# Time for a new rule?



## LongTime (Feb 17, 2005)

Do you think with all the big arrows in ASA blocking the 12 ring and glance outs happening. If people in the group agree should you get the higher score if damage is shown. I know you can opt for the upper 12 but is that fair either. Just a thought.


----------



## hrtlnd164 (Mar 22, 2008)

Yes kick outs suck, you got the yardage, you made the shot but get less than the best result. BUT, just because you damage someone's nock that was in the 12 ring does not mean your arrow would have landed in the 12 ring. I have seen arrows kicked nock high, low, right or left in the target. Not much more they can do besides the option to call uppers.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

Sometimes ya gotta lay up.....call the upper or take the 10


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

12 ring, 1 1/2" in diameter.... 1.500" / .422" (rounded up) = 3.555 arrow widths straight across. And then up and down and the corners.... Whether likeable or not there's enough room for more than 5 arrows.....


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

How is the upper "not fair" ?


----------



## jimb (Feb 17, 2003)

I doubt that they will regulate the size of the arrow due to the money involved with the arrow manufactures. If they would say that everyone must shoot an arrow no bigger than a 23 series or something that is fine as long as everyone is playing the same game. I always looked at glance outs as being part of the game. It happens in field and fita also.

To much judgement on the damaged arrow thing, you guys can't agree on how to score the arrows so lets not put damage into the equation.


----------



## BowHuntnKY (Dec 10, 2008)

tmorelli said:


> How is the upper "not fair" ?


Right. Its the same size as the lower....heck I like the upper...hardly anyone shoots for it...usually got a clean shot at it haha.

Ive shot with some that call upper almost every shot.


----------



## shooter74 (Jul 7, 2005)

This year down in Alabama I had 7 glance out cost me some good points .


----------



## Crow Terminator (Jan 21, 2003)

3D shooting is a game of knowing when and where to make your shots. You have to pick and choose. It's just part of the game. Every one of us that have shot it, have been kicked out by hitting another arrow. But on the flip side of the token, every one of us here has hit another arrow and then it actually knock us INTO the 12. So it does go both ways in that respect. 

It really all depends on the skill level of the shooters in your group. Some days you get with guys that absolutely wear those 12 rings out and stay in them all day. If you are use to shooting in a smaller group or shooting with people that don't hit so many 12s, then you are going to struggle a little bit if you are scared to shoot at a 12 with an arrow or two in it when you get with a group of good shooters that can hit a bunch of 12s. But...you aren't dead last on every target anyway. You will lead off on several targets and have first crack at either 12 ring. Its just the luck of the draw....some times you are up as the first or second shooter on the closest targets, and some times you are up last on them. My weekend in Cullman...most ever target I came up on to lead off on, was right at our max yardage and usually a black target too that I couldn't see any detail on from the stake. So my arrow ended up being a reference point to the other guys as to where the 12 was LOL. It's just how it happens. I lead off on only one close target out of 40 that we shot. And our group of 4 all shot a 12 on it.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

what if you have a glance in should that then be called a 10 ? ya glance outs do suck but glance ins do count higher too ,so really its a horse either way.i have had ins and outs on the 12 ring too i remember the outs and just am happy with the ins.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I think it is just part of the game we are playing, this weekend I had some targets where I was first on a easy target and other easy targets I was last. Depending on how my group had filled up the 12 rings I had to play the game and make good decisions. To me the current asa game is a really challenging game to play and be competitive and I absolutely love it.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

jimb said:


> I doubt that they will regulate the size of the arrow due to the money involved with the arrow manufactures. If they would say that everyone must shoot an arrow no bigger than a 23 series or something that is fine as long as everyone is playing the same game. I always looked at glance outs as being part of the game. It happens in field and fita also.
> 
> To much judgement on the damaged arrow thing, you guys can't agree on how to score the arrows so lets not put damage into the equation.


To go with a max diameter of 23 series wouldn't be that tough of a task. However, it can't be done on a whim and go into effect "overnight". IF the new diameter was put into effect on a "delayed basis" to give the arrow manufacturers time to sell out their inventories, and the shooters to use up their inventories over the course of 2-4 YEARS, then it would work out just fine.
For example: To rule that effective January 1, 2015 the new arrow size max is 23 series and anything larger is illegal for competition would NOT work!
To rule that effective January 1, 2017 or January 1, 2018 would give manufacturers and suppliers time to sell out inventory, and shooters time to use up what they have and a few years subsequent.

Since the USA is the ONLY country on the planet that uses arrow diameters over the WFA (formerly FITA) shaft size restriction...the arrow manufacturers would NOT be "hurt" substantially by the limitation! They would sell just as many arrows after the change, if not more. Also, I know for a fact that with regard to the carbon arrows, they can manufacture a carbon shaft that is WFA (formerly FITA) LEGAL with a range of spines that would "fit" nearly all bows.
They simply need the "nudge" to get that job done, since right now, they have no need to do so.

