# Barebow & the 70m Round



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Mr. Roboto said:


> So there is this perception that the 70m round is just too much distance for Barebow shooters, and that may be one of the main reasons why there are so few barebow shooters at 70m events.
> 
> So after work this evening I raced to the range to see what I could shoot with zero practice. The last 70m round that I shot was almost 10 years ago, and the last time I shot at a target past 60 yards was at the NFAA outdoor nationals last year in Darrington. Since I know my point on is about 66 yards, I shot 3 arrows at the 60m target to confirm that, and I was pretty close to point on. Then I moved over to the 70m target. Aimed at the top of the target, and hit below it. Then the next two arrows at the top of the target shed, and that was in the blue at 4 o'clock. So the aiming point is to be just above the target shed and to the left.
> 
> ...


We will be shooting the Pacific Coast Championships on Sept.20-21. This will be a full fita round so 90m-70-50-30- I will get to see exactly what I can do at a regulation tournament . The 302 the other day was like yours, a hurry up attempt to get 6 ends in before dark. A lot depends on the wind. If we get a calm day, I am predicting 315. Let the laughing begin.:teeth:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Mr. Roboto said:


> So there is this perception that the 70m round is just too much distance for Barebow shooters, and that may be one of the main reasons why there are so few barebow shooters at 70m events.
> 
> So after work this evening I raced to the range to see what I could shoot with zero practice. The last 70m round that I shot was almost 10 years ago, and the last time I shot at a target past 60 yards was at the NFAA outdoor nationals last year in Darrington. Since I know my point on is about 66 yards, I shot 3 arrows at the 60m target to confirm that, and I was pretty close to point on. Then I moved over to the 70m target. Aimed at the top of the target, and hit below it. Then the next two arrows at the top of the target shed, and that was in the blue at 4 o'clock. So the aiming point is to be just above the target shed and to the left.
> 
> ...


We will be shooting the Pacific Coast Championships on Sept.20-21. This will be a full fita round so 90m-70-50-30- I will get to see exactly what I can do at a regulation tournament . The 302 the other day was like yours, a hurry up attempt to get 6 ends in before dark. A lot depends on the wind. If we get a calm day, I am predicting 315. Let the laughing begin.:teeth:


----------



## Mika Savola (Sep 2, 2008)

Mr. Roboto said:


> So there is this perception that the 70m round is just too much distance for Barebow shooters, and that may be one of the main reasons why there are so few barebow shooters at 70m events.


In Finland, adult barebow shoots 50 meters at target events. I believe they are quite happy with it...


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

I've practiced very briefly at 90m in preps of a tourney before I found out they canceled barebow, so I went to our state shoot instead. I didn't find 90 meters that overwhelming.


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

Perception is the key...gun hunters think anything past 25 yards is too much for any bow...die hard trad guys will think anything over 15 is too much...it's all in what you're use to...there was a time I wouldn't shoot a deer past 20 yards this past yea I killed a doe at 32-1/2 yards...it's all in what you're comfortable with and practice at.

Once you're use to shooting 90 meters then everything else seems close.


Dewayne


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

3-under with my normal field/3D anchor and I'm point-on the flag for 70m. It's not an issue for BB once you have the sight mark figured out.

-Grant


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

grantmac said:


> 3-under with my normal field/3D anchor and I'm point-on the flag for 70m. It's not an issue for BB once you have the sight mark figured out.
> 
> -Grant


Grant, you guys really need to learn the gap system we use. Everything is gapped on the tip of the arrow or off your shelf, never picking a point up on the bale. Try looking through your arrow at full draw( both eyes open) , then using the line of the front or back of the shelf as your elevation mark for 70 meters. Just a starting reference point for now.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

BB at 70 is a lot of fun once you find your sweet spot. When I get frustrated with my Oly shooting, I'll break out the BB for some fun shooting...gets me back grounded. 

The first time shooting at 70 bb was great. I was shooting some heavy arrows getting that nice rainbow effect, so much so I was aiming about 10' above the bale..lol. But they were dropping in...fun to watch an arrow from 30' up drop into the red...gold if lucky


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

I shot one the other week for the first time, scored 497 with no misses and wasn't last so pretty happy with that, I was made to feel very welcome and would be happy to try again next year.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

steve morley said:


> I shot one the other week for the first time, scored 497 with no misses and wasn't last so pretty happy with that, I was made to feel very welcome and would be happy to try again next year.


Would that be a double 70 Steve?


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

itbeso said:


> Grant, you guys really need to learn the gap system we use. Everything is gapped on the tip of the arrow or off your shelf, never picking a point up on the bale. Try looking through your arrow at full draw( both eyes open) , then using the line of the front or back of the shelf as your elevation mark for 70 meters. Just a starting reference point for now.


Ben,

I can't shoot pick-a-point worth crap, in actual use I do look through the arrow/gap at the bow when necessary. It just seemed simpler to explain that the point was on the flag, rather that introducing the concept that the yellow was between the point and the plunger.

-Grant


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

grantmac said:


> Ben,
> 
> I can't shoot pick-a-point worth crap, in actual use I do look through the arrow/gap at the bow when necessary. It just seemed simpler to explain that the point was on the flag, rather that introducing the concept that the yellow was between the point and the plunger.
> 
> -Grant


Understand. Just so you know, if you know where the tip of the arrow is pointing, you are not gapping properly. I'm sure you already know that, I'm just putting it here for anyone else who might be reading this, to be able to distinguish between gapping and pick a point.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I took the time to get both references since sometimes the light on our range makes it difficult the see "through" the arrow for me. I much prefer gapping at the bow when not stringwalking. Shooting a secondary reference for me is a sure path to peeking and all sorts of other problems.
I may try shooting split fingered for 70m and just deal with any gap that requires.

-Grant


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

itbeso said:


> Would that be a double 70 Steve?


I guess yes, it was 72 arrows total, first half 258 and second round 239. I gapped off the top of the black ring, we had a little wind/rain on second half but nothing serious. My first two ends on second half were poor, I had to dig deep to regain focus.

I had no idea what to expect so I just set a goal of not missing any arrows, I didn't want to be scratching around the ground for lost arrows and them Target archers thinking Field Archers cant hit squat


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

steve morley said:


> I guess yes, it was 72 arrows total, first half 258 and second round 239. I gapped off the top of the black ring, we had a little wind/rain on second half but nothing serious. My first two ends on second half were poor, I had to dig deep to regain focus.
> 
> I had no idea what to expect so I just set a goal of not missing any arrows, I didn't want to be scratching around the ground for lost arrows and them Target archers thinking Field Archers cant hit squat


It would be great if more barebow archers here in the states would try long range shooting. there is nothing better than watching an arrow fly in a big arc. We are trying to get barebow class reinstated in our National target Championships but they will probably dumb it down to 60 meters or less.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

itbeso said:


> It would be great if more barebow archers here in the states would try long range shooting. there is nothing better than watching an arrow fly in a big arc. We are trying to get barebow class reinstated in our National target Championships but they will probably dumb it down to 60 meters or less.


I had no option but to shoot with the sighted guys, I didn't mind one bit. I came away a better Archer for the experience, more confident and stronger at longer distances:thumbs_up


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

This is a very timely thread, and I'll be interested to see what the preferred distance for an outdoor target event would be. I have recently been asked by USArchery to head a committee that will be forwarding a proposal to the board to bring barebow back to Outdoor Nationals. We've been asked to propose a format for consideration, and a big part of that is the distance and target size the barebow archers - of all ages - would be shooting.

If you have ideas, please let me hear them either here or by PM. And remember, this would be for ALL barebow archers, not just adults and not just experts. We want to grow this discipline at Nationals so that it's there to stay.

John


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

50 meters, 122 cm target for adults, 30 meter 80 cm target for youth would be my vote.



Chris


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Thanks Chris. What are you calling youth? Junior through Bowmen?


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

No less than 60 meters for adults on the 122cm face. Would prefer 70 meters in order to compare scores with the Oly guys


----------



## rambo-yambo (Aug 12, 2008)

My vote is 60 meter, there would be the same as the longest distance for metric 900.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Thanks guys.


----------



## FlyingWatchmake (Apr 15, 2012)

I would put a single range barebow round at the same distance as the 2nd distance for a given 1440 round, 

For adults, this would be 50m on a large (122cm) face, (normally shoot a FITA 60) 

(I'm not sure what the distances are for other ages, but it's on the archery Australia website somewhere... It's just a bugger of a site to navigate)

Tom


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

the American round or Fita 900 round is a great round--for all classes-- to use for barebow...


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

I would love to shoot 30, 50, 70, 90m, but I'm sure I'm in the minority on that one. I also wouldn't mind a straight 70m. In the end, if I'm available, I will shoot anything just don't make it too easy.


----------



## Gryffin du Verd (May 20, 2013)

I have quite a bit of OR experience, but very limited barebow experience, so this is probably worth exactly what you paid for it, but it seems to me that at 70m the difference between gap and string walking would be small enough to be inconsequential (just thinking of how close my sight aperture is to the arrow at 70m). Since we want maximum participation, wouldn't that resolve some of the aiming technique controversies and maybe get more recurve barebow shooters to come together?

Just a thought...


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Me personally, I would prefer to shoot the same distances that all of the other adult/senior are shooting so that there is a direct comparison with my scores and what other people are shooting, even though they are shooting different equipment. Though, I am no where near the same caliber of the Olympic hopefuls. It is a gauge to see how one is progressing.

But on the other hand, I would prefer to see the numbers of barebow shooters increase. I would also like to see barebow become an Olympic class because Compounds are soon to become one, probably 2020. 

So then how does barebow relate to other events world wide? It is my understanding that barebow is not a division within the WA outdoor world championships. But barebow is part of the WA world field championships with a max range of 50m. Barebow is part of almost all indoor championships.

