Ms. Park proved that by breaking 1400 with a recurve, and folks like Ben, John and Dewayne routinely shoot scores without wheels that many guys with wheels wish they could shoot. If they used releases, the gap would be even narrower.

I learned the 12" stab. allowed now in NFAA Trad was worth a solid 10 points to me. Others have proven the same in the past two years at Louisville. And the clicker is invaluable to me when I shoot recurve. It makes that discipline so, so, so much easier to shoot than barebow - for me at least.


----------



## TREESTANDSNYPER

Yeah a clicker does make a HUGE difference.


----------



## limbwalker

Supermag, if you were looking for someone to argue with, I believe you found them.  Warbow can do this all day. And often does!

So goes the issues with barebow (for now)... Too little agreement on what it means keeps it in the shadows, or at least, splits up all the competitors to water down the competitive field (which is just fine for some folks, but not good for the discipline IMO).

Only issue with compound vs. recurve _*is the draw stop*_. If an archer needs the extra cast of the compound, I'm fine with them using one since the trade off is the much more sensitive release due to the low holding weight. I think those things basically balance each other out. But the hard stop on the compound is a draw check, and that is an advantage over a recurve without a clicker. So this is why we don't allow "basic compounds" that feature a draw stop in our barebow division in Texas. Genesis bows and the PSE bow without draw stops are allowed however, and are the only reason a few of our barebow archers can still play archery, esp. outdoors.

So a clicker, stabilizers and a draw stop are all things that I personally don't feel have a place in barebow archery if we wish to design a single barebow division. I'm also not a fan of telling someone how to aim or how to shoot the bow. Rules should be on the equipment, not on how it's used. 

If we could just get agreement on those things, we would be fine. But asking barebow archers to agree is asking a lot in my experience. Most barebow archers shoot barebow because they are very independant and frankly don't really care what others think of what they shoot. This is both a blessing and a curse.


----------



## Pete53

traditional class gets a bunch of string walkers in that class ,what i don`t understand is why string walkers aren`t disqualified ,traditional archers cant their traditional bows, they do not aim its a feel thing mostly. and as far as the bare bow class if there is enough archers in that class let them win a trophy but if only a couple archers give them a $3.00 medal instead. to be honest most barebow archers like the quieter class,some also shoot that class because they shoot poorly in the harder classes but enjoy archery alot and come for the fun of it. so i say let them shoot the barebow class and let them enjoy archery at their level of archery and just maybe we could learn something from them too ? all archery is good for people even a x-bow for some its only a tool to enjoy. good luck to all this summer,Pete53


----------



## limbwalker

> ,traditional archers cant their traditional bows, they do not aim


Uh, yea, most of them do aim, and those that don't probably should.



> some also shoot that class because they shoot poorly *in the harder classes*


Unfortunate this stereotype still exists.  Each class is just as challenging as every other class. There are serious archers in every division, and not-so-serious archers in every division.

There are even plenty of archers who shoot poorly, even with lots of accessories on their bows.


----------



## 2413gary

The biggest problem is there are million different ways to define Barebow we all have a different definition of what it is. Unless I'm wrong and someone will tell me I'm sure Barebow was first defined in competition by NFAA in the early 1950's. then guys started doing different things to win and the rules started to evolve into what they are today in the NFAA. When the compound showed up there was not two divisions who ever shot the best won early 1970's. At that time the recurve Barebow and recurve Bowhunter were almost Nonexistent in NFAA competition. But Barebow rules were still evolving. This was before IFAA, IBO, ASA and I not sure when World Archery devolved Barebow. Every archery Organization here made there own set of Barebow rules because they didn't like what the next organization was doing. So having one definition for Barebow probably won't happen. So for those of you who don't know where you belong read the rules of each organization pick the one you like and get busy build up your style. Don't complain about one is better than the next. For my family we shoot them all because its about Archery not about what your bow looks like or how you aim. So what I'm saying here is teach someone your style and make archery grow no mater what organization. There is no one style fits all. Just show up and shoot !!!


----------



## GBUSA

After reading 9 pages or arguing, I see the light of WA rules for bow set up. It takes the argument out of it.
Fit your recurve through X size ring and go shoot.
Pretty simple control of equipment.

I can certainly see having enough room to get weight forward to balance an Oly rig to the same degree as a purpose built BB riser. Not everyone wants to run out and purchase a new BB riser.
But I can't see how 12" of stabilizer is in any way, shape, or form, part of a bare bow.
It's just not.


----------



## Warbow

limbwalker said:


> Supermag, if you were looking for someone to argue with, I believe you found them.  Warbow can do this all day. And often does!


:embara:



limbwalker said:


> I'm also not a fan of telling someone how to aim or how to shoot the bow. Rules should be on the equipment, not on how it's used.


I'd say from a consistency standpoint that means it would be reasonable to ban distinguishing marks on tabs, including screw holes, logos, stitches, marks and scales. No reason to allow on the tab what isn't allowed on the belly of the bow or the string - would be a bit of a pain to cover up those marks, but we could use tape or what not, just as some folks have to do on the belly of their bows. Banning tab marks is an equipment thing - you can still string walk without them, as you've pointed out. 

But, since the WA rules explicitly do allow for even marks and that isn't likely to change at World Archery, I'm going to use them, hence my thread asking about 3 under tabs.


----------



## limbwalker

That is a good point, and I personally would have no issues at all with banning marks on tabs. I don't need them anyway. Esp. when I use a glove, which is most of the time. 

But there are plenty of guys and gals who would scream bloody murder. My response to them is you can't ask the NFAA trad guys to dispense with the stabilizer, but insist on keeping your carefully crafted aiming tool.


----------



## 2413gary

It's just not as easy as just fit through Xsize ring add weight above the grip and see how far you get


GBUSA said:


> After reading 9 pages or arguing, I see the light of WA rules for bow set up. It takes the argument out of it.
> Fit your recurve through X size ring and go shoot.
> Pretty simple control of equipment.
> 
> I can certainly see having enough room to get weight forward to balance an Oly rig to the same degree as a purpose built BB riser. Not everyone wants to run out and purchase a new BB riser.
> But I can't see how 12" of stabilizer is in any way, shape, or form, part of a bare bow.
> It's just not.


----------



## Mr. Roboto

This entire debate will end if WA would get off their butts and allow barebow (as defined by their rules) to compete in the world target championships. 

Right now, barebow is only allowed to shoot in the World 3D and FITA Field championships. 

Olympic Style Recurve and Compound is allowed to shoot in all 4: Indoor, Outdoor, Field, and 3D.

Since the World Championships and World Cups are prestigious events that people have to earn the right to be there, it becomes the magnet for developing common rules around the world.

NFAA, IFAA, USAA, IBO, ASA, etc. can have all the rules they want for barebow/traditional want. They don't have to change. They can ignore their membership majority all they want.

But if WA allowed barebow to shoot in the world championships, that single move will put a lot of pressure on the different organizations to adopt common rules because of the demands from their membership.

I am not saying that WA has the best rules for barebow. They are what they are. But it is the major events are what drives the needs for common rules.

We can debate all we want, but it is really up to WA allowing the barebow shooters to shoot in the world championships - that is where the real change will come from.

So in the mean time, I will shoot according to what ever tournament's rules are for barebow/traditional that I am currently competing in.

Pete


----------



## grantmac

GBUSA said:


> After reading 9 pages or arguing, I see the light of WA rules for bow set up. It takes the argument out of it.
> Fit your recurve through X size ring and go shoot.
> Pretty simple control of equipment.
> 
> I can certainly see having enough room to get weight forward to balance an Oly rig to the same degree as a purpose built BB riser. Not everyone wants to run out and purchase a new BB riser.
> But I can't see how 12" of stabilizer is in any way, shape, or form, part of a bare bow.
> It's just not.


Bingo. Easy rules, minimal equipment, one international standard. Why anyone would argue against it is beyond me unless they are dead-set on being a big fish in a small pond.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker

Pete, I'm sure you're on to something. The lack of a truly prestigious world class barebow event does allow for the scrambling that we see now. 

If even barebow was allowed at the Indoor World Champ's (and I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be), we may see more unity.


----------



## itbeso

Warbow said:


> :embara:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd say from a consistency standpoint that means it would be reasonable to ban distinguishing marks on tabs, including screw holes, logos, stitches, marks and scales. No reason to allow on the tab what isn't allowed on the belly of the bow or the string - would be a bit of a pain to cover up those marks, but we could use tape or what not, just as some folks have to do on the belly of their bows. Banning tab marks is an equipment thing - you can still string walk without them, as you've pointed out.
> 
> But, since the WA rules explicitly do allow for even marks and that isn't likely to change at World Archery, I'm going to use them, hence my thread asking about 3 under tabs.


One of the problems with making suggestions like yours on banning marks on tabs is lack of knowledge of archery history. For many years, marks on tabs were not allowed. The barebow group would count strands on those old monofilament servings and shoot their arrows, taking all day to shoot a round. After many years of complaints, the Nfaa changed the rules to allow marks in order for the barebow group to finish their rounds in a timely manner. There is no advantage to having marks on tabs other than saving time.


----------



## TREESTANDSNYPER

Pete53 said:


> traditional archers cant their traditional bows, they do not aim its a feel thing mostly.


I completely disagree. I shoot trad, and I can aim very well. I do not "snap shoot" and I do have a solid anchor point as well a bow draw weight I can actually draw back properly. Then again I don't struggle to shoot my trad bow. I took the time to learn how to shoot the right way. Amazing what some proper technique can get you.


----------



## Warbow

itbeso said:


> One of the problems with making suggestions like yours on banning marks on tabs is lack of knowledge of archery history. For many years, marks on tabs were not allowed. The barebow group would count strands on those old monofilament servings and shoot their arrows, taking all day to shoot a round. After many years of complaints, the Nfaa changed the rules to allow marks in order for the barebow group to finish their rounds in a timely manner. There is no advantage to having marks on tabs other than saving time.


Rather than allow marks on tabs I say time the ends. If people taking too long is the problem (for example, in a different equipment class, those compound shooters who glass *every shot*, even the last one, in field archery) then address the problem of people taking too long rather than dumbing down the equipment rules to speed them up. Using a sight would be faster than counting servings, too, but we don't just allow sights in barebow because people take too long doing their crawl. Hell, the stitch counting still takes time, why not just allow individual marks?

I do understand what you are saying, though, that for the sake of expediency marks were allowed. It is an understandable decision for practical purposes where adding timing might not be practical, or would be too much of a paradigm shift.


----------



## limbwalker

Well, we can discuss rules all the live-long day, but until an organization's members agree, the discussion will have no point at all.


----------



## Warbow

limbwalker said:


> Well, we can discuss rules all the live-long day, but until an organization's members agree, the discussion will have no point at all.


That sounds like a chicken and egg problem.


----------



## TER

itbeso said:


> Ter. D. on't tread on anyone. Talk about paranoia and condescention!! You are exactly what is wrong with these forums. Your comprehension skills are severely lacking and your analysis of people you have never met shows me you are one lonely, downtrodden puppy looking for acceptance from this forums most prolific poster. I'm sure you will get it for bashing me but the reality is that your opinion doesn't mean squat to the archers who actually compete in our division and know the difference between who has their back and who is desperately wanting to be included. You should try shooting in our group some time, you might actually enjoy a tournament for the first time. Meanwhile, in my simplest words, don't talk about things you know nothing about.


I didn't bother to reply because you got banned soon after posting this rant. But now you are back from your break so I'll just say you are wrong on every point again.


----------



## _JR_

TER said:


> I didn't bother to reply because you got banned soon after posting this rant. But now you are back from your break so I'll just say you are wrong on every point again.


Hey TER,

Your signature says "Archery over everything". 
Presumably "everything" includes grudges and bickering. 
So maybe just let it go, OK? 
Maybe there's no need to tread on anyone by bringing up rancorous dialogue from a month ago unless it's constructive to the discussion, yeah?


----------



## Supermag1

limbwalker said:


> Supermag, if you were looking for someone to argue with, I believe you found them.  Warbow can do this all day. And often does!
> 
> So goes the issues with barebow (for now)... Too little agreement on what it means keeps it in the shadows, or at least, splits up all the competitors to water down the competitive field (which is just fine for some folks, but not good for the discipline IMO).
> 
> Only issue with compound vs. recurve _*is the draw stop*_. If an archer needs the extra cast of the compound, I'm fine with them using one since the trade off is the much more sensitive release due to the low holding weight. I think those things basically balance each other out. But the hard stop on the compound is a draw check, and that is an advantage over a recurve without a clicker. So this is why we don't allow "basic compounds" that feature a draw stop in our barebow division in Texas. Genesis bows and the PSE bow without draw stops are allowed however, and are the only reason a few of our barebow archers can still play archery, esp. outdoors.
> 
> So a clicker, stabilizers and a draw stop are all things that I personally don't feel have a place in barebow archery if we wish to design a single barebow division. I'm also not a fan of telling someone how to aim or how to shoot the bow. Rules should be on the equipment, not on how it's used.
> 
> If we could just get agreement on those things, we would be fine. But asking barebow archers to agree is asking a lot in my experience. Most barebow archers shoot barebow because they are very independant and frankly don't really care what others think of what they shoot. This is both a blessing and a curse.


Is your state association in TX an NFAA association? If so then redefining their rules to fit what you want to do should probably be looked into by National and corrected. If it's not NFAA sanctioned then we've got another association with another set of barebow rules that don't match any of the other ones.

My setup is actually an NFAA Bowhunter setup but I shoot barebow for the best chance to get all of us in the same class (there have been instances with 3 of us at one competition and all in separate classes (bowhunter, barebow and master senior barebow). I think the NFAA should combine bowhunter and barebow. Nobody can deny the fact that the numbers in the barebow class suck. My question is why do all of you want to run off those of us still shooting in this class so that you can have another traditional class (that's all you guys are talking about, it's traditional equipment so call a spade a spade. Heck it's probably more traditional than the traditional class because you don't want stabs).

It's also completely hypocritical to tell me that since I shoot a compound that I shouldn't be allowed to shoot in barebow anymore and to go put on sights and get a release but you guys won't even consider changing anything in your setups to conform with any one of several classes where your equipment is legal and competitive already.


----------



## Warbow

Supermag1 said:


> *It's also completely hypocritical to tell me that since I shoot a compound that I shouldn't be allowed to shoot in barebow anymore* and to go put on sights and get a release but you guys won't even consider changing anything in your setups to conform with any one of several classes where your equipment is legal and competitive already.


Has *anyone* said that? :dontknow:

Hell, I didn't even know you were a compound shooter. But, why should barebow be any different than sighted classes in separating out compound and conventional bows separately? That doesn't mean eliminating compound barebow, BTW, just allowing conventional barebow to have its own class.


----------



## grantmac

Supermag1 said:


> Is your state association in TX an NFAA association? If so then redefining their rules to fit what you want to do should probably be looked into by National and corrected. If it's not NFAA sanctioned then we've got another association with another set of barebow rules that don't match any of the other ones.
> 
> My setup is actually an NFAA Bowhunter setup but I shoot barebow for the best chance to get all of us in the same class (there have been instances with 3 of us at one competition and all in separate classes (bowhunter, barebow and master senior barebow). I think the NFAA should combine bowhunter and barebow. Nobody can deny the fact that the numbers in the barebow class suck. My question is why do all of you want to run off those of us still shooting in this class so that you can have another traditional class (that's all you guys are talking about, it's traditional equipment so call a spade a spade. Heck it's probably more traditional than the traditional class because you don't want stabs).
> 
> It's also completely hypocritical to tell me that since I shoot a compound that I shouldn't be allowed to shoot in barebow anymore and to go put on sights and get a release but you guys won't even consider changing anything in your setups to conform with any one of several classes where your equipment is legal and competitive already.


We are precisely talking about changing the rules so that NFAA Trad follows WA Barebow.

Personally I'd then like to see all finger-shot compound classes dropped but that is just me.

-Grant


----------



## 2413gary

Come to Redding join in the nonsight money team event. You will get to see what real nonsighted finger shooting accuracy is all about. Sometimes I think your mother dropped you one to many times. But that's just me :wink:


grantmac said:


> We are precisely talking about changing the rules so that NFAA Trad follows WA Barebow.
> 
> Personally I'd then like to see all finger-shot compound classes dropped but that is just me.
> 
> -Grant


----------



## Supermag1

Warbow said:


> Has *anyone* said that? :dontknow:
> 
> Hell, I didn't even know you were a compound shooter. But, why should barebow be any different than sighted classes in separating out compound and conventional bows separately? That doesn't mean eliminating compound barebow, BTW, just allowing conventional barebow to have its own class.


It might not have been said in this thread but grantmac has said it before and most of us know that they won't be splitting the barebow class into two even smaller classes, it will be doing away with the compounds instead of adding one for the recurves.

I'll again say that the best route is to get the NFAA to work on the trad rules to conform to the WA barebow (no stabs, legal string walking) and let the recurve unaided (non-sighted recurve with stabilizers) come and shoot in the barebow or bowhunter class. This might not be as big of a jump as some people think since someone said that several trad guys were string walking already without penalty.


----------



## Warbow

Supermag1 said:


> It might not have been said in this thread but grantmac has said it before and most of us know that they won't be splitting the barebow class into two even smaller classes, it will be doing away with the compounds instead of adding one for the recurves.


I hadn't known grantmac's position until he stated it after my post. Hmm...not sure how I feel about that. But, I also don't see why compounds should be in the same class with recurves, be it sighted or unsighted. They are a different animal.



Supermag1 said:


> I'll again say that the best route is to get the NFAA to work on the trad rules to conform to the WA barebow (no stabs, legal string walking) and let the recurve unaided (non-sighted recurve with stabilizers) come and shoot in the barebow or bowhunter class. This might not be as big of a jump as some people think since someone said that several trad guys were string walking already without penalty.


Sounds like it could work - but I know many will push back against string walking in trad. Seems like it would be easier to put into "barebow" and leave trad alone, but I do see the logic in your proposal.


----------



## itbeso

Supermag1 said:


> It might not have been said in this thread but grantmac has said it before and most of us know that they won't be splitting the barebow class into two even smaller classes, it will be doing away with the compounds instead of adding one for the recurves.
> 
> I'll again say that the best route is to get the NFAA to work on the trad rules to conform to the WA barebow (no stabs, legal string walking) and let the recurve unaided (non-sighted recurve with stabilizers) come and shoot in the barebow or bowhunter class. This might not be as big of a jump as some people think since someone said that several trad guys were string walking already without penalty.


In the past year or so there was discussion on combining barebow and bowhunter into one class but there was too much opposition so I think it died. To my knowledge, no one is trying to eliminate compound barebow and bowhunter, the push is to get barebow recurvers under one set of rules worldwide.


----------



## Ten_Zen

So when I pointed out that one of the main reasons people dont like barebow is because of the constant bickering about the definition, clearly no one was listening. I swear, no matter what changes are made the barebow community will figure out a way to complain about it. Make a class for every type of barebow: too many classes. Lump them all together like NFAA: its unfair to the recurves. Allow stringwalking: might as well allow sights. Dont allow stringwalking: too limiting. Its easier to just get rid of the whole mess, and its the only way to make it equally fair for everyone.


----------



## Warbow

Ten_Zen said:


> So when I pointed out that one of the main reasons people dont like barebow is because of the constant bickering about the definition, clearly no one was listening. I swear, no matter what changes are made the barebow community will figure out a way to complain about it. Make a class for every type of barebow: too many classes. Lump them all together like NFAA: its unfair to the recurves. Allow stringwalking: might as well allow sights. Dont allow stringwalking: too limiting. Its easier to just get rid of the whole mess, and its the only way to make it equally fair for everyone.


The solution is obvious: String walking allowed, but only if your tongue touches the nock. Compounds allowed, but only with reverse let off (exponential stacking) and a minimum 54" axle to axle length. And only flaccid 12" stabilizers allowed - must still fit through the 12.2cm ring. I think that should cover it. 

There definitely is some bickering. And a lot of the people who say "no bickering" also say, but do it my way. So I'm not sure what the answer to that is. But the thing that is bad, I'd say, is how nasty and personal some of the bickering is. There is no excuse for that, certainly not in this forum.


----------



## grantmac

My honest assessment is that compound finger shooting is a dying division within archery and phasing it out can only benefit the community as a whole by forcing those who wish to compete with fingers into either Olympic or Barebow.

I base my reasoning on the success of WA rules worldwide. Regardless of who came first or how each style has traditionally been defined, WA as an organization is the only one offering real international competition for barebow shooters.

-Grant


----------



## Bigjono

grantmac said:


> My honest assessment is that compound finger shooting is a dying division within archery and phasing it out can only benefit the community as a whole by forcing those who wish to compete with fingers into either Olympic or Barebow.
> 
> I base my reasoning on the success of WA rules worldwide. Regardless of who came first or how each style has traditionally been defined, WA as an organization is the only one offering real international competition for barebow shooters.
> 
> -Grant


Once again I find myself agreeing Grant but I think the best international 3D event is still the WBHC. Funny but the big name BB shooters don't seem to do that one, BHR is the class with all the big numbers and good shooters.


----------



## limbwalker

> Is your state association in TX an NFAA association? If so then redefining their rules to fit what you want to do should probably be looked into by National and corrected. If it's not NFAA sanctioned then we've got another association with another set of barebow rules that don't match any of the other ones.


The inclusion of "basic compound" in the barebow division was a decision made by us within the TSAA, which falls under USArchery. On more than one occasion, we have led the way and USArchery has followed suit. They still need to address the issue of having included "basic compound" into the JOAD and AA programs, but not offering them a place on the line at any sanctioned event. We are ahead of that curve, and have further defined what a "basic compound" is (or is not) so they can play with the barebow archers here in Texas. We have seen no competitive advantage (accuracy) from a Genesis bow over a decent recurve. All this rule does is allow NASP archers to play in our barebow division without having to buy an new bow, and for some of our "super seniors" to continue to play outdoors at the distances they want to shoot. 

How's that for inclusive? 

Wheels don't worry me. I think Dewayne and John and a few others proved in Vegas that wheels offer no real advantage indoors. Outdoors may be a different story, but still, I doubt it. If it were decided that wheels did offer a competitive advantage, then I'd be in favor of allowing compounds in the masters class, so that our veteran archers can continue to shoot the outdoor distances they want. This would also preserve the compound fingers class for many of those folks who wish to continue shooting that way.


----------



## limbwalker

As for the barebow bickering, the rules invite this. 

Compound unlimited and Olympic recurve rules are virtually identical for every major national and international competition. Therefore, everyone knows if you want to shoot in either of those divisions with the best archers in the world, you follow those rules or you don't play. Barebow/Trad is where folks run from event to event like a 3-gun competition. It's crazy.


----------



## iArch

limbwalker said:


> As for the barebow bickering, the rules invite this.
> 
> Compound unlimited and Olympic recurve rules are virtually identical for every major national and international competition. Therefore, everyone knows if you want to shoot in either of those divisions with the best archers in the world, you follow those rules or you don't play. Barebow/Trad is where folks run from event to event like a 3-gun competition. It's crazy.


Compound/Recurve have enough shooters to be able to implement "follow the rules or don't play". Barebow/Trad seems to suffer from the opposite. 
Since there aren't as many "players" in the Barebow/Trad competitions, why not "broaden the rules" and combine the sub-styles so more will play? Have all Barebow/Genesis/Trad-type disciplines shoot _one division_? I know that shooting with certain setups within that combined division would have different advantages in competition, but this would at least make Barebow feel like a more holistic division and attract more shooters. Once the combined division has consistent big participation, it can re-divide the divisions and implement "follow the rules or don't play". I think Barebow has hurt itself by segmenting it's own population.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

limbwalker said:


> Wheels don't worry me. I think Dewayne and John and a few others proved in Vegas that wheels offer no real advantage indoors.


No, what they proved (by placing 1st and 4th respectively) is that they are good enough archers to overcome their equipment disadvantages. You really need to go back and look at the last 20 years or so of scores in NFAA Barebow, Bowhunter, and Traditional. The scores that everyone is rightfully in awe of in Traditional are considered normal for compound unsighted classes.


----------



## itbeso

J. Wesbrock said:


> No, what they proved (by placing 1st and 4th respectively) is that they are good enough archers to overcome their equipment disadvantages. You really need to go back and look at the last 20 years or so of scores in NFAA Barebow, Bowhunter, and Traditional. The scores that everyone is rightfully in awe of in Traditional are considered normal for compound unsighted classes.


Very obvious but needed to be said Jason. Thanks


----------



## iArch

MartinOttosson said:


> Where I live and shoot there is just one set of rules. Barebow is barebow. Compound is compound. Recurve is recurve. Done. It´s you that mess things up with divisions like Masters Men Compound Limited Bowhunters Half-Barebow Max 3 Pin On The Sight But With Lens In The Peep And Poop Hole In The Pants. Your result lists just looks ridiculous. Everyone gets to win, since everybody have their own class.


That's true, the results list of Barebow-type divisions are a little sparse. Why have 5 categories with 1 participant each when you can have 1 category with 5 participants?


----------



## High Plains

I've been trying to wrap my head around this subject ever since I decided to upgrade to an ILF Barebow rig and not just be a Trad guy. Then I realized it doesn't matter in my area because there are no events nearby that are sanctioned by the national orgs. and the one state org. that has plenty of shoots doesn't know the difference between barebow and trad. I can only imagine what happens when I go to shoot my rig with the trad police, lol. So I'm just going to keep on doing my thing and hopefully someday I'll be able to have the time and money to attend one of the big shoots before I get too old and my body gives out. I swear 21 years in the Army robbed me of 10 years of health. But I'm still having a good time and just want to shoot my bow no matter what the rules are.

Jeff.


----------



## Supermag1

itbeso said:


> In the past year or so there was discussion on combining barebow and bowhunter into one class but there was too much opposition so I think it died. To my knowledge, no one is trying to eliminate compound barebow and bowhunter, the push is to get barebow recurvers under one set of rules worldwide.


I'm completely for combining barebow and bowhunter, the scores prove that top shooters in each class are shooting comparable scores and having 2 classes that are so similar and so small being separate is hurting both classes. Unfortunately, the same fear of getting beat by someone that does something different and perceiving it to be an advantage (even though scores prove that they are equal) that stopped that from happening is what's fueling this thread and the same thing that will keep Trad and WA barebow from being the same class.



limbwalker said:


> The inclusion of "basic compound" in the barebow division was a decision made by us within the TSAA, which falls under USArchery. On more than one occasion, we have led the way and USArchery has followed suit. They still need to address the issue of having included "basic compound" into the JOAD and AA programs, but not offering them a place on the line at any sanctioned event. We are ahead of that curve, and have further defined what a "basic compound" is (or is not) so they can play with the barebow archers here in Texas. We have seen no competitive advantage (accuracy) from a Genesis bow over a decent recurve. All this rule does is allow NASP archers to play in our barebow division without having to buy an new bow, and for some of our "super seniors" to continue to play outdoors at the distances they want to shoot.
> 
> How's that for inclusive?
> 
> Wheels don't worry me. I think Dewayne and John and a few others proved in Vegas that wheels offer no real advantage indoors. Outdoors may be a different story, but still, I doubt it. If it were decided that wheels did offer a competitive advantage, then I'd be in favor of allowing compounds in the masters class, so that our veteran archers can continue to shoot the outdoor distances they want. This would also preserve the compound fingers class for many of those folks who wish to continue shooting that way.



So TSAA is USA archery and not NFAA, so NFAA classes/rules have nothing to do with it, got it.

If you go look at scores in IBO where the trad, recurve unaided and compound unaided are all shooting from the same stakes and it would be a heck of a show to watch the top 2 or 3 shooters from each of these classes go at it head to head (BTW, the compound unaided 1st and 2nd would finish 1st and 6th if combined with the other top 2 from all of these classes and the 2nd from MCU is no slouch and kicks my butt locally).


----------



## Supermag1

grantmac, you'd be happy to know that many clubs have been eliminating all compound fingers classes over the last few years. But two things to think about for you string walkers and those that use elevated rests, is it far fetched to believe that the Trad guys would make those things illegal? I can even use your argument against compound barebow and stabilizers against you and say that a bow isn't truly bare if it's got a rest or additional weight bolted onto it. And the second thing to think about is, where will you go then? I'll tell you where you'll end up without equipment or style changes and that's with the olympic recurves, if they have them, or where I have to go, with the fixed pin release shooters.


----------



## grantmac

Supermag1 said:


> grantmac, you'd be happy to know that many clubs have been eliminating all compound fingers classes over the last few years. But two things to think about for you string walkers and those that use elevated rests, is it far fetched to believe that the Trad guys would make those things illegal? I can even use your argument against compound barebow and stabilizers against you and say that a bow isn't truly bare if it's got a rest or additional weight bolted onto it. And the second thing to think about is, where will you go then? I'll tell you where you'll end up without equipment or style changes and that's with the olympic recurves, if they have them, or where I have to go, with the fixed pin release shooters.


I've also competed with longbow, freestyle compound and briefly olympic. I'm not worried about not having a place to play.
However I do want to be able to compete with the same equipment and technique across as many events as possible.

I'm not really worried about what the neo-tradies think because quite frankly they just don't matter from a competitive perspective, also WA barebow rules have been stable for a long time and I don't see them going anywhere. I do see them being adopted by more organizations if those organizations knew what was good for them.
The overabundance of classes is part of what is killing the NFAA. That and a game (field) which requires rather large and specific venues. WA field is a much less logistically demanding event, but that is a topic for another time.