Personally, I'm in favor of making the shaft diameter the same through all venues of archery and have that shaft diameter restriction as a "world standard." Outdoors, indoors, NFAA, ASA, IBO, WAF, USA Archery...the works. Make the largest diameter arrow that is legal for competition a 2315, period.

field14


----------



## math1963 (Apr 9, 2014)

Pete53 said:


> what if you have a glance in should that then be called a 10 ? ya glance outs do suck but glance ins do count higher too ,so really its a horse either way.i have had ins and outs on the 12 ring too i remember the outs and just am happy with the ins.


I guy in our group this weekend at the Classic had his arrow glance off of a pine tree (bark flying) and hit the target in the 10 ring. He lost one vane! He scored a 10.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

math1963 said:


> I guy in our group this weekend at the Classic had his arrow glance off of a pine tree (bark flying) and hit the target in the 10 ring. He lost one vane! He scored a 10.


Had that been an NFAA, IFAA, USA Archery event...that arrow glancing off a tree and into the target would have scored....a ZERO! Of course, there are rules concerning target set up that require a full and unimpeding view of the entire target face AND an fully cleared path to the target that "even the lightest bows" can make it to the target without interference, too. Glance ins off the ground? Score ZERO!
field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

field14 said:


> Also, I know for a fact that with regard to the carbon arrows, they can manufacture a carbon shaft that is WFA (formerly FITA) LEGAL with a range of spines that would "fit" nearly all bows.
> They simply need the "nudge" to get that job done, since right now, they have no need to do so.
> 
> Personally, I'm in favor of making the shaft diameter the same through all venues of archery and have that shaft diameter restriction as a "world standard." Outdoors, indoors, NFAA, ASA, IBO, WAF, USA Archery...the works. Make the largest diameter arrow that is legal for competition a 2315, period.
> ...



Lost me, Tom. Carbon Express, Gold Tip, Muddy Outdoors, Victory and others make 350 spine arrows in FITA diameter or a bit under and have for several years.

It's been discussed before, FITA legal diameter arrows. Ain't happening and I've shot FITA legal diameter arrows since whenever Carbon Express came out with the CXLs. Don't use the big logs, but I won't vote them out either....

Era 2007, what happened when the "across the pond" countries tried to ban the Nano? A uproar. Who was with the uproaring ranks? Carbon Express. Think it, a uproar, won't happen here if they try to ban the "logs?"


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

SonnyThomas said:


> Lost me, Tom. Carbon Express, Gold Tip, Muddy Outdoors, Victory and others make 350 spine arrows in FITA diameter or a bit under and have for several years.
> 
> It's been discussed before, FITA legal diameter arrows. Ain't happening and I've shot FITA legal diameter arrows since whenever Carbon Express came out with the CXLs. Don't use the big logs, but I won't vote them out either....
> 
> Era 2007, what happened when the "across the pond" countries tried to ban the Nano? A uproar. Who was with the uproaring ranks? Carbon Express. Think it, a uproar, won't happen here if they try to ban the "logs?"


I know for a fact that carbon arrows can be made in varying spines at a given diameter...if the market would call for it. That is to say, they could make a shaft spine out for a person wanting to shoot a 23 diameter arrow that only has 35# peak weight. They can also make the shaft spine out at the same OD for a person shooting 40, 45, 50, 52, or whatever peak weight, too. Got that information from a "horse's mouth" (but NOT from Easton, haha) when the first fat shaft controversy was "hot" a few years back.
Problem is that this country thinks they "rule" the world of archery...but from a sales standpoint of target type equipment, the USA is a "drop in the bucket" (on a WORLD WIDE SCALE, that is).
Funny that many of our top shooters shoot the SAME SCORES indoors on the Vegas type face...with small shafts, with 23 diameter "FITA LEGAL" shafts, or with logs. The only reason they'll stay with fat logs is so as not to give away too much to the competition...so if the "competition" was restricted to 23 max diameter, then everyone does the same...WORLD WIDE.
If everyone world-wide was restricted to a max of 23 diameter...the SALES wouldn't change one iota...using "manufacturer's lost sales" is a lame excuse! Gotsta have arrows...and obviously if everyone was restricted to the same max...then everyone would buy THOSE arrows.

Only in America......


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

math1963 said:


> I guy in our group this weekend at the Classic had his arrow glance off of a pine tree (bark flying) and hit the target in the 10 ring. He lost one vane! He scored a 10.


Mine hit the eight! :set1_applaud::set1_applaud::set1_applaud:


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

field14 said:


> Had that been an NFAA, IFAA, USA Archery event...that arrow glancing off a tree and into the target would have scored....a ZERO! Of course, there are rules concerning target set up that require a full and unimpeding view of the entire target face AND an fully cleared path to the target that "even the lightest bows" can make it to the target without interference, too. Glance ins off the ground? Score ZERO!
> field14 (Tom D.)