Most states run either the metric or American 900 round with a max distance of 60m/60 yd respectively. The WA Field has a max distance of 60m or 50m for barebow. The NFAA will begin its first outdoor target next month with a 900 round at a max distance of 60 yards. NFAA Field has a max distance of 80 yards, with 7 of the 140 arrows having a distance greater than 60 yards. The NFAA has also made a bad rule change recently that limits Traditional/Longbow shooters to 50 yards max for all tournaments except for sectionals and nationals. The 1440 is 90/70/50/30m but not many barebow shooters wanting to shoot the 90 or 70m but generally do not complain about 50 or 30m. But even WA and USAA are moving away from the 1440 to just the 70 m round.

World Archery has already set a precedent of barebow archers shooting 5 to 10m shorter than recurve/barebow archers.

The 122cm target seems to be pretty much the standard for many different types of target events at distances 50m and greater.

Since I use NFAA field rounds, and 900 rounds from peoples scores around to country to gage how my shooting is progressing with other barebow shooters are doing. And since the NFAA now has a 900 national target championship. It is looking like 60 may be the magic number for the max distance.

The NFAA uses yards (English distances), but USAA uses metric, then that means the distance should be 60m. 

So 60m round, 6 arrows, 6 ends, on a 122cm target. So the same number of rounds for barebow shooters as in the number of rounds the recurve/compound shooters shoot during qualification. Then rank the competitors, and then have an Olympic 60m shoot for elimination and finals. If one wants to make the elimination rounds a bit more challenging, then shoot 60m on the 92cm target.

For the youth, have them shoot 10m shorter than the same age groups for recurve/compound shooters.

I think this would be fairly close to the championship events here in the US, and fits within the trends that WA does with barebow shooters. Who knows, maybe they might like it enough that they would adopt it for the World Outdoor Championships by allowing Barebow shooters to participate in it.

How does this sound?


----------



## ttop (Aug 4, 2007)

I like 60 meters or yards 70 is acceptable, 90 gets it out of the sight window for me. It really doesn't matter, just so we can shoot.
Tom


----------



## wanemann (Oct 7, 2010)

shot in barbow class for a few year competing in mostly 3d, but did go to our target provincials and shot a 479 at 70m. for me it was the first time I used the point to aim as it was right on the gold at 70m, though I shot the class I did not consciously aim or stringwalk, so it was fun getting to aim. so much so I have switched to oly recurve. set up at the time was.. 27" gmx, 12 stran string, victory v1, g3 limbs, #46-48. 

wayne


----------



## archer_nm (Mar 29, 2004)

Roboto, NFAA did not set a 50 Yard max for Longbow/trad it states that below Sectional/national MAY shoot at youth distances! I have yet to see it done at the club level in my Section.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Yeah, but the NFAA did muddy up the waters by adding the entire line hat has the fun word, "MAY".

Up here in the NW, people are shooting both. In the past 2 years in all of the tournaments that I have shot it, all of the longbow shooters have shot the shorter distance (the youth stakes), and it is about 50-50 of the Traditional shooters shooting the Adult stakes vs the Youth stakes. I have talked quite a few of the trad shooters to come and join me in shooting the grown-up distances. The reason I have to "talk them into it" is because they don't know it is an "option". 100% of all state tournament advertisements and signup forms (in my state) clearly state, in writing, that Traditional/Longbow shooters shoot from the Youth Stakes. There is no reference to the word "MAY". So this tells all new people that they have to shoot the youth distances.

Anyways, there are enough people within the NFAA voting leadership that believes shooting beyond 60 yards is just too "hard" for Trad/Longbow shooters so they made an accommodation for them by giving them the choice to shoot the short distances with equal final ranking with those that choose to shoot the longer distances.

What gets me is why people think shooting beyond 60 yards is hard. One just has to do the unthinkable, practice it. I spent 5 hours yesterday working on my gaps for 70 yards out to 90 meters. I suck at those distances, but my "traditional bow" with my fixed anchor, and my finger touching the arrow all the time, I was still scoring points on paper at 90m.

I personally would prefer to see the USAA National Target stay at 70m. Why? So that when I look at my score, and can do an apples to apples comparison with all of the Compound shooters and Olympic style shooters, and see is I out shot any of them. If I shot a 300 at 60m, there is no way I can compare how I did with all of the Oly and Compound shooters that shot a 300. And there is no way for an Oly Shooter or a Compound shooter to look at that 300 score and say "nice shooting" without thinking in the back of their mind, yeah but that was at a shorter distance. But this is just my opinion.

But I would give that distance up, if it would spur more interest in Barebow/Traditional shooters showing up at these events. There are a lot of really good barebow/traditional shooters out there, but don't go to all of these types of events.

But I also think the biggest thing that can be done to get more Barebow/Traditional shooters to show up is if the NFAA/USAA/WA/IFAA/IBO would all get together in a room and unify the rules for a Barebow/Traditional class that they can compete in all of these events, without having to develop different skill sets and different rig setups depending on which organization that happens to be running the specific event.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Me personally, I would prefer to shoot the same distances that all of the other adult/senior are shooting


All the barebow archers from the same division would shoot the same distance.  

If you mean as the other archers, recurve shoot 70 and compound shoot 50 anyway, so a different distance for barebow would be consistent with what's already being done.

Personally, I don't like the idea of shooting 70 and being compared to full Olympic gear. It won't bode well for the barebow archers in the minds of the spectators.


----------



## archer_nm (Mar 29, 2004)

No the Directors did not think that shooting the longer distances for Trad/longbow was to hard or they would have made it for all the sectional and national shoots. The point being that if a club shoot wanted to use the shorter distances at the urging of the T/L shooters they could do just that, you need to talk to your Director and ask how they voted. Do you know how an agenda item is passed at the meeting?


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Well, that's biscuits and gravy on my face.

I don't shoot compound so I haven't followed any of the specific details or whos who in the compound world. Every tournament I have shot, the compound guys/gals shoot all the same distances as the Olympic recurve people do. Its been quite a few years since I shot a formal 70m round, and I don't recall the compound people shooting different distances. Right now I can't even remember if there was any compound people there. It was a long time ago. I was shooting the the Oly guys and getting schooled at how bad of a shot I was. Thanks for pointing that out to me John.

So why doesn't the compound people shoot 70m? Many of the shooters that I see at the tournaments I go to would be crushing the 10 ring all day long, with a rare 9 once in a while.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Thanks for the reply Bob. This is my understanding (as the way it was explained to me), different state representatives make requests for rule changes (agenda item), if the agenda item is accepted (motion approved), then there is a discussion (if any, with possible amendments) and then vote by all of the representatives (i.e. the different state reps) at the annual meeting. Rule change occurs with majority vote. In our state, on occasion all of the agenda items gets posted in our forums. Those people that care enough to bother to read the forums makes their comments to the different agenda items. Our state representative is supposed to be representing the desires of the state at the annual meeting for the voting. Is that about right? No, I have not looked up to see how our representative voted on different agenda items in the past. Our rep was just one of the 40 states that showed up last year. I just end up face palming when I see certain changes that eventually pass, such as senior being lowered to 50, the "May" clause for youth distances in Trad/Longbow, the stabilizer rule for Trad, and last years Longbow definition rule. Yeah, I know, it is easy to point fingers at the leadership at Yankton, when in reality these changes occur due to the vote of the representatives. But the leadership does have a lot of power in how they can present the importance of certain issues, such as rules/class/division unification with different organizations, and make this very public so the dues paying members can then let their representatives know their opinions so votes can be made with the knowledge of the majority of the dues paying population. For example, Archery Magazine can bring this important topic up.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Mr. Roboto said:


> But on the other hand, I would prefer to see the numbers of barebow shooters increase. I would also like to see barebow become an Olympic class because Compounds are soon to become one, probably 2020.


I will preface this by saying i have no more concrete fact it is not getting in than you have it is getting in, 

however....

Compounds are not getting into the Olympics by 2020, though that would be a nice thing. 

They will introduce the mixed team event first into the Olympic format and that may not get in by 2020. They couldnt even get it added for 2016. how long has there been mixed team events in World champs and world cup? 

Compounds might get in 2024 or 2028 if the powers to be really press for it. I dont really think the powers to be are in any hurry to add compound and they seem to not be pressing for it at any meeting. 

Chris


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

You know.. If you barebow guys are really dying to see how well your scores compare to the Olympic recurves you could always throw a sight and stab on and go compete against them. Then there's no guessing or computing or people thinking things in the back of their mind. Someone commented above about the sighted guys doing this but I've only ever seen or heard of it from barebow guys. Something like " yeah I was behind by "x number of points" but I didn't even have a sight or stabilizer.. Anyway I don't think it's important to compare scores with another class, be it olympic recurve, compound or selfbows. Compete in the class you choose. And like I said above, if you want to derive a comparison of your shooting ability to another class then just take the guess work and mental hangups out of the equation and go shoot that class. 

If I were shooting my barebow I would personally want the distance to be 50 or 60. Or possibly multiple distances like 30,50,70. Then the big boys could show their stuff on the 70 and this would give beginner and intermediate shooters an appreciation for the longer distance but the closer distances would allow everyone to get arrows on the target and the big boys would still sweep the field at these distances too.


----------



## D_Winslow (Mar 20, 2014)

chrstphr said:


> 50 meters, 122 cm target for adults, 30 meter 80 cm target for youth would be my vote.