-Grant


----------



## J. Wesbrock

Killing the NFAA? They just set new all time records for attendance at Louisville and Vegas this year. They're far, far from dead. :confused3:


----------



## limbwalker

J. Wesbrock said:


> Killing the NFAA? They just set new all time records for attendance at Louisville and Vegas this year. They're far, far from dead. :confused3:


Yea, the NFAA is doing just fine from all I can tell, and in fact, I often prefer their events (indoor at least) over USArchery events. They are always very well run, and very accommodating.


----------



## grantmac

NFAA field is doing well enough on a national level and in some regions, but on the whole struggling to maintain the ranges which already exist.
Through most of the country there is nowhere to shoot Field at all.

But that is another topic.

-Grant


----------



## Warbow

grantmac said:


> NFAA field is doing well enough on a national level and in some regions, but on the whole struggling to maintain the ranges which already exist.
> Through most of the country there is nowhere to shoot Field at all.
> 
> But that is another topic.
> 
> -Grant


Seems that is likely true for archery in general, as well as any sport that has low income and needs a lot of property. Here in the SF Bay Area we are lucky enough to have a fair number of field archery ranges. They are all NFAA, of course, and haven't had the same issues to the extent some other California clubs have had with hikers and bikers wanting to take over the ranges (as the MAYA Archers of Roseville had leading to their range being cut in half, and as the Pasadena Roving archers faced just recently). I don't see that as being an "NFAA" issue specifically, more like an urban encroachment issue or some such, one that applies to any archery org using park space.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

limbwalker said:


> Yea, the NFAA is doing just fine from all I can tell, and in fact, I often prefer their events (indoor at least) over USArchery events. They are always very well run, and very accommodating.


The only USA Archery type events I've attended are the local ones put on by the Illinois Target Archery Association, and they are always ran impeccably well. I may shoot this year's FITA field nationals though, but I'm still not sure. It looks like it'll be ran concurrent with the NFAA Outdoor Target Nationals, and I really want to shoot that again this year.


----------



## Mr. Roboto

It is like I keep saying, if WA would allow barebow to shoot in their indoor and outdoor world championships just like they already do for field and 3D, then all of a sudden you will see USAA, NFAA, IFAA, and IBO have a common set of rules for Barebow. Then the numbers of Barebow shooters will explode at all of the tournaments.

But until there is a major world event where people have to "qualify" to attend, then each organization will keep to the play by my rules or go away.

What gets me, is that the differences between the Traditional/Barebow-Recurve are tiny. Basically 2 things: stabs and string walking. We are so close and yet so far apart.

I want to see the class grow and be an encouragement to new shooters.


----------



## Mr. Roboto

Hey Jason, what do you normally shoot for a 900 round? I hear it was really cold and windy last year. I would love to shoot that 810 round with the 92cm 6 ring target. That will be a brutal target.

I too want to shoot both of them. The NFAA claims that they will be able to run both the USAA Fita Field Championships and the NFAA Target back to back on the same weekend. I am dubious that there is enough light in the day to pull it off.


----------



## Ten_Zen

This is the thread that never ends...
It just goes on and on my friend...
Some people started reading it not knowing what it was,
and they continued replying to it forever just because...
This is the thread that never ends....


----------



## Warbow

Ten_Zen said:


> This is the thread that never ends...
> It just goes on and on my friend...
> Some people started reading it not knowing what it was,
> and they continued replying to it forever just because...
> This is the thread that never ends....


You are thinking of the Archery Shoes thread :wink:


----------



## Darryl Longbow

Does anyone know {approximately } how many tournaments that include bare bow in the U.S. are shot under WA. rules ? Are they field, target, indoor , or 3D. ? I get the impression that WA has BB in 3D and indoor but not field or target and I am not familiar with their rules and would like to know this.If WA does not even consider BB in many of its shoots why does everyone want to be under them. Seems that trying to get them to reconise BB in all venues should be the first thing to try and change.Another question about rules that concern how the shot is made as opposed to equipment.If a gap shooter who only sees a visual gap as opposed to a string walker who uses their tab to make a measurement on the string is equally accurate then why is everyone wanting string walking to be made legal for all barebow type divisions ? Perhaps to speed up a shoot instead of counting stiches and serving wraps why not just use a visual gap for everyone if they are truly equally as accurate. And the name Bare Bow does that not denote in the purist sense just that, a bare bow without weights added,elevated rests, pressure buttons, stabelisers and the mechanical measureing on the string that is basically a sight setting. Lets get rid of all that .And last, at any tournament you go to how many BB archers are there in comparison to Traditional archers, how many are concerned with international competition. BB here with a recurve is traditional and hunting driven not a specialized piece of equipment with a specialized method of shooting it and a desire to get to a particular score or participate in international events. The idea that traditionalist do not care to compete a great deal is true, 3D being the exception. True or not it is seen as a hunting oriented type shoot that holds their intrest more so than say a target shoot. The traditional numbers are there for that but you want to change everything with string walking and such.It seems to me that the BB community is the one who show an elitest attitude wanting to change everyone else for the benefit of a few. BB and traditional are as different as night and day and that is what we all need to realize and work to co exist with. T he only thing we have in common is that we shoot archery without a sight and with our fingers. So the flannel army goes.


----------



## Warbow

Darryl Longbow said:


> If a gap shooter who only sees a visual gap as opposed to a string walker who uses their tab to make a measurement on the string is equally accurate then why is everyone wanting string walking to be made legal for all barebow type divisions ? Perhaps to speed up a shoot instead of counting stiches and serving wraps why not just use a visual gap for everyone if they are truly equally as accurate.


That's been my thinking. If string walking is fair because it doesn't confer an advantage, then neither does prohibiting it confer a disadvantage. But, the fact is, string walking works.

I think Limbwalker made the most salient point about string walking, one that has led me to think twice about it. He notes that some archers have a natural advantage in facial structure that lends itself to better point on distances. Stringwalking is a democratizer that lets everybody get point on. I think that is an interesting way to look at it. But I could counter that, well yeah, but if you want to democratize sighting, we have these things called *sights*.

Right now, my compromise (but not realistic) thought is to allow string walking but prohibit distinguishing tab marks of any kind and put a time limit on shooting to prevent serving thread counters from taking forever to shoot. But the 12" stab? That's just an oddball thing that really ought to go. It makes a BB rig look like some sort of pre-pubescent Oly Recurve rig. Bow weights, no extensions.


----------



## Darryl Longbow

I have one more myth to dispel, we that consider ourselves traditional and not bb do not shoot this division to hide, escape , or worry about winning a two dollar medal. We choose it because we like it. When we compete we want to do the best we are capable of. Yes we do work just as hard to improve as anyone else and are just as serious about how well we shoot within our own group. Come and join us sometimes under our rules, don't worry you wont see stabelisers or even many elevated rests in reality.Come shoot off the shelf with a good gap system, I promise if you beat us that way no one will do anything but congradulate you on shooting well. Don't worry about using a metal handled target bow, no one will care, a lot of us do.And I promise that you will not be required to hunch over and short draw every shot though no one will care if you do ( we may laugh quietly though)


----------



## Warbow

Darryl Longbow said:


> .And I promise that you will not be required to hunch over


Please, no making fun of Fred Asbell - I hear he's actually a decent shot


----------



## J. Wesbrock

Mr. Roboto said:


> Hey Jason, what do you normally shoot for a 900 round? I hear it was really cold and windy last year. I would love to shoot that 810 round with the 92cm 6 ring target. That will be a brutal target.
> 
> I too want to shoot both of them. The NFAA claims that they will be able to run both the USAA Fita Field Championships and the NFAA Target back to back on the same weekend. I am dubious that there is enough light in the day to pull it off.


My practice NFAA 900 rounds leading up to last year's nationals were in the very low 800s with a high of either 814 or 815 (I don't have the score card handy now). The weather last year was brutal -- 30s and 40s with 40mph wind gusts. It was a lesson in drive by shooting since there was no way I could hold even remotely steady on target. I think my 900 score at nationals was in the high 760s. The 600 Classic round is unforgiving for Traditional shooters. A 46cm target at 60 yards doesn't leave much room for error. It's a lot of fun though.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

> Another question about rules that concern how the shot is made as opposed to equipment.If a gap shooter who only sees a visual gap as opposed to a string walker who uses their tab to make a measurement on the string is equally accurate then why is everyone wanting string walking to be made legal for all barebow type divisions ?


String walking may not offer any real advantage for indoor paper, but it's a huge game changer for field archery. As someone who shoots field both ways with a recurve, I can tell you string walking is much, much easier. Being able to hold your tip on the spot at every yardage is a lot easiermore accurate than trying to figure gaps and hoping you have something to aim at on the ground in front of the target.

Imagine if Freestyle shooters couldn't adjust their sights during a round -- just one fixed aiming point. What would happen to their scores? That's the difference between string walking and not. It's huge, and there's a reason why arguably the best gap shooters in this country choose to string walk for FITA Field.


----------



## itbeso

J. Wesbrock said:


> String walking may not offer any real advantage for indoor paper, but it's a huge game changer for field archery. As someone who shoots field both ways with a recurve, I can tell you string walking is much, much easier. Being able to hold your tip on the spot at every yardage is a lot easiermore accurate than trying to figure gaps and hoping you have something to aim at on the ground in front of the target.
> 
> Imagine if Freestyle shooters couldn't adjust their sights during a round -- just one fixed aiming point. What would happen to their scores? That's the difference between string walking and not. It's huge, and there's a reason why arguably the best gap shooters in this country choose to string walk for FITA Field.


Arguably?lol


----------



## Mr. Roboto

J. Wesbrock said:


> My practice NFAA 900 rounds leading up to last year's nationals were in the very low 800s with a high of either 814 or 815 (I don't have the score card handy now). The weather last year was brutal -- 30s and 40s with 40mph wind gusts. It was a lesson in drive by shooting since there was no way I could hold even remotely steady on target. I think my 900 score at nationals was in the high 760s. The 600 Classic round is unforgiving for Traditional shooters. A 46cm target at 60 yards doesn't leave much room for error. It's a lot of fun though.


Thanks,

Funny though, my best 900 round was in a heavy steady wind. There was this barn way off to the left of the target. The wind was steady through the whole shoot. I just aimed at the top, the window, and the bottom of the barn at the 3 distances, and the wind carried the arrows to the center of the target. I almost broke 800 that day. Everyone else cried. I thought it was great. Then day 2 came, and no wind, and I couldn't hit water if I fell out of a boat.


----------



## Ten_Zen

To sum up my thoughts on the matter: barebow shooters are a small group of whiny old men/women with amazing skills, and a much larger group of entry level newbs who saw hawkeye or the hunger games and wanna develop their Lars Anderson instinctive style (and a few outliers). The reason there is so much contention about the rules is because the majority in that class chose it for that reason, and so they think it is unfair that they should have to shoot against bows and shooting styles that actually put arrows on paper. Or they want to be in a class of their own, that way they will walk home with a medal no matter what happens. Maybe thats how we should divide the class! Fantasy LARPer's vs Crotchety Old Folks. Fantasy LARPers MUST use back quivers, must snap shoot, and any type of holding, aiming, or consistent anchoring is not allowed. Crotchety Old Folks class can have any style, any bow, any stabilizer setup. They also can have 4 minutes per arrow to ensure proper sight rituals have been preformed every time. There will be awards for seniors, masters, masters+, master seniors, master silver seniors, master 50+, seniors 50+, master seniors 60+, silver master super grand extra seniors 60+, etc.


----------



## limbwalker

J. Wesbrock said:


> String walking may not offer any real advantage for indoor paper, but it's a huge game changer for field archery. As someone who shoots field both ways with a recurve, I can tell you string walking is much, much easier. Being able to hold your tip on the spot at every yardage is a lot easiermore accurate than trying to figure gaps and hoping you have something to aim at on the ground in front of the target.
> 
> Imagine if Freestyle shooters couldn't adjust their sights during a round -- just one fixed aiming point. What would happen to their scores? That's the difference between string walking and not. It's huge, and there's a reason why arguably the best gap shooters in this country choose to string walk for FITA Field.


I can't disagree with this. If stringwalking has an advantage anywhere, it's in field. Indoors, and for outdoor target at one, two or three known distances, I don't see where stringwalking has much of an advantage. But for field, it may make it easier to remember string crawls than gaps. True enough.

To me, a clicker and stabilization offer more advantages than stringwalking, but that's just me.



> I think that is an interesting way to look at it. But I could counter that, well yeah, but if you want to democratize sighting, we have these things called *sights*.


Of course you could counter that. You live to counter things.

And I think the whole point of making competition fair, is "democratizing" the divisions.


----------



## grantmac

Darryl Longbow said:


> Does anyone know {approximately } how many tournaments that include bare bow in the U.S. are shot under WA. rules ? Are they field, target, indoor , or 3D. ? I get the impression that WA has BB in 3D and indoor but not field or target and I am not familiar with their rules and would like to know this.If WA does not even consider BB in many of its shoots why does everyone want to be under them.


Clearly you have no experience and have done no research, or even really read the thread. USAArchery doesn't offer a 3D event, only indoor, outdoor and field. All of which have a pretty active BB participation. The reason the experienced BB archers want one set of rules is because WA offers world championships in both Field and 3D which draw the best BB archers in the world and we want to be able to compete with the equipment and technique used at the world level. 



Warbow said:


> allow string walking but prohibit distinguishing tab marks of any kind and put a time limit on shooting to prevent serving thread counters


Again someone without any understanding of a technique making rules to suit themselves. I both gap and stringwalking. A small difference in gap leads to a small different in impact. 1mm difference on the tab is a difference of several inches at the target.
Ban the marked tab and I'll jut carry a ruler or learn to count faster because it DOES have to be that precise.

-Grant


----------



## _JR_

Ten_Zen said:


> To sum up my thoughts on the matter: barebow shooters are a small group of whiny old men/women with amazing skills, and a much larger group of entry level newbs who saw hawkeye or the hunger games and wanna develop their Lars Anderson instinctive style (and a few outliers). The reason there is so much contention about the rules is because the majority in that class chose it for that reason, and so they think it is unfair that they should have to shoot against bows and shooting styles that actually put arrows on paper. Or they want to be in a class of their own, that way they will walk home with a medal no matter what happens. Maybe thats how we should divide the class! Fantasy LARPer's vs Crotchety Old Folks. Fantasy LARPers MUST use back quivers, must snap shoot, and any type of holding, aiming, or consistent anchoring is not allowed. Crotchety Old Folks class can have any style, any bow, any stabilizer setup. They also can have 4 minutes per arrow to ensure proper sight rituals have been preformed every time. There will be awards for seniors, masters, masters+, master seniors, master silver seniors, master 50+, seniors 50+, master seniors 60+, silver master super grand extra seniors 60+, etc.


OK, I'm confused. I don't know you so I can't tell if you're trolling (in this provocative post as well as in starting the thread itself with an equally provocative title), or if you really do think a good use of your time is to ponder all these minutiae in a shooting division that's not even one that you shoot in (as far as I know). 

So how about this: instead of your '_Barebow shooters are either whiny old people or entry level LARPer newbs_', I'll suggest that a great majority of barebow shooters are the following, first and foremost:

*ARCHERS.*

Archers are people who like archery and who like to shoot. 
There, that's about it. 

Why all the polemical discussions about what barebow is and what it's rules should be? 

Well, some barebow shooters like to shoot in competitions. And barebow shooters are a veeeery diverse group. In the barebow classes at some events you'll see someone with an 48" horsebow shooting alongside someone with a 70" Oly recurve (_sans_ accoutrements), next to someone with an English Longbow, next to someone with a hunting recurve, and so on. Obviously each of those people is happiest with the bow that they brought and that's why they brought it. But just stop and admire that diversity for a moment. Then go look at the other divisions at the tournament. Is there the same diversity? No. Diversity in Oly Recurve, for example, is limited to more subtle things like wood vs. foam, riser color, or stab/weight configuration. Not that the lack of equipment diversity is in any way a bad thing - in Oly Recurve we've figured out what works well and is within the rules, so that's what we use. On the line in Oly Recurve we see a great diversity in people, not so much in equipment. 

The difference with barebow, especially when we start crossing association or event boundaries (e.g., USAA, NFAA, Vegas, Lancaster, etc.), is that - as has been discussed ad nauseum in another thread - there is no agreement on what constitutes barebow. Is it the equipment? Is it whether or not you touch your arrow as you shoot? Yada, yada. 

Back to what I said before, Barebow shooters are Archers. Some archers want to compete. With such an incredibly diverse range of possible interpretations of what the category means, there will never be agreement (unless, as has been suggested elsewhere, there were WA Barebow divisions in major international events like World Cups - then that would become the de facto norm). So your solution is to get rid of it? So you're saying "Oh, too much diversity of equipment, too many different kinds of people, and they all annoy me, so I propose that we get rid of it!" 
Humboldt County is generally thought of as a laissez-faire, libertarian-ish kind of place. I'm surprised that your draconian suggestions of eliminating the most inclusive of all divisions in target archery are originating from there, leading me to the conclusion that you must just be trolling us. 

In which case... very well done, sir! 
222 replies,
7,000+ views, 
...and counting...

Success!



Here, let me give you an analogy


----------



## _JR_

_JR_ said:


> Here, let me give you an analogy


Oops! didn't get to the analogy. 
Anyway, it's about transportation. 
I have 2 skateboards, 4 bicycles, and a motorcycle. 
No car. 
Why no car? 
Obviously a car is immensely more practical and is superior in almost every way to those.
But I _like_ my boards and bikes, and I _don't _really like cars, even though I recognize the practical superiority of the car for most purposes.
I choose the bikes and boards because they make me happier.

To me, and I suspect to many "barebow types", archery is like that. This morning I decided "_hmmm, I think I'll go shoot for a few hours_". So I went out and looked at my bows and then decided which one to take. Shooting is the primary action, how/what I shoot is secondary. I didn't dress up to LARP, I wasn't whiny or old, I'm not a noob, I don't care about medals or shooting in any class against any kind of bow, and I definitely don't have amazing skills. However, I did spend a very enjoyable 3 hours shooting in the company of 7 other wonderful people, most of whom were shooting barebow (with some shooting compound), and all-in-all it was just a nice little archery fun day in the sun. 
In sum, the reality that your humble servant just witnessed and experienced had absolutely nothing to do with the offensive mischaracterizations in post #221 above. 

But anyway, dang, I just realized I have now contributed one more troll point... Aaargh!!


----------



## limbwalker

There is no point in discussing what barebow is or isn't unless it relates to specific target competitions. 

When a championship is on the line, it matters how we define it. Otherwise, who really cares? I don't.


----------



## grantmac

limbwalker said:


> There is no point in discussing what barebow is or isn't unless it relates to specific target competitions.
> When a championship is on the line, it matters how we define it. Otherwise, who really cares? I don't.


Exactly! I honestly don't care what people do with bows for fun. Competition and competitors are the only thing that matter from a rules standpoint.

-Grant


----------



## Warbow

grantmac said:


> Again someone without any understanding of a technique making rules to suit themselves. I both gap and stringwalking. A small difference in gap leads to a small different in impact. 1mm difference on the tab is a difference of several inches at the target.
> Ban the marked tab and I'll jut carry a ruler or learn to count faster because it DOES have to be that precise.
> 
> -Grant


I'm not a stringwalker, though I plan on trying it in the upcoming months. And yes, in fact, I do understand the gemometry involved. I'll add "no rulers" to my list of string walking bans.

Look, I'm not a "there's only one kind of archery" kind of person. I like the variety. But, I also recognize stringwalking for what it is, a calibrated aiming system in an nominally unsighted class. There is something kind of silly about banning sights and distinguishing marks on the belly of bows but then letting string walkers move those marks to their tabs, and using Beiter plungers with *numbered*, calibrated markings to adjust the plunger for and equivalent to windage. That's a whole lot of gaming the system in an unsighted class. I also recognize that such gaming of the system is what many highly competitive people do to win - they look for loopholes in the rules and exploit the heck out of them. That kind of stuff, I would think, is how the NFAA wound up with it's finger must touch the nock rules.

What I propose, as a theoretical set of rules that really don't have a chance of being implemented, is *no marks or rules*, not on the bow, not on the tab, not on the plunger. And a time limit. Serving counting to be allowed, but get it done on time. If not, that's on you. You would be free to string walk all you want, but not free to use a plethora of marks and calibrated tools to do at the string and plunger what you aren't allowed to do on the belly of the bow, i.e. use a calibrated sight. John can string walk without a tab, if you need marks, then you are just indicated you need a calibrated sight, you are just putting it on your tab instead of screwing it to your riser.

And I'm not actually against string walking, per se. I think it is an amazing technique. Clever and effective. But it is gaming the system. And the system can fix that loophole so you can still string walk, but not use all manner of calibration.


----------



## Ten_Zen

_JR_ said:


> OK, I'm confused. I don't know you so I can't tell if you're trolling (in this provocative post as well as in starting the thread itself with an equally provocative title), or if you really do think a good use of your time is to ponder all these minutiae in a shooting division that's not even one that you shoot in (as far as I know).
> 
> So how about this: instead of your '_Barebow shooters are either whiny old people or entry level LARPer newbs_', I'll suggest that a great majority of barebow shooters are the following, first and foremost:
> 
> *ARCHERS.*
> 
> Archers are people who like archery and who like to shoot.
> There, that's about it.
> 
> Why all the polemical discussions about what barebow is and what it's rules should be?
> 
> Well, some barebow shooters like to shoot in competitions. And barebow shooters are a veeeery diverse group. In the barebow classes at some events you'll see someone with an 48" horsebow shooting alongside someone with a 70" Oly recurve (_sans_ accoutrements), next to someone with an English Longbow, next to someone with a hunting recurve, and so on. Obviously each of those people is happiest with the bow that they brought and that's why they brought it. But just stop and admire that diversity for a moment. Then go look at the other divisions at the tournament. Is there the same diversity? No. Diversity in Oly Recurve, for example, is limited to more subtle things like wood vs. foam, riser color, or stab/weight configuration. Not that the lack of equipment diversity is in any way a bad thing - in Oly Recurve we've figured out what works well and is within the rules, so that's what we use. On the line in Oly Recurve we see a great diversity in people, not so much in equipment.
> 
> The difference with barebow, especially when we start crossing association or event boundaries (e.g., USAA, NFAA, Vegas, Lancaster, etc.), is that - as has been discussed ad nauseum in another thread - there is no agreement on what constitutes barebow. Is it the equipment? Is it whether or not you touch your arrow as you shoot? Yada, yada.
> 
> Back to what I said before, Barebow shooters are Archers. Some archers want to compete. With such an incredibly diverse range of possible interpretations of what the category means, there will never be agreement (unless, as has been suggested elsewhere, there were WA Barebow divisions in major international events like World Cups - then that would become the de facto norm). So your solution is to get rid of it? So you're saying "Oh, too much diversity of equipment, too many different kinds of people, and they all annoy me, so I propose that we get rid of it!"
> Humboldt County is generally thought of as a laissez-faire, libertarian-ish kind of place. I'm surprised that your draconian suggestions of eliminating the most inclusive of all divisions in target archery are originating from there, leading me to the conclusion that you must just be trolling us.
> 
> In which case... very well done, sir!
> 222 replies,
> 7,000+ views,
> ...and counting...
> 
> Success!
> 
> 
> 
> Here, let me give you an analogy


I have to admit that last one was shameless trolling for comedic value. Those are of course gross generalizations of the barebow community based on stereotypes. I honestly just enjoy the banter, but also nothing brings people together like a cause to rally against. Playing devil's advocate is often the best way to find a solution to the problem. Look at how many people have stepped up to defend the integrity of the class, and talked about what needs to be done to fix it. Hopefully one day there _will_ be a barebow class that is the same in every organization. And also hopefully people will stop coming to the range with mongolian longbows and no prior experience trying to speed shoot off their thumb and ending up hitting the wall because they saw a video on youtube. Seriously, that is a thing now. But it has nothing to do with the barebow class, just something to gripe about


----------



## limbwalker

> There is something kind of silly about banning sights and distinguishing marks on the belly of bows but then letting string walkers move those marks to their tabs, and using Beiter plungers with *numbered*, calibrated markings to adjust the plunger for and equivalent to windage. That's a whole lot of gaming the system in an unsighted class. I also recognize that such gaming of the system is what many highly competitive people do to win - they look for loopholes in the rules and exploit the heck out of them.


Highly competitive people are going to game any system we come up with. For instance, shooting full-length 2412's with 300 grain points indoors at 20 yards so one can be point-on while still touching the arrow nock. What is that, if not gaming the system? 

I will continue to maintain that being forced to touch the nock creates an advantage for some archers with shorter faces and who can anchor higher and still keep the nock end of the arrow directly under their eye. Not everyone can do this, which is why I feel that an archer should be allowed to grab the string wherever they choose. I think the marked tabs go overboard, and personally I string walk just fine with a glove, so I am sure there is room for improvement there. But why tell the archer how to aim? That's baloney. 



> I would think, is how the NFAA wound up with it's finger must touch the nock rules.


That could be part of the reason, but another reason is that there were and still are many in the "trad" community that wish to believe they shoot by instinct, without aiming, and want to only compete against other archers who do the same. The idea that if you have to touch the nock and aren't allowed to string walk helps those archers believe that nobody in the division has an aiming method, which we all know (and I suspect they do too) is baloney. But if it makes them feel better or sleep better, then I guess it accomplished it's goal.

As some have pointed out, this "touch the nock" thing is a much bigger deal in field archery than outdoor target or indoor.


----------



## wfocharlie

Its interesting to observe these barebow threads from an outsiders perspective as I'm an oly guy. I see the same thing happen over and over again. There is a group of people who are trying to come up with the best way to get a COMMON set of rules for barebow competitions. Then there is a group that wants to argue about what is the fairest or best way to shoot the bow itself. It seems like these should be two different threads and be discussed separately although I guess I get why that is kind of hard to do.


----------



## Warbow

wfocharlie said:


> Its interesting to observe these barebow threads from an outsiders perspective as I'm an oly guy. I see the same thing happen over and over again. There is a group of people who are trying to come up with the best way to get a COMMON set of rules for barebow competitions. Then there is a group that wants to argue about what is the fairest or best way to shoot the bow itself. It seems like these should be two different threads and be discussed separately although I guess I get why that is kind of hard to do.


The issue with barebow is that it is a *restrictive* class, and making a class that merely allows *everything* doesn't work - where to draw the lines is really key. So, I'd say that the argument is largely about people lobbying for rules that favor their own preferred shooting system, and rule out what *other people* do. (Not everybody, though, some have advocated beyond their own shooting style). You can't make people happy by creating combined class by merely making a Venn diagram of everything allowed in all existing barebow systems.


----------



## TREESTANDSNYPER

To me barebow seems pretty simple...a bare bow. End of story. Now obviously shooting a riser cut past center requites the shooter to either use a rest/plunger or build the hell out the shelf out to accommodate the riser being cut past center. So I can see where using a rest is acceptable. Otherwise IMHO the only true barebow is a recurve/longbow being shot directly off the shelf.


----------



## Supermag1

Warbow said:


> The issue with barebow is that it is a *restrictive* class, and making a class that merely allows *everything* doesn't work - where to draw the lines is really key. So, I'd say that the argument is largely about people lobbying for rules that favor their own preferred shooting system, and rule out what *other people* do. (Not everybody, though, some have advocated beyond their own shooting style). You can't make people happy by creating combined class by merely making a Venn diagram of everything allowed in all existing barebow systems.


Yeah, because having less people eligible to compete in the barebow class will improve participation numbers and make it a viable class.


----------



## Warbow

Supermag1 said:


> Yeah, because having less people eligible to compete in the barebow class will improve participation numbers and make it a viable class.


We already have an NFAA barebow class so permissive it allows draw checks, full stabilizer rigs, levels and compound bows. Making a class more permissive doesn't necessarily make it better or more popular. As it is we have a very permissive "barebow" class called WA Recurve. You can use all of your favorite bare bow set ups. It is very permissive, so permissive it allows drawchecks, stabilizers, blemishes on the belly of the bow - heck, it even allows sights. Surely that would improve participation for unsighted shooters, right? Of course not. 

You can't please everybody.


----------



## MikeG

TREESTANDSNYPER said:


> To me barebow seems pretty simple...a bare bow. End of story. Now obviously shooting a riser cut past center requites the shooter to either use a rest/plunger or build the hell out the shelf out to accommodate the riser being cut past center. So I can see where using a rest is acceptable. *Otherwise IMHO the only true barebow is a recurve/longbow being shot directly off the shelf.*


"Barebow" is a bit of a misnomer for this class, but we can call it whatever we like. The current WA Barebow Rules do make it an accessible class for most folks without breaking the bank or requiring highly specialized gear. For barebow being a "restrictive" class there's a lot of flexibility in riser types and shooting styles. There's nothing wrong with that.