Like we used to say in flat track racin'...we don't care how the hell they go it in California.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

field14 said:


> I know for a fact that carbon arrows can be made in varying spines at a given diameter...if the market would call for it. That is to say, they could make a shaft spine out for a person wanting to shoot a 23 diameter arrow that only has 35# peak weight. They can also make the shaft spine out at the same OD for a person shooting 40, 45, 50, 52, or whatever peak weight, too. Got that information from a "horse's mouth" (but NOT from Easton, haha) when the first fat shaft controversy was "hot" a few years back.
> 
> You missed my point. Fat shafts are in different spine grades and have been for years. You have a 35 pound they've got a arrow that will work. I have CXLs of .510 spine, .410 and .332. Year of make makes some difference. Like the 2010/2011 series of CXL 150s given .504, 250s of .417 and the CXL 350 now .361
> 
> ...


What next, Tom? Restrict draw weight like FITA has? Color of bow or arrows or vanes? If by your thinking it'll come down to X bow, X arrow, X everything. Maybe even have to own and drive a Bentley to qualify to shoot. Whoops. I probably wouldn't be allowed to shoot as I am a cigarette smoker. Concerning archery, I got a lecture on smoking over seas. Even got a wake up call right here in Illinois. FITA Indoor Championship; "No Smoking Allowed On Clubs Grounds." Not even in your car in the parking. You must leave the club grounds if you wish to smoke. They lost me and 4 other shooters.


----------



## shamlin (Aug 18, 2007)

I would like to see the change to smaller diameter arrows just to minimize the damage on those targets!!


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

shamlin said:


> I would like to see the change to smaller diameter arrows just to minimize the damage on those targets!!


Have seen what Nanos can do to brand new 3D targets? Right through to the offset side. Want to do away with 27/64" arrows because of target damage you best include Nanos. No discrimination......


----------



## reylamb (Feb 5, 2003)

SonnyThomas said:


> Have seen what Nanos can do to brand new 3D targets? Right through to the offset side. Want to do away with 27/64" arrows because of target damage you best include Nanos. No discrimination......


Yup, those knittin needles can do some damage quickly.


----------



## ArcheryNut2006 (Dec 5, 2006)

field14 said:


> Had that been an NFAA, IFAA, USA Archery event...that arrow glancing off a tree and into the target would have scored....a ZERO! Of course, there are rules concerning target set up that require a full and unimpeding view of the entire target face AND an fully cleared path to the target that "even the lightest bows" can make it to the target without interference, too. Glance ins off the ground? Score ZERO!
> field14 (Tom D.)


The rule in NFAA is "score it where it lies" not a zero.

From the rules:
Any arrows deflected by a foreign object or miss fired will be scored where it lies.


----------



## PFD42 (Mar 31, 2011)

When the 12 ring is full of fat shafts my little VAPs usually slip right on in there. As far as target damage, my 120gr glue in tipped 340 total gr tooth picks flying out at 295fps at 56lbs penetrate just the same as the fattys in the same target. Why push , pull , touch or cut a line when you can just hit where your aiming ? A small diameter arrow is consistently more forgiving and accurate, per my own test results of course.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

ArcheryNut2006 said:


> The rule in NFAA is "score it where it lies" not a zero.
> 
> From the rules:
> Any arrows deflected by a foreign object or miss fired will be scored where it lies.


Not entirely sure here. I forget exactly, but believe the RIC ruled skid-ins a zero. Bounce outs and complete pass throughs rule, the arrow is to be shot over.

Checked once. RIC rulings are many, a book full, and not published to my knowledge or I would have had the book.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

SonnyThomas said:


> Not entirely sure here. I forget exactly, but believe the RIC ruled skid-ins a zero. Bounce outs and complete pass throughs rule, the arrow is to be shot over.
> 
> Checked once. RIC rulings are many, a book full, and not published to my knowledge or I would have had the book.


Are you saying the NFAA rules are somewhat....oh, say, hard to read and need a re-write? :wink:


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

SonnyThomas said:


> Not entirely sure here. I forget exactly, but believe the RIC ruled skid-ins a zero. Bounce outs and complete pass throughs rule, the arrow is to be shot over.
> 
> Checked once. RIC rulings are many, a book full, and not published to my knowledge or I would have had the book.





carlosii said:


> Are you saying the NFAA rules are somewhat....oh, say, hard to read and need a re-write? :wink:


Oh! I forgot, you're from across the border, Indiana 

Rules are rules and the NFAA Rules Interpretation Committee (no different than the ASA's) rules on a questionable issue. I thought some time ago...more years than what I want to remember, the RIC ruled skid-ins were to be scored zero.

Separate; Bounce and pass through shots are in the regular NFAA rules, to be shot over.

The above is different than the ASA. ASA has a longer reading rule for pass throughs and rebounds (bounce outs) and number of issues to wade through for pass throughs and rebounds (bounce outs), some giving the shooter 5, 8, and 10 points, but no 12 score is allowed. And then there is that "connecting" line thing (imaginary line) that gives the higher score. I don't know how or if this applies to the newer size 10 and 12 rings.


----------



## huteson2us2 (Jun 22, 2005)

In NFAA, if an arrow hits a leaf, limb, tree. etc. and is witnessed, the archer has the choice of marking and shooting another arrow (If the arrow hits the spot you can count it). The object that was hit must be in the line between the archer and the target. Hitting the ground first does not count. (However should be given to children for encouragement). Witnessed pass-throughs and bouce-outs must be shot again. (Again, small kids can be discouraged from archery if they have to shoot another arrow everytime they bouce out).