I would agree with this. +1 for this vote.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

ryan b. said:


> You know.. If you barebow guys are really dying to see how well your scores compare to the Olympic recurves you could always throw a sight and stab on and go compete against them. Then there's no guessing or computing or people thinking things in the back of their mind. Someone commented above about the sighted guys doing this but I've only ever seen or heard of it from barebow guys. Something like " yeah I was behind by "x number of points" but I didn't even have a sight or stabilizer.. Anyway I don't think it's important to compare scores with another class, be it olympic recurve, compound or selfbows. Compete in the class you choose. And like I said above, if you want to derive a comparison of your shooting ability to another class then just take the guess work and mental hangups out of the equation and go shoot that class.
> 
> If I were shooting my barebow I would personally want the distance to be 50 or 60. Or possibly multiple distances like 30,50,70. Then the big boys could show their stuff on the 70 and this would give beginner and intermediate shooters an appreciation for the longer distance but the closer distances would allow everyone to get arrows on the target and the big boys would still sweep the field at these distances too.


Ryan, you are on point IMO.


----------



## rambo-yambo (Aug 12, 2008)

I think for the general barebow shooters 70 m is the max. I personally would like to see 4 distances 60m, 50m, 40m and 30m (a smaller target at 30m). Diehard barebow shooters can always shoot York (100, 80 & 60 yds) or Hereford (80, 60 & 50 yds) rounds if they want.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Rambo, you'd love our TOTS round.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

ryan b. said:


> You know.. If you barebow guys are really dying to see how well your scores compare to the Olympic recurves you could always throw a sight and stab on and go compete against them. Then there's no guessing or computing or people thinking things in the back of their mind. Someone commented above about the sighted guys doing this but I've only ever seen or heard of it from barebow guys. Something like " yeah I was behind by "x number of points" but I didn't even have a sight or stabilizer.. Anyway I don't think it's important to compare scores with another class, be it olympic recurve, compound or selfbows. Compete in the class you choose. And like I said above, if you want to derive a comparison of your shooting ability to another class then just take the guess work and mental hangups out of the equation and go shoot that class.
> 
> If I were shooting my barebow I would personally want the distance to be 50 or 60. Or possibly multiple distances like 30,50,70. Then the big boys could show their stuff on the 70 and this would give beginner and intermediate shooters an appreciation for the longer distance but the closer distances would allow everyone to get arrows on the target and the big boys would still sweep the field at these distances too.


I hate it when someone speaks condescendingly to me , or in this case, the barebow class of archers. I don't care if everyone gets their arrows on paper or not. If an archer chooses to compete in the barebow class, then it is incumbent on that person to achieve the skill level to score every arrow. Don't sit there jn the heartland and tell me that every arrow launched by elite archers in Olympic style have hit paper, though. Then, there is that old adage, " Be careful what you wish for", because some of the barebowers just might cross over and take some of those coveted ranking spots away from the "BIG BOYS". As if the only Big Boys are Oly Style shooters.


----------



## rambo-yambo (Aug 12, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> Rambo, you'd love our TOTS round.


What is a TOTS round?


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

rambo-yambo said:


> I think for the general barebow shooters 70 m is the max. I personally would like to see 4 distances 60m, 50m, 40m and 30m (a smaller target at 30m). Diehard barebow shooters can always shoot York (100, 80 & 60 yds) or Hereford (80, 60 & 50 yds) rounds if they want.


I, personally like the idea of four distances, however, as the theme seems to be one distance for Oly style, and this is target archery, I think the barebow group should adhere to the one distance concept as well.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Rambo, you'd love our TOTS round.


John, I realize you have a lot on your plate, but, is there any way that program could get into the hands of our State Archers Of California organization?


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

My POD is at 100yrds. so 90m would be great! :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> My POD is at 100yrds. so 90m would be great! :wink:
> 
> Ray :shade:


Funny, Ray, but I was thinking of you and your point on when this thread was being discussed.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

itbeso said:


> Funny, Ray, but I was thinking of you and your point on when this thread was being discussed.


:thumbs_up :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Wow, 100 yard POD.. I thought my 60m POD was long. At 90m my shelf is still above the target.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

rambo-yambo said:


> I think for the general barebow shooters 70 m is the max. I personally would like to see 4 distances 60m, 50m, 40m and 30m (a smaller target at 30m). Diehard barebow shooters can always shoot York (100, 80 & 60 yds) or Hereford (80, 60 & 50 yds) rounds if they want.


Barebow/Trad shooters don't need to look for the York/Hereford rounds to shoot in. They can shoot in the same 900, 70m, and 1440 rounds, and those that want to shoot the long distances, do shoot in them. Right now the rules do not prevent them from shooting. In fact, they can even shoot in the Olympic style, because the rules do not mandate the use of sights, clickers, or stabilizers.

The individual tournament has the right to limit the number of different classes that can compete for that specific tournament. For example, the National Target has decided to drop the Barebow division. They have that right, and I will back them up 100% for exercising their right to make that change, even if I don't agree with the decision. Its their right. But as a competitor, I also have the right to ask/encourage/beg them to change their minds. Ultimately its their event, and their decision.

I am just trying to argue against the perception that barebow shooters cant shoot the long distances.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Mr. Roboto said:


> Wow, 100 yard POD.. I thought my 60m POD was long. At 90m my shelf is still above the target.


Mr., You are probably not pulling 70 lbs like Ray is.:teeth:


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

itbeso said:


> I hate it when someone speaks condescendingly to me , or in this case, the barebow class of archers. I don't care if everyone gets their arrows on paper or not. If an archer chooses to compete in the barebow class, then it is incumbent on that person to achieve the skill level to score every arrow. Don't sit there jn the heartland and tell me that every arrow launched by elite archers in Olympic style have hit paper, though. Then, there is that old adage, " Be careful what you wish for", because some of the barebowers just might cross over and take some of those coveted ranking spots away from the "BIG BOYS". As if the only Big Boys are Oly Style shooters.


I'd say it is then incumbent upon you to anti up


I'm not being condescending. I think you're being defensive and feeling insulted and it's not my intention. I shoot barebow. And longbow (wood arrows split finger). I also shoot with a full target setup. 

IMO you are making divisions and theoretical comparisons where none need to exist. 
I'm just not hung up on comparing myself to the sighted crowd unless I'm shooting my sighted setup. You are. 

You seem to really want to compare yourself to the sighted recurve while focusing on the importance of the caveat that you are not shooting sights. 

I guess you can compare your scores and most likely find out that this puts you in the middle of the pack (or lower) amongst the sighted group. Does this make you a better archer than the people shooting those scores or better than people shooting superior scores? Rather than debating you could convince all of the sighted archers to take up barebow to compare scores with you.. OR you could put the whole comparative idea to rest and go shoot sights with the people who are competing. Then you won't wonder, you will KNOW exactly where you stand in terms of ranking.


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

Itbeso, if you or any other barebow archer put sights and stabs on and start stealing trophies then I think that would be about THE COOLEST THING IN THE WORLD. 
I also think it would be really great to see more high level OR guys shoot some barebow. 



The following are my thoughts and not directed at one person or one class:

If the top ten barebow (or longbow or compound etc) were to switch to Olympic recurve then a lot of them would find themselves bumped down from top 10 to top 100 or maybe lower. 

The best archers in the world are not shooting Olympic recurve because sights and stabs are easier (I agree in some ways they are). They are competing in that class because that is where the field of talent is deepest. It's where the greatest competitive challenge lies.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

ryan b. said:


> I'd say it is then incumbent upon you to anti up
> 
> 
> I'm not being condescending. I think you're being defensive and feeling insulted and it's not my intention. I shoot barebow. And longbow (wood arrows split finger). I also shoot with a full target setup.
> ...


Comparisons in archery do and always will exist. It's just human nature. I've already said that I was going to ante-up. I am not defensive nor insulted, I can hit the target no matter what the distance or style of shooting but your inference was that the majority of barebowers could not, and that is insulting to that whole class. You obviously do not understand motivation and goals. By looking at Oly scores and trying to shoot those scores barebow, I make myself a better barebow archer, which I always strive to do. What the Oly style needs is a bunch of barebow archers to cross over and inundate that style with some fun and lack of stuffiness. Years ago, when I started shooting the Duel in the Desert tournament with a compound and release, you could feel the starch coming off the white pants boys. I and Two of my fellow teammates made up a "Bottle of Whoopass" label with the whole California team names. We bought bottles of So-Be drink and put those labels on them, then passed them out to the whole team before the competition. That one act seemed to take the "airs" out of the purists. It was so popular that the Arizona Team came over asking for the extras we had made up. My point being that some archers seem to think that their style trumps all, which is ridiculous.


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

I pretty much agree with everything you're saying. 

I've been saying for a long time that I think there are TONS of great barebow and trad archers that could and would excel in OR. Talk about a deep pool of shooters (barebow/trad ranks). I also think, that at this time, most really good trad/barebow guys wouldnt dream of setting up a sighted rig because THEY are too stuffy lol. 

My suggestion about most barebow guys not being able to hit the target (not really what I was saying..) was simply that having one, critically difficult, distance wouldn't be a good idea because not enough people could shoot it, nor would they want to. You'd have a handful of guys holding red and six million arrows in the grass


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

ryan b. said:


> Itbeso, if you or any other barebow archer put sights and stabs on and start stealing trophies then I think that would be about THE COOLEST THING IN THE WORLD.
> I also think it would be really great to see more high level OR guys shoot some barebow.
> 
> 
> ...


Ryan, with all due respect, that is the most arrogant statement ever. Do you really think any of the OLy style archers are better than Jesse Broadwater, Levi Morgan, Morgan Lundin, Reo Wilde and that group? Do you really think the Freestyle field depth is any less than Oly style? I'll just end by saying that I have all the respect in the world for the accuracy achieved by the top Oly archers. I am looking forward to trying that discipline.


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

itbeso said:


> Ryan, with all due respect, that is the most arrogant statement ever. Do you really think any of the OLy style archers are better than Jesse Broadwater, Levi Morgan, Morgan Lundin, Reo Wilde and that group? Do you really think the Freestyle field depth is any less than Oly style? I'll just end by saying that I have all the respect in the world for the accuracy achieved by the top Oly archers. I am looking forward to trying that discipline.