----------



## Darryl Longbow

Grantmac, you stated about my question (how many tournaments in the U.S. are held under WA. rules) That, "Clearly you have no experience and have done no research or even read the thread.USAA archery doesent offer a 3D event, only indoor, outdoor, and field all of which have a pretty active BB participation". You are absolutely correct my experience [50 t yrs of tournaments} is limited and since I don't have all the answers I asked a question. I guess neither one of us has read the thread as I asked nothing about USAA archery. The other statement you made : "The reason experienced archers want one set of rules is because WA offers world championships in both field and3D which draw the best BB archers in the world and we want to compete with the equipment and techniques used at the world level." My question would then be, Whats stopping you from doing so now. Even at a club level aren't you allowed to shoot your WA legal BB rig anytime you want in a BB class ? Perhaps its because you might shoot against compounds with clickers and stabelisers ? Seems that might be good practice for a experienced archer to prepare for a WA. world championship to me.Or is it you want to shoot against the traditional shooters with their off the rest one finger touching the nock snap shooting style so you can enlighten them ? No I don't guess that's it as you have already stated that you don't care what the neo tradies think because they don't count when it comes to competition.Wow, yesterday our home club held a field shoot that drew 25 traditional shooters in addition to quite a few freestyle compounders. BB, sorry there were not any. Guess the club wished we had not showed up and paid the same fees as everyone else. The contempt shown here for traditional by some is astounding, neo trad, the flannel army, tradies, etc.Be sure to label it always works so well. There is no such thing as traditional,and such drivel.For not existing there sure seem to be a lot of us around..Equipment, I agree, stabelisers should not be allowed.Out of the 25 trad style shooters yesterday we had zero stabelisers. We did have a few elevated rests though. I think it has become apparent here that string walking is an advantage over gap shooting for field and possibly 3D. So for all of us who gap shoot you want us to change the rules to suit you ? and anyone has the gall to call trad elitest, amazing. Recurve BB should have its own place, shot by rules agreed upon by the majority that know what BB is all about. If you want inclusion the thing to do is petition the organization {WA} to include you in the games you want to play in . If the other organizations then change to those rules then great but you start with the organization that has rules you are happy with and work on inclusion first. Unfortunate but true, we will always be the step child of archery.We do not buy enough equipment from the big sponsers that drive the organizations and that is what it is all about, money. There are not enough of us to change that.We can write , call, E mail, send petitions to WA to include us. We can submit articles you writers out there to explain what BB is and what you want. We can show up at shoots and make our presence known and if we have to shoot against compounders or whatever do so. Do so in numbers that will get noticed, Join the organizations and help them grow and evolve. What will accomplish nothing is to continue on a public forum showing our ass and I am just as guilty as anyone in this.I am a serious trad shooter, I have worked hard to develop my skills in my chosen way, you the BB community have all done the same, we differ in our thoughts on rules but are the same as to a goal of having respect in the archery community. Instead of fighting among ourselves lets agree to disagree on some things and change it from inside the organizations to the benefit of all. Lets discuss how we might get WA to reconise BB for all its games rather than insulting one another.If you do nothing you will get nothing. Lets do it.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

limbwalker said:


> That could be part of the reason, but another reason is that there were and still are many in the "trad" community that wish to believe they shoot by instinct, without aiming, and want to only compete against other archers who do the same. The idea that if you have to touch the nock and aren't allowed to string walk helps those archers believe that nobody in the division has an aiming method, which we all know (and I suspect they do too) is baloney. But if it makes them feel better or sleep better, then I guess it accomplished it's goal.
> 
> As some have pointed out, this "touch the nock" thing is a much bigger deal in field archery than outdoor target or indoor.


NFAA Traditional was instituted in 1985. The rule about a finger having to touch the nock in Bowhunter predates Traditional by many years. It had nothing to do with what you referred to as the "trad" community or instincrive aiming.


----------



## 2413gary

Funny thing I see here is NFAA Barebow shooters are fine with the NFAA Barebow rules and don't care what WA's rules are. But WA Barebow shooters want NFAA to change to there rules. Hello it's two completely different organizations going in two different directions. Like it has been said here before pic what you want go shoot and quit complaining about NFAA rules on a Fita sight.


----------



## Warbow

J. Wesbrock said:


> NFAA Traditional was instituted in 1985. The rule about a finger having to touch the nock in Bowhunter predates Traditional by many years. It had nothing to do with what you referred to as the "trad" community or instincrive aiming.


What does it have to do with?


----------



## Demmer

Pick what we want and shoot it. Kinda for the most part eliminates a lot of people from picking a wider verity of shoots. Kinda like they choose to stick to one org. Kinda silly because with a unification, one can choose everything and be an easy transition while maximizing the rules without making changes. Oh wait there is that in Olympic and open compound. They seem to be doing awesome with numbers. But hey my logic seems to be very very flawed.


----------



## limbwalker

J. Wesbrock said:


> NFAA Traditional was instituted in 1985. The rule about a finger having to touch the nock in Bowhunter predates Traditional by many years. It had nothing to do with what you referred to as the "trad" community or instincrive aiming.


Jason, it has a lot to do with the "instinctive" segment of the "trad" community. When I used the term "trad" it was a reference to those who consider themselves "traditional" and not necessarily the NFAA traditional division.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

limbwalker said:


> Jason, it has a lot to do with the "instinctive" segment of the "trad" community. When I used the term "trad" it was a reference to those who consider themselves "traditional" and not necessarily the NFAA traditional division.


I trully mean no disrespect, but I don't think you have much understanding of the history of these NFAA classes you constantly criticize and want to change. You really need to sit down with some of the older NFAA folks and find out the truth of the matter. The whole issue of string walking goes back to before you were born, and long before the "traditional" movement you dislike so much. The NFAA actually had a FITA Barebow class at one time. It died out from lack of participation.

Again, still no disrespect and I consider some of you friends, but for a small group of people whose total involvement in NFAA is a few indoor spot shoots for a couple months out of the year to try dictating rules to the rest of the membership is a little self serving. You guys show up after outdoor season, shoot a few 300 rounds, demand the NFAA change to suit your needs, and then disappear in March to go back to your main archery interests, USA Archery or IBO. Obviously some of you have no interest in most of what the NFAA offers -- you have never even shot an NFAA field round and don't consider 3D real target archery -- so please have a little respect for those of us who do.


----------



## regas

if you read the old nfaa handbooks from the early days , 1950's, the bowhunters wanted a game closer to how they shot when hunting. there 's not time to count stitches
when hunting. until the target shooters outnumber the hunters, we had better stay on our side of the range .:wink:


----------



## 2413gary

I choose them all with just a weight change. Sorry for rubbing the wrong way I'm getting over the flu and Sandy kicking my butt at West coast IBO this weekend lol


Demmer said:


> Pick what we want and shoot it. Kinda for the most part eliminates a lot of people from picking a wider verity of shoots. Kinda like they choose to stick to one org. Kinda silly because with a unification, one can choose everything and be an easy transition while maximizing the rules without making changes. Oh wait there is that in Olympic and open compound. They seem to be doing awesome with numbers. But hey my logic seems to be very very flawed.


----------



## Supermag1

Darryl Longbow said:


> Grantmac, you stated about my question (how many tournaments in the U.S. are held under WA. rules) That, "Clearly you have no experience and have done no research or even read the thread.USAA archery doesent offer a 3D event, only indoor, outdoor, and field all of which have a pretty active BB participation". You are absolutely correct my experience [50 t yrs of tournaments} is limited and since I don't have all the answers I asked a question. I guess neither one of us has read the thread as I asked nothing about USAA archery. The other statement you made : "The reason experienced archers want one set of rules is because WA offers world championships in both field and3D which draw the best BB archers in the world and we want to compete with the equipment and techniques used at the world level." My question would then be, *Whats stopping you from doing so now. Even at a club level aren't you allowed to shoot your WA legal BB rig anytime you want in a BB class ? Perhaps its because you might shoot against compounds with clickers and stabelisers ? Seems that might be good practice for a experienced archer to prepare for a WA. world championship to me.Or is it you want to shoot against the traditional shooters with their off the rest one finger touching the nock snap shooting style so you can enlighten them ? No I don't guess that's it as you have already stated that you don't care what the neo tradies think because they don't count when it comes to competition.*Wow, yesterday our home club held a field shoot that drew 25 traditional shooters in addition to quite a few freestyle compounders. BB, sorry there were not any. Guess the club wished we had not showed up and paid the same fees as everyone else. The contempt shown here for traditional by some is astounding, neo trad, the flannel army, tradies, etc.Be sure to label it always works so well. There is no such thing as traditional,and such drivel.For not existing there sure seem to be a lot of us around..Equipment, I agree, stabelisers should not be allowed.Out of the 25 trad style shooters yesterday we had zero stabelisers. We did have a few elevated rests though. I think it has become apparent here that string walking is an advantage over gap shooting for field and possibly 3D. So for all of us who gap shoot you want us to change the rules to suit you ? and anyone has the gall to call trad elitest, amazing. Recurve BB should have its own place, shot by rules agreed upon by the majority that know what BB is all about. If you want inclusion the thing to do is petition the organization {WA} to include you in the games you want to play in . If the other organizations then change to those rules then great but you start with the organization that has rules you are happy with and work on inclusion first. Unfortunate but true, we will always be the step child of archery.We do not buy enough equipment from the big sponsers that drive the organizations and that is what it is all about, money. There are not enough of us to change that.We can write , call, E mail, send petitions to WA to include us. We can submit articles you writers out there to explain what BB is and what you want. We can show up at shoots and make our presence known and if we have to shoot against compounders or whatever do so. Do so in numbers that will get noticed, Join the organizations and help them grow and evolve. What will accomplish nothing is to continue on a public forum showing our ass and I am just as guilty as anyone in this.I am a serious trad shooter, I have worked hard to develop my skills in my chosen way, you the BB community have all done the same, we differ in our thoughts on rules but are the same as to a goal of having respect in the archery community. Instead of fighting among ourselves lets agree to disagree on some things and change it from inside the organizations to the benefit of all. Lets discuss how we might get WA to reconise BB for all its games rather than insulting one another.If you do nothing you will get nothing. Lets do it.


Great point right there!


----------



## grantmac

I shoot a WA legal BB rig for NFAA Trad indoors and 3D and NFAA Barebow for Field.
However to do that I have 3 different sets of arrows. When I shoot WA I can cover all the disciplines with one set and one tune if I wish.

Besides the fact that many people (more every day thanks to the internet) are using a form of stringwalking for hunting with single-string bows.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker

> I trully mean no disrespect, but I don't think you have much understanding of the history of these NFAA classes you constantly criticize and want to change.


Jason,

I also consider you a friend and for that reason, I just deleted a LENGTHY reply to your post.

Next time, if you have something like that to get off your chest, PM me. Or I'll be glad to give you my phone number.

All I'll say here is you are dead wrong about me on many counts, and I don't really appreciate it.

John


----------



## SBills

OK this thread needs a little levity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVTpCViyUwM


----------



## tered

Okay I have now fell off the pot lmao in this thread. This is great stuff. Better than the new paper.
Just for knowledge I am a compound shooter and I am happy to stay that way.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

Scott,

That's funny.


----------



## Supermag1

Maybe I should put that as my footer on here, just in case.




With all due respect


----------



## limbwalker

Yup, pretty much what I was thinking...


----------



## Supermag1

After seeing the whole no camo BS that WA and probably USAA is regulating, you guys can keep your "barebow", "world" championships.

With all due respect...


----------



## Ten_Zen

This thread now has more replies than the gillo thread! Talk about a hot button issue LOL


----------



## limbwalker

Ten_Zen said:


> This thread now has more replies than the gillo thread! Talk about a hot button issue LOL


Well, it's all some of us barebow archers have to talk about. LOL.


----------



## limbwalker

Honestly, the real rub here is that because so many choices are available, and all called "barebow", quite a few folks have found their favorite niche of all the various choices, and they are comfortable in that niche. And they really don't want to change what they have been doing. I completely understand that. 

In Olympic recurve or freestyle compound, you don't get choices. Well, I suppose you have the choice to either shoot under those rules or not, but there isn't really a way to get around them. So you either decide to compete against archers who take full advantage of all the accessories they are allowed, or you don't. Pretty simple.

Some of us just want a common set of rules for "Barebow." That's it. 

What a few here don't understand is that I and a couple guys like me who hope to see a common set of barebow rules develop, don't really CARE THAT MUCH about what that common set of rules are. It's more important to us that we see barebow come together than it is how it's defined. 

Do we have our preferences? Sure we do. We're human just like anyone else and we have our preferences. There is also the practical side of which organization will or won't change their rules. But let's not lose sight of the fact that the goal here for some of us is to bring barebow together and dispense with the equipment rodeo many of us do each year to compete in the various barebow divisions. 

If World Archery and USArchery adopted the 12" stabilizer and no stringwalking rules of NFAA, I might not agree that it's still "bare bow" bow I would see it as a step in the right direction from a competitor's viewpoint. Hell, I enjoy shooting NFAA "trad" with the 12" stabilizer. It makes me look a lot better than I really am! LOL. 

But I think it's important to barebow archers everywhere that we figure out a way to come together. The fractions within the barebow community only hurt us IMO. And the annual equipment rodeo we go through doesn't help our level of competition.


----------



## Kendric_Hubbard

I'm going to discuss the possibility of advocating for a change of the NFAA trad rules towards the World Archery barebow rules at our next state meeting.


----------



## Ten_Zen

limbwalker said:


> Honestly, the real rub here is that because so many choices are available, and all called "barebow", quite a few folks have found their favorite niche of all the various choices, and they are comfortable in that niche. And they really don't want to change what they have been doing. I completely understand that.
> 
> In Olympic recurve or freestyle compound, you don't get choices.  Well, I suppose you have the choice to either shoot under those rules or not, but there isn't really a way to get around them. So you either decide to compete against archers who take full advantage of all the accessories they are allowed, or you don't. Pretty simple.
> 
> Some of us just want a common set of rules for "Barebow." That's it.
> 
> What a few here don't understand is that I and a couple guys like me who hope to see a common set of barebow rules develop, don't really CARE THAT MUCH about what that common set of rules are. It's more important to us that we see barebow come together than it is how it's defined.
> 
> Do we have our preferences? Sure we do. We're human just like anyone else and we have our preferences. There is also the practical side of which organization will or won't change their rules. But let's not lose sight of the fact that the goal here for some of us is to bring barebow together and dispense with the equipment rodeo many of us do each year to compete in the various barebow divisions.
> 
> If World Archery and USArchery adopted the 12" stabilizer and no stringwalking rules of NFAA, I might not agree that it's still "bare bow" bow I would see it as a step in the right direction from a competitor's viewpoint. Hell, I enjoy shooting NFAA "trad" with the 12" stabilizer. It makes me look a lot better than I really am! LOL.
> 
> But I think it's important to barebow archers everywhere that we figure out a way to come together. The fractions within the barebow community only hurt us IMO. And the annual equipment rodeo we go through doesn't help our level of competition.


Wow, we need more of this mentality. Its not about what rules are chosen, it is about coming together. A big fat +1 to this.


----------



## Ten_Zen

Kendric_Hubbard said:


> I'm going to discuss the possibility of advocating for a change of the NFAA trad rules towards the World Archery barebow rules at our next state meeting.


I like where your going with this. could be just the compromise we need to end this debate once and for all.


----------



## Bigjono

My problem with your point John is, if it is one set of rules and that set adopts NFAA Trad as the barebow standard, it alienates the biggest barebow shooters outside the USA and makes it hard for guys here to go and compete there. Look at Lancaster, with big numbers and a good purse, would that attract the big European barebow shooters, maybe, but not with the mix and match rules they ran this year. IFAA Barebow is not big like WA is so it really needs to be WA I think.


----------



## limbwalker

Oh believe me, I agree with you. I think there are more points in favor of going the WA way (even though I and a lot of others would be giving up our new 12" cheating rod) than any other single way. 

Lancaster had big numbers because of who was running it, and the fact that it was the first year. If they can keep that purse, and the same amount of interest, I'll be pleasantly surprised. With those rules, I doubt it though. 

WA Barebow is much bigger than many U.S. barebow shooters would like to admit. But I'd also be happy with just one major set of domestic barebow rules. 

Barebow is where I want to compete for the next 30+ years. I am planning to give the Olympic trials one more run this fall, and after that I expect to be shooting barebow exclusively for a long time, save for perhaps a few years trying to set a few Masters OR records.  But I'd sure like to spend the majority of those 30 years shooting one bow, one way. 

John


----------



## Darryl Longbow

I totally agree about the stabeliser in NFAA trad. Tried it and it did nothing for me worth carrying the extra weight along.Totally agree barebow needs unification and WA rules look reasonable and should be adopted for BARE BOW. Bare bow and Traditional are two entirely separate things. Trad is mostly hunters that choose to compete in a form of target archery shooting like they hunt. Bare bow is for target shooters that like to hunt with the same method they shoot tournaments. How many hunters that shoot some competition are there compared to actual string walking, weighted riser, elevated rest. bare bow shooters. I do not use a sight, I consider myself traditional and not a bare bow archer. I am to that stage that I would rather shoot competition rather than hunt nearly as much as I once did.So. petition the WA group for inclusion in their organization . Then work on a separate recurve barebow division in the NFAA. Adding a BB division might well ad some non sighted archers to the NFAA shoots.If you change NFAA to WA rules you are going to lose all the trads who now participate. If you want to be competitive you will have to become a string walker. Traditionalist are not going to do that, it is not what they are all about. They would welcome you as a bare bow archer in a bare bow class but changing the traditionalist to your way of doing things will simply drive them away. Yes I know that trad numbers at a Nationals is not high, but they are the vast majority of shooters in a non sighted division at many many local tournaments. Last week at our club shoot, a field round, we had 25 traditional and one BB compound along with a good turnout of freestyle shooters. The trad division is well represented on a local level. If you do accomplish this change to WA rules at NFAA events most of the traditionalist will simply stick to their own shoots (and wear whatever they want) and this appears to be exactly what is being hoped for in this discussion. Recurve BB division, yes. Change traditional divisions to comply with WA, no.


----------



## 2413gary

NFAA Barebow is not going anywhere anytime soon. I wrote a petition a few years back to combine Barebow and Bowhunter because of lack of competition in some areas. Almost got skinned at that meeting. NFAA will not add another division like recurve Barebow. Most of the directors feel we have to many divisions now there right. The closest thing WA and NFAA have is WA Barebow and NFAA trad one allows a up to a 12" stabilizer and no string walking. The other allows string walking and no stabilizer. They are really not that far apart you just buy two stabilizers a long and a short one. Or none at all. I doubt NFAA will not add string walkin in the trad division anytime soon. I also doubt that 99% of NFAA trad shooters really care if the Europeans show up here and shoot. So for all the WA people here of which I am one show up at WA shoots and make WA Barebow grow. But don't try and force NFAA to change to Wa rules it won't happen. If I see you at a shoot you can bet if its NFAA I will be shooting trad if WA shoot you will see my short stabilizer. The only way to make recurve Barebow or trad grow is to show up.


----------



## Demmer

2413gary said:


> NFAA Barebow is not going anywhere anytime soon. I wrote a petition a few years back to combine Barebow and Bowhunter because of lack of competition in some areas. Almost got skinned at that meeting. NFAA will not add another division like recurve Barebow. Most of the directors feel we have to many divisions now there right. The closest thing WA and NFAA have is WA Barebow and NFAA trad one allows a up to a 12" stabilizer and no string walking. The other allows string walking and no stabilizer. They are really not that far apart you just buy two stabilizers a long and a short one. Or none at all. I doubt NFAA will not add string walkin in the trad division anytime soon. I also doubt that 99% of NFAA trad shooters really care if the Europeans show up here and shoot. So for all the WA people here of which I am one show up at WA shoots and make WA Barebow grow. But don't try and force NFAA to change to Wa rules it won't happen. If I see you at a shoot you can bet if its NFAA I will be shooting trad if WA shoot you will see my short stabilizer. The only way to make recurve Barebow or trad grow is to show up.


This saddens me greatly. When we speak you are good with what is best for the sport, but online you seem to be the exact opposite. We came up with some polls, and they were definitely inline with change and moat thought it would grow the sport. I see your base line continues to be, "pick one and stick to it". Nfaa has shown absolutely no growth in trad or barebow for years and years now. With this attitude it will truely not grow. Nfaa and Ifaa have continued to show every year that their set of rules do not pull in the numbers that shoots have have wa barebow rules. For example, how many showed up in men's trad or men's bb in the nfaa to indoor nationals and outdoor nationals? How many showed up last year in Yankton for the "world" shoot in those two divisions? Gary, I really hope one day you guys do give it a shot and see how this can be a great thing for everyone. You guys seem to make it more about "we have history, why do we need to change". People evolve, the sport evolves. Nfaa doesn't seem to be as important to others has it used to be for our side of archery. If everything was made in unison with one class, it would be so much easier for people to grow as archers, to show up to more shoots and grow the nfaa to where it should be. If you guys are happy with bb with six at indoor nationals and 4 or 5 at the world shoot, the so be it. If you are happy with 13 at indoor nationals and however many there were at worlds, then I guess that's fine for you guys. It it was me that was solo pationate for the NFAA, I would look at it like this, " something definitely isn't working. Let's look at things from a different perspective". In Europe, they have wa and ifaa. All the big time shooters shoot wa rules. They pull in the bigger numbers and the bigger shooters. Look at how many came to indoor worlds for the ifaa this winter in the men's trad and men's bb divisions. They werent that good over there as well as they aren't good here. I really wish you guys take a good long hard look at things and see them for how they are. I heard rumblings how this push for unification is about a select few trying to make a push for something that will be if it only them. A couple elitists making an elite class, and that couldn't be farther from the truth. We are in it for the growth and making our shooters the best they possible can be. Its as pure and simple as that.


----------



## 2413gary

I am for making it grow that's why I show up and shoot. I was just stating how NFAA feels about Barebow and trad. I may be wrong but I don't think so. But when and if we change I will still be there. Last year at NFAA outdoor and IFAA world there were about 30 nonsighted recurve shooters. The only way to make a change is for people to show up. I see more NFAA trad shooters than Wa Barebow shooters. You are right the poll showed the other way. So where are you guys at ? We will never grow our sport by staying home and typing. Bring all these people to Harrisburg this summer show your support. Numbers are what makes things change. When I here people say well they don't have a class for the way I shoot so that's why I don't come. I don't think they really don't want to compete. So for all here who think I'm wrong show up and prove me wrong. Nothing would make me happier than to have about fifty guys poking there finger at me showing me I'm wrong. At least then I would have someone to keep score.


----------



## limbwalker

> The other allows string walking and no stabilizer. They are *really not that far apart* you just buy two stabilizers a long and a short one.


I'd say that depends on who the shooter is, and what their goal is. 

But if they're really "not that far apart" then why do we need them both? It's a real PITA to have to swap back and forth, or worse yet, confine guys and gals to one style of shooting the bow for fear of having to swap back and forth, which is basically what's happening now.



> So for all the WA people here of which I am one show up at WA shoots and make WA Barebow grow.


I can't disagree with this at all, and that's exactly what we're doing in my club, in our state, and hopefully in USArchery.


----------



## Kendric_Hubbard

If the rules are going to change, it is the NFAA rules that will change. World Archery will never change their rules to accommodate the NFAA.


----------



## limbwalker

Kendric_Hubbard said:


> If the rules are going to change, it is the NFAA rules that will change. World Archery will never change their rules to accommodate the NFAA.


Agreed. And why would they? WA Barebow is still considered the "gold standard" of barebow archery worldwide. Like it or not, admit it or not. Don't believe me? Ask Ben, Alan, John, Ty and Mark.


----------



## archer_nm

I am in Yanton (or will be got stuck in Denver) this week for NFAA Council meeting and then a Meeting with our Directors will see if the topic comes up... John I am in fact of doing something to make BB grow what ever it takes so. Let the games begin....


----------



## Kendric_Hubbard

I'm probably not going to take a stand on whether or not the NFAA should change their rules, I'm simply going to open it up for discussion at my state level.


----------



## limbwalker

I wish I could do the same shooting demo for the NFAA council that I did at my equipment seminar last year.

At the time, I had one bow set up to illustrate the effect of stabilization on tuning. Without the 12" stabilizer, I shot arrows with 120 grain points (fletched and bare). With the stabilizer, I shot the same arrows with 200 grain points (fletched and bare). All flew dead straight. Then I reversed the order, and the arrows flew stiff and weak by about 1' at 18 meters. The whole time, about 25 people in my class were standing behind me watching the demonstration. 

Talk about opening some eyeballs! 

It matters. Quite a bit. You cannot shoot the exact same arrows from the same bow with and without a 12" stabilizer and expect to compete with the top shooters. It ain't gonna happen.

Until folks who are not familiar with setting up competitive barebow rigs see this with their own eyes, they usually ask the question "what's the big deal?"

The idea that the NFAA could adopt WA recurve barebow rules is not that far-fetched. Not when they already have the same rules as WA for Olympic rigs.

The idea that WA would adopt NFAA's 12" stabilizer however... They have absolutely no reason to do this. WA barebow is alive and well and thriving in Europe.

Again, I'm just in favor of one set of rules for recurve target barebow, period. Whatever those are. I honestly enjoy shooting NFAA Trad with the 12" stabilizer very much. But I just don't see the rest of the world going that way - ever.

John


----------



## J. Wesbrock

limbwalker said:


> It matters. Quite a bit. You cannot shoot the exact same arrows from the same bow with and without a 12" stabilizer and expect to compete with the top shooters. It ain't gonna happen.


That's odd, because so long as I keep my BB weights and stabilizer the same mass weight, the tuning difference is only a few clicks on the plunger. Gary doesn't seem to have a problem with it either. Perhaps you could call him and ask for his input on how to make it work.


----------



## Warbow

limbwalker said:


> I wish I could do the same shooting demo for the NFAA council that I did at my equipment seminar last year.
> 
> At the time, I had one bow set up to illustrate the effect of stabilization on tuning. Without the 12" stabilizer, I shot arrows with 120 grain points (fletched and bare). With the stabilizer, I shot the same arrows with 200 grain points (fletched and bare). All flew dead straight. Then I reversed the order, and the arrows flew stiff and weak by about 1' at 18 meters. The whole time, about 25 people in my class were standing behind me watching the demonstration.


Woah, you'd have to find trad shooters who could shoot small enough groups to even notice a BB shaft an inch off center. There's your problem. :wink:

(Kidding. I know that there are tack driving BB shooters out there.)


----------



## limbwalker

J. Wesbrock said:


> That's odd, because so long as I keep my BB weights and stabilizer the same mass weight, the tuning difference is only a few clicks on the plunger. Gary doesn't seem to have a problem with it either. *Perhaps you could call him and ask for his input on how to make it work*.


Jason, you should have been there to see the demo. And "with all due respect" I'd probably call Demmer first.  

But if you and Gary are happy with how your bows are tuned, then so am I.


----------



## Azzurri

Naïve and dumb question perhaps tangential as well but when the trad-type NFAA rules say one consistent anchor point may be used, what precisely does that mean? I gather this along with the finger on the arrow rule is attempting to prohibit string walking but does this also impact the Olympic recurve style setting up with nose and chin on string? Strictly speaking the anchor would seem to be under chin, corner mouth/cheek, or whatever, but not sure what's meant..........


----------



## Warbow

Azzurri said:


> Naïve and dumb question perhaps tangential as well but when the trad-type NFAA rules say one consistent anchor point may be used, what precisely does that mean? I gather this along with the finger on the arrow rule is attempting to prohibit string walking but does this also impact the Olympic recurve style setting up with nose and chin on string? Strictly speaking the anchor would seem to be under chin, corner mouth/cheek, or whatever, but not sure what's meant..........


No face walking - i.e., different anchors for different distances.


----------



## Azzurri

Warbow said:


> No face walking - i.e., different anchors for different distances.


So if I wanted to go under chin for a 60 target it's under chin for everything else, or conversely back to the facial anchor for everything.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

limbwalker said:


> Jason, you should have been there to see the demo. And "with all due respect" I'd probably call Demmer first.
> 
> But if you and Gary are happy with how your bows are tuned, then so am I.



I have no idea why you can't make the tuning work and others can. I was just offering a suggestion to help you work through it. I like trying to learn new things and help people do the same. Feel free to disregard if you're not interested. 

And please, enough with the caustic, profane private messages. Thanks.


----------



## limbwalker

> why you can't make the tuning work and others can


Maybe my idea of an acceptable tune and others is just different? 

Physics are physics. The sun is going to rise in the East every day, and an arrow shot from a bow without a stabilizer is going to act weaker than one shot with it. It's not something "I" see, it's something that hundreds of coaches and archers see every day.

I'm sorry you can't see it. If you had asked Demmer, he would tell you the exact same thing I said. Perhaps when you conduct your equipment seminars, you can demonstrate to the participants how your method works.



> nd please, enough with the caustic, profane private messages. Thanks.


Seriously dude? 

Since you want everyone to think I am sending you "caustic, profane PM's" I think I'll just post them here to set the record straight. 

I figured we were friends (my mistake) and didn't think you'd be so offended when I told you to stop being an *******.

Lay off the snark and maybe we could actually have a real conversation about this. I had hoped you and I could talk about this privately until I saw that. But if you'd rather I be blunt with you here for the world to see, I can do that too. Your choice.


----------



## limbwalker

The amusing thing about all these stupid arguments is that if there were one accepted recurve barebow division, they would all dissapear and we would actually all get along better. All we would have to talk about then would be our shooting. Just imagine.


----------



## Demmer

Warbow, that was a foot not an inch.


----------



## Warbow

Demmer said:


> Warbow, that was a foot not an inch.


Doh! That explains why that boat I just built seems a bit off... I better stick to metric, now if only I can remember whether mm or cm are the really small ones :embara:


----------



## rsarns

WOW. Yet he gets away with it.


----------



## limbwalker

rsarns said:


> WOW. Yet he gets away with it.


Barebow should probably be eliminated until everyone can agree on a single set of rules, the way archery was eliminated from the Olympics, until everyone agreed on a single set of rules. I'm starting to think that may actually be the answer. LOL.


----------



## Warbow

limbwalker said:


> Barebow should probably be eliminated until everyone can agree on a single set of rules, the way archery was eliminated from the Olympics, until everyone agreed on a single set of rules. I'm starting to think that may actually be the answer. LOL.


OK, but be prepared to wait 43 years after the single set of rules is invented. 