----------



## huteson2us2 (Jun 22, 2005)

I shoot FITA legal arrows because I sometimes shoot FITA tournaments and do not wish to re-tune my bow everytime I shoot a different venue. That means using 60# and under and 23/64th or smaller arrows. So changing the rules would not bother me. 

So what happens when a 3D shooter uses a 27/64th arrow at 70#s and wants to shoot a FITA round in your area? Do the clubs not enforce the rules or do the 3D shooters in your area not shoot anything but 3D tournaments?


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

huteson2us2 said:


> I shoot FITA legal arrows because I sometimes shoot FITA tournaments and do not wish to re-tune my bow everytime I shoot a different venue. That means using 60# and under and 23/64th or smaller arrows. So changing the rules would not bother me.
> 
> So what happens when a 3D shooter uses a 27/64th arrow at 70#s and wants to shoot a FITA round in your area? Do the clubs not enforce the rules or do the 3D shooters in your area not shoot anything but 3D tournaments?


What's FITA? The only FITA event I know of is in Illinois is the Indoor Championship. If 35 attend it, it's about it. We have Indoors and 3Ds. Field is far a few between and Outdoor, 900 rounds, has a practice for the IAA Championship.

My bow is set so I am FITA legal, but only due to the combination that I've come to like.


----------



## EROS (Feb 15, 2004)

May be it's time for a bigger 12 ring.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

EROS said:


> May be it's time for a bigger 12 ring.


The issue is the ASA 12 ring. Limit is 5 shooters to a group. Legal arrow diameter is .422" and a .425" diameter point. If using .425" for diameter 10 arrows should fit easily, maybe 12 and then the number of line cutters....25 arrows?


----------



## EROS (Feb 15, 2004)

Just seems to me the 12 ring was a little larger in the years of the ASA target. They are smaller since the three ring targets we see today. Never been a fan of the change.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

The targets used on the National circuit today were changed last year or the year before. All ASA "range" targets have 5" ten rings and 1.5" 12 rings.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

EROS said:


> Just seems to me the 12 ring was a little larger in the years of the ASA target. They are smaller since the three ring targets we see today. Never been a fan of the change.


everything looked bigger to me when i was a kid... :wink:


----------



## elkhunter (Jun 7, 2002)

We started shooting ASA in 1999, and it seems as though all the rings shrunk over the years.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Okay, ASA has the smaller rings for the National circuit. Just a few weeks ago I shot our ASA State Championship and here's this like new Elk with the standard point zones. That 12 ring looked huge and drilled that sucker, 35 yards.....


----------



## BowHuntnKY (Dec 10, 2008)

...


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

What is accomplished by beating this arrow size dead horse again? NFAA limited arrow size to 9.3 mm only to have the Jim Easton/Bruce Cull co-dictators call a special meeting and successfully have the size changed to .422 inch.

I was on the committee that recommended the 9.3. We thoroughly considered all aspects and concluded that it would be advantageous to have a size that would be world wide. It passed the main body with flying colors. However, I was sitting in the airport waiting to fly out when they called the famous special meeting of the sheep.

It is not likely that NFAA, ASA, and IBO will be changing the arrow size limitation now.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

FS560 said:


> What is accomplished by beating this arrow size dead horse again? NFAA limited arrow size to 9.3 mm only to have the Jim Easton/Bruce Cull co-dictators call a special meeting and successfully have the size changed to .422 inch.
> 
> I was on the committee that recommended the 9.3. We thoroughly considered all aspects and concluded that it would be advantageous to have a size that would be world wide. It passed the main body with flying colors. However, I was sitting in the airport waiting to fly out when they called the famous special meeting of the sheep.
> 
> It is not likely that NFAA, ASA, and IBO will be changing the arrow size limitation now.


The old adage, "If at first you don't succeed, try and try again", comes to mind, Jim.

Of course, it will take someone of strong will and fortitude and a great gift of politicing and gab to get an agenda item concerning shaft size to pass muster...but it can be done. One thing that would be most important would be a "phasing in period" of from 3-5 years time and avoid even trying to force the item through by having any implications that if approved in February, the new shaft size limit will take effect in June of the same year.
THAT would never float.

A world-wide standard for shaft size only makes sense. Look how long it took the NFAA to finally muster up changing SENIORS to age 50! How many times over the years was it shut down...but tried and tried and tried again until it finally came to fruition.

Never say never again...so they say.

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

The 9.3 is the most sensible size limit, however the only screaming I seem to hear these days is the rubber deer shooters, all shooting at a single 12 ring.

These may be the same people that embraced the 42 caliber arrows previously as line cutters and, of course, now they cry about smashing arrows and losing score. Now they also want to get the higher score if damage to another arrow can be determined. This is the same game where they take the higher score if the arrow is not just close to the line but if it is in the same county.

What is next? Maybe shoot a 28 caliber arrow but figure the score as if it were a 42 caliber arrow and also in the same state as the 12 ring.