I disagree. And I didn't say the top 3 best shooters in the world (arguably best of all time). I Said the top ten. I'm sure there are a handful that could do it but I guess they'd have to prove it just like an OR guy would have to go prove he could take the longbow world championship. ..but then I don't see any OR guys hollering about how great they would be IF they switched classes. 

I apologize that this gets under your skin. I hope you channel it and go stomp the Olympic recurve field. Really.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

ryan b. said:


> I pretty much agree with everything you're saying.
> 
> I've been saying for a long time that I think there are TONS of great barebow and trad archers that could and would excel in OR. Talk about a deep pool of shooters (barebow/trad ranks). I also think, that at this time, most really good trad/barebow guys wouldnt dream of setting up a sighted rig because THEY are too stuffy lol.
> 
> My suggestion about most barebow guys not being able to hit the target (not really what I was saying..) was simply that having one, critically difficult, distance wouldn't be a good idea because not enough people could shoot it, nor would they want to. You'd have a handful of guys holding red and six million arrows in the grass


Ryan, I think I understand what the problem might be with our differing perception of barebowers. I don't know the abilities of those barebow archers in Nebraska, but living in California, I get to shoot with many of the best barebow shooters in the country every weekend. And there is always the chance that there will be a different winner every weekend, that's the depth and ability of barebowers in California. Seeing this ability from so many archers all the time gives me more faith in barebow archers than you have. If all the top barebow archers were able to attend a major tournament at the same time, I think it would make a few people rethink that class. Just my opinion


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

itbeso said:


> Ryan, I think I understand what the problem might be with our differing perception of barebowers. I don't know the abilities of those barebow archers in Nebraska, but living in California, I get to shoot with many of the best barebow shooters in the country every weekend. And there is always the chance that there will be a different winner every weekend, that's the depth and ability of barebowers in California. Seeing this ability from so many archers all the time gives me more faith in barebow archers than you have. If all the top barebow archers were able to attend a major tournament at the same time, I think it would make a few people rethink that class. Just my opinion


That might be the case. I can't do what you've done or what you're doing so I really commend you on everything you've done and are going about doing. 

Now convince all those folks to start shooting sighted setups ( in addition to barebow) and then get the rank and file trad community to accept it and start practicing it, then.. BAM! All of the sudden we have an unbelievable depth of field in our country.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

ryan b. said:


> The best archers in the world are not shooting Olympic recurve because sights and stabs are easier (I agree in some ways they are). They are competing in that class because that is where the field of talent is deepest. It's where the greatest competitive challenge lies.


IMO...Olympic archers are NOT necessarily the 'best' archers in the world...BUT...I do believe they are the BEST archers in the world at what they do. Olympic archery is just ONE style of archery that involves known distances and the use of sights and other shooting aides.

There's more to archery than just Olympic archery.

I admire and have the utmost respect for our Olympians...or anyone who chooses to compete and do well in any type of competition. 



itbeso said:


> My point being that some archers seem to think that their style trumps all, which is ridiculous.


:thumbs_up :thumbs_up

You should share that opinion more over on the Trad site :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

ryan b. said:


> I disagree. And I didn't say the top 3 best shooters in the world (arguably best of all time). I Said the top ten. I'm sure there are a handful that could do it but I guess they'd have to prove it just like an OR guy would have to go prove he could take the longbow world championship. ..but then I don't see any OR guys hollering about how great they would be IF they switched classes.
> 
> I apologize that this gets under your skin. I hope you channel it and go stomp the Olympic recurve field. Really.


You underestimate me, it takes a lot more than these tame discussions to get under my skin. Also, please show me where any barebow shooter has "hollered' about how great they would be if they switched clases to Oly style. I know of two barebowers who are going to try Oly style. Both are excited to see if they can make the transition, but I haven't seen either post of how great they will be at it, If you are going to make inferences, please state facts.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Ryan, there is no problem comparing scores. I do that all the time. You don't try to shoot up a class? A lot of times there is no one in my class, so I try to hang with the next class up. There is never any "disrespect" going on. Its just something i do, and never say aloud that I beat anyone if I do in the next class with "inferior equipment". Most people understand that you keep it to yourself because of other factors that come into play that are class specific. Now, saying that the barebow guys might not even make the top 100 is ridiculous. You never catch any of us (barebow guys) say that about Olympic guys coming and trying out barebow. Stuff like that should never be said period. It does no good and creates animosity.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

You can take your six million arrows with ya too


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

You will never see very many Oly shooters shooting Barebow be cause its really really really really really really really Hard !!!!!:mg:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

itbeso said:


> John, I realize you have a lot on your plate, but, is there any way that program could get into the hands of our State Archers Of California organization?


It would be an honor if it did.

TOTS has literally exploded here in Texas in just it's 2nd year. Clubs don't have the space for all the demand, and events are filling up a month or even 2 months in advance. The Sept 13th TOTS event being shot at Buffalo Field Archers club in Houston was full way back in July. 

I can't wait to calculate the number of arrows shot in our TOTS series this year. Last year it was well over 10,000 scored arrows. I suspect this year it will surpass 20,000.

Ben, send your representatives my way, and I'll do all I can to help them get it rolling. It's one heck of a fun and VERY competitive round to shoot. And the best thing about it is that it's a nice blend between the old four-distance FITA round and the new single distance OR round since every archer gets to shoot 36 arrows at their OR distance and target size. Plus the closest target is shot on a 60cm face (vertical 3-spot 60 for compounders) which keeps it interesting up the very last arrow.

Rambo, you can find more info about the TOTS here: http://www.texasarchery.org/Registrations/14/TOTS/TOTSInfo.htm


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> What the Oly style needs is a bunch of barebow archers to cross over and inundate that style with some fun and lack of stuffiness.


Well, I did lead the way over 10 years ago now. What's taking you boys so long?


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

You guys need to go back and re read your own posts. You keep saying that the barebow guys are going to take rankings from the OLympic recurvers and that everybody better watch out if you decide to do this. You guys said that! I said it probably won't happen that's all. You guys all started saying if you switched to OR you would do this. That IS the exact inverse of what I'm saying. I said most , not all, barebow guys wouldn't rank high at all AFTER you guys said you'd be swiping rankings from the OLYMPIC recurve class. You literally said it first. Why can you guys talk about the what ifs but if I talk about the what ifs then it's being condescending or arrogant or rude?

And my 6 million arrows comment was in reference to the AVERAGE barebow shooter competing at 70m, not the guys at the top of their game. And it WOULD happen. It was absolutely not in reference to the top tier guys who are talking about switching over.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Do you really think the Freestyle field depth is any less than Oly style?


In the U.S., the deepest talent lies in the compound discipline. That is why our compounders still dominate worldwide. 

Worldwide, the deepest talent is in the Olympic discipline, which is why our boys and girls - as good as they are - continue to struggle. 

Clearly the deepest talent in barebow lies in Europe, based on the historic performance of European barebow archers at world field. I want some of whatever those Swedish boys are drinking!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Wow, 100 yard POD.. I thought my 60m POD was long. At 90m my shelf is still above the target.


If I anchor on my right nipple, my POD is 287 meters.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

ryan b. said:


> You guys need to go back and re read your own posts. You keep saying that the barebow guys are going to take rankings from the OLympic recurvers and that everybody better watch out if you decide to do this. You guys said that! I said it probably won't happen that's all. You guys all started saying if you switched to OR you would do this. That IS the exact inverse of what I'm saying. I said most , not all, barebow guys wouldn't rank high at all AFTER you guys said you'd be swiping rankings from the OLYMPIC recurve class. You literally said it first. Why can you guys talk about the what ifs but if I talk about the what ifs then it's being condescending or arrogant or rude?
> 
> And my 6 million arrows comment was in reference to the AVERAGE barebow shooter competing at 70m, not the guys at the top of their game. And it WOULD happen. It was absolutely not in reference to the top tier guys who are talking about switching over.


Gentlemen, this whizzing contest has gone on for quite some time now over three different threads. 

Please.


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

Yeah I'm done. It's not coming out the right way anyhow.

Good luck to everyone.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

ryan b. said:


> You guys need to go back and re read your own posts. You keep saying that the barebow guys are going to take rankings from the OLympic recurvers and that everybody better watch out if you decide to do this. You guys said that! I said it probably won't happen that's all. You guys all started saying if you switched to OR you would do this. That IS the exact inverse of what I'm saying. I said most , not all, barebow guys wouldn't rank high at all AFTER you guys said you'd be swiping rankings from the OLYMPIC recurve class. You literally said it first. Why can you guys talk about the what ifs but if I talk about the what ifs then it's being condescending or arrogant or rude?
> 
> And my 6 million arrows comment was in reference to the AVERAGE barebow shooter competing at 70m, not the guys at the top of their game. And it WOULD happen. It was absolutely not in reference to the top tier guys who are talking about switching over.


Lol. I hope no one reads your words as fact.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

We are all good. What's next?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

What's next is you guys helping me make barebow a true national championship event at Outdoor Nationals next summer. That's what.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> What's next is you guys helping me make barebow a true national championship event at Outdoor Nationals next summer. That's what.


John, Just head us in the right direction.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ben, it will be about 1.5 miles SW of downtown Decatur, AL on the 4th of July weekend next year. 

I've got to get a proposal into the board that they will go for. Not just adults, but for all age divisions down to the 10 year old bowmen who want to shoot barebow at Nationals.

Only reservation I have is practicing barebow that close to the 1st leg of the 2016 Oly. trials. There will only be about 8 weeks to re-rig after Nationals. It's doable, but not optimal.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

John, you are really tempting me at going.