FITA was founded in 1931, creating unified rules for international competition (and introducing the extra rings to the 5 color English Target to make it into a 10 ring target along with decimal scoring (instead of the odd 9,7,5,3,1 English scoring)), but it took 43 years for archery to plead its way back into the Olympics.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

Limbwalker,

Your PMs don't offend me in the least. I just think they're very unfortunate and beneath you, especially the one you sent yesterday.


----------



## limbwalker

Jason,

How 'bout we just stay on topic. If you have something personal to say to or about me, address me in a PM. I'm sure the forum would appreciate it. My apologies to the forum for the comments above. Should have been in a PM to Jason instead.

My point about tuning has not changed. And will not. Esp. when I can easily demostrate it, and have in front of large groups of students several times. Other BB archers like Demmer would happily do the same if asked.

I have no idea why some feel there is no real difference between a stabilized and unstabilized bow when physics dictate otherwise.

My point is that it's a great example of why the multiple "barebow" divisions are problematic. Again, exactly what are we trying to accomplish? The Olympic and Freestyle divisions seem to be thriving under a single set of rules. Are we as barebow archers satisfied to languish in the shadows so we can keep all our various accessories on our "bare bows?"


----------



## J. Wesbrock

limbwalker said:


> I have no idea why some feel there is no real difference between a stabilized and unstabilized bow when physics dictate otherwise.


As Gary correctly pointed out, they're both stabilized bows. The only difference is the shape and length of the stabilizers (2" or so versus 12"). If you keep the weight of the stabilizers the same, 10" or less isn't a big deal. If you're comparing an unweighted riser to one with a 17 ounce Bee Stinger on the front, that's a different story.


----------



## Ten_Zen

J. And please said:


> J. Wesbrock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Limbwalker,
> 
> Your PMs don't offend me in the least. I just think they're very unfortunate and beneath you, especially the one you sent yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> Dude. John had the decency to take his personal gripe with you to a private conversation, and your attempt to shame him for it (unsuccessfully I might add) by 'telling on him' in a public forum is pretty pathetic if you ask me. But since I am just here for the soap opera, please continue with your snooty retorts. Im gonna go make some popcorn
Click to expand...


----------



## J. Wesbrock

Several texts and private responses already to that post and yours is the only negative one. Such is life.


----------



## limbwalker

> The only difference is the shape and length of the stabilizers


Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true. The difference is how the arrow behaves. It's not possible to make a WA-legal barebow rig have the same affect on an arrow as a NFAA trad rig with a 12" stabilizer. And the more competitive you make that NFAA rig (more weight on the end of that 12" stabilizer) the greater the difference. 

I guess I'll just have to throw a video up on YouTube and link to it here, although that may not convince those who don't wish to be convinced.

All this comes down to how competitive you wish to be. Sure, a person can compete in the NFAA trad division with a WA barebow rig, but a simple check of the scores in Louisville from before and after the rule change will tell you that the stabilizer is worth at least 10 points across the board. 

Who here is willing to give up a known 10 points when they are wishing to be competitive? 

So that results in changing rigs over and over again between NFAA and USArchery barebow events. That's what the best archers do, in order to remain competitive in their class, and the MAIN POINT HERE is that barebow is the only division that has to tolerate this equipment rodeo. Neither compound or Oly. recurve have to put up with it, and not only does it hamper our competitive depth, many of us feel it hurts our credibility.


----------



## Ten_Zen

J. Wesbrock said:


> As Gary correctly pointed out, they're both stabilized bows. The only difference is the shape and length of the stabilizers (2" or so versus 12"). If you keep the weight of the stabilizers the same, 10" or less isn't a big deal. If you're comparing an unweighted riser to one with a 17 ounce Bee Stinger on the front, that's a different story.


So, regarding the physics of your argument. The moment of inertia of a mass on a rod is proportional to the mass of the weight, but it is proportional to the SQUARE of the length of the rod. Increasing length by 10" increases the moment of inertia by a factor of 100. A Factor of 100 isn't a big deal, youre right, it is a HUGE deal.


----------



## Last_Bastion

limbwalker said:


> I guess I'll just have to throw a video up on YouTube and link to it here, although that may not convince those who don't wish to be convinced.


In all seriousness, I would be very interested to see that video. I understand the effect that a stabilizer has on an arrow, but have never seen a side-by-side comparison.


----------



## Warbow

limbwalker said:


> I guess I'll just have to throw a video up on YouTube and link to it here, although that may not convince those who don't wish to be convinced.


I think that would be a great video to post, but not just to settle an argument. It's a good, informative point about arrow tuning, something that is good to actually *see*, not just hear about.


----------



## limbwalker

Last_Bastion said:


> In all seriousness, I would be very interested to see that video. I understand the effect that a stabilizer has on an arrow, but have never seen a side-by-side comparison.


Most folks never have. Even the coaches in my equipment seminar - some of them VERY accomplished recurve archers - were blown away. They had no idea that something as "minor" as a 12" stabilizer would have that affect on arrow flight. 

But again, if mediocre grouping is okay with someone, or if they think it's "just them" and not their equipment, then by all means, have at it. Shame on me for educating the competition, huh? LOL. 

I know some damn good barebow archers who would be much more competitive if they really knew how to tune their rigs. One of the reasons Stonebraker was able to re-set all the masters BB records is because of his ability to achieve a perfect competitive tune. Sure, he's a great archer, but so is the guy who's records he broke.


----------



## Warbow

limbwalker said:


> But again, if mediocre grouping is okay with someone, or if they think it's "just them" and not their equipment, then by all means, have at it. Shame on me for educating the competition, huh? LOL.


Please, such people aren't your competition.


----------



## limbwalker

Again, the idea of tuning different rigs to be competitive is simply another example of what hoops barebow archers are currently forced to jump through, that the compound and recurve archers are not. It's just one more thing that holds barebow back IMO.


----------



## limbwalker

Warbow said:


> Please, such people aren't your competition.


Oh yes they are. Several of them are better archers than I am, and if they knew more about their equipment, they would smoke me. I'm not that great of a barebow archer. But having well tuned gear sure doesn't hurt. I need all the advantages I can get if I'm going to compete against someone like Jason because he's a much more experienced barebow archer than I am.


----------



## Bigjono

I don't pretend to be a good archer or even a mediocre bow tuner but I do know that I score higher and group better with a 12" stab than I do with just BB weights in. I'm guessing that's why all the BB crowd used stabs at Lancaster and Vegas instead of a WA style set up.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

Bigjono said:


> I don't pretend to be a good archer or even a mediocre bow tuner but I do know that I score higher and group better with a 12" stab than I do with just BB weights in. I'm guessing that's why all the BB crowd used stabs at Lancaster and Vegas instead of a WA style set up.


I suspect most folks score somewhat higher with a longer 12" stabilizer instead of shorter FITA BB ones. I know I do, but tuning between the two isn't a big deal.


----------



## GLaw1

I had the opportunity to shoot with John Demmer during one of his epic tuning sessions. For the better part of 6 hours he changed his nocking point, brace height, arrows, and stab weights in so many different combinations I was lost. By moving his nocking point I watched him move his shot placement 6 inches horizontally across the target. It blew me away. I thought nock point only moved the shot up and down. John made me a firm believer in bow tuning. I saw him shoot a 299 at the NFAA Mid Atlantic Championship. I think he could have used a stick with twine that day and beat everybody. The point I am trying to make is that additions to the bow such as a stab do make a bow tune differently and in the right hands shoot more consistently. Playing on a level field where all the rules are the same I would think is what this whole thread is about.


----------



## Demmer

2413gary said:


> I am for making it grow that's why I show up and shoot. I was just stating how NFAA feels about Barebow and trad. I may be wrong but I don't think so. But when and if we change I will still be there. Last year at NFAA outdoor and IFAA world there were about 30 nonsighted recurve shooters. The only way to make a change is for people to show up. I see more NFAA trad shooters than Wa Barebow shooters. You are right the poll showed the other way. So where are you guys at ? We will never grow our sport by staying home and typing. Bring all these people to Harrisburg this summer show your support. Numbers are what makes things change. When I here people say well they don't have a class for the way I shoot so that's why I don't come. I don't think they really don't want to compete. So for all here who think I'm wrong show up and prove me wrong. Nothing would make me happier than to have about fifty guys poking there finger at me showing me I'm wrong. At least then I would have someone to keep score.


There are a couple of issues to overcome when you want this to happen.
One, you want people to spend some good hard earned money to go to a shoot when they know they are going to to be at a good equipment disadvantage. Case in point, come to Vegas and then you can complain. I went to Vegas spent a good amount knowing that I was giving up X amount of points with my wa bb setup to the recurvers and compounds with their extra stuff. So myself and others like me donated a couple grand and 4 days off of work to shoot in a shoot where we were at a serious disadvantage. You are asking a lot from people knowing they are going to be behind the eightball and giving pretty much a donation. 
Two. The problem also here are those that show up to these shoots preferring to shoot wa bb but show up with equipment to max the rules out and you claiming as pure nfaa trad only shooters. 
Three. Come to these shoots and show your numbers. There were a pile of recurve shooters at Vegas that showed up even though they were shooting against compounds. That apperantly went totally unnoticed. I heard some nfaa guys saying, hey look at the numbers barebow pulled in we don't need to change anything we are growing! Dont say come to the shoot and show numbers, and then deny them when they do show up for eventually they will stop showing. Out of everyone there, only Rich made a point saying "its a shame you guys don't have your own class. There are a pile of you guys. Heck they have sing digit crossbow guys year after year and they have a class". Other than that, all I heard was " see equipment doesnt matter at all". On a side note, there were quite a few wa bb setups at indoor nationals. But I guess they went unnoticed too. You are way more likely to get more wa bb setups at indoors than outdoors based on points and the handicap we are under. Those are just the facts.


----------



## limbwalker

GLaw1 said:


> I had the opportunity to shoot with John Demmer during one of his epic tuning sessions. For the better part of 6 hours he changed his nocking point, brace height, arrows, and stab weights in so many different combinations I was lost. By moving his nocking point I watched him move his shot placement 6 inches horizontally across the target. It blew me away. I thought nock point only moved the shot up and down. John made me a firm believer in bow tuning. I saw him shoot a 299 at the NFAA Mid Atlantic Championship. I think he could have used a stick with twine that day and beat everybody. The point I am trying to make is that additions to the bow such as a stab do make a bow tune differently and in the right hands shoot more consistently. Playing on a level field where all the rules are the same I would think is what this whole thread is about.


Yup. :darkbeer:


----------



## 2413gary

One, been going to Vegas and at a disadvantage for 10 years spending my hard earned money. Case in point I was there no complaining here. And pretty much been donating. 
Two , ? I don't think I have ever claimed this ? Or done this
Three , take your blinders off all I heard was a recurve class could could happen because of the numbers. But someone needs to aproach Nfaa. Pretty sure I shook your hand with a Complement. And everybodys that was there. And the crossbow issue nobody else gets it either. 
I come because I love archery
When you started the poll it was me who told all of you how to get this done. Has this been done? As I said before numbers are what NFAA looks at. Without more shooters you are just a lone voice in the wilderness. 


Demmer said:


> There are a couple of issues to overcome when you want this to happen.
> One, you want people to spend some good hard earned money to go to a shoot when they know they are going to to be at a good equipment disadvantage. Case in point, come to Vegas and then you can complain. I went to Vegas spent a good amount knowing that I was giving up X amount of points with my wa bb setup to the recurvers and compounds with their extra stuff. So myself and others like me donated a couple grand and 4 days off of work to shoot in a shoot where we were at a serious disadvantage. You are asking a lot from people knowing they are going to be behind the eightball and giving pretty much a donation.
> Two. The problem also here are those that show up to these shoots preferring to shoot wa bb but show up with equipment to max the rules out and you claiming as pure nfaa trad only shooters.
> Three. Come to these shoots and show your numbers. There were a pile of recurve shooters at Vegas that showed up even though they were shooting against compounds. That apperantly went totally unnoticed. I heard some nfaa guys saying, hey look at the numbers barebow pulled in we don't need to change anything we are growing! Dont say come to the shoot and show numbers, and then deny them when they do show up for eventually they will stop showing. Out of everyone there, only Rich made a point saying "its a shame you guys don't have your own class. There are a pile of you guys. Heck they have sing digit crossbow guys year after year and they have a class". Other than that, all I heard was " see equipment doesnt matter at all". On a side note, there were quite a few wa bb setups at indoor nationals. But I guess they went unnoticed too. You are way more likely to get more wa bb setups at indoors than outdoors based on points and the handicap we are under. Those are just the facts.


----------



## limbwalker

Classic chicken or egg conundrum. USArchery has been in this mode with barebow for years now. Show us the numbers, and we'll do more. Problem is, they haven't made a division or promoted it at all, so the numbers are either hard to figure out, or nobody thinks they have a division. 

We're finally making some headway within USArchery. Two barebow archers returning from Croatia with medals for Team USA certainly didn't hurt the cause. They notice things like that. So well done Ben and Ryland.

Squeaky wheels usually get greased from time to time as well. If NFAA members continue to ask for a recurve barebow division, I suspect they will eventually get one. What would be truly interesting to me is to see how many folks shuck the 12" stabilizer and leave "trad" behind. I have no idea how that would play out, but we would really learn who is more interested in a common barebow division, and who wants to play back and forth between NFAA trad and 3D.

John


----------



## J. Wesbrock

I just checked the USA Archery Field Nationals results from last year. First, because I may shoot my first FITA field event next weekend and want to have a frame of reference with respect to score. Second, I wanted to see the attendance numbers. Honestly, I was very surprised. It seemed like most every class had single digit numbers. Even the adult male compound class didn't have ten guys in it. Why is that? 

I didn't add the whole thing up but it didn't look like there were more than a hundred and a half people in all classes combined. And last year was a world team selection year. I thought the event would have been packed to the gills. I think the NFAA got more people than that at their first outdoor target nationals last year, and that event took place in horrible weather during most states' deer hunting season.

I was going to check last year's USAA Outdoor Target Nationals for Barebow numbers, but then I remembered they didn't even have a class last year. Didn't I read something by Denise Parker a while back that they discontinued the class because attendance was so low? I know they brought it back as a test this year, and hopefully they get better numbers. I know I'd love to be there, but I've already committed to another big shoot that month.

Honestly folks, I don't see the big talent pool you're claiming the NFAA can draw from if they align with USAA. The numbers just don't show it.


----------



## Demmer

Jason, you are reading, but not listening. In Europe, they have wa and ifaa. Wa always pulls the bigger groups and more of the top competitors. I mean always. I'm telling you, if things lined up, nfaa would bring in more numbers then they are now with a wa bb style class than they will with what they have now. Those set of rules (nfaa or ifaa) don't stand a chance against wa bb rules in Europe. You seem to have a lot of animosity to us archery barebow events. That seems to be very clear, but I don't blame some people. I get ticked off with some of the things they do to. I don't look at this as a us verses them mentality. I look at it as an opportunity to grow numbers in a rather easy way. Us fita field had never been that popular, but I anticipate next one will be attended by more barebow shooters than before. There are a lot of 3d events going on that time of the year, so I am to assume that many of those archers are attending them instead of the field event. One of these days when I'm not too busy doing other things, I will pull hardcore numbers apples to apples and show you how much more wa bb rules pull in that ifaa/nfaa. 
Gary, I was giving you a lot of the stuff I heard, and just showing you why the average Joe won't do what you are asking. We are a special breed, you have to admit that. Some more special than others.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

Demmer said:


> Jason, you are reading, but not listening. In Europe, they have wa and ifaa. Wa always pulls the bigger groups and more of the top competitors. I mean always.


That may be the case in Europe. This is America, and the numbers here don’t reflect what you're stating happens across the pond. 



Demmer said:


> I'm telling you, if things lined up, nfaa would bring in more numbers then they are now with a wa bb style class than they will with what they have now.


You guys keep saying that, but no one wants to explain where those numbers would come from. If USAA had huge numbers in Barebow I’d be the first in line saying the NFAA should consider making the change. But as it sits, that’s not the case. You folks have the exact class you want in the oldest national archery organization in the country and still people aren’t showing up. Why is that? 

Honestly, and I’ll apologize in advance if I’m wrong, but I somehow doubt if Barebow was strong in USAA we’d even be having this discussion right now.



Demmer said:


> You seem to have a lot of animosity to us archery barebow events. That seems to be very clear, but I don't blame some people.


You’ll have to forgive me if I’m confused by how you came to that conclusion. I purposely stay out of the USAA bashing threads here because I’m not a member and have never been to any of their shoots (except our state shoots which are always top notch). The only things I remember stating are that, based on what Magera and some others posts here, USAA doesn’t seem to care much about Barebow one way or the other. That’s not animosity; that’s observation based on what you folks are posting here.


----------



## Demmer

I was basing it on all the sarcasim you were dishing out. That is all. 
I have stated before. If you guys are happy with 6 in the men's barebow and 13 in the men's trad class at Louisville, then so be it. I for one and not happy and very unsatisfied. I want more. It seems as though some are using Europe as a tried and true example of how certain rules tend to bring in more numbers than others. I think it is a very safe and accurate comparison. If wa archery held the field nationals in the states, they would crush the numbers that were in Yankton for the ifaa worlds. That's a fact Jack. 
I am a nfaa member and a USA archery member. I think they both could be better.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

John,

I'm sorry if you thought that was sarcasm. I was actually being serious and thought the USAA field nationals was better attended. It really surprised me when I saw the numbers, especially in compound. Hopefully this year's turnout is better. Again, I'm trully just trying to figure out where you guys think this big uptick in participation in the NFAA will come from. I'm sorry again if you took it the wrong way.

And yes, it would be nice if attendance were higher at Louisville, but this isn't just about the handfull of folks who show up there every year. It's also about the people who go to Darlington, Mechanicsburg, Yankton, Redding, Ft. Lauderdale, and every sectional, state, league, and local NFAA shoot out there. It's also about the 25 Traditional folks Daryl mentioned at his club field shoot. They're all members, and they all matter.


----------



## Demmer

My bad. It did read like that to me. I read it s few times to make sure i wasnt jumping to conclusions. I know how things can be written one way and read another all too well. Lol
I know all those people matter. They survived the stab rule change and they will survive another rule change if there was one. That being said, national shoots matter the most. For the most part, if attendance is down, its usually a direct correlation of the heath of the class. Some events I know are less attended than others based on the popularity of that style. Field for the most part isn't well attended, but indoors should be and that's why I always bring it up. World fields should always be well attended as well. Europe's field passion is like our 3d passion. Even our 3d has seen a decline in numbers. Hopefully changes will happen so you guys can see how numbers will change. Like I said before, it will never be dramatic at first, but it will make it easier for people to shoot one bow not feeling at a huge disadvantage equipment wise. It will make the class healthier and giving it a better chance to grow. I show how dominant wa bb rules are in Europe to show you guys what potential we are missing.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

No sweat, John. The way we banter back and forth in person there's no telling some days.


----------



## limbwalker

> Honestly folks, I don't see the big talent pool you're claiming the NFAA can draw from if they align with USAA. The numbers just don't show it.


Some folks look at numbers, others look at the level of competition. They aren't always the same thing. When you look at some of the folks who attended the USArchery Field event, there are some pretty big names on that list. 

Having said that, I am not sure why we need two "Field" tournaments in the U.S. Seems like NFAA should handle field and USArchery should handle target. But that would make too much sense. LOL. 

Of course, for NFAA to select teams for world championships, they would have to have a BB division that followed WA rules. I honestly don't know why we don't just do this - let the NFAA handle all the field tournaments and selection shoots for international teams, and have USArchery handle all the target events and team selections for those. 

USArchery has always struggled to devote enough attention to outdoor field events to do them justice. And this is from a guy who helped put that field together for the trials.


----------



## limbwalker

> You guys keep saying that, but no one wants to explain where those numbers would come from. If USAA had huge numbers in Barebow I’d be the first in line saying the NFAA should consider making the change.


USArchery has more recurve barebow archers at indoor natioanls than NFAA does, by a longshot. Esp. if you pull out all the JOAD barebow archers who have been forced to shoot in the recurve division.



> based on what Magera and some others posts here, USAA doesn’t seem to care much about Barebow one way or the other


It's going to be a very interesting turnout in Alabama this July.


----------



## Warbow

limbwalker said:


> Some folks look at numbers, others look at the level of competition. They aren't always the same thing. When you look at some of the folks who attended the USArchery Field event, there are some pretty big names on that list.
> 
> Having said that, I am not sure why we need two "Field" tournaments in the U.S. Seems like NFAA should handle field and USArchery should handle target. But that would make too much sense. LOL.
> 
> Of course, for NFAA to select teams for world championships, they would have to have a BB division that followed WA rules. I honestly don't know why we don't just do this - let the NFAA handle all the field tournaments and selection shoots for international teams, and have USArchery handle all the target events and team selections for those.
> 
> USArchery has always struggled to devote enough attention to outdoor field events to do them justice. And this is from a guy who helped put that field together for the trials.


This struggle to support varying disciplines is nothing new. The NFAA was founded 1939 in part because the NAA didn't have the bandwidth to support field archery. Before the NFAA was founded the NAA asked Howard Hill for advice on how to incorporate field archery into the nationals, but the NAA ultimately decided that it just wasn't practical to add another major event that would either run concurrently or consecutively with the target rounds.

The NFAA has its own failures in field archery, though. In the past they've had really lackluster support for IFAA longbow, for instance. The NFAA hasn't really been known for its full support of its world governing body rules domestically, so not sure why anyone would think they'd suddenly be willing to go for FITA Field under WA rules. And I don't know if FITA supports/allows for the idea of more than one NGB for archery per country, so I don't know how that would work politically - but, admittedly, I really don't know much about that. Maybe USAA could contract out to NFAA, so they could use NFAA facilities and coordinators, but be under the rules and perview of USAA? :dontknow:

Also, FITA has a long history in barebow. Sights were completely prohibited under FITA rules until 1954, whereas the NAA had always allowed them, including ground markers for Point of Aim - it was a point of contention between the two orgs. I'm not sure when NAA created it's first unsighted class.


----------



## limbwalker

USArchery could, and most likely should, contract out US Field Nationals to the NFAA every year, including the world field team trials. 

The next few years will be interesting since Yankton is being used for both the jr. world target champ's and the USArchery field nationals. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if USArchery made an agreement with NFAA to do just as I proposed above. 

Let the outdoor field specialists handle outdoor field, and the outdoor target specialists handle outdoor target. 

Indoors is a whole other matter. LOL.


----------



## Warbow

limbwalker said:


> Indoors is a whole other matter. LOL.


Hire NASP... :embara:


----------



## J. Wesbrock

limbwalker said:


> USArchery has more recurve barebow archers at indoor natioanls than NFAA does, by a longshot.


And they should; it's a multi venue event whereas the NFAA Indoor Nationals is not. If the turnout wasn't higher with people having the choice of 11 different locations across the nation, that would be a very serious problem.


----------



## limbwalker

True. But you were looking for numbers. And despite USArchery virtually ignoring barebow archers for the past few decades, they still get significant numbers. This is what John and I are trying to tell folks. The WA BB interest is very strong. Strong enough for folks to shoot in the recurve division at USArchery indoor nationals, knowing full well their results will be buried among the OR shooters. 

This is why I say July will be a landmark moment. I don't think USArchery staff have any idea how much pent-up barebow interest there is within the membership, and shooting outdoors alongside recurve and compound archers at distances will bring this out, I believe. I've seen it in my own club. We now have more barebow archers than we have recurve archers, many of whom are planning a trip to Decatur now.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

limbwalker said:


> And despite USArchery virtually ignoring barebow archers for the past few decades...


I think that was the whole point I made earlier and what troubles me the most. If you folks can't even get your own organization support your class, why should anyone else hook their cart to that wagon? It's a shame USAA doesn't seem to care much about Barebow, but it's not the NFAA's job to fix it. Maybe instead of trying to tell the NFAA what they're doing wrong, you should be asking what they're doing right.


----------



## Demmer

You have a way different assessment on right and wrong. If 6 and 13 for indoors is right, then I want to be wrong.


----------



## Demmer

You are again making this US archery vs NFAA. This is and and always has been about rules. For an organization that hasn't cared much about barebow yet continues to have people show up is amazing and speaks volumes for the potential that the number of people the wa bb rules can bring in. Now imagine the numbers they would have if they cared more, and now you might see where we are getting at. In Europe, they care and the numbers are huge!


----------



## limbwalker

J. Wesbrock said:


> I think that was the whole point I made earlier and what troubles me the most. If you folks can't even get your own organization support your class, why should anyone else hook their cart to that wagon? It's a shame USAA doesn't seem to care much about Barebow, but it's not the NFAA's job to fix it. Maybe instead of trying to tell the NFAA what they're doing wrong, you should be asking what they're doing right.


Jason, if you would stop focusing on your fervent defense of the NFAA for a moment, and just look at the facts for what they are, you'd realize that even despite USArchery not supporting barebow to the level they support OR or Compound, they STILL support it more than NFAA does. That's what the numbers show.

Like John says, if that's what "right" looks like, then I want to be wrong.

Jason, this is NOT a "NFAA vs. USArchery" issue. You seem to be stuck on that notion. It's not. This is a matter of growing barebow as a whole, and what the best way to do that is.

Some of us feel that unifying the rules and bringing the classes together will help remove some of the obstacles to growth. It appears you don't agree, and feel that things are just fine the way they are. That's okay. We don't all have to agree all the time. Hopefully, as you suggest, petitions will be made and decisions will be made based on those petitions. 

I'm hoping that somehow we can bring barebow together in the U.S. to help it grow. If we can't bring it together, then I'll continue working my butt off within USArchery to encourage barebow participation and ensure that barebow archers are viewed with the same respect and enjoy the same support as their recurve and compound counterparts.

John


----------



## limbwalker

Another way of looking at this is that folks believe in shooting barebow under WA Barebow rules SO MUCH, that they are even willing to play in an organization that has traditionally given them very little recognition or support. That tells me something. 

John


----------



## J. Wesbrock

Demmer said:


> You have a way different assessment on right and wrong. If 6 and 13 for indoors is right, then I want to be wrong.


We both want to see the classes grow. We simply disagree on how to go about doing that. You feel the NFAA adopting USAA's rules for Barebow is the solution. Many of us do not. Just because two people disaree about what color to paint a house doesn't mean they don't both want it to look nice.


----------



## limbwalker

J. Wesbrock said:


> Yes, it tells me something too. It tells me you have a problem within *your* organization that needs to be fixed. If the roof of my house was missing shingles, I'd climb up there and take care of it. I wouldn't go knock on my neighbor's door and demand that he do it. :wink:


Since I was a member of NFAA before I was a member of USArchery, which one do you mean? 

We're working on fixing the "problem" within USArchery and NFAA at the same time. But instead of viewing it as "my problem" or "your problem," it would help if all barebow archers worked together. I want to shoot both NFAA and USArchery events, so I don't see the two org's as "us vs. them." I belong to both. I would think it would be in the interest of every barebow archer to have the healthiest barebow divisions possible, in both organizations.


----------



## limbwalker

And I'm still waiting on that phone call Jason. You have my number.


----------



## Mr. Roboto

I for one will not have any problem if the NFAA took charge of field events, and USAA took charge of Target events. It doesn't matter to me, I will shoot both.

But what does matter is that the rules have to be consistent.

The NFAA draws a lot of talent to their field and 3D events, so they will be a natural for the US team selection for world championships. But they need to have rules that are consistent with the world events. Not only in the bow classes, but the rules themselves. i.e. the NFAA will have to adopt unmarked fita field style events.

It would be really cool if the NFAA changed their filed championships from their current Field/Hunter/Field/Hunter/Animal format to a Unmarked-Field/Unmarked-Hunter/Field/Hunter/Animal format. That would be awesome - but this is for a totally different discussion.

One of the biggest problems in head counts at tournaments is because of the different rules. It takes a lot of time and effort to get proficient within a specific style. The different rules creates this problem. Most people don't have the time to become proficient under multiple rule structures.

Another problem is that we have a lousy training program. New shooters are generally pushed towards compounds and oly style. Rules are consistent. so it is easier for the coaches/instructors to push their students to compound/oly. Because there is so much confusion in the rules, it is difficult for coaches/instructors to point their students to barebow. (this is ignoring the blatant bias that many coaches/instructors have).

And then whats the ultimate goal? It takes a lot of time and money to get to the top of one's game. Why do people do this? Compounders have the professional circuit, they have the world championships and world cups. There is a potential to make a living off of being a top compound shooter. Oly shooters have world championships and the olympics. There is a lot of money and sponsorships that come from that. Again there is the potential of making a living being a top shooter.

Barebow has what, bragging rights because I won some local tournament? There are no world championships or world cups or professional circuits or sponsors. If WA would open the world championships and world cups to Barebow shooters there will be an explosion of barebow shooters. The NFAA, IFAA, IBO would rapidly and completely on their own, will adopt a WA barebow style because the demand from the membership will make it happen. Why will this happen? Because there is a ultimate goal, a real world title.

I have an NFAA National Field silver bowl. Its not because I am the best field shooter. It is because Alan Eagleton, Ben Rogers, Dewayne Martin, John Demmer, and many others, didn't show up to that tournament. But if the winners of that event were selected to represent the US in world championships, the above named people would have been there to give me a good old fashion teaching lesson in how to shoot and it would have been a great experience to shoot with the best. World events draw people.


----------



## limbwalker

Maybe I shouldn't be so surprised, but it's incredible to me how some people take these rules so personally. 

I came out of the "trad" ranks to shoot target archery years ago, and thought I had left the personal nature of disagreements behind. I am discovering there is still a place in the target world where disagreements get very personal, and that's the rules of the barebow world. Who knew? One would think that "bare bow" would be the simplest place for us to all agree on the rules. Nothing could be further form the truth.