Even if NFAA were to change to 9.3, that does not mean that ASA and IBO would change. With the USAA/NFAA proposed merger seemingly off the table, where is the incentive for NFAA to change to 9.3 mm? The indoor shooters are happy at this time and field shooters do not use rebar for arrows.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

FS560 said:


> What is accomplished by beating this arrow size dead horse again? NFAA limited arrow size to 9.3 mm only to have the Jim Easton/Bruce Cull co-dictators call a special meeting and successfully have the size changed to .422 inch.
> 
> I was on the committee that recommended the 9.3. We thoroughly considered all aspects and concluded that it would be advantageous to have a size that would be world wide. It passed the main body with flying colors. However, I was sitting in the airport waiting to fly out when they called the famous special meeting of the sheep.
> 
> It is not likely that NFAA, ASA, and IBO will be changing the arrow size limitation now.


Just curious...and without discussing the merits of the 9.3 rule...how much notice and/or input did the general membership have in the 9.3 rule? Or, it's undoing? There's a huge problem with 15 signature items, especially when an emergency does not exist, and that problem is that the general membership is not given the opportunity to provide their input, which by definition, they should be given that opportunity before something like this issue ever goes to the floor to begin with...IMO.


----------



## Dr.Dorite (Oct 27, 2008)

Seems to me that, Since I shoot 3d knowing the rules and accept them, why would I try to have Fita or FAA change their rules, because I want to shoot Fat arrows, or that I don't want to tune my bow? Why can't we just man up and follow each organization's rules, and quit being so childish by wanting the rules to simply meet our satisfaction? Guess it could be that we just want to be heard?(JMO)


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Dr.Dorite said:


> Seems to me that, Since I shoot 3d knowing the rules and accept them, why would I try to have Fita or FAA change their rules, because I want to shoot Fat arrows, or that I don't want to tune my bow? Why can't we just man up and follow each organization's rules, and quit being so childish by wanting the rules to simply meet our satisfaction? Guess it could be that we just want to be heard?(JMO)


Well, the USofA is the only country on the planet that allows FAT SHAFTS...and trust me, there are more archers world-wide that even if we count the bow hunters we wouldn't come close to being the "most shooters in the world of archery."
Here in the USA, some organization has to start the ball rolling (again) on the FAT SHAFT issue, but right now they all are content upon not rocking the boat and basically telling the rest of the planet to go fly a kite..WE (the USA) are the bosses and we will do it OUR way.
The excuse that R&D and "too much inventory" and "the manuf. would lose too much money if there was a new 9.3 limit on shaft size" is bunk. As long as there is a phasing in period so the inventory would be sold off, and the shooters would use up what they have. The arrow sales would NOT go "down"...they'd go UP as people changed over to the world standard 9.3mm shaft diameter.
I strongly feel the 9.3 mm. can be done, but NOT unless the agenda item was written by a "popular" well received, vocal, diplomatic, and politically well placed "leader" to present it properly. I also said earlier that I see no chance whatsoever of making the rule in February to become effective on June 1 of the SAME year. That would never float.
I think the first time, the lack of a phase in period was the straw that broke the camel's back. Had the committee put in a "phase in period" instead of such short notice to the manuf, things may have "stuck". Could be wrong, but if this thing had the merit to "fly" the first time; if properly brought up, worded, and given a phase in, it stands a chance.
However, ONE of the orgs has to take the bull by the horns and just get 'r DUN. You'll never get the ASA, IBO, and NFAA to agree on the same thing at the same time.
field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Why does anything *have* to be done? Other than some overtly vocal folks on AT (their attendance and actual shooting at events unknown), why does anything *have* to change? It's not like American rules are the same for all other international events. Hell, international basketball rules have huge differences from the American game, yet I'm not hearing a suggestion to change those.

That's right...a person plays by the rules of the game that they are playing at the time...


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Rolo said:


> Why does anything *have* to be done? Other than some overtly vocal folks on AT (their attendance and actual shooting at events unknown), why does anything *have* to change? It's not like American rules are the same for all other international events. Hell, international basketball rules have huge differences from the American game, yet I'm not hearing a suggestion to change those.
> 
> That's right...a person plays by the rules of the game that they are playing at the time...