Right now, these are the trips that are on my bucket list for next year: Vegas, NFAA Outdoors, USAA Field. If the USAA brings back the Barebow to the target, I will add it to my bucket list. The problem is that I can't afford to go to all of them or get all the time off from work, and at best it would be 2 of them. Vegas is leading right now because airfair is dirt cheap, and one of the Trad shooters I shoot with is thinking on going and we can share hotel room costs. If the USAA field is in Spokane, I will definitely be there if it is a weekend event and then it will be 3 trips next year, since it is only a 6 hour drive to get there, and I know some nice inexpensive places to stay in town. So the question comes down to how many Trad shooters are heading to the NFAA outdoors, or how many Barebow shooters goes to the USAA target.


----------



## rambo-yambo (Aug 12, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> Ben, it will be about 1.5 miles SW of downtown Decatur, AL on the 4th of July weekend next year.
> 
> I've got to get a proposal into the board that they will go for. Not just adults, but for all age divisions down to the 10 year old bowmen who want to shoot barebow at Nationals.
> 
> Only reservation I have is practicing barebow that close to the 1st leg of the 2016 Oly. trials. There will only be about 8 weeks to re-rig after Nationals. It's doable, but not optimal.


Too bad I won't be able to make it next year because it is going to be back-to-back with the National Senior Games in Minneapolis. I will definitely going to make it the year after. 

For those who are interested, come up to St. Louis for the Hoyt Day next year; we had a good barebow turn out thanks to Limbwalker. It is going to get bigger if Limbwalker agrees to show up again next year.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Originally Posted by ryan b. 

... If the top ten barebow (or longbow or compound etc) were to switch to Olympic recurve then a lot of them would find themselves bumped down from top 10 to top 100 or maybe lower."



itbeso said:


> Ryan, with all due respect, that is the most arrogant statement ever. Do you really think any of the OLy style archers are better than Jesse Broadwater, Levi Morgan, Morgan Lundin, Reo Wilde and that group? Do you really think the Freestyle field depth is any less than Oly style? I'll just end by saying that I have all the respect in the world for the accuracy achieved by the top Oly archers. I am looking forward to trying that discipline.


The only actual test case I know of in recent years is Braden Gellenthien (probably in the top 3 in the world at that time in compound) competing in the US Olympic Recurve Trials in Sept 2011 and finishing 51st.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Top shooters in any discipline could be top shooters in any other discipline. I'm absolutely sure of that and nobody will convince me otherwise. The skills, discipline and work ethic it takes to reach the top in one is the same as another.

Therefore, the argument that one is "harder" than another is a pure myth, created by those with self-image issues that really need to be addressed if they are to reach their full potential as a competitive archer.

That's my .02 - disagree if you wish.

Which discipline has deeper talent is a related topic, as the shallow competitive field in some areas will lead a few folks to believe they are better than they actually are, while deeper fields will lead others to believe they are "worse" than they actually are. A good example of this is a fellow like Rod Menzer - compound archer who once trained for Olympic recurve. Rod is largely a recreational compound shooter but still made the World Indoor team several years ago and came home with a World Championship Medal, showing that the compound field is so deep in the U.S. that an archer most folks are not familiar with can go overseas and win. Bridger Deaton just did the same at the world cup. Likewise, archers in other disciplines have success locally or nationally, then go to "the big show" and get buried. It happens. 

It helps to keep it all in perspective and remember this is just a game. If your archery results define you, you don't have enough important things going on in your life IMO. 

John


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> Top shooters in any discipline could be top shooters in any other discipline. I'm absolutely sure of that and nobody will convince me otherwise. The skills, discipline and work ethic it takes to reach the top in one is the same as another.
> 
> Therefore, the argument that one is "harder" than another is a pure myth, created by those with self-image issues that really need to be addressed if they are to reach their full potential as a competitive archer.
> 
> ...


Agree completely. And Brady is a perfect example - the world's best junior compound archer before switching to recurve.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

lksseven said:


> Agree completely. And Brady is a perfect example - the world's best junior compound archer before switching to recurve.


And he'd kick butt if he ever chose to shoot barebow, I'm sure.


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

That's saying it a lot better than I did. My point was just someone isn't going to be able to simply "throw some sights on" or go "grab a compound" etc. and start dominating. The same definitely works the other way towards barebow. I've had sighted shooters not even be able to fathom how it's possible to group wooden arrows out of a longbow at 40yds. ..Like it was magic or something

I know when I set up a sight for the first time I was thinking "pshhh, this is going to be SO easy compared to shooting a well programmed gap(instinctive)". I shot MEASURABLY worse for at least a month.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ryan, back when I was still "trad" and frequenting the leatherwall forums, we'd often talk about adding a sight to a recurve/longbow to check one's form. Most guys that tried it were shocked at how poorly they did, expecting like you said for it to be SO easy with a sight. LOL.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

totally agree !!!


limbwalker said:


> Top shooters in any discipline could be top shooters in any other discipline. I'm absolutely sure of that and nobody will convince me otherwise. The skills, discipline and work ethic it takes to reach the top in one is the same as another.
> 
> Therefore, the argument that one is "harder" than another is a pure myth, created by those with self-image issues that really need to be addressed if they are to reach their full potential as a competitive archer.
> 
> ...


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Top shooters in any discipline could be top shooters in any other discipline.


Key words - 'could be'

I agree that there's a certain level of Abilities (skill), Personality (discipline and work ethic) it takes to reach the top...BUT.... being great in one discipline is NO guarantee that an athlete will be great in another.

Hitting aerial targets or other moving targets is just another type of archery discipline. It also requires a different kind of hand and eye coordination than what is required with sight shooting stationary targets.

I have no doubt a good sight shooter could become good at hitting moving targets...BUT it's no guarantee that they are going to necessarily become a top shooter. If that were true...it could easily be said of the opposite regarding top shooters in moving targets becoming top shooters in Olympic style archery.

Neither is necessarily harder to become a top shooter. They're just different...requiring slightly different skill sets even though they also share some similarities...which is why there also isn't any guarantee of a top barebow shooter becoming a top Olympic shooter or vice versa.

I do believe a top shooter has a better chance at becoming a top shooter in another discipline...but it's still no guarantee. 

I absolutely love competing and comparing myself with other archers...and I will acknowledge when something is in fact harder or easier to do. In many cases there are easier and harder ways of doing things and there's absolutely nothing wrong with acknowledging that.

Ray :shade:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Key words - 'could be'
> 
> I agree that there's a certain level of Abilities (skill), Personality (discipline and work ethic) it takes to reach the top...BUT.... being great in one discipline is NO guarantee that an athlete will be great in another.
> 
> ...


Ray, one of the things that has always bugged me about archers is this: Archery is such a small time sport that there isn't a whole lot of recognition attached to it from the rest of the world. Consequently, archers fight and claw for every little bit they can accumulate, oft times at the expense of other archers. In my opinion, this is why the different classes so often tear other classes down in order to make their discipline look better. There is no better example of this than the Nfaa Pro class, circa 1978. We had a pro class that encompassed over 400 archers and included the various styles of shooting. At a pro meeting in that time period, the freestylers complained that all the other styles diluted the pro division and asked that they be eliminated , which they were. Today, I would be surprised if there were 60 pros in the Pro division in 2014. In 1978, I won $2500 cash and an all expense paid hunting trip to British Columbia for winning the Pro Bowhunter class. In 2014, 36 years later, I would bet that the top freestyle Pro did not win that much money from the Nfaa for winning the outdoor nationals. My point being that instead of being united and standing together as one group to pressure for bigger purses and better tournaments, archers are so fragmented and singular in thought that they will never improve their lot. I also believe the archery manufacturers are good with that because they don' have to pay out the big bucks to a lot of top archers to shoot their equipment.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

itbeso said:


> Consequently, archers fight and claw for every little bit they can accumulate, oft times at the expense of other archers. In my opinion, this is why the different classes so often tear other classes down in order to make their discipline look better.


That has ALWAYS been one of my biggest pet peeves in the archery community and something I have tried to help correct and bring awareness to.

Ego seems to ALWAYS get in the way, which causes to much strife among us when there really is no need for it. 

ANY 'elitist' attitude towards a discipline, form issue or aiming technique is ridiculous, IMO...no matter where or who it's coming from. 

Something else to contemplate...if someone's primary purpose to compete is for recognition...they really should look else where and maybe re-examine why they 'need' recognition in the first place. 

My attitude towards competition isn't for recognition...even though it feels good when you get it...but I primarily do it for enjoyment, preparing for bowhunting season and self improvement. I can rejoice in getting my butt kicked as well as winning...but that's just me and I don't expect everyone to feel the same way.

Ray :shade:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> That has ALWAYS been one of my biggest pet peeves in the archery community and something I have tried to help correct and bring awareness to.
> 
> Ego seems to ALWAYS get in the way, which causes to much strife among us when there really is no need for it.
> 
> ...


Yes, you are a little different than most.:teeth: But, once again, the internet apparently does not convey the meaning meant. Most of us, especially the Oly style hopefuls could benefit from financial help and the only way, usually, to get that help is to be recognized as a potential elite shooter or as an existing elite archer. Sponsor money and equipment goes a long way toward helping those people be able to afford to keep practicing and attending tournaments.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

itbeso said:


> Most of us, especially the Oly style hopefuls could benefit from financial help and the only way, usually, to get that help is to be recognized as a potential elite shooter or as an existing elite archer. Sponsor money and equipment goes a long way toward helping those people be able to afford to keep practicing and attending tournaments.


Now...that I can understand and totally support!!!! :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

In the circumstance you described...'recognition' isn't the primary Goal....but just a means to an end that helps an archer achieve a specific Goal.