I would have expected the OR guys to be arguing over magnification in their apertures or not, or peeps on strings or not, or arrow diameters or SOMETHING. There are so many more items to bicker over on a freestyle bow or OR than on a "bare bow" and yet there is no bickering on those lines. Only on the barebow line? 

That doesn't make much sense to me. Maybe that's why I'm having such a hard time wrapping my mind around all the various ways to define BARE BOW.


----------



## Darryl Longbow

Definition seems to be the key.WA says it is ok to use an elevated rest, and a plunger. Weights within the bow, marked tabs.If the word bare is strictly followed then we would have none of these things. How is the set up bare ? Wa has decided to put forth their interpretation of what constitutes bare bow, the Nfaa has another for bare bow as well as one for traditional. Yes it would be nice to see simple consistent rules in all organizations but they like people are all different. Throw in ASA, and IBO and while these are 3D events do we try and change them to the same set of rules ? How about 3D under the NFAA, I suspect that there are far more 3D shooters every weekend than field and target archers put togather. The change in rules would be across the board so 3D would be under WA rules for BB ? If one does or does not see 3D as a major target game it is in this country where the majority of archers are concerned. A workable solution only appears to me to be the addition of a recurve BB division rather than try and change other divisions. If you succeed in changing traditional then you will gain some BB shooters at nationals and loose some traditional. On a local level you will simply loose traditional shooters. The question then boils down to whos interpretation of BB we accept. I believe that the average traditional archer could care less about what is done in other countries, that is not their concern nor their interest lies.Your changes will require them to make major changes in equipment and how they use it, the same as you appear to do now. Will they ? I doubt it. So I ask instead of attempting inclusion by forming a new division why is someone so dead set on changing one already established. If you are included and have the numbers then you will thrive while trad dies and then the trads either become BB or do not participate.Instead you wish to do away with traditional, Why ? do they not conform to some notion of target archery or field archery, are they not serious archers ? are they somehow lesser archers because of their equipment and how they use it ? Are they considered the ignorant and proud of it archers in the sport ? I ask you the forum members involved in this discussion to ask yourself these questions, for whose good , the sport its self or the individual do you want to change others ?


----------



## Bigjono

I have to say, from my point of view it's a selfish thing driven by limited money. I would like to have one outdoor bow and one indoor bow that I can shoot no matter who's banner is over the door. I think NFAA have not helped with the ridiculously named "Trad" class. Is there really anyone whose idea of a trad bow involves a 12" stab? They should just class it as BHR like the EFAA and IFAA, the name makes more sense. I think the clicker would be the stumbling block for any kind of BB unification, guys just wouldn't want to lose that aid.
I think the door has been kicked open for WA barebow here now, I can see it exploding in popularity and giving us genuine world events and a real USA vs Europe vs the rest scenario and the more who see that the bigger it could get.


----------



## Mr. Roboto

Having a common set of rules is good for the sport. Can anyone explain that having a common set of rules is a bad thing?

In essence within WA/USAA/NFAA/IFAA/IBO there already exists an effective "barebow" class, though they may not use the word "barebow". The rules within these organization is already almost identical. The main issues/differences within these rule sets is the 12" stab and sting/face walking.

Changing the rules to allow string/face walking does nothing to anyone else. If people want to instinctive or gap shoot, they still can. That rule change only affects how people hold the string. There should never be a rule in how one chooses to hold their bow. A common rule on this a must across the board.

As for the stab, well that is a tough one. None of the rule sets make it mandatory that people have to have a stab. It just allows it for those who choose to use one.

Now if a common rule set prohibits the 12" stab, then that rule will only affect those people that actually use it.

Now if a common rule set that allows the use of the 12" stab, then absolutely no one is affected by it.

So the easiest thing to implement towards a common set of rules is allow string/face walking across the board. Those who complain about this one are the selfish ones. This is the first thing that should be changed.

The 12" stab rule is the hard one. Because WA does not allow barebow in the indoor/outdoor target world championships/cups is it very hard to generate a compelling argument within the other organizations to abandon the 12" stab".

So it either comes down to petitioning WA/USAA to allow the 12" stab, or the other groups to abandon them. 

WA can be the driver in this rule by allowing Barebow in the target events, and what ever they decide on the 12" stab (either allow them or not), will become the default standard.


----------



## Demmer

Darryl, I personally am all for getting it however possible. I, unlike others am happy with an additional class, because I am confident that it will be very successful. I know most don't care what's going on overseas. Its just a hard case in point what class rules bring people in and what rules struggle to bring in shooters. 3d is an absolute interest in trying to get a wa bb style class. ASA won't do it. They make women children and men all shoot together so definitely won't do it. Ibo is possible. 
Two years ago trad was no stab so their bow would fit in wa bb rules minus a select few risers. At the local levels, nobody really cares much anyway about being very strict on the rules, so I don't think those risers will be an issue locally anyway. Do you think the advent of the stab killed the local trad shooters? I don't think it would have that much of an effect on it anyway if they morphed the trad class. Besides, most wooden bows don't take a stab anyway. 
I'm always in it for the growth of the sport and never personal interest. Some may say "its elitists trying to make a class for themselves" but they are ignorant and misguided. I've been overseas and seen first hand how popular these rules are and seen the numbers they bring in. I also talked to many over there and yes, wa bb brings in way more shooters than the ifaa. Just the simple fact that more people naturally gravitate to those rules, I feel that's where we should move forward in harmonizing a single set of rules throughout the US.


----------



## Bigjono

Demmer said:


> Darryl, I personally am all for getting it however possible. I, unlike others am happy with an additional class, because I am confident that it will be very successful. I know most don't care what's going on overseas. Its just a hard case in point what class rules bring people in and what rules struggle to bring in shooters. 3d is an absolute interest in trying to get a wa bb style class. ASA won't do it. They make women children and men all shoot together so definitely won't do it. Ibo is possible.
> Two years ago trad was no stab so their bow would fit in wa bb rules minus a select few risers. At the local levels, nobody really cares much anyway about being very strict on the rules, so I don't think those risers will be an issue locally anyway. Do you think the advent of the stab killed the local trad shooters? I don't think it would have that much of an effect on it anyway if they morphed the trad class. Besides, most wooden bows don't take a stab anyway.
> I'm always in it for the growth of the sport and never personal interest. Some may say "its elitists trying to make a class for themselves" but they are ignorant and misguided. I've been overseas and seen first hand how popular these rules are and seen the numbers they bring in. I also talked to many over there and yes, wa bb brings in way more shooters than the ifaa. Just the simple fact that more people naturally gravitate to those rules, I feel that's where we should move forward in harmonizing a single set of rules throughout the US.


[emoji106][emoji106][emoji106]


----------



## grantmac

Darryl Longbow said:


> Definition seems to be the key.WA says it is ok to use an elevated rest, and a plunger. Weights within the bow, marked tabs.If the word bare is strictly followed then we would have none of these things. How is the set up bare ? Wa has decided to put forth their interpretation of what constitutes bare bow, the Nfaa has another for bare bow as well as one for traditional. Yes it would be nice to see simple consistent rules in all organizations but they like people are all different. Throw in ASA, and IBO and while these are 3D events do we try and change them to the same set of rules ? How about 3D under the NFAA, I suspect that there are far more 3D shooters every weekend than field and target archers put togather. The change in rules would be across the board so 3D would be under WA rules for BB ? If one does or does not see 3D as a major target game it is in this country where the majority of archers are concerned. A workable solution only appears to me to be the addition of a recurve BB division rather than try and change other divisions. If you succeed in changing traditional then you will gain some BB shooters at nationals and loose some traditional. On a local level you will simply loose traditional shooters. The question then boils down to whos interpretation of BB we accept. I believe that the average traditional archer could care less about what is done in other countries, that is not their concern nor their interest lies.Your changes will require them to make major changes in equipment and how they use it, the same as you appear to do now. Will they ? I doubt it. So I ask instead of attempting inclusion by forming a new division why is someone so dead set on changing one already established. If you are included and have the numbers then you will thrive while trad dies and then the trads either become BB or do not participate.Instead you wish to do away with traditional, Why ? do they not conform to some notion of target archery or field archery, are they not serious archers ? are they somehow lesser archers because of their equipment and how they use it ? Are they considered the ignorant and proud of it archers in the sport ? I ask you the forum members involved in this discussion to ask yourself these questions, for whose good , the sport its self or the individual do you want to change others ?


NFAA Trad allows all those things and adds a 12" stab. How exactly does changing it to WA rules make any of the current shooters under those rules have to change anything other than a BB weight instead of the 12" stab?

-Grant


----------



## Darryl Longbow

Grant you are absolutely correct, under current rules traditional does allow more than WA BB rules. Personally I do not think they should be allowed in the traditional division, especially the stabeliser. but they are.If I was the great archery guru that set all the rules I would do away with them in a heart beat but I am not and can not. So it seems that the last barrier is not one of equipment so much as the issue of string walking between what we call traditional and bare bow.The statement has often been made that it is only in the realm of equipment that rules should be established and the method should not be dictated by rules. I know of no organization that allows the longbow shooters to walk the string. Should they be allowed to do so ? I suspect the answer in general would be yes. Does string walking allow for a greater degree of accuracy than the so called instinctive or gap shooting methods ? My feeling is that it does. Gap shooters use a visual gap for finding their distance, string walking uses a carefully measured distance of crawl down the string and multiple anchors, which is the most precise ? Traditional shooters work to be as accurate as they can be just like any other archer. Now they can shoot with split finger or 3under touching the string under WA bare bow rules, no one is stopping them from doing so correct ? But, can they really be competitive if they choose to do so, I don't think so. Imagine all classes were combined. Now the BB archer would be stuck shooting against compounds with scopes and releases, now if you wanted to be competitive could you really be. You could choose to shoot your BB rig since it would be legal but would you be competitive or would you have to do something (switch to the freestyle set up} to be so. Do you love what you do enough to know you were just contributing to the general shoot fund and kept at it. A switch to WA BB rules would place the traditionalist in that boat, they would have to change everything they have spent years learning and they would have to change their equipment. Since trad is so strongly hunting oriented would they make such a change, I doubt it. Result, they are simply pushed out of competitive archery as they enjoy it. Oh they could enjoy it perhaps but could they ever be competitive ? There is a world of difference between a Bear Grizzly shot off the shelf and a full BB rig. I know it is the shooter more so than the equipment but the comparison is real. Traditional wishes to only go their own way and do their own thing as they see fit not change everything about them to be in the main flow. I truly hope that BB gets its reconition and place in WA as it wants, it should be but not at the cost to traditional. Perhaps if you the BB community can get in then who knows perhaps traditional will as well.


----------



## Bigjono

As I said earlier, calling NFAA Trad a "Trad" class is just wrong, it's is really BHR, trad bows don't have 12" stabs. I think adding a proper BB class under WA rules, keeping the BHR class and having Trad as 19" max riser length and 64" max bow length shot off the shelf with 4"+ of feathers and screw in points, no string or face walking would be the ideal solution. I don't care about adding more classes short term, just let numbers decide if the class stays active.


----------



## grantmac

The guy shooting a Grizzly off the shelf is just as outclassed now as he would be under WA BB rules if not more so.

However if the NFAA were to adopt WA rules for all equipment (something I favor) then in fact he would be place in a different category which actually fitted his equipment better. He'd still lose to a more specialized rig since winners don't get there by accident, but it would at least be familiar.

-Grant


----------



## steve morley

Instinctive div in WA3D is wood riser, bolt down limbs, basic hoyt rest or off the shelf and finger touching the nock, it's simple and nice to see wood only bows but think they took it too far by only allowing bolt down limbs, I feel they should have included ILF fitting. 

I suppose whatever association rules you're never going to please everybody but WA Field/3D in my opinion have it nailed down nicely with only 5 divs which cover most tastes. Longbow, Instinctive rec, Barebow rec, Freestyle rec and Compound, makes IFAA bit of a joke with so many shooting divs.


----------



## limbwalker

For the life of me, I don't know why WA thinks they need to host 3D events.


----------



## steve morley

limbwalker said:


> For the life of me, I don't know why WA thinks they need to host 3D events.


Don't why they made that move but in the last 5 years it has become very popular grown pretty big, most of the top shots from WA Field take part, the elimination shoots in each country are very competitive, Italy, France Spain, Sweden etc all send full teams some with Team Doctors and Manager and Coach. The first year I took part Russia had 4 people in their team, last 3 years they've sent a full team and they're starting to get results.


----------



## limbwalker

Is there just not a major 3D org. in Europe to fill this need? I'm sorry, but I shot my last 3D event in 1990 or 91, and I've not paid much attention to what 3D org's are doing internationally. But I would think the "International" Bowhunting Org. would be the lead on international 3D events?


----------



## Greysides

I think it was Vittorio who wrote that there's a danger 3D may overtake field in Europe.


----------



## limbwalker

Greysides said:


> I think it was Vittorio who wrote that there's a danger 3D may overtake field in Europe.


Well it certainly replaced field in the US, beginning about 25 years ago. I remember the time well. Field courses, like the ones I used to shoot in Tyler and Nacogdoches, TX gradually went over to paper animal faces, then 2-D foam animal cutouts, then when the first "real" McKenzie 3D deer targets came out - over to those. From 1980 to 1990, the landscape of archery in the "outdoors" had changed in the U.S.

I didn't really care for the direction 3D was going in the early 90's so I just quit shooting the events. I never thought scopes, long stabilizers and overdraws were appropriate on 3D courses as I always viewed them as practical hunting practice and not "target" events. I guess I still do. 

If I want to shoot a target event. I'll go to a target event. If I want to practice hunting, I'll take my HUNTING bow and go shoot a 3D target.

John


----------



## Bigjono

But John, you're still associating 3D with hunting, that stopped being the case years ago. 3D is a target event now, that's why the European field guys shooting. I know that if you look at the field champs numbers vs the NFAS 3D champs numbers in the UK, it's not even close. Also the WBHC is a huge event as Steve can testify. WA 3D is very close to iBO 3D so should be a natural fit here.


----------



## limbwalker

Yes, I will always associate 3D with hunting. I think that's the whole point of having ANIMAL SHAPED TARGETS.


----------



## grantmac

The Canadian national 3D championships is shot under WA rules. It happens at the same time as the Field and Outdoor championships which is a major bonus considering the cost of travel.

I can honestly say the WA equipment categories are just about perfect.

-Grant


----------



## steve morley

IFAA have big tourneys in Europe with the more Traditional divs making 80% of the entry. I will shoot World Bowhunter Champs in Hungary and have to skip the awards to make a mad dash to Italy for WA3D world champs.

It will be my last as the kids leave Kindergarden and start big School and I need to finish building our new house


----------



## Darryl Longbow

Since I now find that WA provides a place for what I basically agree is a better interpretation of traditional than the NFAA I would be much more comfortable with the proposed change to WA BB rules.The problem would be getting the NFAA to adopt all WA rules as a whole and not doing away with traditional to make all archers without a sight under one umbrella as BB. I do not understand how the NFAA came up with the allowing of a stableiser for trad, it just isn't . I suppose some do use them but where I am in Virginia we have a large amount of traditionalist and no one uses it. I have just started using a Trad Tech Titan III 64 inches and off the shelf but if WA wants a wood riser one piece or bolt on limb then I would have absolutely no problem with that and am pretty sure no other traditionalist would either. Same for some type of simple raised rest which as those of you shooting in the sixties and seventies would know was far more common than not. Of course by the seventies metal risers were common but hey, if they say wood then ok. I suspect that some of you have had run ins with what is commonly called neo trads who were not even born during that period thinking they know how it was, the solution to them is to educate them with books, pictures, articles, photos, and older archers who were there. So WA, sounds reasonable to me now.


----------



## Darryl Longbow

Limbwalker, 3D is definitely a target game now. It resembles hunting practice in no way. Open lanes and marked distance is pretty much the rule. I fear that field is in its last gasp, cost of and maintaining ranges, space for them, and unfortunately a lessening intrest in shooting any thing except close distances. Money plays a huge part here as well, the 3D craze has dictated a short axle to axle compound with lots of speed and all the accessories that go along with it. You could compare scores world wide with field but it depends on the particular range in 3D so you cant compare unless you were there.Sad, bring back field and make it unmarked distances for a real challenge.


----------



## Warbow

Darryl Longbow said:


> Limbwalker, 3D is definitely a target game now. *It resembles hunting practice in no way*. Open lanes and marked distance is pretty much the rule. I fear that field is in its last gasp, cost of and maintaining ranges, space for them, and unfortunately a lessening intrest in shooting any thing except close distances. Money plays a huge part here as well, the 3D craze has dictated a short axle to axle compound with lots of speed and all the accessories that go along with it. You could compare scores world wide with field but it depends on the particular range in 3D so you cant compare unless you were there.Sad, bring back field and make it unmarked distances for a real challenge.


Really ought to make people pack out their kills for the score to count :embara:


----------



## limbwalker

Warbow said:


> Really ought to make people pack out their kills for the score to count :embara:


Okay. THIS, I agree with. LOL!

I'm sorry, but for me at least, 3D will ALWAYS be hunting practice. The way it started out. I will ALWAYS shoot my REAL hunting bow when I compete in a 3D event. But then, since I don't see the need to "compete" in the outdoors when I hunt, maybe I'll never again see the need to "compete" with my hunting bow. When I hunt, it has very little to do with the sport of archery, and when I shoot archery, it has very little to do with hunting. 

The two are almost entirely separate in my mind. One is hunting - a lifestyle and a basic way of feeding my family, and the other is sport - a.k.a. "play." Hunting, to me, has nothing to do with play.


----------



## limbwalker

The part of 3D as a so-called "target" competition that I don't get is that the "bullseye" is essentially hidden. It takes a cue card and a pair of world-class optics to know where to aim. 

That's not an archery contest so much as it is a memory and vision contest. Sure, it still takes a great shot, but why not just shoot round paper targets if it's an archery contest you want. 

I don't get that at all.

When I shoot 3D, I put the arrow in the most logical place for a clean, humane kill. If it scores an 8 and the "11 ring" is 4" from my arrow, I couldn't care less.


----------



## grantmac

Darryl Longbow said:


> Limbwalker, 3D is definitely a target game now. It resembles hunting practice in no way. Open lanes and marked distance is pretty much the rule. I fear that field is in its last gasp, cost of and maintaining ranges, space for them, and unfortunately a lessening intrest in shooting any thing except close distances. Money plays a huge part here as well, the 3D craze has dictated a short axle to axle compound with lots of speed and all the accessories that go along with it. You could compare scores world wide with field but it depends on the particular range in 3D so you cant compare unless you were there.Sad, bring back field and make it unmarked distances for a real challenge.



I honestly don't know which organization you shoot under but there are zero marked 3D categories for traditional equipment with the exception of Redding, which is technically Safari.
Also you will find that very few short ATA speed bows are shot competitively beyond the local level.

As for Field, WA has the first day as unmarked. But that doesn't mean anyone is guessing.

-Grant


----------



## 2413gary

You should come to the World IBO Trad Championships in July it might change your mind. The level of competition is second to none. And the level of accuracy would amaze you.


limbwalker said:


> The part of 3D as a so-called "target" competition that I don't get is that the "bullseye" is essentially hidden. It takes a cue card and a pair of world-class optics to know where to aim.
> 
> That's not an archery contest so much as it is a memory and vision contest. Sure, it still takes a great shot, but why not just shoot round paper targets if it's an archery contest you want.
> 
> I don't get that at all.
> 
> When I shoot 3D, I put the arrow in the most logical place for a clean, humane kill. If it scores an 8 and the "11 ring" is 4" from my arrow, I couldn't care less.


----------



## 2413gary

Grant there are marked 3d shoots all up and down California every weekend. All under NFAA rules and regulations. Including Trad equipment.


grantmac said:


> I honestly don't know which organization you shoot under but there are zero marked 3D categories for traditional equipment with the exception of Redding, which is technically Safari.
> Also you will find that very few short ATA speed bows are shot competitively beyond the local level.
> 
> As for Field, WA has the first day as unmarked. But that doesn't mean anyone is guessing.
> 
> -Grant


----------



## steve morley

Darryl Longbow said:


> Open lanes and marked distance is pretty much the rule.


Our 3D's are not in open lanes and never shot a marked 3D in my life, our WA qualification tourneys are held in a different location every time and rare we use the same location twice in one season. I arrive in the morning two of us build the 24 target course in a couple of hours, after everybody has shot I pack it up ready for next tourney, a lot of work but keeps it interesting and fair. Cross country Ski resorts are ideal for me, good access/terrain for building a course and always have food and toilet facilities. 

The distances shot are pretty straight forward (similar to IBO) so the evil in me makes me put some tricky shots out, sometimes the only thing you can see is the kill zone. 









This is our home range, I made some Compounds miss on this shot lol


----------



## pokynojoe

steve morley said:


> Our 3D's are not in open lanes and never shot a marked 3D in my life, our WA qualification tourneys are held in a different location every time and rare we use the same location twice in one season. I arrive in the morning two of us build the 24 target course in a couple of hours, after everybody has shot I pack it up ready for next tourney, a lot of work but keeps it interesting and fair. Cross country Ski resorts are ideal for me, good access/terrain for building a course and always have food and toilet facilities.
> 
> The distances shot are pretty straight forward (similar to IBO) so the evil in me makes me put some tricky shots out, sometimes the only thing you can see is the kill zone.
> 
> View attachment 2217090
> 
> 
> This is our home range, I made some Compounds miss on this shot lol


The first time your club is sued, you'll never set up a shot like that again. Oh, never mind, I see you live in a foreign country, you're liability laws are probably not so stringent. We have to set up our three D course with our liability insurance in mind. Also, we could never set up a platform like that, it's not ADA compliant, we'd lose our non-profit charter. Unless you're a club officer, responsible for keeping the doors open, these things never enter your mind. I've shot 3D courses that would make me lose sleep, I don't know how the club gets insurance. I can tell you from experience, waivers of liability are only as effective as the lawyer defending them.


----------



## limbwalker

2413gary said:


> You should come to the World IBO Trad Championships in July it might change your mind. The level of competition is second to none. And the level of accuracy would amaze you.


I have no doubt the competition and accuracy are amazing. My question is why did we need to turn 3D into another target event when we already had less-subjective target events both on flat fields and through the woods? 

The not knowing where to aim is the part I have a problem with. If every animal had a big orange dot on it to remove that question, then I would see it as more of a legitimate target event. Moving the 11 ring around or having multiple 11 rings is just odd to me. 

But I admit it's been a long time since I've shot a 3D event, and I've even talked to my JOAD and AA archers about attending one this summer. Why? Because they really are a lot of fun to shoot. 

I think that's why 3D is so popular. Many people see it as much more fun than standard target archery.


----------



## Old Sarge

Steve I have shot 3-D since it started here and it has changed a lot. Perhaps because of the liability as mentioned above but they are certainly set up in much more open terrain. Used to be that you had to shoot between trees, kneel down to shoot under limbs, bend around a tree etc. now a days they are mostly just open lanes. 
At our club we still have a running deer shot which is shot from a raised platform but not as high as yours. The shot is down into a deep gulley where the deer is slid across a wire. We also have shots where you shoot across a creek, and down a steep bank at a gator target on the creek bank. 
I find the more challenging shots much more fun and wigs the 3-D game would go back to the way it started. I think one reason it had changed is because the compounders with all the stabilzers, sights etc don't like it.


----------



## T2SHOOTER

Interesting!! I would love to shoot an event like yours, Steve. I believe the Trad guys/gals would go ape. Smile. The numbers we get in 3D events here, it would take two days to shoot 28 targets. The open lanes, varied known distances, safely staged keeps it moving. Saying that, is one reason I'm shooting a few different bows. I love the idea of unknown and naturally staged targets, but I wouldn't want to shoot a freestyle rig, or be in an event that allows it. It's taken a year to get our club on board. They still had the "Bowhunter" mentality, but getting numbers that major back-ups were the norm. Keeping the events fun for most, means thinking and designing courses for the expected numbers. Anyway, would love to shoot your events, Steve.


----------



## limbwalker

Sarge, it won't be long before they are shooting bullseye targets on open fields. LOL.



> Used to be that you had to shoot between trees, kneel down to shoot under limbs, bend around a tree etc. now a days they are mostly just open lanes.


That's what I remember. If I shot a course where all the shots were open lanes and relatively level ground, I may as well go shoot a real target event. 

Maybe they are trying to make the shoots more inviting to women and kids who don't hunt, or don't hunt yet?


----------



## wfocharlie

My guess on 3D is that people tend to follow the crowd. Walk into any bow shop in this country and you will see that hunting rules archery. I think archers are not immune to gravitating to what appears to be the latest thing or the most popular. Younger people especially do this. I've seen it in other sports as well.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

Steve,

I agree with T2SHOOTER. I would love to shoot a round like that again. Our club still shoots hard angles out of a high platform, but not quite as challenging as yours (although shorter people do have to shoot between the rails at times) It doesn't seem all that long ago when nearly straight down shots off towers were normal around here. Those were fun courses and drew a lot of shooters.


----------



## Darryl Longbow

A lot of the compounders are saying that they prefer marked distance because to them it then becomes a archery accuracy contest and not a yardage judging contest. There is a petition with ASA now to include marked distance.It has become that numbers in the marked range 3D are now greater than the unmarked distances according to many clubs around here. Thankfully most trad only 3D shoots still use unmarked and challenging shots instead of what I call the animal target field range. A few clubs I am aware of tried to use cube targets with spots like a field round but at hunting distances like 3D and almost no one came. It seemed a pretty good idea I thought but not to many others it seems. Guess a lot of people feel that it must be an animal target before they will bother, sad. I wonder with the current trend toward political correctness and anti hunters if this type of target might become an issue someday.


----------



## limbwalker

> A lot of the compounders are saying that they prefer marked distance because to them it then becomes a archery accuracy contest and not a yardage judging contest.


Hey, I hear there's a round with not only marked distances, but readily identifiable scoring rings too! 

Maybe we just need to shape our round fita bales into large animals. I'm pretty sure if I used a couple old bales for ears, I could make a giant Mickey Mouse 3D target. 

A triceratops would be easy to do too. Front on shot, of course. :darkbeer:


----------



## doeboiz74

We need new blood in this sport... I look at the membership roster for my club, and the BoD, and there are few a person under 60. The numbers drop even quicker below 50. The sport has oodles of college scholarships out there which seem to go unclaimed. Let em shoot. Everybody starts somewhere!


----------



## steve morley

pokynojoe said:


> The first time your club is sued, you'll never set up a shot like that again. Oh, never mind, I see you live in a foreign country, you're liability laws are probably not so stringent. We have to set up our three D course with our liability insurance in mind. Also, we could never set up a platform like that, it's not ADA compliant, we'd lose our non-profit charter. Unless you're a club officer, responsible for keeping the doors open, these things never enter your mind. I've shot 3D courses that would make me lose sleep, I don't know how the club gets insurance. I can tell you from experience, waivers of liability are only as effective as the lawyer defending them.


I have been building Field/3D courses for 20 years and designed/built all the courses for the last WA3D Europeans, I know how to put a tricky shot and still keep everything safe, you only need 3-4 targets like this to seperate the top scores. Normally a shot like this is downhill with a good natural backstop so no risk to anybody.

What makes it easy for me is we have two levels, one for newer shooters were I keep the shots short and straight forward and a more advanced level were even with sneaky shots these guys would maybe shoot an 8/5. The novice league top 3 are advanced to top league the following year, it is a good compromise to keep everybody happy, newbies wont come back if the lose or break all their arrows.


----------



## Ten_Zen

whered you find this thread? I thought it got buried in 2015?


----------



## stick monkey

As to 3d. I've seen a bunch of great 3d shooers that dont shoot paper targets well. Some don't have the concentration to stand in front of the same target for 30 and 60 shots and let alone do the same thing the next day. As for not enough demmers and dewaynes. I'm practicing and that leads to failure or greatness. Time will tell and alot of new archers will come and go in that time.


----------



## steve morley

stick monkey said:


> As to 3d. I've seen a bunch of great 3d shooers that dont shoot paper targets well.


I think it is more a matter of just not having the time to discipline for both paper and 3D, in the USA it seems you have way more 3D going on than Field, and with a lot less Field ranges available it makes it hard to excel. I've done well internationally in both Field and 3D like many of my European peers, Bowhunting isn't such distraction this side of the pond so we see a much better balance between paper and 3D tourney shooting, the guys and girls that dominate 3D also win at Field, at least at National level. The Estonian women took top 3 places at last years World Bowhunters, pretty much the same girls that took 4 of the top 5 places at World Field champs in Germany.

I wouldn't put your top 3D shooters down, I think if they really put their minds to it, they could adapt and shoot Field very well.


----------



## 5 Arrow

limbwalker said:


> I'll take the bait.
> 
> 1) We have a lot of newb's in archery right now. And a lot of them want to be the next Brady or Khatuna, but are shooting all the way out to 70 meters with no coaching or practice, and 24# "Olympic" recurves that are poorly tuned. There will be archers in the Olympic recurve division that are consistenly missing the target, esp. on windy days. There will even be some compound archers new to the sport that are missing the target. If we cannot tolerate the thought of archers missing the target, then every division needs to have qualifying criteria to get into major events. Absent of that, let everyone shoot. One could even argue that it's faster to pull arrows from the grass than to score them and do math at the bale.
> 
> 2) Not an issue since every official event has a clear set of rules for every division. Some may not like those rules, but they will conform to them or just not shoot at all.
> 
> 3) I could say the same about watching most Olympic recurve archers.




It would be nice if everyone was thoughtful enough to bring along a little grass seed to sprinkle on the divots left by those nasty arrows!