Point well taken, Rolo. However, as archery is GROWING big time here and especially internationally, some sort of STANDARDIZATION is needed. The "age" thing took years and years of hard work to get the NFAA (the LAST standout on the Senior Divisions, that is) to come around to the WORLD standard and even to join in with the "standard" of the ASA and IBO, too.
This sport isn't a multi-million dollar affair like basketball, so it is basically apples and oranges. There are STANDARDS world-wide for match competitions for almost everything else in the shooting sports...Shotguns, small and large bore rifles, pellet guns, et cetera. ARCHERY is the only one where the USA if the ONE that is out of line with the rest of the world.
Sure, not a lot of USA archers compete on the world scale events; but that is changing quickly to where more and more are competing on the world platforms.
Just like the ASA and IBO and to some extent the USA Archery fought the NFAA for years over the age thing and being a "senior" everywhere else at age 50, but having to wait til age 55 in the lonely NFAA caused problems, so does the failure of the USA to come into line with the World standard (everywhere else) of the 9.3 mm max shaft diameter.
Just sayin'.
However, you and I can agree to disagree about the issue, since it is really highly unlikely that anyone in the USA has the fortitude to commit political hari-kari of archery and tackle shaft size again after having it basically shoved...
Of course, attendance and the other stuff you mention don't mean crapola. All PAID UP NFAA MEMBERS have as much right to an opinion and input as any other PAID UP NFAA member! I'm going onto my 46th consecutive year of PAID UP Membership, how 'bout you? Are you even at 10 years yet? I likely have shot more sanctioned and/or unsanctioned NFAA events than you have, recently or not. 
Of course, FS560 is a former VEGAS WINNER and long standing member of the NFAA that has DONE SOMETHING within the NFAA and has taken the bull by the horns, taken the ball and run with it...Jim has forgotten more about this game than either of us will ever know! How many Vegas tournaments have you won? How many times have your been your State's NFAA director, run State or Local events as tournament chairperson, or tried to be a Sectional Councilman within the NFAA or any other org? THOSE are what count, not mere "attendance" at tournaments and local events, known or otherwise.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Actually, I'm not opposed to a 9.3 rule...and I don't recall there ever being a 'fight' between IBO, ASA, US Archery and the NFAA over the age thing...the orgs had their various rules, people playing that game played by those rules...the NFAA changed the Senior Division to 50 (I was in favor of that) yet managed to screw things up with invention of the Silver Senior Division and further water things down...

As to the rest of your silly questions...the answers may well surprise you...


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Rolo said:


> Actually, I'm not opposed to a 9.3 rule...and I don't recall there ever being a 'fight' between IBO, ASA, US Archery and the NFAA over the age thing...the orgs had their various rules, people playing that game played by those rules...the NFAA changed the Senior Division to 50 (I was in favor of that) yet managed to screw things up with invention of the Silver Senior Division and further water things down...
> 
> As to the rest of your silly questions...the answers may well surprise you...


Rolo, there really wasn't a "fight"...the ASA and IBO have had the age 50 for Seniors for years and years. The NFAA was the only "hold-out" concerning having Seniors at age 55. The ASA and IBO probably didn't care, since it wasn't hurting their participation one bit. However, there were quite a number of ASA/IBO seniors that just wouldn't shoot NFAA events because of that difference in age classification for Seniors.

As far as the rest of this...it will take years and years, and years of hard work to get the 9.3 mm. implemented, and frankly, I doubt if I'll see it in this lifetime, because I don't think anyone will even try to tackle it anymore. Too bad, because world-wide standardization, IMHO is needed with regard to "bullet sizing." Just sayin'.
Hopefully, the new guard that soon will be taking over will be able to make some of the other various "changes" that should have been taken care of years ago that haven't come to more than "table talking about them"...such as a complete revision of the rules of the game within the NFAA, for example, paring them down, and streamlining them for easy understanding and removal of the room for local interpretations.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

field14 said:


> Rolo, there really wasn't a "fight"...the ASA and IBO have had the age 50 for Seniors for years and years. The NFAA was the only "hold-out" concerning having Seniors at age 55. The ASA and IBO probably didn't care, since it wasn't hurting their participation one bit. However, there were quite a number of ASA/IBO seniors that just wouldn't shoot NFAA events because of that difference in age classification for Seniors.
> 
> As far as the rest of this...it will take years and years, and years of hard work to get the 9.3 mm. implemented, and frankly, I doubt if I'll see it in this lifetime, because I don't think anyone will even try to tackle it anymore. Too bad, because world-wide standardization, IMHO is needed with regard to "bullet sizing." Just sayin'.
> Hopefully, the new guard that soon will be taking over will be able to make some of the other various "changes" that should have been taken care of years ago that haven't come to more than "table talking about them"...such as a complete revision of the rules of the game within the NFAA, for example, paring them down, and streamlining them for easy understanding and removal of the room for local interpretations.


Some would say that since the NFAA was the first to establish the Senior Division, perhaps all those other orgs. should have gotten on board...

As for the rest...and yet every time there is a change, people come on AT and complain about it...oh gee, like the X counting as a +1 for the Pro division for field. Hey, wait a minute...apparently only if the change by the "new guard" is approved by the AT folks is it positive change, but how dare the "new guard" do something that is not what the ATcrowd wants them to do...


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Rolo said:


> Some would say that since the NFAA was the first to establish the Senior Division, perhaps all those other orgs. should have gotten on board...
> 
> As for the rest...and yet every time there is a change, people come on AT and complain about it...oh gee, like the X counting as a +1 for the Pro division for field. Hey, wait a minute...apparently only if the change by the "new guard" is approved by the AT folks is it positive change, but how dare the "new guard" do something that is not what the ATcrowd wants them to do...