Ray :shade:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

itbeso said:


> Ray, one of the things that has always bugged me about archers is this: Archery is such a small time sport that there isn't a whole lot of recognition attached to it from the rest of the world. Consequently, archers fight and claw for every little bit they can accumulate, oft times at the expense of other archers. In my opinion, this is why the different classes so often tear other classes down in order to make their discipline look better. There is no better example of this than the Nfaa Pro class, circa 1978. We had a pro class that encompassed over 400 archers and included the various styles of shooting. At a pro meeting in that time period, the freestylers complained that all the other styles diluted the pro division and asked that they be eliminated , which they were. Today, I would be surprised if there were 60 pros in the Pro division in 2014. In 1978, I won $2500 cash and an all expense paid hunting trip to British Columbia for winning the Pro Bowhunter class. In 2014, 36 years later, I would bet that the top freestyle Pro did not win that much money from the Nfaa for winning the outdoor nationals. My point being that instead of being united and standing together as one group to pressure for bigger purses and better tournaments, archers are so fragmented and singular in thought that they will never improve their lot. I also believe the archery manufacturers are good with that because they don' have to pay out the big bucks to a lot of top archers to shoot their equipment.


Well said Ben.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

I once shared a house with Jerry Brabec, and he was telling me a story about the "Wallmart Test" that he offered to a fellow archer that thought he was going the be very popular after winning a big tournament. He said he would give that archer $100 if he could pass the "Walmart Test"

So I asked Jerry, what is the "Walmart Test" and he said, go into any Walmart, and see if anyone there recognizes you. If one person, that you don't already know, comes up to you because they recognized you, then you passed the "Walmart Test"

I wonder how many archers have passed the "Walmart Test"


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Maybe Katniss has. Otherwise, I doubt any. LOL.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

LOL...I've had that happen to me...but I never made a bet with anyone...nor would I :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Gryffin du Verd (May 20, 2013)

A quick question for our European members: I know (or have heard) that barebow is much more popular there than it currently is in the U.S. what distances do you typically shoot?

Thanks, 
K


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Gryffin du Verd said:


> A quick question for our European members: I know (or have heard) that barebow is much more popular there than it currently is in the U.S. what distances do you typically shoot?
> 
> Thanks,
> K


I'm also curious about the answer to this - for target archery. We already know about field.


----------



## Lipi (Sep 9, 2014)

Well, in Czech Republic, barebow isn't exactly popular, though the numbers of barebow shooters are slowly (but constantly) growing. Usually we shoot 72 arrows: 36 from 50m, 36 from 30m - both on 80cm target. (Ladies shoot 40 and 30m.) You can also shoot 1440 FITA from 70m, 60m (both 122 cm targets), 50m and 30m (both 80 cm targets), but almost no one shoots that. Behind our eastern borders, in Slovakia, barebow shooters only shoot 72 arrows from 40 m on 122 cm target. I don't know about the rest. Since WA doesn't recognise barebows in target archery, it's always just a national level competition, and it differs one country from another.
As for popularity of barebow in Europe - Italy and Sweden both have a lot of great barebow archers and I believe this discipline is pretty popular there, but I don't suppose you'll meet that many barebow archers anywhere else after they finish their beginer's course and head off to purchase their own gear. Too modern stuff for the trad guys and too much inconsistency for olympic recurve or compound shooters.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Too modern stuff for the trad guys and too much inconsistency for olympic recurve or compound shooters.


That's something we struggle with. The image of barebow. But usually that's because nobody has ever seen it done well. If we can just get some good barebow archers on the line and show folks what's possible, that alone will attract some to the discipline. The idea that a good barebow shooter can hold gold at 60M... That's going to open some eyes, I think.

John


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

You know John, the last couple of years every new kid I have started, I have done so barebow. It is so much easier to just say "put your finger in the corner of your mouth and put the point of the arrow where you want the arrow to go." Then we can work on bow arm, draw elbow, etc. ("just like Merida" helps too."). Like for these two 5 year olds.


----------



## wfocharlie (Feb 16, 2013)

Great photo.


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

Anyone can be taught.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

TomB said:


> Anyone can be taught.
> View attachment 2040105


"I did not have release with that bow" ...


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

ha, ha.

Actually, I'm looking at that and thinking... A Lefty Flag Axis Riser!!! Imagine what that sucker is worth!

And why are all our Democrat presidents lefties? Hmm...


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> ha, ha.
> 
> Actually, I'm looking at that and thinking... A Lefty Flag Axis Riser!!! Imagine what that sucker is worth!
> 
> And why are all our Democrat presidents lefties? Hmm...


And some are left handed too.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

lol


----------



## rambo-yambo (Aug 12, 2008)

Where is the arrow?


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

If WA would recognize Barebow as a class for target archery instead of relegating them to just indoor or field, we would see and explosion of all of these outstanding barebow shooters coming out of the woodworks. There are quite a few barebow/trad shooters nailing 800+ on the 900 round. In order to do that one has to be pounding the gold a whole bunch of times.

I am not saying that WA has to create a barebow world championship next year. But just adding that into the rules opens the doors for clubs and national events around the world to add a barebow class. Then as more and more archers come out for their respective national championships, then WA will realize that there is a large number of really good barebow shooters.

If you look at the last months field championship scores in the qualification round, the #32 rank shot 598-recurve, 591-barebow. We are talking only 7 point difference between recurve and barebow at the #32 rank position, and a 43 point spread between the number 1 ranked shooters. Okay, field and target archery is different, and the depth of highly skilled recurve shooters for target archery is huge, but this does give an indicator that there are a lot of good barebow shooters on the world scale.

Open the WA target to barebow shooters, there will be a lot of highly skilled barebow shooters not feeling that their only future is going over to recurve/compound, and that they can have a competitive career with the barebow at the international level.

Chicken and the egg problem....


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

So for a side twist:

Compound shoots 50m at the 80cm target
Recurve shoots 70m at the 122cm target

Since the distance and target diameter are scaled proportionally, one asks, why the difference in the distances? Its obvious, right? Slower velocity arrows get the longer distance.

So with that analogy, and to keep the scaling trend perfect
Barebow shooters shoot 90m at the new 156cm target

Makes sense doesn't it? I will do it.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Two things:

WA doesn't recognize barebow for indoor, just 3d and field. USAA are the ones who permit a barebow class indoors.

Those barebow scores were shot 5-10m closer than the Oly ones. Not precisely apples to apples.

Grant


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

What are the big world indoor events for barebow shooters outside of Vegas, NFAA Indoor, and USAA Indoor?

Now we need to hope that USAA doesn't drop barebow for indoor.

Yeah, I know, barebow doesn't shoot the same distances that Oly recurve does. But isn't that part of this whole debate? In some tournaments compound shooters shoot the same distances as the Oly people do, in others, they shoot shorter distances. In some tournaments, barebow shooters shoot the same distances as Oly shooters do, and others, they shoot shorter. Some barebow shooters are happy with shooting the long distances as the Oly shooters do. Whereas other's prefer to shoot shorter ones.

One of the arguments against barebow shooters is that they spray their arrows all over the place, and that people (spectators) want to see the shooters hit gold all of the time. That is why I brought in the recent field event as an example. For the prescribed set of rules of the world championships, the top barebow shooters were nailing the gold just about the same as the top recurve shooters were.

Some of the issues with keeping barebow within USAA may be driven by WA. WA may be pressing the USAA behind the scenes to get in line with WA rules, and since attendance at the USAA outdoor target has been low lately, maybe this was USAA's test to see what kind of response from the archery community when they announced dropping the barebow from the Outdoor Nationals. If there is no outcry from the overall archery community, then what is the next logical step? drop them from the Indoor's. Naturally the barebow shooters have not liked being dropped from the Outdoors. But if the Olympic Recurve and Compound archers ignore these changes out of principle of preserving archery as a whole, then they may be helping in the demise of the barebow class out be quietness. Then when the USAA drops it, at what point does WA begin to drop barebow from Field and 3D?


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Most nations who care about Barebow offer it as class for indoor events.

However besides Field and 3D there are ZERO international events which offer a WA Barebow specific classification. Personally I don't see that changing. Perhaps if the Vegas shoot eventually adopts a Recurve BB (or drops compounds from BB once the last generation of those shooters stops competing more likely) then we will see a truely international event.

-Grant


----------



## trevorpowdrell (May 8, 2012)

USA Archery did not drop barebow and traditional divisions from all National competitions.
Barebow got a reprieve for 2015 Indoor Nationals and got a committee to make a recommendation for 2015 Outdoor Nationals.

An Except from the following press release http://www.teamusa.org/USA-Archery/...aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582

The Barebow division was also discussed. During the November Board meeting, it was determined that USA Archery would follow World Archery guidelines related to what classes were offered at National events. This eliminated the traditional categories and the Barebow division at all events except the U.S. National Field Championships. This change has been fully implemented for the upcoming U.S. National Target Championships.

However, due to a strong increase in Barebow participation during the U.S. National Indoor Championships, the elimination of this division within that event has been put under review, and barebow will be a part of the U.S. National Indoor Championships for 2015. In the meantime, USA Archery staff will be working on a more comprehensive policy related to when and how divisions are added and removed from competitions.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Unfortunately, these types of decisions have trickle down effects to other events. Local organizers always has a tough time organizing and running events, and there are always a lot of people complaining about one thing or another. Eventually it just gets easier to just point their fingers at the nationals rules, and just follow them. That means that what the Nationals do, so does the states.

Up here in Washington state, when the NFAA decided to give shooters the option of shooting the adult stakes or the youth stakes, all state events immediately changed all their literature/advertisements/signup forms to make it absolutely clear that Traditional/Longbow shooters shoot the Youth distance. Once the camel gets his nose under the tent flap, you can't push the camel back out.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Just shoot as BB in NFAA and you don't have to worry about being stuck on the kiddie stakes.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Unfortunately, these types of decisions have trickle down effects to other events. Local organizers always has a tough time organizing and running events, and there are always a lot of people complaining about one thing or another. Eventually it just gets easier to just point their fingers at the nationals rules, and just follow them. That means that what the Nationals do, so does the states.


Apparently they do things in WA a little differently than we do down here in Texas. 'Round here, we lead, not follow. 