----------



## Mr. Roboto

Ten_Zen said:


> whered you find this thread? I thought it got buried in 2015?


Barebow shooters are like the Hydra, you might have cut its head off, but you didn't kill it and he will return again.....


----------



## kdts330

AMEN, Barebow shooters have the most eloquent looking equipment. IMO


----------



## minnie3

kdts330 said:


> AMEN, Barebow shooters have the most eloquent looking equipment. IMO


true, i agree.


----------



## lowellhigh79

kdts330 said:


> AMEN, Barebow shooters have the most eloquent looking equipment. IMO


Elegant?


----------



## limbwalker

Eloquent. Our bows speak to us.


----------



## J. Wesbrock

Mine swears at me.


----------



## lowellhigh79

limbwalker said:


> Eloquent. Our bows speak to us.


Elegant and eloquent. She's a keeper.:thumbs_up


----------



## barebowjay

I found this thread and I thought it's a joke. Newbies me included carry the sport forward. Without new people the sport would die. I don't know much about all the rules but the Lancaster rules worked out this year and people like them. They are the same rules as us archery uses I'm told. And is it really true that only demmer and Dwayne are the only good shooters. From what I read I think not. Theres a handful of shooters at the top level and very many who are good. Sorry Barebow isn't as accurate as Olympic. Maybe they should eliminate Olympic because Brady can't beat all the compound shooters. Gimme a break dude.


----------



## limbwalker

> Maybe they should eliminate Olympic because Brady can't beat compound shooters.


That may very well be one of the most insightful, intelligent comments I've ever read about barebow. 

Very well said.


----------



## Stephen Morley

To give you idea of the calibre in Europe, DeWayne is considered the best 3D shooter in the USA, he was the only one to qualify individually to top 8 out of a full US team in WA3D World's, I'm glad they won team Gold because I know they will return stronger next year in Canada. Some were a little shocked when archers like Fawn Gerrard didn't even qualify, they thought she would walk it.

USA Barebow is making a comeback where European Barebow was already thriving and its good for the sport that the best of Europe and the best of USA's Barebow are pretty evenly matched. At a guess around 15-20 Europeans shooting at John Demmer level or better. Which makes Barebow a VERY exciting/interesting div to be in at the moment.


----------



## jmvargas

to be fair the original post was 3 years ago and things have changed.....for the better.


----------



## Vittorio

Stephen Morley said:


> To give you idea of the calibre in Europe, DeWayne is considered the best 3D shooter in the USA, he was the only one to qualify individually to top 8 out of a full US team in WA3D World's, I'm glad they won team Gold because I know they will return stronger next year in Canada. Some were a little shocked when archers like Fawn Gerrard didn't even qualify, they thought she would walk it.
> 
> USA Barebow is making a comeback where European Barebow was already thriving and its good for the sport that the best of Europe and the best of USA's Barebow are pretty evenly matched. At a guess around 15-20 Europeans shooting at John Demmer level or better. Which makes Barebow a VERY exciting/interesting div to be in at the moment.


I'm just back from a full immersion in USA BB Archery, attending to Lancaster classic first and Las Vegas last weekend.
For sure, European Bare bow is much more developped than USA BB , as development started many years before already, but top level is top level on both continents. 
There are NOT 15 or 20 European shooters at Demmer's level, and World Field 2016 and World Games 2017 have clearly shown it. 
But there are for sure several tens or hundreds of archers that can shoot > 540 at 18 mt.

Next week we will have the italian Indoor Championships, that also include Bare Bow.
You have to qualify to participate, as places are limited. 
Following link brings you to the list of qualified, based on double indoor score over previous 12 months. 
Looking to Bare Bow scores, top 10 Men are over 540 average, top 3 Ladies are over 520, top 3 Junior Man are over 540 and top 5 Master too.
So, no one at Demmer's level at present, but many at competititive level, if you go to Head to Head. 

http://www.fitarco-italia.org/circolari/192018ListaQualCIIndoor.pdf

What really USA needs IMHO is a consistent set of BB rules to get the movement growing faster. Situation like Las Vegas as far as BB is concerned is not helping to attract people to BB.


----------



## Stephen Morley

Great post Vittorio

I wasn't thinking in terms of pure scores in this case but more in the 15-20 Barebows that are familiar names placing pretty much every year in Field/3D and becoming BB celebrities others look up too, comparing to DeWayne and John who regularly place in tourneys and inspiring others into the same level.

This kind of celebrity thing is what's generating the interest in Barebow and will drive it forward in the USA.


----------



## Rylando

Vittorio said:


> What really USA needs IMHO is a consistent set of BB rules to get the movement growing faster. Situation like Las Vegas as far as BB is concerned is not helping to attract people to BB.


From my surely biased point of view there is pretty much one standardized BB division in the USA. We use the same BB rules from 4-H with the kids all the way up to USAA. NFAA is a separate entity all together. Atleast that's just my view of it. 
I'm expecting World Archery to fully embrace Recurve BB before NFAA does lol. 

There seems to be a massive gap of performance that rests between indoors and outdoors/field. My best guess is lack of places for city-people to practice 50m(or 60m  ) as opposed to 18m? Atleast here in the states. I wouldn't think people would be scared of shooting 50m but maybe that's holding people back too?

The celebrity thing is certainly helping. Need someone(s) who can prove how good one can be at this division, like for my short time in archery I've always seen mainly Brady and Jake doing in Oly in the states.


----------



## Stash

Every time a thread like this comes up, I can’t help thinking about a comparison to other sports.

I can’t think of any at the Olympic level in which the athlete can use a specific piece of equipment (like the recurve bow) for one event, and then can add on additional equipment to be considered a different event. 

(I’m going to consider bikes with or withour gears to be different things, like recurves and compounds. Does anyone familiar with bike racing know if there is discussion about using geared bikes for pursuit, or gearless bikes for road races?)

Maybe the best fair comparison would be race walking versus running. Same basic “equipment”, far fewer participants, but a different technique that nobody can argue doesn’t lower the end result (time vs score).

I wonder if in the race forums (RaceTalk would probably be an unfortunate choice of name for such a forum) there isn’t a subforum for race walkers who are trying to get walking sprints and middle distances into the Olympics.


----------



## granite14

Vittorio said:


> I'm just back from a full immersion in USA BB Archery, attending to Lancaster classic first and Las Vegas last weekend.
> For sure, European Bare bow is much more developped than USA BB , as development started many years before already, but top level is top level on both continents.
> There are NOT 15 or 20 European shooters at Demmer's level, and World Field 2016 and World Games 2017 have clearly shown it.
> But there are for sure several tens or hundreds of archers that can shoot > 540 at 18 mt.
> 
> Next week we will have the italian Indoor Championships, that also include Bare Bow.
> You have to qualify to participate, as places are limited.
> Following link brings you to the list of qualified, based on double indoor score over previous 12 months.
> Looking to Bare Bow scores, top 10 Men are over 540 average, top 3 Ladies are over 520, top 3 Junior Man are over 540 and top 5 Master too.
> So, no one at Demmer's level at present, but many at competititive level, if you go to Head to Head.
> 
> http://www.fitarco-italia.org/circolari/192018ListaQualCIIndoor.pdf
> 
> What really USA needs IMHO is a consistent set of BB rules to get the movement growing faster. Situation like Las Vegas as far as BB is concerned is not helping to attract people to BB.


Those qualification scores are impressive. Is this the same competition last year? http://ianseo.net/TourData/2017/2016/IQANM.php
I'm wondering about what people post as qual score vs actual competition result?


----------



## Demmer3

Stephen Morley said:


> To give you idea of the calibre in Europe, DeWayne is considered the best 3D shooter in the USA, he was the only one to qualify individually to top 8 out of a full US team in WA3D World's, I'm glad they won team Gold because I know they will return stronger next year in Canada. Some were a little shocked when archers like Fawn Gerrard didn't even qualify, they thought she would walk it.
> 
> USA Barebow is making a comeback where European Barebow was already thriving and its good for the sport that the best of Europe and the best of USA's Barebow are pretty evenly matched. At a guess around 15-20 Europeans shooting at John Demmer level or better. Which makes Barebow a VERY exciting/interesting div to be in at the moment.


Hmm. Where do I begin.... To understand American shooting, you have to shoot in America. Morely, a lot of people like to look down on the Americans skill. What they don't understand is the difficulties we need to overcome to compete at the world level. Everything we do isn't condusive to put out elite shooters on the same venues that most of the world shoots on. Field, we have next to none. Our field shooters that qualify shoot an average of one competitive field round a year. Not exactly benefiting the American archers in training them to be the best they can be. So I've shot field for 5 years, I've shot a total of 8 field events. Lol. 
3d here for the single string guys is geared unfortunately more towards hunting distances instead of target distances. Trad world's for an RU is 18-22 yards most of the day. Longbow, even closer. We don't shoot small tagets here, so gapping is a very good approach for 3d here. Dewayne got caught off guard for sure as well as most of the other shooters. We just don't shoot anything difficult here for 3d. Again, not exactly condusive to helping our 3d shooters in preparing them on a world archery style shoot. 
Your comparisons are a bit off to say the least. If they shot the style we shoot, the results would be closer to what you might have thaught they would be. It's a constant struggle here as Vitorrio already stated. Too many organizations with different set of rules everywhere. We do the best we can, and have faired quite nicely in my opinion. Hopefully we keep pushing forward in the barebow progress. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Stephen Morley

No offense was intended John, I have a lot of respect for American Archers, I've shot IBO and NFAA in the US a few times, even got Schooled on a Field range by Gary, then again I think Sandy showed us both up that week lol

I understand the difficulties, you have as with our country, proving hard to get interest in WA Field, the only course we have is the one I built, not ideal training for me and ended up training in Sweden before Dublin.

France was tough for everyone as the targets were unfamiliar to everyone (except the French), you couldn't make out the kill zone even from pictures supplied. It was fun and great to meet Calvin and DeWayne and have lot of respect for both of them. USA certainly rattled the cage as some top Europeans were not performing as expected.


----------



## Bigjono

I’ve seen barebow field and 3D on both sides of the pond and guarantee that the top US guys give up nothing in skill and mental ability to anyone in Europe, it’s just experience of the events and access to tough courses that is the issue. If you shoot IBO 3D with Dewayne you get a lesson in shooting and mental strength, not classic form but if your life depended on a guy getting an 11, bet your house on him every day. JD3 nailed it for field, it’s almost non existent here so he’s having trouble finding events to shoot, even on bad courses. If the big European names want to mix it on equal terms, they should do some travel and shoot Lancaster, it’s all equal there so would be a fairer comparison.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Stephen Morley

WA when you make that first16 cut, the skill level is equal, it then becomes all about how well you can focus and handle the increasing pressure.

I've shot IBO, WA has the same distances but the smaller group 3-4 are smaller, the French targets were very small compared to the Italian SRT targets we normally shoot. Everyone was in the same boat in that respect.


----------



## Vittorio

granite14 said:


> Those qualification scores are impressive. Is this the same competition last year? http://ianseo.net/TourData/2017/2016/IQANM.php
> I'm wondering about what people post as qual score vs actual competition result?


Qualification scores are best 2 over 12 months and tens of competitions for each archer. Championship is a single competition one given day. Last year, championships have been in Bari, South of Italy, for the first time. Targets did not have a good lighting and location was quite hard to reach for majority of participants. This year we will be back to Rimini, easier to reach and tagets have individual lights on top. Scores will be average much better. 

No one "posts" scores in Italy. All competitions are run under Fitarco control and results are managed by Ianseo program and controlled by minimum one judge. Ianseo files, if competition is not connected in real time, have to be transfered to Fitarco by Monday morning at latest and files are cripted so can't be modified. Italian rank lists for all divisions and categories are updated on Fitarco website every Monday afternoon, so you every week you can know your ranking in comparison to the rest of Italy.


----------



## granite14

Vittorio said:


> Qualification scores are best 2 over 12 months and tens of competitions for each archer.


Would that be comparable to a "league" night at our local stores in the US? 
real indoor FITA is 2, maybe 3 per year for me.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


----------



## erose

Rylando said:


> From my surely biased point of view there is pretty much one standardized BB division in the USA. We use the same BB rules from 4-H with the kids all the way up to USAA. NFAA is a separate entity all together. Atleast that's just my view of it.
> I'm expecting World Archery to fully embrace Recurve BB before NFAA does lol.


If you want NFAA to provide a division that reflects WA rules, then the only way to do that is for WA style B.B. shooters start shooting NFAA events with solid participation. And then start pushing your delegates to make it happen.

I tell you now that the NFAA still has too many divisions, and adding another one to the mix, that is under represented is not good for anybody.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Demmer3

Stephen Morley said:


> WA when you make that first16 cut, the skill level is equal, it then becomes all about how well you can focus and handle the increasing pressure.
> 
> I've shot IBO, WA has the same distances but the smaller group 3-4 are smaller, the French targets were very small compared to the Italian SRT targets we normally shoot. Everyone was in the same boat in that respect.


I don't think you are understanding what I was trying to convey. I'm trying to explain how it's done here. I haven't seen you at any America IBO shoots, so........ Lol. I was saying how I wasn't totally. Surprised how the individuals played out for the Americans cause it's not what they are used to. I was really impressed with how Calvin did. He shot great especially shooting targets much farther than he sees all year every year. If you don't shoot courses setup like world archery sets them up, then it is difficult to be fully trained and prepaired. That's why I'm saying that they were not fully ready for something like that. Next time they will have a better understanding. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## SELABraveheart

BARE: Adjective...Basic and simple. Without addition. 

What's currently being called a Bare Bow is not really a Bare Bow. 

Remove all the "Additions" and they'll be true Bare Bows, which means eliminating the Plungers and Dampers/Weights from the Riser. (You get your arrow rest and that's it) 

Why is all that even allowed? 

If the category is continued, (It should be) then there should be "Modified Bare Bow" AND "True Bare Bow" categories.


----------



## jmvargas

i kinda like this but wouldn't that be more like "primitive" rather than barebow?

.....i also think it's possible to build a bow with internal weights and the hoyt pro rest already acts like a plunger with properly spined arrows so perhaps a "true bare bow" category is really possible.


----------



## Stephen Morley

John the first year I shot WA3D I won, my only experience was IFAA before that, shooting IFAA Bowhunter 3D's out to 60y makes WA3D feel like kids distances, it's really all about confidence anyway, if you cannot practice WA3D shoot some IFAA 3D, not ideal but it helped me.

Bill Leslie won team Gold and 3rd place the first time out, when it was 3DI, apparently airline lost his bow and someone loaned him one, maybe he would have walked it with his own bow. When he did get his bows a few weeks later they were all damage beyond repair.

I build all the WA3D courses here, I make them harder than the international courses, we have separate score league and stakes for less experienced Archers ( they wouldn't come back otherwise lol), every country has it's own vision on how WA3D and want to make their mark so nobody knows what to expect. When I built the courses for Europeans the Judges came round and moved most of the stakes closer, they didn't like my evil concept of WA3D lol


----------



## Demmer3

Stephen Morley said:


> John the first year I shot WA3D I won, my only experience was IFAA before that, shooting IFAA Bowhunter 3D's out to 60y makes WA3D feel like kids distances, it's really all about confidence anyway, if you cannot practice WA3D shoot some IFAA 3D, not ideal but it helped me.
> 
> Bill Leslie won team Gold and 3rd place the first time out, when it was 3DI, apparently airline lost his bow and someone loaned him one, maybe he would have walked it with his own bow. When he did get his bows a few weeks later they were all damage beyond repair.
> 
> I build all the WA3D courses here, I make them harder than the international courses, we have separate score league and stakes for less experienced Archers ( they wouldn't come back otherwise lol), every country has it's own vision on how WA3D and want to make their mark so nobody knows what to expect. When I built the courses for Europeans the Judges came round and moved most of the stakes closer, they didn't like my evil concept of WA3D lol


I'll try this again. Lol. It sounded like you were voicing how disappointed you were in the USA shooters in Robin, so I was explaining how why it shouldn't have been a total shocker. They are talented shooters, but zero experience in anything on a world level let alone shooting a lot of targets past 27 yards. The women and longbow shooters never shoot past 27 yards here. Dewayne shoots past 27 only in the IBO and never at ASA. So, yes, it is very unfamiliar territory for them. Not a total shocker that they were disappointed in their placement. I'm actually proud of them going out there so green and shooting what they did. They will be better prepared and more experienced next time. Also, you put another jab at me saying that there are so many that shoot as good if not way better than me. That may be true but you wouldn't see any Americans saying that about you on a pilublic forum. I don't know if it's the cold wether that has you stir crazy or what not. Lol. If I'm fortunate to make the field team again, looking forward to sharing a pint or two with you. By the way, the wife liked your chocolate. [emoji16]

Oh yeah, again inexperienced in what happens in the USA, no IFAA 3d here. Lol

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Stephen Morley

John sincere apologies for that comment it wasn't meant to come out that way, should have proof read before posting. Estonian Marmalade Chocolate is in the post lol

You and Alan Eagleton I admire/respect the most in American Barebow, you both seem willing to shoot any type of round and do it extremely well. But you dress better.

I wasn't disappointed because I know how brutal WA rounds can be, it only takes one bad shot at the wrong moment and you're out the game. I think everyone assumed USA would clean up, you guys practically Invented tourney 3D and ASA/IBO has more shooters than WA. Everyone was happy to see USA, made it feel like a proper World Champs. I hope they keep coming as it can only get better for everyone.


----------



## 74f100

Well since this started as a complaint towards new and inexperienced BB shooters, I fit that definition. 

I chose to start with BB simply because I was already overwhelmed with equipment choices. BB allowed me to enter into the sport, without mortgaging the house to buy equipment, realize it wasn't right, buy again. I had already been through that multiple times in the 6 months prior to what I have now. And once that part was settled, I have a bow setup for about $500 that will compete. Though not the best out there.

Second, I tended to associate more with what I saw on videos. Many of the BB shooters are not teens or 20 somethings. Starting in this at 50, many are closer to my age group. I know at my age, I'll never go to an Olympic event. So, I saw no point in shooting that way. Besides, it saves $1000 not doing that style. 

Then, the archery community as a whole, that I've come in contact with, has been more than helpful in bringing me along. I went to a local 3d shoot, and ended up shooting with a 6 time national champion. He never once looked down on my inexperience. That in itself was a big part in me joining a local club, and signing up with USA Archery. It brings money to the sport. I shot in my first indoor tourney this past weekend (not a great score, but a starting point at 444). I was treated great at that event, and my scores were close to the local recurve scores....So not completely different. But also being able to watch videos of John Demmer, Dewayne Martin, Bobby Worthington, and many more. I have something to work towards. I will keep working. This brings more money into the sport (equipment/ tourney money). My goal is to one day share a line with some of those guys. And I feel confident that none of them would look down on my inexperience if I ever do. That over all acceptance is what makes archery great.


----------



## limbwalker

74f100

You mention some excellent reasons why barebow is gaining popularity. Not ever competing for a spot on "Team USA" in recurve is one of them. In all reality, once a person hits their late 30's, pouring time and money into Olympic Recurve with the thought they have a legitimate chance to land a spot on an international team is just not reality. Most of those folks would have a better time, spend less money, stress less and be more competitive in the barebow division - as many are discovering.

As for looking down on an inexperienced archer, I can't say I've ever seen that in either barebow or recurve. Most elite recurve archers are happy to share the line, and their experience with those just starting out.


----------



## Dillinger1

limbwalker said:


> 74f100
> 
> You mention some excellent reasons why barebow is gaining popularity. Not ever competing for a spot on "Team USA" in recurve is one of them. In all reality, once a person hits their late 30's, pouring time and money into Olympic Recurve with the thought they have a legitimate chance to land a spot on an international team is just not reality. Most of those folks would have a better time, spend less money, stress less and be more competitive in the barebow division - as many are discovering.
> 
> As for looking down on an inexperienced archer, I can't say I've ever seen that in either barebow or recurve. Most elite recurve archers are happy to share the line, and their experience with those just starting out.


Limbwalker makes a great point.

IMO the talent pool in this country is crazy deep for potential Barebow shooters. We just need a way to tap into that. Crossing over for me from shooting BHFS was somewhat painless. I have been shooting competitive Barebow for about 3.5 years now and I think I'm getting the hang of it. My point is that I was a decent compound shooter for decades who crossed over with the skill set and form that I already had in place and have adapted quite well. 
Many compound shooters especially, see switching to Barebow as a step down or shooting your (trad bow) something you do in the backyard playing around. I see this stigma slowly changing in the local clubs that I shoot in, due somewhat to my promotion of the sport and limited success shooting Barebow. The more exposure that Barebow gets from us and with things like the World Archery events thanks to social media the better off or form of archery is to these people that know nothing about it.


----------



## limbwalker

Most people who look down on barebow archers or see it as something you do in your back yard playing around, have never seen a good barebow shooter.


----------



## Dillinger1

limbwalker said:


> Most people who look down on barebow archers or see it as something you do in your back yard playing around, have never seen a good barebow shooter.


Exactly. Especially when you can give them a run for their money on a marked 3D round. Well at least make them nervous with your score. Haha.


----------



## JimDE

Barebow is the only thing that keeps the purple color risers sales up and the wild colored shoe market going ........


----------



## yegon

barebow forever


----------



## jmvargas

although i have been in archery since the 50s it was always in some kind of shooting my bows bare including bowhunting,plinking and some informal shooting at targets...

it was only in the early 2000s that i got seriously involved in Olympic archery and thoroughly enjoyed the experience but was in my mid-50s by then and had no illusions but did manage to win a few tournaments and almost dominated in the 50 and above crowd..

i am now 72 and had to drop down in poundage due to diminishing powers and got a dedicated but versatile aarebow set-up which i am now in the process of tuning and preparing for barebow indoor and am excited to join this group which is also gaining popularity here..


----------



## Azzurri

Why not, simply, it's what 95% of noobs walking in the door thought they were getting into. I had a sight from day 1 and that impacts what feels natural to me, but all things being equal it's the modern equivalent of what people thought archery would be. If you don't divert people coming in the door, the numbers likely break out different, and I think at least in adult men in Texas you're seeing that play out now.

I wouldn't discount competitions, USAT, etc. People who can do Oly or Compound have to weigh their options, and when that happens I think it matters what opportunities are out there. It's not just the Olympics, it's tournament availability, international tournament possibilities, a sense it can go someplace. It doesn't have to go to Tokyo. But I think for certain people who have a choice it may matter whether it goes "someplace." It increasingly does, and I see things like Lancaster expanding how many advance, as making a difference. 

I understand meritocratic and I am not asking for participation trophies, but I think it matters whether stuff is set up for the best 8 or whether 32 go through, or at 50m or 60m. I think if Oly only had 4 or 8 advance at Arizona, and those slots were dominated by RAs everyone knows, and you had to shoot a FITA, it's a different, smaller sport. So it's a good thing Lancaster opened up H2H a bunch. Likewise, if the bales are out at 60m or 70m as opposed to 50m you're sending a different message to people interested in making the jump. You can make it seem like a club for a few or like something you too can crack into. Lately barebow has trended towards more accessible and I think that's helped. I think barebow has a lot going for it as long as people think big picture and not their personal challenge. We still have to shoot better than they can at the distance and within the format.

One other thing I'd express concern on is the age gap. Senior male barebow has taken off, to some extent senior female as well. But while that's happening youth archery participation is "flat." Related tangent, people in archery seem to hyperspecialize. I get if you want to be elite you need to focus at some point. But I don't think in soccer what you're playing at 10 is necessarily what you're playing at 18 or college or beyond, track athletes are usually tried at a variety of races and field events if but to chase more team points. One issue I see with it not yet being a "swim team" or "little league" sport, and where you can declare yourself a 3rd baseman at 10, or have your parents declare you same, is whether that cuts off the normal sports phenomena of adjustment and experiment. I say that because barebow would probably benefit from a "swim team" type situation where a kid competed out of their comfort zone one weekend, or there was a limit on how many Olys could shoot and so they had to do something different, or coach said this year let's try you barebow.


----------



## jmvargas

i believe barebow will have greater appeal for the older crowd vs the young ones..

for us oldies it gives us a chance to compete again-specially indoor--vs Oly where you need higher poundages and also a better eyesight and physical condition..

...and let's face it-all the youngsters who show some promise will normally have making the Olympics and national teams a top priority.


----------



## rsarns

USA Archery missed a great chance to help grow Barebow by not including us in the shootiff for the Indoor Nationals like Oly and Compound. Shame, That would have been great.


----------



## Azzurri

rsarns said:


> USA Archery missed a great chance to help grow Barebow by not including us in the shootiff for the Indoor Nationals like Oly and Compound. Shame, That would have been great.


I don't know how they square that with outdoor nationals (inc. BB), or how the USATs are now broken down (inc. BB teams).


----------



## limbwalker

rsarns said:


> USA Archery missed a great chance to help grow Barebow by not including us in the shootiff for the Indoor Nationals like Oly and Compound. Shame, That would have been great.


Sometimes change is really hard. Remember, you have a bunch of people in control of USArchery that have spent a lifetime thinking barebow was something kids played with in the yard. For them to change their mind about that would be to admit their stereotypes are wrong, and not many people have the capacity to do that.


----------



## rsarns

limbwalker said:


> Sometimes change is really hard. Remember, you have a bunch of people in control of USArchery that have spent a lifetime thinking barebow was something kids played with in the yard. For them to change their mind about that would be to admit their stereotypes are wrong, and not many people have the capacity to do that.


Change is bad.... lol. Just a point and maybe, just maybe, with the numbers shooting indoor in B.B. we can effect change.


----------



## jazzydaze

I'm a noob and know very little of anything, especially the politics. Wouldn't it be cool if the world champ beat everyone at barebow, Olympic and compound? 30 arrows on each. You win that, you are THE bad ass archer, and promote everything. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker

Jazzy, we think alike. If they can run a "nordic combined" event in the winter games, I have no idea why archery cannot have combined events to see who the most well rounded archer is.


----------



## [email protected]

Hi to All;
With Denise gone and Rod Menzer as the CEO of USA Archery, the board members like myself will have a willing leader to implement more barebow and masters events into USA Archery. Please make yourselves heard by emailing or talking to Rod and your board members about your opinions on outdoor target distances, BBR shoot-off finals at National Indoor and other BBR issues. Rod "gets it" and there has never been a better board who puts what's best for the sport of archery first in regards to USA Archery over anything else. Together, we also need to work on the NFAA to embrace World Archery rules in a Barebow Recurve division. Go to the tournaments and just as importantly, make yourselves heard... I'm honored and humbled to be a part of the barebow recurve community.


----------



## Azzurri

I wouldn't even call it "change," all you're asking for is treat indoor barebow like outdoor barebow, or like barebow is treated as a co-equal for USAT purposes, or life barebow is treated at field or 3d, etc. 

"Update this one part to match the way you treat it the rest of the time."

I mean to me it's bass-ackwards that outdoor barebow is the half still working on numbers but it is a full part of the outdoor national program with quali and H2H but indoors is approaching the numbers Oly had when I started, no numbers problem at all anymore, and yet......

Since the indoor finals are for senior classes only, whether the age groups are as strong as senior (a issue I see) is also immaterial. Both men's and women's senior barebow are booming. Only number that matters for the present format.

The last few years USAA has made a fair amount of positive reforms and included barebow more, so I think it's worth pressing. In contrast, I wouldn't be wasting my time trying to convince NFAA of anything. Consolidate and grow WA barebow and let NFAA figure out on its own time that it's being dense.


----------



## limbwalker

Rob, first of all - thank you for serving.

Folks if you are interested in the future of barebow recurve archery in the U.S., you need to take Rob up on his offer and take his advice to contact Rod Menzer and the USArchery board members. 

These are indeed exciting times for barebow recurve archers, and amateur archers in general.

Jay, I think you're right about NFAA. The only thing pushing the leadership within NFAA has accomplished to date is to see them push back even harder out of pride and stubbornness. Eventually they will see the numbers and draw their own conclusion. The real irony here is that World archery has recognized barebow recurve in FIELD ARCHERY for a long time now. It's a natural fit for the style.


----------



## Dillinger1

rsarns said:


> USA Archery missed a great chance to help grow Barebow by not including us in the shootiff for the Indoor Nationals like Oly and Compound. Shame, That would have been great.


Ren I was thinking the same thing as well as the Indoor World Championships in Yankton.


----------



## rsarns

[email protected] said:


> Hi to All;
> With Denise gone and Rod Menzer as the CEO of USA Archery, the board members like myself will have a willing leader to implement more barebow and masters events into USA Archery. Please make yourselves heard by emailing or talking to Rod and your board members about your opinions on outdoor target distances, BBR shoot-off finals at National Indoor and other BBR issues. Rod "gets it" and there has never been a better board who puts what's best for the sport of archery first in regards to USA Archery over anything else. Together, we also need to work on the NFAA to embrace World Archery rules in a Barebow Recurve division. Go to the tournaments and just as importantly, make yourselves heard... I'm honored and humbled to be a part of the barebow recurve community.



Had me all the way up to changing NFAA and lost my support


----------



## rsarns

Dillinger1 said:


> Ren I was thinking the same thing as well as the Indoor World Championships in Yankton.


I agree John


----------



## limbwalker

rsarns said:


> Had me all the way up to changing NFAA and lost my support


I guess I'll never understand why it's okay for NFAA to recognize the same equipment in compound and recurve, but not barebow.


----------



## rsarns

limbwalker said:


> I guess I'll never understand why it's okay for NFAA to recognize the same equipment in compound and recurve, but not barebow.


NFAA has too many classes already and age groups. Adding a new class did not work a few years ago. NFAA has B.B. and Trad, shoot in either class


----------



## limbwalker

But I understand they just added some pro divisions? 