So far, the +1 scoring for PROS for field and hunter rounds hasn't done what it was intended to do. Two years in a row, it was basically a "slaughter" for 1st, another "slaughter" for 2nd, and the rest were shooting for 3rd place. The "base scores" of 560 were a tight race indeed, but kick in the +1 for the X...and it quickly became a runaway and was over after the first round, and positively over after the 2nd one.
Wouldn't surprise me one bit to see the +1 for the PROS fall by the way-sideand for something different to be tried. Whatever that "something different" might be? I don't have a clue. Just sayin'......


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

I think we should all shoot Lightspeeds...now there's a size I like. Let the non-english speaking world try that one on fer size.

Like we used in the motorcycle bidness, we don't give a dam* how they do it in california.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

field14 said:


> There are STANDARDS world-wide for match competitions for almost everything else in the shooting sports...Shotguns, small and large bore rifles, pellet guns, et cetera.


To tired to Search, Tom, and it's been some years since I competed with firearms. Enlighten me of the firearms world standards. All my target firearms were legal anywhere I went, Trap guns, rifles, pistols and revolvers. Winchester pistol and revolver events, we had to use Winchester ammo. Browning event, we had to use Browning rifles. Other than the Winchester events, no restrictions I know of for ammunition, shot size or type of bullet. Of course, factory type events you had to use deemed factory firearms. You wanted to compete in a class with your factory firearm against those with $5,000.00 Race guns all you had to do was sign your name.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

SonnyThomas said:


> To tired to Search, Tom, and it's been some years since I competed with firearms. Enlighten me of the firearms world standards. All my target firearms were legal anywhere I went, Trap guns, rifles, pistols and revolvers. Winchester pistol and revolver events, we had to use Winchester ammo. Browning event, we had to use Browning rifles. Other than the Winchester events, no restrictions I know of for ammunition, shot size or type of bullet. Of course, factory type events you had to use deemed factory firearms. You wanted to compete in a class with your factory firearm against those with $5,000.00 Race guns all you had to do was sign your name.


It has always been my understanding that "Hot" loads were NOT legal for trap, skeet, rifle, pistol, etc; especially in international competitions. Bullet types, ok. BUT I am almost sure that renegade loads are not permissible. Other restrictions do apply as well, although I'm not "up" on what exactly those restrictions are.
I do know that in years past, the USA match teams for small bore were NOT using "American made" .22 cal rounds, but rather German made. I also read/heard somewhere that we were still getting beat on the ranges in international competition...only to find out later on that we were buying the Germans' "seconds" and not their best rounds. They were within international specs, but not quite as "perfect" as the match ammunition being used by...the Germans and other European nations...>Gamesmanship?
Same thing was happening with aluminum arrows back in the day. The USA was selling bunches of Aluminum arrows to foreign nations...but not the super "prime stock", saving those rather for our own teams. I also recall a huge "shortage" in the mid 1970's of 1814, 1816, 1914, and 1916 X-7 arrows here in the USA because the Japanese, among others were buying those sizes up in quantities of GROSS (144 dozen at a time), creating a shortage here in the USA for about a year or so.
I also found out recently from my cardiologist who competes Nationally in trap and skeet...that no longer can a shooter "bring their own" shells to any competitions. They MUST use the "standard rounds" provided AT the competition, period. Obviously, no "hot loads" or "renegade loads" EVERYONE uses the same brand, type, size of shot, and load of ammunition for each gauge of shotgun shell used in that competition, purchased at THAT competition, or they don't shoot the event. OR so I was told by my cardiologist...who should know since he is competes in these National events regularly.
field14


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

SonnyThomas said:


> To tired to Search, Tom, and it's been some years since I competed with firearms. Enlighten me of the firearms world standards. All my target firearms were legal anywhere I went, Trap guns, rifles, pistols and revolvers. Winchester pistol and revolver events, we had to use Winchester ammo. Browning event, we had to use Browning rifles. Other than the Winchester events, no restrictions I know of for ammunition, shot size or type of bullet. Of course, factory type events you had to use deemed factory firearms. You wanted to compete in a class with your factory firearm against those with $5,000.00 Race guns all you had to do was sign your name.