John


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Or I could shoot NFAA BowHunter. That doesn't specifically say it is a compound only class, though it is almost identical to BB in the rule set 

This past summer the State Games of Washington had a 900 round using WA style divisions. Because I was the only barebow shooter, I was put in the same lane as three other Oly shooters. Of the 4, I had the higher score. But I can see it now. Next year, the only way I will get to shoot it is if I sign up under the recurve division, because USAA has officially canned the barebow guys and gals. 

Fortunately the Olympic Recurve division doesn't prevent barebows from shooting in the same class. Looking at last year's National Target, I know I can shoot better than 894 that was the #64 shooter score. Who knows, maybe there is still a chance for this barebow shooter to weasel his way into a tournament and shoot a score good enough that I can be paired up with Brady Ellison in an elimination round. Maybe we can even do a rock-scissors-paper to see if we switch bows for that round.

But I would just prefer that us barebow shooters get enough respect that we are allowed to shoot at these big events.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Well, according to my born and bred Texan wife, Texas is a country all of its own that doesn't need to follow anyone.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Mr. Roboto said:


> Well, according to my born and bred Texan wife, Texas is a country all of its own that doesn't need to follow anyone.


You won't find any disagreement with that in these parts.

What I mean by that however is that we didn't wait for USArchery to come up with barebow awards for JOAD, barebow achievement scores, a barebow friendly outdoor round, or allowing NASP/Genesis bows to compete in the barebow division. We were doing all those things here before USArchery was. 

In fact, we had head to head "OR" matchplay for barebow archers at our state outdoor championships back in June.

John


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Mr. Roboto said:


> Or I could shoot NFAA BowHunter. That doesn't specifically say it is a compound only class, though it is almost identical to BB in the rule set
> 
> This past summer the State Games of Washington had a 900 round using WA style divisions. Because I was the only barebow shooter, I was put in the same lane as three other Oly shooters. Of the 4, I had the higher score. But I can see it now. Next year, the only way I will get to shoot it is if I sign up under the recurve division, because USAA has officially canned the barebow guys and gals.
> 
> ...


Mr. Roboto. I shoot barebow but I am also a realist. The truth is that there are a lot of recurve barebow archers out there in archeryland but very few of them are accomplished shooters and even fewer of that class are inclined to attend major tournaments. That is a regretful fact that can't be overlooked. Ever since the Nfaa brought in the trad class because" give us a class and we will attend" was thrown at them, the recurve classes have been all but non existent at the Outdoor Field shoots. My personal opinion is that this class is very hard to excel in and most archers in the barebow recurve discipline are not inclined to practice enough to shoot the scores needed to be competitive, at least on a major level. The problem is that you have 5 or 6 guys shooting extremely well and everyone else is scared to come out and get beat, pay their dues if you will. Do any of these archers think that the top archers didn't "pay their dues" at some point and time. It drives me crazy sometimes at the amount of time I have spent trying to motivate others in the barebow classes. At times, It's like beating your head against a wall. Every class needs to have personalities for that class to be recognized and get press. The Jesse Broadwaters, Brady Ellisons, David Hughes, Denny Clines, Frank Gandys , Butch Johnsons, Terry Ragsdales, etc. have all brought recognition to their styles of shooting over the years. The barebow recurve class needs to get their act together and get some turnout numbers for future tournaments or they soon will not have any quality tournaments to attend.


----------



## pencarrow (Oct 3, 2003)

itbeso said:


> Mr. Roboto. I shoot barebow but I am also a realist. The truth is that there are a lot of recurve barebow archers out there in archeryland but very few of them are accomplished shooters and even fewer of that class are inclined to attend major tournaments. That is a regretful fact that can't be overlooked. Ever since the Nfaa brought in the trad class because" give us a class and we will attend" was thrown at them, the recurve classes have been all but non existent at the Outdoor Field shoots. My personal opinion is that this class is very hard to excel in and most archers in the barebow recurve discipline are not inclined to practice enough to shoot the scores needed to be competitive, at least on a major level. The problem is that you have 5 or 6 guys shooting extremely well and everyone else is scared to come out and get beat, pay their dues if you will. Do any of these archers think that the top archers didn't "pay their dues" at some point and time. It drives me crazy sometimes at the amount of time I have spent trying to motivate others in the barebow classes. At times, It's like beating your head against a wall. Every class needs to have personalities for that class to be recognized and get press. The Jesse Broadwaters, Brady Ellisons, David Hughes, Denny Clines, Frank Gandys , Butch Johnsons, Terry Ragsdales, etc. have all brought recognition to their styles of shooting over the years. The barebow recurve class needs to get their act together and get some turnout numbers for future tournaments or they soon will not have any quality tournaments to attend.


++++
Fritz


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Mr. Roboto said:


> Or I could shoot NFAA BowHunter. That doesn't specifically say it is a compound only class, though it is almost identical to BB in the rule set
> 
> This past summer the State Games of Washington had a 900 round using WA style divisions. Because I was the only barebow shooter, I was put in the same lane as three other Oly shooters. Of the 4, I had the higher score. But I can see it now. Next year, the only way I will get to shoot it is if I sign up under the recurve division, because USAA has officially canned the barebow guys and gals.
> 
> ...


Mr. Roboto, how many arrows, on average, do you shoot a month? What about most of the barebow archers you know in your area?


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

itbeso said:


> Mr. Roboto. I shoot barebow but I am also a realist. The truth is that there are a lot of recurve barebow archers out there in archeryland but very few of them are accomplished shooters and even fewer of that class are inclined to attend major tournaments. That is a regretful fact that can't be overlooked. Ever since the Nfaa brought in the trad class because" give us a class and we will attend" was thrown at them, the recurve classes have been all but non existent at the Outdoor Field shoots. My personal opinion is that this class is very hard to excel in and most archers in the barebow recurve discipline are not inclined to practice enough to shoot the scores needed to be competitive, at least on a major level. The problem is that you have 5 or 6 guys shooting extremely well and everyone else is scared to come out and get beat, pay their dues if you will. Do any of these archers think that the top archers didn't "pay their dues" at some point and time. It drives me crazy sometimes at the amount of time I have spent trying to motivate others in the barebow classes. At times, It's like beating your head against a wall. Every class needs to have personalities for that class to be recognized and get press. The Jesse Broadwaters, Brady Ellisons, David Hughes, Denny Clines, Frank Gandys , Butch Johnsons, Terry Ragsdales, etc. have all brought recognition to their styles of shooting over the years. The barebow recurve class needs to get their act together and get some turnout numbers for future tournaments or they soon will not have any quality tournaments to attend.


itbeso,

I'm sure you agree that _*every*_ class is hard to excel in ... tiddlywinks is hard to excel in, if there's a competition for it.

Not very many barebow shooters inclined to practice enough to be competitive on a significant level ... that's certainly true in my neck of the woods. Most of the barebow shooters I observe are shooting ... wait for it ... dozens of arrows a month. Well, that won't get it done, will it? 

It's my opinion that the demographic for each target variation of the sport (barebow, compound, olympic) is pretty much self selecting (with some obvious exceptions - you being one of them). 

Compound - Obviously there is a small % of compound target shooters who are very motivated and disciplined about pursuing the perfection of their craft, and they are very very formidable shooters. *I'm not now talking about that 10%.* I'm talking about the other 90% -the ones who want to consistently hit the yellow a half hour after buying their bow so they can strut around like a blue jay who imagines itself to be a bald eagle, or like Jeff Goldblum doing that ridiculous cocky walk in the last scene of Independence Day. I'll bet this 90% of compound shooters don't shoot 100 arrows a year - their bow sits in the closet most of the year, unloved and unused.

Barebow - Obviously there is a % of barebow shooters who are committed and dedicated competitors, driven to be as good as they can be and willing to work hard to get there. *I'm not now talking about those shooters* - I'm talking about the other 90%. They are not looking for a 'discipline' to pursue, not looking for a personal quest. *most* of the barebow shooters I observe approach archery like most bowlers approach bowling - for fun, for exercise, for some camaraderie. A few of them get together once a month at the range and shoot 5 or 6 arrows at 10 or 20 yards outside - yes, five or six arrows - and then go inside and squeeze 30 minutes of shooting into 2 hours of yacking and laughing (which is great!). But very very few of these shooters have any desire to commit to chasing their own individual archery ceiling. 

Olympic - a much bigger % of the people who shoot Olympic are the types that are looking for a personal journey toward excellence, and the time/effort required is seen by them as one of the biggest benefits, not a drawback. That's why they're most likely the ones who are shooting 1,000-2,000 arrows a month. 

And I believe that those 'I want to pursue the variant of the sport that requires a LOT of training/practice/diligence' archers mostly gravitate toward the Olympic style because #1) it's the style they see IN THE OLYMPICS, and #2) an Olympic archer and Olympic bow at full draw is an intrinsically beautiful thing.

Those are just my observations. Again, I state for the record that I believe there are a LOT of barebow and compound target shooters who are serious and motivated and dedicated to the perfection of their craft. I'm just commenting on what I observe to be the case for the larger segment of archers who aren't described by 'serious and motivated and dedicated to the perfection of their craft (and maybe in the big picture they're the ones with the healthier outlook!)


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

lksseven said:


> Mr. Roboto, how many arrows, on average, do you shoot a month? What about most of the barebow archers you know in your area?


Not as many as I would like to.

My wife keeps telling me to switch to Oly style because she says as good as I shoot with a Trad bow, I could be a serious Olympic competitor. I don't because I know I can not put in the hours that is required to compete at that level. My regular job is 9 to 12 hours a day plus 1 hour commute each way. So getting out to the range during the week only occurs in the summer due to the available light. So weekends are the only available time that I have, and most of Sundays are serving in different church activities.