Maybe they should eliminate the compound freestyle (since they follow WA rules) so they can bring back recurve barebow. Oh wait... LOL

Look Ren, to the outside observer, the choice by NFAA to make compound and recurve divisions that are consistent with WA rules, but to ignore WA barebow is simply illogical. No amount of reasoning can square the fact that compounders and Olympic recurvers can move seamlessly between the two organizations, but barebow archers cannot. You can make every excuse in the world, but until that happens, NFAA will just continue to lose out as more and more barebow archers join USArchery and enjoy shooting in ever-increasing fields of archers that play by internationally accepted rules. Meanwhile NFAA barebow and trad will continue to die a slow painful death. 

But hey, maybe the goal of NFAA is to get rid of barebow and trad. If that's the case, they are doing it the right way. :thumbs_up


----------



## rsarns

Only time will tell. They added the SS Pro , but deleted FSL and Oly Pro.


----------



## limbwalker

When did NFAA change the rules to conform with fita recurve?


----------



## rsarns

limbwalker said:


> When did NFAA change the rules to conform with fita recurve?


No idea. I know my dad shot a version of it in the 60’s but not sure what the rules were


----------



## rsarns

My biggest concern is for those at the local
Levels who shoot “trad”, which in some spots is huge. Talk to Denny Cline about the issues that happened prior to giving string walkers their own class “Barebow”.


----------



## limbwalker

barebow recurve is on the rise. I would suggest the NFAA get on board because they aren't adding any more compound barebow or trad members. But they will eventually come to that conclusion.


----------



## rsarns

I shoot both orgs, but I don’t understand the issue of USA Archery B.B. shooters not shooting NFAA because they’d either have to shoot against compounds or against trad shooters? I shoot against string walkers, change my setup to shoot WA rules, but I much prefer gap shooting instead of SW. SW is a definite advantage, and has its place in its own class. I have waivered on adding a BB recurve class but my fear is another case of “build it and they still won’t come” as recently experienced by the droves who wanted longbow.


----------



## rsarns

limbwalker said:


> barebow recurve is on the rise. I would suggest the NFAA get on board because they aren't adding any more compound barebow or trad members. But they will eventually come to that conclusion.


It is but there are a lot of new B.B. compound kids showing up now, a bunch at Vegas this year (under 25 yrs old and several under 18). I recognize it’s not the growth B.B. has, but it is a growing group


----------



## Demmer3

rsarns said:


> It is but there are a lot of new B.B. compound kids showing up now, a bunch at Vegas this year (under 25 yrs old and several under 18). I recognize it’s not the growth B.B. has, but it is a growing group


I think that is a bit misleading. You guys had mid low 30s for compounds the last three years at Vegas. Growing..... I don't know about that. Couple younger ones. And then had guys like Denny who's in his 70s come too. So really hard to see the actual growth and age.. Best place to see is in Cincinnati. That's the shoot that is most condusive to bringing in the biggest numbers all year. In trad at Cincinnati, the biggest class will be masters, then seniors, then adult. Sighs. Before I get the hate, keep in mind I shoot both and have done both an equal number of years and will continue to do so. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker

Ren, Lancaster "built it" and they came in droves.

Nope, recurve barebow guys shouldn't have to compete against compounds or 12" stabilizers. Neither of those things are barebow or traditional, so where these rules come from, I have no idea.


----------



## rsarns

limbwalker said:


> Ren, Lancaster "built it" and they came in droves.
> 
> Nope, recurve barebow guys shouldn't have to compete against compounds or 12" stabilizers. Neither of those things are barebow or traditional, so where these rules come from, I have no idea.



Gary Mccain can explain the 12” stab, but I was for it as a bunch of IBO (3D I think IBO), said it would bring us more shooters. You can ask 100 people and get 50 different definitions of those two terms. I’d love to sit and talk sometime, either way change happens and hopefully it helps Archery. If Trad goes away we lose a lot of Archer’s locally and at State levels. I guess my biggest issue is the lack of other than a few, we don’t see B.B. recurve guys show up to any shoots. I know I’d shoot that class if it happens, if that’s where the best shooters are. My reason to support deleting my favorite class Bowhunter was lack of Archer’s. Nothing worse than driving 1500 miles and shoot against yourself or 1-2 others.


----------



## limbwalker

Yea, defining "Trad" is a dead end road as there is one definition for every archer. 

I suspect a lot of BB recurve guys don't show up because there isn't a division for them and they don't want to compete vs. compounds or bows with 12" stabilizers. That's my guess.


----------



## rsarns

Just as an oh by the way. FSLR/L and compound FS are not exactly the same as WA. Most change their setups to accommodate larger arrows (27’s) in NFAA for compound and even Brady shot fat shafts at Vegas.


----------



## limbwalker

Not true. "Most" do not. A very, very few do. Don't forget you're talking to an Olympic recurve archer who competed for years at NFAA Indoor Nationals and has a few medals from that event. Neither myself, Butch, Vic or any other Olympic archer I knew of, ever shot anything more than 23's at that event. Jake and now Brady are the only two I know (both full-time archers at the time mind you, so they had plenty of time to prepare) who have used larger than 23's at an NFAA/Vegas event.


----------



## pokynojoe

rsarns said:


> Just as an oh by the way. FSLR/L and compound FS are not exactly the same as WA. Most change their setups to accommodate larger arrows (27’s) tn NFAA for compound and even Brady shot fat shafts at Vegas.


There's a few other differences. No fixed pin class (BHFS) in USA archery, no electronics, no lights on your scope. It's not as seamless a transition as one would think.


----------



## limbwalker

You're missing my point. My point is that the top compound guys (pros) and the top recurve guys (pros/Olympians) don't have to change a thing. Meanwhile, the barebow archers are split up into fractions. 

I am not sure this isn't a larger effort to keep barebow down. Why? Because the industry doesn't make enough $ off of barebow archers.


----------



## rsarns

limbwalker said:


> You're missing my point. My point is that the top compound guys (pros) and the top recurve guys (pros/Olympians) don't have to change a thing. Meanwhile, the barebow archers are split up into fractions.
> 
> I am not sure this isn't a larger effort to keep barebow down. Why? Because the industry doesn't make enough $ off of barebow archers.


Not sure it’s a conspiracy, but I’m sure most of the top people in companies and the two major orgs wouldn’t mind us going away. Not a lot of money spent at the major players by B.B.


----------



## limbwalker

I've heard this more than a few times by pro shops and major manufacturers. They don't care for barebow because we don't spend enough $ on gear. Even worse about traditional bowhunters, who like to make a lot of their own gear. For shame. How dare they snub corporate like that. LOL


----------



## grantmac

Longbows having to shoot in Trad is fine but Trad having to shoot with RecBB isn't?
Disregarding that the whole purpose of the NFAA is to promote Field archery and their version of it is headed for obscurity.

Would be better for all involved if they simply copy and pasted WA rules for equipment and games, simplicity is the path to success.
If you think I'm wrong try explaining an NFAA field round to a newby without their eyes glazing over.


----------



## limbwalker

I'm sorry, but this "everyone gets their own division, everyone wins" nonsense perpetrated by the original entitled generation needs to die a quick and quiet death. 

If it's fewer divisions we seek, then World Archery is way ahead of the curve. Three options, rules are on the equipment and not how you use it. And GO. 

You see, people with global ambitions don't have time for local tribal disagreements.


----------



## Elmosaurus

limbwalker said:


> I've heard this more than a few times by pro shops and major manufacturers. They don't care for barebow because we don't spend enough $ on gear.


Somehow, I have to think that companies like Gillo, Tradtech, and Spigarelli are laughing at that sentiment on their way to the bank. I chat with a lot of beginners, so I try to be mindful of the inventory at Lancaster so that when someone gets curious about getting/trying something, I know what their chances of finding it are.

Shortly after the LAS Classic last year, and again with more intensity this year, the shelves for BB type stuff basically emptied out. My one student I help teach is stuck waiting on a G2 riser backorder right now, but really wants to get his first personal setup going. LAS can't seem to ever keep enough Spig ZT rests in stock. Yost tabs fly off the shelves, and I'm pretty sure people would buy multiples if they made them in a larger assortment of colors. I'm guessing it's too early for it to be due to a rush to get new gear for the upcoming outdoor season (I could be wrong I suppose...) but the timing is really coincidental to the massive livestream view counts from the Classic BB clip each year.

I'm also seeing a constant stream of posts on the forums and the BB Facebook group of new archers moving into BB this year, post Classic. "Just bought this new bow...", "Going to order this bow this week...", "Trying out barebow and have some questions...", etc, etc. Again, could be coincidental, or it could be the visible trend of a growing community because we have some really great ambassadors for barebow. 

I was discussing with another coach at my range tonight, and we both agreed that BB is growing fast, and likely here to stay, _simply because it makes archery really fun and exciting for the masses again_. It's reasonably affordable as well as nonthreatening and uncomplicated for the average person. This is literally the ideal type of catalyst a niche sport like archery needs, and the industry as a whole will be foolish if it passes up its chance to grow the ranks. (especially if it's overlooked due to organizational bickering)

Just my opinion.

Cheers,
Elton


----------



## limbwalker

Gillo and others are not laughing. And with all due respect, they are not major manufacturers. They understand the reality. Any manufacturer who designs a riser for barebow knows they are living on the margin, and if they are smart - like the Frangilli's - they don't put all their eggs in one basket and they design a riser that is also good for recurve. 

While it's great and I agree that barebow is enjoying a lot of recent growth, that doesn't change the fact that pro shops all over the U.S. couldn't care less because they cannot sell $175 sights and $80 lenses and $150 drop-away rests to barebow archers.


----------



## chrstphr

The Gillo was made as a recurve riser. For Olympic recurve, barebow, etc. 

The application of the buyers for the Gillo tends to be mostly barebow as they love the weight assortment system and really love the riser. 

But you can put a full stab system and sight and its a top end olympic riser as well. 


Chris


----------



## JimDE

Limbwalker, I would bet that at least some of the reason for the growth of Barebow has to do with the fact that the costs of getting into the sport is less than the other genre of target archery. IMHO archery manufacturers are partly to blame for the decline of archery brick and mortar stores and decreased participation by pricing themselves right out of a customer base in target archery. I have been away from compounds for awhile (last ones I owned were Golden Eagles) And could not believe $1900 for a TOL Hoyt target compound, $800 for a dozen TOL Easton target arrows and points, $400 for a sight, etc... To get a full blown TOL Hoyt/Easton unlimited freestyle target setup is real close to $4k. That is nuts ... I paid just a little more for my first new muscle car in the late 60’s. 

It’s no wonder Barebow is growing when you can buy a fully competitive BB setup for about 1/4-1/3 the cost. Then for $4k in the unlimited division you had better shoot near perfect to have a chance of just donating entry fees to those who do shot perfect. In Barebow you can have some hiccups and still be in the contest. 

Cost to get into the sport, perfection is a goal not a necessity to win, comraderie among competitors, allowing stringwalking as a sighting method, and fun factor all imo contribute to the growth of Barebow target archery.


----------



## limbwalker

No question Jim. I have promoted barebow as a low-cost competitive archery option for years. It's how I started target archery, and how we start most of our kids, largely for that reason. 

We just have to get rid of the notion that it's a beginner's discipline because in all truth, anyone who has shot barebow at a high level can tell you quite the opposite is true. To shoot barebow well, you have to perform more of the work yourself.


----------



## Vittorio

limbwalker said:


> I'm sorry, but this "everyone gets their own division, everyone wins" nonsense perpetrated by the original entitled generation needs to die a quick and quiet death.
> 
> If it's fewer divisions we seek, then World Archery is way ahead of the curve. Three options, rules are on the equipment and not how you use it. And GO.
> 
> You see, people with global ambitions don't have time for local tribal disagreements.


.... Have ever had a look to WA Instinctive Bow rules? Aluminium , fiber or carbon risers are forbidden, you can only adjust one tiller bolt, while the other has to be not adjustable at all, no one knows why, and string and face walking are forbidden, too. Not to mention limits on rest. The craziest assembly of rules in the planet. No one notes it outside Europe, as division is limited to WA 3D, but its rules tell you that the overruling party is very active behind the courtain in WA too.

As far as Bare bow and traditional divisions not welcome by Pro shops, this is not true. You are talking about market segmentation. From turnover point of view, for sure selling a full compound top level equipmnt is better than selling a China cheap riser with Axiom limbs and a steel simple weight. But percentage wise, profit is better in low end equipments and they are easier to sell. And people with limited money to spend are more than those that can survive to the purchese of a 4K US$ gear. So it goes at the end to numbers, only. If numbes are growing fast, the shops and the Archery organizations will follow ...


----------



## Demmer3

Vittorio said:


> .... Have ever had a look to WA Instinctive Bow rules? Aluminium , fiber or carbon risers are forbidden, you can only adjust one tiller bolt, while the other has to be not adjustable at all, no one knows why, and string and face walking are forbidden, too. Not to mention limits on rest. The craziest assembly of rules in the planet. No one notes it outside Europe, as division is limited to WA 3D, but its rules tell you that the overruling party is very active behind the courtain in WA too.


Yeah, that's a bizzare class for sure. I was trying to explain that one to a few this year. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Stephen Morley

The original concept for Instinctive div was wooden Recurves, archers started shooting ILF metal risers but as the rules had left this open in trying to close this loop hole left Instinctive div in bit of a mess. They should just make it wood riser with bolt down limbs and can shoot split or 3 under. 

I see no reason to even have an Instinctive div if they have metal risers or Stringwalking, it's already covered by BB, spectators wouldn't understand or know the difference between Instinctive and Barebow. IFAA introduced a Traditionally div last year which is wood bolt down riser, shot split finger ( when I say wood I mean 'mostly' I know very few are 100% wood)

I chose Barebow because it's the least messed around rules, I got totally PO with IFAA screwing with Longbow and Barebow was the only other Div I could shoot both orgs with one setup, i.e I keep it WA rules for everything, it doesn't bother me if others use Long stabs or clicker in IFAA.


----------



## JimDE

We have seen a decline in other shooting sports for similar reasons. Take the major clay sports for example. Cost and requiring perfect scores imo have caused the lack in participation in trap and Skeet where sporting clays continues to grow because you can shoot what you have and though some perfect scores have been shot they are rare so mere humans feel they have a shot at winning with a miss or two. Once again though the manufacturers are taking their toll on participation by increasing the selling prices of their products. Tell me in what world a hunk of walnut, two tubes welded together and a unengraved receiver is worth $12k or more. They aren’t complex techno assemblies....But look on any field and you’ll see hundreds of these overpriced tools that let a shot cup full of pellets propel its way to a breakable target in a expanding shot string. It’s a frigg’n set of tubes......just like it’s a bow is used to propel a arrow to a target 90m and in. Inflation is one thing.... greed and sucking the marketplace dry of people willing to pay this hurting participation in the sport is another. 

Look at the Italian manufacturers that cater to the barebow community! They get it and their highest priced barebow risers are $600 usd and under down to a couple hundred. This is reasonable cost for value pricing and they know they need to make their money in volume sales. I started with Hoyt equipment in the early 60’s as I grew up in St Louis, knew Earl and Ann Hoyt, and because I started with them I am naturally drawn to equipment with their badging even 56 years later. I am sure Gillo and Spigarelli are hoping for the same results with beginners able to afford their products.


----------



## limbwalker

> As far as Bare bow and traditional divisions not welcome by Pro shops, this is not true.


Perhaps not in Italy, but it is here. I've been in hundreds of archery pro shops in the U.S. in my lifetime, and the quickest way to get the owner's eyes to glaze over is to mention you shoot barebow or traditional. I've literally had them stop talking to me after that. The only successful range and shop I know of that is focused on barebow, traditional and recurve archery (and you know the owner) went into that model with a great amount of trepidation because the owner also knew the risk they were taking. Fortunately it has worked out for them - taking advantage of this surge in barebow interest.

Your turnover and margin example is a good one, but unfortunately here in the U.S., pro shops have a compound-centered culture and most are not willing to change.


----------



## Nick1959

John I am lucky that the pro shop where I spend too much time, according to my wife, is a well established and successful shop.
Here recurves can outnumber compounds on the line.
My league night is made up of 2 barebow, about 8 Oly's and the rest compound.
It helps that the owners are trad folks.
So I guess I'll count my blessings.

Nick


----------



## limbwalker

Nick, you are lucky indeed.

I can only think of one range/pro shop in the U.S. where that's the case. I'm sure there are others, but I only know of one.

There is a reason the U.S. remains competitive in compound worldwide, but has fallen behind in recurve and barebow. Not to mention the neo-trad mindset that overtook the traditional community back in the 80's and set back single string archery 50 years.


----------



## Stephen Morley

Visited Donadoni's shop in Bergamo Italy, 10 years ago, not a single metal ILF or Compound, you guys wouldn't believe it, just a stunning setting.

www.donadoniarchery.com


----------



## Jason W.

John,

"In trad at Cincinnati, the biggest class will be masters, then seniors, then adult."

I looked at the results from 2017 and 2015 (2016 are not posted for some reason) and the largest Traditional class those two years was Adult. Maybe that'll be different this year, I don't know.


----------



## Jason W.

Ren,

I'm glad to hear the pros dropped the pro classes for FSL/R and FSL. I understand the reason they added the FSL/R pro class years ago, but it never really came to fruition. I was hoping they'd also get rid of the multiple senior divisions for everything other than FS, but that agenda item failed. Hopefully it'll go through next time.


----------



## Azzurri

Jason W. said:


> Ren,
> 
> I'm glad to hear the pros dropped the pro classes for FSL/R and FSL. I understand the reason they added the FSL/R pro class years ago, but it never really came to fruition. I was hoping they'd also get rid of the multiple senior divisions for everything other than FS, but that agenda item failed. Hopefully it'll go through next time.


I started out primarily an NFAA shooter, through our SYWAT series in Texas, and the most recent tournament I did was a SYWAT, but on about every class decision I can think of y'all seem on the rampage in precisely the wrong direction.

WA started a world master's championship this year. Masters classes are starting to be added to USAT series as well as the teams themselves. Recurve barebow that y'all can't be bothered with is booming under WA. And you tossed out some trad classes like longbow that USAA has kept.

I understand some sort of "too many bowls" notion has gotten in people's heads over there but the choices being made are like turning your sailboat into a headwind. 

WA barebow in particular is instructive, I am sure people are fine with NFAA style barebow going up slightly at Vegas. Meanwhile I think Lancaster WA barebow (ish) has probably gone 3x in size in a matter of a few years and we're talking separate gender classes, etc. If NFAA nationals doesn't populate the more esoteric classes as well as USAA then that might suggest NFAA has the work to do. People seem happy to fly to Lancaster under WA rules....


----------



## rsarns

Jason W. said:


> Ren,
> 
> I'm glad to hear the pros dropped the pro classes for FSL/R and FSL. I understand the reason they added the FSL/R pro class years ago, but it never really came to fruition. I was hoping they'd also get rid of the multiple senior divisions for everything other than FS, but that agenda item failed. Hopefully it'll go through next time.


I agree, backed the removal of Silver Senior but that didn’t pass. Should have adult and senior in majority of classes only with Senior starting at 60


----------



## rsarns

Azzurri said:


> I started out primarily an NFAA shooter, through our SYWAT series in Texas, and the most recent tournament I did was a SYWAT, but on about every class decision I can think of y'all seem on the rampage in precisely the wrong direction.
> 
> WA started a world master's championship this year. Masters classes are starting to be added to USAT series as well as the teams themselves. Recurve barebow that y'all can't be bothered with is booming under WA. And you tossed out some trad classes like longbow that USAA has kept.
> 
> I understand some sort of "too many bowls" notion has gotten in people's heads over there but the choices being made are like turning your sailboat into a headwind.
> 
> WA barebow in particular is instructive, I am sure people are fine with NFAA style barebow going up slightly at Vegas. Meanwhile I think Lancaster WA barebow (ish) has probably gone 3x in size in a matter of a few years and we're talking separate gender classes, etc. If NFAA nationals doesn't populate the more esoteric classes as well as USAA then that might suggest NFAA has the work to do. People seem happy to fly to Lancaster under WA rules....



USA Archery did exactly the same thing getting rid of masters 50-60-70 in Barebow. Now you have 2 adult classes only senior and masters


----------



## Elmosaurus

limbwalker said:


> There is a reason the U.S. remains competitive in compound worldwide, but has fallen behind in recurve and barebow. Not to mention the neo-trad mindset that overtook the traditional community back in the 80's and set back single string archery 50 years.


Limbwalker,

I can't disagree with any of your statements regarding existing shops/mentality. Your point that it's thought of by many as only a beginner phase is spot on, and a big part of problem; hopefully the visibility of the current high level barebow archers help to dispel it. (more venues need to be added to showcase their talent)

My guess is that shop owners are put off on single string because of the foreign and unfamiliar nature of it; they have no idea how to go about it and can't speak to it, so they don't bother. Of the shops that I've been to that do support some aspect of the single string community, the staff have active single string shooters. I'm extremely fortunate that my home range is also one of those; it makes it clear that having educated/experienced people around is what _always_ makes the difference. Reducing the apprehension will require better accessibility to shared knowledge, but as I've stated before, any infighting within the division is counter-intuitive to fostering that.

As for shops and margin, my thoughts were along the lines that embracing the larger potential volume of new barebow archers does bring in income. Having five people walk in and spend $400 each, certainly beats having only one or two come in to spend $800 each. Having a larger client base always leads to more ancillary spending, which in turn increases sales volume. The barebow oriented manufacturers seem to sell all the product they can make, so while perhaps not reporting numbers like Hoyt, Mathews or Win&Win, I can only assume their bottom line looks healthy each year.

So in the end, maybe we need shop owner oriented barebow sales training? What gear is needed. (less items and more affordable) How to set it up. (way less time/effort than a compound) How to get someone having fun inside an hour. (very easy with a 60 cm at 10 yards) Most important, how profitable it can be. (accessories, limb upgrades as the archer develops, nicer equipment once the archer feels the investment is justified...)

Just more of my opinions.

Cheers,
Elton


----------



## limbwalker

Jason W. said:


> Ren,
> 
> I'm glad to hear the pros dropped the pro classes for FSL/R and FSL. I understand the reason they added the FSL/R pro class years ago, but it never really came to fruition. I was hoping they'd also get rid of the multiple senior divisions for everything other than FS, but that agenda item failed. Hopefully it'll go through next time.


Personally, I'd be in favor of a pro recurve division in both NFAA and USArchery, although it will never happen in USArchery for a number of reasons.


----------



## limbwalker

> My guess is that shop owners are put off on single string because of the foreign and unfamiliar nature of it; they have no idea how to go about it and can't speak to it, so they don't bother.


Elton, I do think that's a big part of it. Trouble is that shop owners who are open-minded enough to learn about barebow, probably already are.

I've also noticed however that most shops are opened by bowhunters and bowhunting enthusiasts that also dabble in target archery. Like compounds, bowhunting is an accessory-rich market where they can profit from the sale of a lot of items that people seem to want. 

This again is an area where shop owners look down on traditional bowhunters, because we tend to use less "stuff" and even make a lot of our own. So to many shop owners, it's like a double whammy when a barebow recurve guy walks in. They aren't going to sell them much gear either for target or hunting. At least that's the stereotype, and there is probably some truth to that. I've never seen an archery shop owner more excited than when a city slicker driving a Lexus or BMW walks in and says they want to learn how to bowhunt. LOL I've seen guys spend an entire afternoon setting up a compound and hanging every single accessory they can think of on it, because they know the person across the counter isn't even asking how much.


----------



## Jason W.

Ren,

I'm failing to recall what the cut point was for senior division prior to the current configuration. Was it 55 or 60?


----------



## rsarns

60 prior. Ooops it was 55 if I remember and a director who pushed it was turning 50 and got it changed to 50


----------



## Elmosaurus

limbwalker said:


> They aren't going to sell them much gear either for target or hunting. At least that's the stereotype, and there is probably some truth to that.


My credit card statement says otherwise... :set1_rolf2:

I get what you're saying for sure though and have even experienced it myself on occasion.

Not helping matters, there are far too many people in our culture who are driven to purchase based on status, affinity for gadgets, or the search for the easiest route; so they willingly stand on the other side of that counter and let someone tell them what to buy without having done any real research.

Thank the Lord for the massive amount of accessible discussion and information recorded on the internet; it's paradigm changing in so many ways, and so few people really stop to think about its impact on our daily lives. I think (hope) that the days of disingenuous sales staff will continue to decline in this information empowered age.

Cheers,
Elton


----------



## limbwalker

rsarns said:


> 60 prior. Ooops it was 55 if I remember and a director who pushed it was turning 50 and got it changed to 50


IMO there should be a cutoff at 40 and another at 55.


----------



## Dillinger1

limbwalker said:


> Perhaps not in Italy, but it is here. I've been in hundreds of archery pro shops in the U.S. in my lifetime, and the quickest way to get the owner's eyes to glaze over is to mention you shoot barebow or traditional. I've literally had them stop talking to me after that. The only successful range and shop I know of that is focused on barebow, traditional and recurve archery (and you know the owner) went into that model with a great amount of trepidation because the owner also knew the risk they were taking. Fortunately it has worked out for them - taking advantage of this surge in barebow interest.
> 
> Your turnover and margin example is a good one, but unfortunately here in the U.S., pro shops have a compound-centered culture and most are not willing to change.


Or they sell them a Samick Sage with 50# limbs and cut to 29" 300 spine arrows with 100gr points and say "Have Fun". Haha


----------



## Jason W.

Dillinger1 said:


> Or they sell them a Samick Sage with 50# limbs and cut to 29" 300 spine arrows with 100gr points and say "Have Fun". Haha


And if you're lucky they put a nock set somewhere, anywhere, on the string.


----------



## Jason W.

limbwalker said:


> IMO there should be a cutoff at 40 and another at 55.


Look, you, it's bad enough I have to register in something called "Senior" in USA Archery. Don't make me have to do it in the NFAA too. :wink:


----------



## archer_nm

It was 60 and then some were crying that they did not think it was fair for old people to compete against Kids so they got lowered to 50 and then added the Silver senior. The NFAA did offer the Recurve Pro division but as with the Longbow due to Lack of participation it was dropped. A few years back I proposed the dropping of everything in the Senior Division back to 60 getting rid of all of the Watering down of the bowls and once again giving the Bowls credence and it did not even get out of committee. Mater of fact I tried to get it back on the floor and could not get a second. As was stated above the Age and style of the NFAA Directors will have a direct effect on what gets passed. To get WA BB into Vegas you need to get in contact with the NFAA Council and not the Directors only after this change would happen would it stand a chance of passing at the NFAA Level/.


----------



## archer_nm

Jason don't forget in the NFAA you can sign up as an Adult all the time and not as a Senior


----------



## itbeso

archer_nm said:


> Jason don't forget in the NFAA you can sign up as an Adult all the time and not as a Senior


Yes, It's called " The Rogers effect". LOL


----------



## itbeso

There was some joking at the Nfaa outdoor nationals last year though. The jist of it was to pass an Nfaa rule that when you turn 70, you HAVE to shoot in your own age group.:wink:


----------



## Demmer3

itbeso said:


> There was some joking at the Nfaa outdoor nationals last year though. The jist of it was to pass an Nfaa rule that when you turn 70, you HAVE to shoot in your own age group.:wink:


Did that get passed?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker

itbeso said:


> Yes, It's called " The Rogers effect". LOL


Wow.


----------



## Jason W.

archer_nm said:


> Jason don't forget in the NFAA you can sign up as an Adult all the time and not as a Senior


That's right. Ben does it and he's like 143 years old, or something like that. (Love ya, Ben) :happy:


----------



## rsarns

Jason W. said:


> That's right. Ben does it and he's like 143 years old, or something like that. (Love ya, Ben) :happy:


Come on he doesn’t look a day over 99. &#55357;&#56834;


----------



## Azzurri

Personally I'd say consolidating the O-50 age groups is myopic. A lot of NFAA's traction is local. If you look at SYWAT standings a lot of people do the different O-50 age groups in a variety of classes, particularly men. Do they show up for nationals? Maybe not. But the age groups serve their purpose here. I think that's apples and oranges compared to what does USAA do. USAA in Texas there are very few full blooded indoor events. So while you axe things based on national bowls you might consider the local impact. NFAA's classes are used by a lot of local/state tournaments that are better attended than the national. Unlike USAA I can't just go to College Station and shoot NFAA nationals.

I also think it's myopic to be talking trad bowls when that is a niche class that in Texas is only a senior class anyway. Meanwhile WA BB that would dwarf it is left at the door.

I also more pointedly, perhaps paranoid, perhaps not, hear a little bit of a bias in where "more bowls" gets pointed. No WA BB despite it booming. Trimming FSLR age classes. Those happen to be the two classes I do in WA. Since unlike USAA this isn't some drawn-out, number-driven, superficially-objective exercise, where a class gets to save itself by showing up next year, I kind of wonder whose axe is being grinded. I acknowledge bowhunter and longbow have also gotten the trim, but I kind of feel like the axe, whether offensively or defensively, is getting swung around the WA-parallel classes that aren't as popular with hunters. It doesn't feel entirely like a "how many people show up for the shoot to make a bowl worth it" exercise. If it was, we might look at local participation in age groups and classes, and we might look at how well attended something like WA BB is.

Or maybe NFAA could steer this somewhat in USAA's direction of being more objective and numbers driven where it's as simple as show x number people or watch your class die, and conversely, if you show x people for this test class, you have a class. I think that would make people less grumpy about everything getting the axe or kept out under some "more bowls" argument that seems inconsistently applied.