Sonny,
this from the ATA rules, page 50: http://www.iowadnr.gov/portals/idnr/uploads/shootingsports/atarules.pdf?amp;tabid=1355 Pretty TIGHTLY restricted, I would say.
G. GUNS AND AMMUNITION
Any shooter violating any of these Rules shall be disqualified from
competition in accordance with these Rules. Any such violator shall
be referred to the Executive Committee for possible further disciplinary
action.
A contestant cannot use:
1.
A gun with a chamber larger than 12 gauge. Guns of smaller gauges
are permissible in registered and tournament shooting, but no
competitive consideration shall be given in recognition of that fact
for handicap and classification purposes. A contestant may not use
a gun capable of chambering more than one gauge of shells at
the same time. For example, chambering 12 gauge and 20 gauge
shells in the same gun at the same time is prohibited.
2.
Loads that contain nickel or copper coated shot or tracer loads.
However, the use of lead, steel, bismuth, or other composite non-
toxic shot materials shall be allowed. Any gun club allowing shot
materials described in this Rule, other than lead, shall be required
to cover or shield all hard surfaces on trap fields which are known,
or reasonably believed, to cause pellet ricochet with material which
will prevent the shot pellets from rebounding and/or ricocheting.
3.
Any load with a velocity greater than 1290 FPS (Feet Per Second)
with maximum shot charge of 1 1/8 ounces, or 1325 FPS with a
maximum shot charge of 1 ounce, or 1350 FPS with a maximum
shot charge of 7/8 ounces or less, as measured in any individual
shotshell. These velocities are maximum and no individual
shotshell shall exceed these limits for the designated shot charge.
In addition, no load containing more than 1 1/8 ounces or any shot
larger than Number 7 1/2 can be used. Shot charges are maximum
and no charge may exceed the charge amount by more than 3%.
Steel shot in Number 7 will be acceptable as long as velocity criteria
are the same as for lead shot shells.
4. Any shell loaded with black powder.
5.
Shoot Management, ATA official(s) or any contestant may
challenge the load of any other contestant. Any challenge shall be
initiated so as to not disrupt the harmony of the shoot or interfere
with other contestants not involved with the challenge. On receipt
of a challenge management or ATA official(s) shall obtain a shell
or shells from the challenged party, and if after examination,
management or ATA official(s) find the contestant violated the ATA
rule, he/she may be disqualified. Any such initiated challenges,
determined to be abusive in nature, will be referred to the ATA
Executive Committee for disciplinary action.

The NRA small-bore rules can be found...and again, restrictions are prevalent; international rules are even tighter:
http://competitions.nra.org/documents/pdf/compete/RuleBooks/SBR/sbr-book.pdf

International Rules are tighter: Page 8: http://compete.nra.org/documents/pdf/compete/RuleBooks/IntlRifle/intl-rifle-book.pdf


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Is the Amateur Trapshooting Association an American organization? Like the NFAA?

Other than that, it looks like the equipment restrictions are pretty similar to those of the various archery orgs...limit the maximums and don't care too much about the minimums.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

In response to the OP's original question, I don't favor a rule change. I would favor re-instating the 14 ring. Doing so might free up some room in the 12 ring. Just a thought...or a brain fart, I'm not sure which.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

field14 said:


> Sonny,
> this from the ATA rules, page 50: http://www.iowadnr.gov/portals/idnr/uploads/shootingsports/atarules.pdf?amp;tabid=1355 Pretty TIGHTLY restricted, I would say.
> G. GUNS AND AMMUNITION
> Any shooter violating any of these Rules shall be disqualified from
> ...


Tom, virtually the same basic rules we had 15 years ago. Standard velocity for Trap was 1200 fps and we that experimented kept velocities for best pattern. Most who tried to get more velocity would "blow" holes in their pattern.
As for "Hot Loads," I had one the fastest legal rounds going for the .30/06. 110 gr Sierra boattail chronographing 3,525 fps. and deemed legal for factory class rifles. I tailored this specific round for best accuracy, which came at 3,477 fps. Most impressive was the bullet didn't settle down until reaching 200 yards. I think I have the score sheet, Three 3 shot groups averaging .769" C/C at 200 yards. The heaviest, fastest hand load I used in 200 meter Handgun Silhouette events was a .45 Colt round. Shot in the much stronger Ruger Bisley, the 300 gr PSP Speer bullet chronographed 1,250 fps. I won High Overall at the Chillicothe Sportsman Club back in early 2000 something - I still have the Awards and score sheets. Lucked out with 1 more point to win. 4 people tied for 2nd....It was after Brian died that I quit pistol competing. He was the one that talked into competing and Range Master at Chillicothe. 
When Trap shooting I shot reloads for club events, extra hard 8s and Winchester Super Target (paper case - 8s) for Trophy Divisions. 4 time Club Doubles Champion - For this I was given one of the Collector S&W Belt Buckles (still in the display case it came in).


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Rolo said:


> Is the Amateur Trapshooting Association an American organization? Like the NFAA?
> 
> Other than that, it looks like the equipment restrictions are pretty similar to those of the various archery orgs...limit the maximums and don't care too much about the minimums.


Yes, very much so American. In fact, once called the American Trap Shooting Association. And of all things, John Phillip Sousa (sp?), well noted composer and conductor, started the ATA around the early 1920s. The Grand is the jewel of the ATA, now located in Sparta, Illinois. Want to see something that will blow your mind, take in the Grand. Thousands shooting some 7,000,000 targets for just this event. I attended the Grand when located in Ohio. Alas, I had a broken right hand.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

SonnyThomas said:


> Yes, very much so American. In fact, once called the American Trap Shooting Association. And of all things, John Phillip Sousa (sp?), well noted composer and conductor, started the ATA around the early 1920s. The Grand is the jewel of the ATA, now located in Sparta, Illinois. Want to see something that will blow your mind, take in the Grand. Thousands shooting some 7,000,000 targets for just this event. I attended the Grand when located in Ohio. Alas, I had a broken right hand.


So...what's the relevance of comparing one American association to the other and then talking about international rules?  A better question for Field...


----------