----------



## Azzurri

Xeroxing across that USAA doesn't fill masters classes doesn't quite compute. At least locally if I see "masters" they are doing a SYWAT most of the time. A select few constantly, usually high performers, do USAA. But the broader variety are in SYWAT. They may not show for nationals but you kill the classes and that trickles down to local SYWAT entries.


----------



## rsarns

Azzurri said:


> Xeroxing across that USAA doesn't fill masters classes doesn't quite compute. At least locally if I see "masters" they are doing a SYWAT most of the time. A select few constantly, usually high performers, do USAA. But the broader variety are in SYWAT. They may not show for nationals but you kill the classes and that trickles down to local SYWAT entries.


Am I the only one confused here? Since you mention SYWAT, you are talking NFAA rules, which are silver senior, senior etc. However, the diluting at all levels is ridiculous in Trad, B.B. and just about any class but freestyle. By the way I shoot SS in SYWAT. I think there are a total of 44 Trad shooters in both male/female and adult age groups. Why dilute them in adult/senior/silver Senior and Master Senior? Lump them all together in adult. I shoot my appropriate age group no matter what, but am all for putting us all together. 😎


----------



## rsarns

Azzurri said:


> Xeroxing across that USAA doesn't fill masters classes doesn't quite compute. At least locally if I see "masters" they are doing a SYWAT most of the time. A select few constantly, usually high performers, do USAA. But the broader variety are in SYWAT. They may not show for nationals but you kill the classes and that trickles down to local SYWAT entries.


Not sure what you mean by “xeroxing across”. In USA Archery B.B. you either shoot Senior (adult), or master. There is no more master 50-60/70 as there once was


----------



## Jason W.

rsarns said:


> Come on he doesn’t look a day over 99. ��


I hope I shoot that well when I'm 99.


----------



## rsarns

Jason W. said:


> I hope I shoot that well when I'm 99.


Don’t we all!


----------



## jmvargas

limbwalker said:


> IMO there should be a cutoff at 40 and another at 55.



i like this ..

if you want to increase participation in any event one of the come-ons is to make it as easy and as attractive as possible for the people to want to participate..

age grouping is one way as you automatically increase your potential target market..

other possible come-ons are easily accessible venues,attractive prizes and a credible organisation with a good track record of well-run events. 

when we decided to have really attractive raffle prizes provided by sponsors in our golf tournaments we had a long waiting list of guys wanting to enter..


----------



## limbwalker

I mean, let's face it - responsibilities outside of archery and one's ability to be competitive against 20-somethings really change after 40. I've never seen a 40-something not named Butch Johnson who was competitive in the recurve world. Not true - yet - in the barebow world but we're getting there. It will eventually become a younger person's game just like recurve has been and compound has become. To me, 42 year olds belong shooting against 52 year olds much more than they do 22 year olds.


----------



## jmvargas

limbwalker said:


> I mean, let's face it - responsibilities outside of archery and one's ability to be competitive against 20-somethings really change after 40. I've never seen a 40-something not named Butch Johnson who was competitive in the recurve world. Not true - yet - in the barebow world but we're getting there. It will eventually become a younger person's game just like recurve has been and compound has become. To me, 42 year olds belong shooting against 52 year olds much more than they do 22 year olds.


...that's true for most sports where some physicality is involved..

as an archer and a golfer for 60 years plus i find that golf is more physically demanding than archery and archers have better longevity also assuming we're looking at competitiveness...

we can always reduce poundages in archery and concentrate on shorter distances and the only possible equivalent of that in golf is to play for the forward tees..

..but tournaments from the forward tees are almost non-existent..


----------



## jhinaz

limbwalker said:


> To me, 42 year olds belong shooting against 52 year olds much more than they do 22 year olds.


To me (at 75 years old), grouping all ages 55 and over into one group is what someone in their 40s might say. - John


----------



## jmvargas

jhinaz said:


> To me (at 75 years old), grouping all ages 55 and over into one group is what someone in their 40s might say. - John


i'm 72 and any recognition of age differences as you get older is a bonus vs having us compete with the youngsters..

.....but ideally more age groups based on a 10 year range up to 70 and above would definitely be better for us..

we do it in golf all the time including our nationals..

PS..and it's also nice to see some long lost friends you used to compete with many many years ago..


----------



## jhinaz

jmvargas said:


> PS..and it's also nice to see some long lost friends you used to compete with many many years ago..


Agree, it's real good to see the 'long lost ones' are still around and able to participate in the event(s). - John


----------



## limbwalker

jhinaz said:


> To me (at 75 years old), grouping all ages 55 and over into one group is what someone in their 40s might say. - John


If you mean me, I never said that. Those are your words. 

I just said there should be a 40+ and 55+. That is not mutually exclusive from a 65+ or 70+ division. And I won't be in my 40's much longer anyway. LOL


----------



## jhinaz

limbwalker said:


> If you mean me, I never said that. Those are your words.
> 
> I just said there should be a 40+ and 55+. That is not mutually exclusive from a 65+ or 70+ division. And I won't be in my 40's much longer anyway. LOL


I'll be the first to admit that my reading comprehension isn't the greatest. I read it as meaning 'exclusive'. - John


----------



## Azzurri

Here is what I mean, I get you're saying USAA is consolidating 50-70. Where I live USAA doesn't have a real busy schedule and masters participation is limited.

And one could look at NFAA Nationals, and say there aren't many people at those meets, and xerox over USAA's decision. It would suit the "bowl" obsessives and at a national level be numerically justified.

But.

One of the things NFAA generally has going for it in the south is a lot of local participation. Such as SYWAT. SYWAT follows the current NFAA rules with a split every 10 years, 50, 60, etc.

If you look at the SYWAT series standings, taken as a whole, there are a lot of people across a variety of masters type age groups. Freestyle 50-60 (32 people) but also 60-70 (15), 70+ (7). In a single state. Well, that's freestyle. But there are a variety of other classes with 5+ people per age group per sex.

My bet is national numbers are probably no better, perhaps worse, than local participation. If you consolidate away the age divisions, are the older shooters going to be as interested competing against a 51 year old fresh from adult division? The "too many bowls" theory about these things talks like local NFAA isn't there and ignores local participation and local impact. Maybe it's a bowl for a 2-person division nationally, but maybe it keeps some older guy shooting 140 at age 70+ still thinking he should bother with FSLR.

To me you couldn't design a better way of giving some of the older shooters second thoughts about bothering. And NFAA needs to think about some of these things like, even if no one shows in Cincinnati, does it still have a fan club locally, is it participation I want to promote.

My thing is generally speaking no one in this country wins anything without a ton of hard work, the "bowls" obsession is a bit silly. While they are obsessing about attendance they might pay note to whether the winner of the division put up a decent score. I think the assumption is small field, no quality, but what if Bateman wins a 3 man class and the right to represent us abroad, does that make him bad?

I just think NFAA is going a bit haywire, barebow is the particular one that bothers me but I think the class discussion right now is a little agenda driven behind the guise of "bowls" and not really objective or well thought out.


----------



## erose

I think this is a good conversation to have; but do any one of us has the data to make truly informed comments on this matter.

Seriously what are the percentages? What percent of the NFAA membership shoot these styles (BB & Trad)? What percent USAA membership shoot B.B.?

Maybe someone here knows what these membership statistics are, but I’ve never seen any.

The associations should be making decisions concerning classes and divisions based off of empirical data, and not just off of assumptions and National Tournament data. I hope they are doing that.

It wouldn’t be hard to get that data. All they got to do is poll the membership, either by requesting that data during membership renewal and/or via email.

Maybe they do something similar. I hope so, because the best way of making a good decision is to make an informed decision.

Personally I would love to see those numbers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Azzurri

https://texasfieldarchery.org/results/sywat

erose, you have done SYWAT, here's our overall SYWAT series data. It has everyone who does at least one shoot. That's a pretty good database at a local level. The LA equivalent that started this year, ditto.

24 people do MBB, but you'll notice 14 of those did just one shoot.

Well, I know a lot of those people, and it's basically they only do our local SYWAT, they don't do state or nationals in NFAA. Why? Because at state they are guaranteed compound competition, and they're having to shoot the mish mash of a division.

Compare the same list to TSAA state, the WA/USAA state org, hmmmm, funny, they show up for WA BB state. Some even do USAA nationals events.

I know a couple people including myself who have done trad in the past few years, but we're rarities because that doesn't allow stringwalking. Only so many want to bother with gapping particularly with bows set up to stringwalk. You go through and ask most of the people on the list why they vigorously do USAA and not NFAA and it's not for lack of local shoots, or lack of ambition, they will do state or nationals in the division that lets you stringwalk. But other than shooting in a SYWAT at their own home range they aren't interested in pursuing a stringwalk division where they compete with compounds. I mean, some like Stonebraker might, but generally speaking, it repels interested archers.

The thing is that these people won't show up in NFAA nationals data, you won't find them in trad, and they will look on paper like minimally involved SYWAT people. But if you check the tournament results they do just about every WA event that's held, plus their local SYWAT. You really would need to survey USAA folks to know what NFAA numbers should be, if they allowed the right division.


----------



## Azzurri

The other obvious indicator is once Lancaster allowed more barebow to advance and expanded payouts, their recurve barebow division surpassed Vegas in participation and left it in the dust. It used to be Vegas was like 60 BB and Lancaster was less. It's now Lancaster has 122 and Vegas is like 70 or 80. Vegas has "grown" but Lancaster has "exploded." I am sure NFAA types point to continued growing Vegas field size as a sign of division health, but it's really that it's the Grandpappy of them all and a big event for the compounds. But the Lancaster tournament that is straight WA BB recurve has like gone 3x in size.

I am sure they want to play the "who knows" game paired with the "but more bowls" cry. But the division at USAA Nationals indoors now has almost as many people as Oly did 5 years ago. Plus the Vegas/Lancaster thing. Plus all the people around here who'll do just the one SYWAT grudgingly but attend everything USAA.

To me WA BB in NFAA would be bigger than trad or Old BB.


----------



## archer_nm

Erose the NFAA does use empirical from National events as that is all the NFAA needs for the awards that they give out, States can and do add styles or divisions as they need. Case in point the state of California is still using the Longbow and BH styles on a state level.


----------



## Azzurri

The solution to me is not complicated at all. Add BB like you should, and then on some of these underpopulated classes, the division at national events either doesn't exist for those events, or is only formed if x people enter. NFAA already does this with tournaments like Outdoor Target or First Dakota, which streamline the classes available. You can sign up to do x, y, or z but even though they are sanctioned classes a, b, and c are left out. So the class exists for local play and maybe certain national tournaments, but for others, not offered unless demand is there that year.

But the thing is that when y'all axe the classes there are often a few people doing them locally, or interested in same. And while in theory each state can run their own slate of classes, I think they look to NFAA's lead. Longbow vaporized from Texas once off the NFAA list. And while I am thinking about it, even if some states fight you on it, well, hmmm, isn't that suggesting they saw a local demand that NFAA laser focused on who goes to Cincinnati missed? With how much is done local I don't know if basing everything on how many people do national tournaments is fair.

I also think some of this tap dances around NFAA considering whether its indoor nationals is as attractive as it should be. Instead of asking why does USAA have 200 people in Oly and NFAA has 20 in FSLR, the focus goes on the 20 number, which to me in context is perhaps a sign of underperformance by the tournament as opposed to an accurate sense of how many people could/would participate. Perhaps this is why WA BB is seen as an event where who knows who would show up -- zero attendance today -- rather than, hmmmm, 90-100 people do this at USAA Nationals.


----------



## archer_nm

It was the Directors (50)of NFAA that made these decisions and you would need to poll them to see why it passed? and on what basis. Texas can and should make changes as they see fit.


----------



## Mr. Roboto

Azzurri said:


> The other obvious indicator is once Lancaster allowed more barebow to advance and expanded payouts, their recurve barebow division surpassed Vegas in participation and left it in the dust. It used to be Vegas was like 60 BB and Lancaster was less. It's now Lancaster has 122 and Vegas is like 70 or 80. Vegas has "grown" but Lancaster has "exploded." I am sure NFAA types point to continued growing Vegas field size as a sign of division health, but it's really that it's the Grandpappy of them all and a big event for the compounds. But the Lancaster tournament that is straight WA BB recurve has like gone 3x in size.
> 
> I am sure they want to play the "who knows" game paired with the "but more bowls" cry. But the division at USAA Nationals indoors now has almost as many people as Oly did 5 years ago. Plus the Vegas/Lancaster thing. Plus all the people around here who'll do just the one SYWAT grudgingly but attend everything USAA.
> 
> To me WA BB in NFAA would be bigger than trad or Old BB.


It wasn't that Lancaster "allowed" more barebows, the explosion occurred when they changed a rule from the NFAA's everything is legal to attach to an arrow shooting mechanism called barebow, to using WA barebow rules. It was the WA barebow rules that caused the explosion. People understand and respect the simple WA barebow definition. The NFAA barebow rules is just insanity at its peak.

I too am of the opinion that WA barebow rules would dwarf Trad, current NFAA barebow rules, and Olympic style (FSL-R) combined. If no one wants to believe that just look at last year's USAA Field Nationals. Barebow out numbered the combined attendees for compound and recurve. It will probably happen again this year.


----------



## Jason W.

Azzurri said:


> The solution to me is not complicated at all. Add BB like you should, and then on some of these underpopulated classes, the division at national events either doesn't exist for those events, or is only formed if x people enter. NFAA already does this with tournaments like Outdoor Target or First Dakota, which streamline the classes available.


The NFAA does not exclude any classes from the Outdoor Target Nationals. Although, sadly, a few of those classes last year were classes of one.

https://www.nfaausa.com/wp-content/...l-Results-e_id_8105_c_competitor_summary..pdf


----------



## Azzurri

Jason W. said:


> The NFAA does not exclude any classes from the Outdoor Target Nationals. Although, sadly, a few of those classes last year were classes of one.
> 
> https://www.nfaausa.com/wp-content/...l-Results-e_id_8105_c_competitor_summary..pdf


I'd swear in the initial years it did, but I could be wrong. And I am pretty sure it's not a full slate for First Dakota.

And my point is not really to squabble about what is available at what, as to point out that rather than dumping classes and age groups, or refusing to add classes -- being all stubborn and get off my lawn about it -- you could do a variety of things, like the class exists but is not always offered, or is not offered for particular events where it has proved no one shows up; or a minimum number of entries is needed to make out a class. That might help WA BB get treated right as a potential class instead of it gets caught up in some chop a thon.

So if either no one shows up or not enough, no class, no bowl. Or you could recognize the class could exist but since not enough ever show, no class, no bowl. But for a class that does have some significant local participation, why kill it? I don't know if a more locally oriented organization like NFAA does well by going through with the class hatchet based on national bowls. At least in Texas a lot of these random classes actually had names and faces to them. And while you say we can campaign to bring stuff back, it's a hard sell and we tend to follow NFAA's lead on classes, or at least that's the impression I get from the annual changes on the "styles" part of the TFAA page.

USAA, you can get an idea there is a number someplace and classes falling below it get in trouble. But they also generally give a class a year or two to save itself. So it's more like due process and it comes across less like some person or set of person has it in for barebow, for Oly as FSLR (masters ages), and such, which cumulatively makes me wonder if people would be happier if it looked like IBO or something. Cause to me if this was about numbers that also works in reverse and why the heck isn't WA BB going "in" since that would be a class you wouldn't have to worry about.

Deep down my thing is when I started NFAA was the one who got scores done faster and had more classes to choose from and was actually the smarter place to start. But the past few years USAA got their scoring act together, and has been the more enlightened organization about building to go forward. Lately NFAA is the one that seems to be mired in class warfare and getting all stubborn about BB and less attuned to what the target archers want. But saying all this my last tournament this season was a SYWAT, so take this as well meaning. I just worry NFAA's losing the plot a little bit. I don't think the archers were beefing about bowls. I think that's inside baseball. Worry about what the archers want.


----------



## limbwalker

archer_nm said:


> It was the Directors (50)of NFAA that made these decisions and you would need to poll them to see why it passed? and on what basis. Texas can and should make changes as they see fit.


I was actually thinking of competing in the longbow division at our TFAA state indoor, until I realized they eliminated it.  Ah well. Not that it's that big of a deal but I kinda hate to see barebow go away when we still have no fewer than four compound divisions.


----------



## erose

archer_nm said:


> Erose the NFAA does use empirical from National events as that is all the NFAA needs for the awards that they give out, States can and do add styles or divisions as they need. Case in point the state of California is still using the Longbow and BH styles on a state level.


Yes, but that is just polling those going to National Events. I think we can both agree the far majority of NFAA members don’t regularly shoot these events. Those members aren’t being polled as far as I can determine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## erose

Azzurri said:


> To me WA BB in NFAA would be bigger than trad or Old BB.


You know this may or may not be the case. In all honesty the potential pool of NFAA BB Archers is significantly larger than WA BB. The problem is NFAA needs to figure out how to attract this massive pool of archers. I’m referring to NASP archers. In the NFAA BB division NASP archers could actually shoot in a NFAA National event, without buying another bow. They can’t do that in USAA National events, without competing in the compound division. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Nockin'em

Unbiased logical thinking, truthful, and always articulate...triple wammy...it's why your my goto guy for no nonsense feedback! Oh, and I hope the changes in your form recently served you well at USA Archery Indoor Nationals at Lancaster last week.

Frank


----------



## Nockin'em

Elmosaurus said:


> Somehow, I have to think that companies like Gillo, Tradtech, and Spigarelli are laughing at that sentiment on their way to the bank. I chat with a lot of beginners, so I try to be mindful of the inventory at Lancaster so that when someone gets curious about getting/trying something, I know what their chances of finding it are.
> 
> Shortly after the LAS Classic last year, and again with more intensity this year, the shelves for BB type stuff basically emptied out. My one student I help teach is stuck waiting on a G2 riser backorder right now, but really wants to get his first personal setup going. LAS can't seem to ever keep enough Spig ZT rests in stock. Yost tabs fly off the shelves, and I'm pretty sure people would buy multiples if they made them in a larger assortment of colors. I'm guessing it's too early for it to be due to a rush to get new gear for the upcoming outdoor season (I could be wrong I suppose...) but the timing is really coincidental to the massive livestream view counts from the Classic BB clip each year.
> 
> I'm also seeing a constant stream of posts on the forums and the BB Facebook group of new archers moving into BB this year, post Classic. "Just bought this new bow...", "Going to order this bow this week...", "Trying out barebow and have some questions...", etc, etc. Again, could be coincidental, or it could be the visible trend of a growing community because we have some really great ambassadors for barebow.
> 
> I was discussing with another coach at my range tonight, and we both agreed that BB is growing fast, and likely here to stay, _simply because it makes archery really fun and exciting for the masses again_. It's reasonably affordable as well as nonthreatening and uncomplicated for the average person. This is literally the ideal type of catalyst a niche sport like archery needs, and the industry as a whole will be foolish if it passes up its chance to grow the ranks. (especially if it's overlooked due to organizational bickering)
> 
> Just my opinion.
> 
> Cheers,
> Elton


Unbiased logical thinking, truthful, and always articulate...triple wammy...it's why your my goto guy for no nonsense feedback! Oh, and I hope the changes in your form recently served you well at USA Archery Indoor Nationals at Lancaster last week.

Frank


----------



## rsarns

Azzurri said:


> https://texasfieldarchery.org/results/sywat
> 
> erose, you have done SYWAT, here's our overall SYWAT series data. It has everyone who does at least one shoot. That's a pretty good database at a local level. The LA equivalent that started this year, ditto.
> 
> 24 people do MBB, but you'll notice 14 of those did just one shoot.
> 
> Well, I know a lot of those people, and it's basically they only do our local SYWAT, they don't do state or nationals in NFAA. Why? Because at state they are guaranteed compound competition, and they're having to shoot the mish mash of a division.
> 
> Compare the same list to TSAA state, the WA/USAA state org, hmmmm, funny, they show up for WA BB state. Some even do USAA nationals events.
> 
> I know a couple people including myself who have done trad in the past few years, but we're rarities because that doesn't allow stringwalking. Only so many want to bother with gapping particularly with bows set up to stringwalk. You go through and ask most of the people on the list why they vigorously do USAA and not NFAA and it's not for lack of local shoots, or lack of ambition, they will do state or nationals in the division that lets you stringwalk. But other than shooting in a SYWAT at their own home range they aren't interested in pursuing a stringwalk division where they compete with compounds. I mean, some like Stonebraker might, but generally speaking, it repels interested archers.
> 
> 
> Hey look at that great scores in SS Trad!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is that these people won't show up in NFAA nationals data, you won't find them in trad, and they will look on paper like minimally involved SYWAT people. But if you check the tournament results they do just about every WA event that's held, plus their local SYWAT. You really would need to survey USAA folks to know what NFAA numbers should be, if they allowed the right division.



Hey look at that score in SS Trad, ok well one of the 3. Lol


----------



## rsarns

limbwalker said:


> I was actually thinking of competing in the longbow division at our TFAA state indoor, until I realized they eliminated it.  Ah well. Not that it's that big of a deal but I kinda hate to see barebow go away when we still have no fewer than four compound divisions.


John are you shooting this weekend?


----------



## limbwalker

> They can’t do that in USAA National events, without competing in the compound division.


Actually, here in Texas they can. And it's made basically zero difference. NASP archers, it turns out, are mostly concerned with NASP and then bowhunting and 3D. Back in 2007, we invited the two NASP national champions (boys and girls) to the JDT camps at the Oly. training center. Very nice and respectful kids, but you could immediately tell they were not in their element at all. Unfortunately they didn't last very long although the young lady went on to become an Olympic coach in shooting (firearms). Perhaps NFAA could have more luck than USArchery has with the NASP kids. If they ever will, it's right now because Mackenzie Brown was a NASP champion, so that's their example to use if they want. But I'm just not seeing it.


----------



## limbwalker

rsarns said:


> John are you shooting this weekend?


Nope. I haven't been shooting this year. Taking a break for a while. I did however shoot a nice 10 pt. with my hunting recurve, so I have my "trophy" for the year. LOL


----------



## rsarns

limbwalker said:


> Nope. I haven't been shooting this year. Taking a break for a while. I did however shoot a nice 10 pt. with my hunting recurve, so I have my "trophy" for the year. LOL


Nice!


----------



## limbwalker

rsarns said:


> Nice!


Maybe you can beat my trad score and then I'll have to go back and shoot that event again.


----------



## rsarns

limbwalker said:


> Maybe you can beat my trad score and then I'll have to go back and shoot that event again.


I’m in SS though. Shot a 283 in the last SYWAT, finally got a decent tune going.


----------



## erose

limbwalker said:


> Actually, here in Texas they can. And it's made basically zero difference. NASP archers, it turns out, are mostly concerned with NASP and then bowhunting and 3D. Back in 2007, we invited the two NASP national champions (boys and girls) to the JDT camps at the Oly. training center. Very nice and respectful kids, but you could immediately tell they were not in their element at all. Unfortunately they didn't last very long although the young lady went on to become an Olympic coach in shooting (firearms). Perhaps NFAA could have more luck than USArchery has with the NASP kids. If they ever will, it's right now because Mackenzie Brown was a NASP champion, so that's their example to use if they want. But I'm just not seeing it.


Genesis shooters cannot shoot in BB at National USAA events.

Here in LA, we are seeing NASP & 4H kids making the transition. Not in droves mind you, but we are seeing about 4 to 6 on average at our local tournaments. There has been quite a few transition to OR and BB out of NASP and 4H. Just recently certified a couple of NASP coaches as level 2 instructors, who are planning to start a JOAD club at a local school. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker

erose said:


> Genesis shooters cannot shoot in BB at National USAA events.
> 
> Here in LA, we are seeing NASP & 4H kids making the transition. Not in droves mind you, but we are seeing about 4 to 6 on average at our local tournaments. There has been quite a few transition to OR and BB out of NASP and 4H. Just recently certified a couple of NASP coaches as level 2 instructors, who are planning to start a JOAD club at a local school.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I didn't say they could. We tried to "lead" here in Texas by allowing NASP shooters and others to use the Genesis bow in our barebow division. My point was that nobody came.


----------



## archer_nm

Like I stated elsewhere States can have all of the styles and it is not a problem, results at Nationals are what drives the amount of awards at NATIONALS


----------



## erose

limbwalker said:


> I didn't say they could. We tried to "lead" here in Texas by allowing NASP shooters and others to use the Genesis bow in our barebow division. My point was that nobody came.


What I claimed initially is that USAA does not have a division for Genesis shooters at their National tournaments; the NFAA does.

Concerning your last point, here in LA they are coming to State NFAA events, and the few local USAA sanctioned events I’ve hosted.

Why are they coming? They have coaches who have ties to the LFAA and those coaches are encouraging them.

To get to the kids, you got to get to the coaches first.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## wa-prez

Azzurri said:


> rather than dumping classes and age groups, or refusing to add classes -- you could do a variety of things, like the class exists but is not always offered, or is not offered for particular events where it has proved no one shows up; or a minimum number of entries is needed to make out a class. That might help WA BB get treated right as a potential class instead of it gets caught up in some chop a thon.
> 
> So if either no one shows up or not enough, no class, no bowl. Or you could recognize the class could exist but since not enough ever show, no class, no bowl. But for a class that does have some significant local participation, why kill it? I don't know if a more locally oriented organization like NFAA does well by going through with the class hatchet based on national bowls. And while you say we can campaign to bring stuff back, it's a hard sell and we tend to follow NFAA's lead on classes.


I actually submitted an NFAA Agenda Item similar to this a few years ago. I might dredge it up and try again, but I think the changes they made last year (eliminating Bowhunter, Bowhunter Freestyle Limited, and Longbow) make it a moot point. Hard to get back what you just threw away.

Anyway my proposal was that - for Nationals (and maybe also Sectionals) the registration numbers would be reviewed as of close of "pre-registration". Those who registered for divisions that were too under-subscribed would be informed their category would not be awarded, and would be given option to change to another category (either a different age group for which they qualified, or a different style or both) or they could withdraw from the tournament. 

For example, someone registers for Silver Senior Freestyle Limited. They are only one or two or three in the category. Those people could:
1. Change to Senior or Adult Freestyle Limited
2. Change to Silver Senior Freestyle 

In both cases, would just shoot the same equipment, just face stiffer competition

3. Change to something completely different like Barebow (take off their sights)

4. Stay home

It would take a LOT of coordination and firm deadlines to re-shuffle people, but better than discontinuing the style altogether.

Maybe next year the SS-FSL would bring some of their friends!


----------



## archer_nm

Linda #4 is what would happen, get rid of all the BS Divisions for anyone 18 and over ADULT - Senior (Over 50) and that is all, folks would know prior to registration closing. I spent too many years trying to stop this mess we have now.


----------



## Azzurri

erose said:


> You know this may or may not be the case. In all honesty the potential pool of NFAA BB Archers is significantly larger than WA BB. The problem is NFAA needs to figure out how to attract this massive pool of archers. I’m referring to NASP archers. In the NFAA BB division NASP archers could actually shoot in a NFAA National event, without buying another bow. They can’t do that in USAA National events, without competing in the compound division.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


(1) Lancaster is now bigger than Vegas, ergo if people are already willing to travel, a NFAA WA BB division would probably be bigger than NFAA (current) BB. I'm talking NFAA Nationals where trad and BB are usually like 5-10 people. What would likely happen is those WA BB shooters who do another class slide over to the one built for them, and stringwalkers who skip NFAA start considering it. It might not be Freestyle or FSLR but I see a set of national-level BB people who actually do like to travel and might try it.

(2) In TX in USAA events what keeps BB and Oly even is TAMU. Otherwise the bigger normal range oriented participation is BB. And some of those people do travel.

(3) It may just not be showing up where you are, and that's kind of the way BB seems to work. Feast or famine. It tends to be very intense around a few mentors and then absent elsewhere. In Houston the shooters come from two places. There is a third pod at Cinnamon Creek. In between it would not appear anything is happening, except for an individual SYWAT suddenly having almost 10 BBs. But what happens is when state or nats has a WA BB division those people are willing to travel. So to me it's like if you build it they will come. And they might even be in heavy numbers from 2 ranges here but if a class populates and is bigger than trad or compound BB I don't think it matters whether it's just a few motivated ranges sending several or a bunch of ranges sending 1 or 2.


----------



## Azzurri

Re Genesis:
(a) I would think the flaw in the transition idea is if you flip over to USAA coaching with the idea of competing they are going to be thinking mainstream USAA classes. The first idea in their head is probably not, ahhh, we have a Genesis division shooter. Which might even be a feedback loop that it's not a popular choice already. But chances are a student coming in the door asked what they want to learn to shoot in USAA doesn't say Genesis, they get switched over to something else. In theory the division could be huge except those who switch are probably constantly re-directed someplace new at their next stop.

(b) Whether that then feeds the arms race, another question, but once you leave the spec class that would seem to be the way of the world.

(c) It's not the worst idea over, but you need coaches pushing it and interested students on the other side. At least one thing considering, though, is that Genesis by its nature is supposed to be kind of a try-archery thing, and switching over to USAA can be like going from tee ball to select, and whether it's keeping up with Joneses or sincere or coach driven, half the reason the step was taken in the first place was to elevate the game. When I switched from rec soccer to select, I tried to slide over with the same stuff and found I had to swap out all my gear. Cleats didn't hold up. Shinguards didn't protect well enough. A cheap ball wouldn't hold up. The fields get bigger. The refs know the rules. etc. etc. So to me rather than lament the progression from Genesis, it's like the kid's first cleats that get you started playing soccer. You maybe don't need to spend $200 for cleats but once you're headed down the road to more intense and serious it's almost strange if you're still on the try-soccer gear, it's just not even intermediate level gear.


----------