So with that said, I can average about 400 to 500 arrows a month (about 100 a week) during the fall, winter, and spring seasons, and then in the summer months, I can get 1000+ arrows a month. I started shooting about 10 years ago. I was reminded about that when I got my 10 year NFAA pin a few months ago.

I have no idea where that puts me in the "dedication towards excellence" scale.

I like the barebow/trad style, and my goal is to develop my skills so that I can shoot scores like Ben Rogers. Will I ever get there? I don't know, but I sure am going to try 

As for other shooters in my area. I only know of one other person that is a serious barebow/trad shooter at range I go to. He is shooting at the same level as I am. Everyone else I see consistently at the range shoot Oly or Compound. There is one guy in the area that I know of, who smoked me at the state target (900 round) last month, he looks to be a serious competitor. I don't know how much time he puts in, but his form is really good.

At our club, we have some really great teaching programs for the kids (JOAD) and general public. It is standing room only in the classes, 4 nights a week. Barebow/longbow/Olympic/compound are all taught and are used in these classes. We have one "team" of kids that get together once a week for competition training, but they are only Olympic and Compound. I have seen over they years, is that those people that decide to continue shooting beyond the basic classes choose only Olympic Style or Compound style.

I do know that all of the kids that working out on the flat range at targets greater than 20 yards have desires to compete in the Olympics.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

lksseven said:


> itbeso,
> 
> I'm sure you agree that _*every*_ class is hard to excel in ... tiddlywinks is hard to excel in, if there's a competition for it.
> 
> ...


Larry, there is nothing in your statement that I could disagree with.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

itbeso said:


> Larry, there is nothing in your statement that I could disagree with.


That's probably because Larry is a damn smart guy who "gets" it. 

Ben, you're right. We need high profile events and high-profile archers. It would help if those archers were young and attractive too.  

Whether they want to admit it or not, one of the turn-offs to barebow archery for those who make the rules is that the most competitive within the division are old gray men. That doesn't sell copy or work in the Twittersphere and sponsors aren't ready to bank on that image.

So it's a chicken-or-egg conundrum. We need to find the answer as to why a young attractive archer in their prime would choose to shoot barebow. So far, in the U.S., we don't have the answer to that.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> That's probably because Larry is a damn smart guy who "gets" it.
> 
> Ben, you're right. We need high profile events and high-profile archers. It would help if those archers were young and attractive too.
> 
> ...


So, I don't have a chance of getting sponsors when I make the Olympic team?:sad:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> That's probably because Larry is a damn smart guy who "gets" it.
> 
> Ben, you're right. We need high profile events and high-profile archers. It would help if those archers were young and attractive too.
> 
> ...


Well---------------- I may be fat but you're ugly, and I can lose weight.:shade:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

ha, ha.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

But seriously. It's more than whether a particular archer can get recognized, or get sponsors or support. It's about what it takes to grow barebow. And yes, it's going to take young attractive folks who COULD otherwise choose compound or recurve, to instead choose barebow. That's a tall order and I'm not sure if we can get there. But I intend to try.

John


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> But seriously. It's more than whether a particular archer can get recognized, or get sponsors or support. It's about what it takes to grow barebow. And yes, it's going to take young attractive folks who COULD otherwise choose compound or recurve, to instead choose barebow. That's a tall order and I'm not sure if we can get there. But I intend to try.
> 
> John


I hope we are successful. Over the last 10 years or so I have seen many promising young people, most female, convert to compound or recurve when their chosen discipline has no support in JOAD or going forward and then find the the alternatives not as much fun and just leave the sport all together. No support, no encouragment, no role models. Not a healthy prescription for success. Hollywood has turned that around, not the archery community. But, I am very happy they jumped on the bandwagon.

Coaching barebow kids buried in the Olympic recurve standings at indoor nationals every year has been very frustrating? I felt like Jerry Jones promising a cowboys Super Bowl win. "Maybe next year."


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> That's probably because Larry is a damn smart guy who "gets" it.
> 
> Ben, you're right. We need high profile events and high-profile archers. It would help if those archers were young and attractive too.
> 
> ...


I appreciate the compliment John!

If there isn't any significant money in barebow, and it isn't in the Olympics, then I can't fathom what will encourage young beautifuls to pursue it with gusto. My understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) is that barebow is not nearly the money maker for manufacturers that compound is (fewer doodads to sell to archers) ... so what would motivate the manufacturers to put money into high profile events or sponsorships? It's a conundrum.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

It is a conundrum, and yet, it's exactly what Hollywood turns to when they need a character with a "bow" in their hands. LOL. How ironic, eh?


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> It is a conundrum, and yet, it's exactly what Hollywood turns to when they need a character with a "bow" in their hands. LOL. How ironic, eh?


Yes, exactly. Maybe barebow needs its own version of 'sporting clays' - a course/challenge/competition that involves movement and ever changing problems to solve.


----------



## Gryffin du Verd (May 20, 2013)

TomB said:


> Over the last 10 years or so I have seen many promising young people, most female, convert to compound or recurve when their chosen discipline has no support in JOAD or going forward and then find the the alternatives not as much fun and just leave the sport all together. No support, no encouragment, no role models. Not a healthy prescription for success. Hollywood has turned that around, not the archery community. But, I am very happy they jumped on the bandwagon.


My daughter is a good example of this. She was introduced to archery in Girl Scouts and -loved- it. She begged us to get her a bow for Christmas ("It can be the ONLY present you give me!" ) She was only interested in barebow, none of the other styles attracted her in the slightest. Unfortunately, there were no knowledgeable barebow coaches at her JOAD program, so she really got no support, but she did fairly well.

At one point they held a pin shoot where they adjusted the required score to make it a little more challenging for everyone (which I thought was a great idea, in principle). The compound kids nailed it early, but the barebow kids were required to shoot the equivalent of a 150/300, which was much, much harder than anyone else. Not the instructors' fault at all, they just didn't really understand barebow. She shot the best she had ever done and missed getting the pin by one point. She was disappointed, but took it like a champ. But she put down her bow and has never picked it up since. Kind of a shame...

K


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I'm wondering if Barebow is the easiest to pick up, is it also the easiest to put down?

My oldest daughter shot barebow (quite well) until about her red JOAD pin, back before we had barebow JOAD pins, or even pins at all for that matter - they were patches. When she realized she would need to add a sight and clicker to compete with the OR kids, she quit JOAD. Still breaks my heart, since she was a very good barebow archer.


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> I'm wondering if Barebow is the easiest to pick up, is it also the easiest to put down?


This may be gospel! Especially with no support system other than parents and a few enlightened coaches. Moreover, there is so much more out there like cheerleading and team sports with recognition that attracts their attention.

So, you guys that shoot barebow well have a huge opportunity! I hope we have kids who say, "I want to shoot like John, or Ben, or Skip, or Liz, or Ty, or Mark, or Rebecca or ...." Bring on the trading cards and autographs.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

I know for a lot of people...especially Joe Public...watching an archery event is almost as exciting as watching paint dry :wink: I love watching archery competitions but with the average attention span of the average person...they need something with more excitement. I'd love to see archery competitions that included moving targets or at least something other than just shooting paper...but maybe that's just me :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Corene1 (Apr 27, 2014)

Well there are still a few kids out there that want to shoot barebow. My 7 year old grandson actually took the sights off his bow. When I try to help young kids start shooting I prefer to let them shoot non sighted as there are a lot less things for them to contend with. My favorite practice for them is setting up balloons on the target faces. When they hit it there is instant gratification. They always leave with a smile and ask when they can do it again. I just try to teach them to enjoy archery when they get older they can decide the direction.


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

Who exactly are the people claiming adult men barebow archers can't handle 70 meters? As far as I can tell the barebow archers in this thread sound like they would enjoy shooting 70 meters. There's some suggestions that executives in the NFAA believe 70 meters is too much? Why should that have any weight in WA Target Archery?

In the early 1980's I was a yoot and a barebow archer. As a Cadet the distances I shot in the 1440 round were 70M, 60M, 50M and 30M. Just like all the other Cadet equipment divisions. As a 14 and 15 year old barebow archer I enjoyed shooting 70 meters. But nowadays people think adult men can't handle it? I think they can. So I support Barebow men shooting a normal 720 Round, 72 arrows at 70M. There's no need to worry about spectators unfavorably comparing barebow scores with OR scores. The vast majority of sports fans will see the barebow has no sight and no stabilizers and will understand the scores will have to be lower than OR scores. 

On the other hand, if we follow the theme of different equipment shooting different targets at different distances... since OR is a 122cm target at 70M and compound is a 80cm target at 50M then obviously Barebow should be a 92cm target at 90M.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Corene1 said:


> Well there are still a few kids out there that want to shoot barebow. My 7 year old grandson actually took the sights off his bow. When I try to help young kids start shooting I prefer to let them shoot non sighted as there are a lot less things for them to contend with. My favorite practice for them is setting up balloons on the target faces. When they hit it there is instant gratification. They always leave with a smile and ask when they can do it again. I just try to teach them to enjoy archery when they get older they can decide the direction.
> View attachment 2041357


That's a very good philosophy, I think.


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

> I just try to teach them to enjoy archery when they get older they can decide the direction.


Yes a very good philosophy. Works on religious denominations with children too.


----------



## _JR_ (Mar 30, 2014)

limbwalker said:


> I'm wondering if Barebow is the easiest to pick up, is it also the easiest to put down?
> 
> My oldest daughter shot barebow (quite well) until about her red JOAD pin, back before we had barebow JOAD pins, or even pins at all for that matter - they were patches. When she realized she would need to add a sight and clicker to compete with the OR kids, she quit JOAD. Still breaks my heart, since she was a very good barebow archer.


A few years ago I got "back" into archery, and started teaching/coaching my son also (then early-teens). We started out with a full OR setup, but gradually took more and more things off until we now shoot barebow. We've done a few local, informal shoots and done OK, so we joined USA Archery and have decided to test our skills at a "proper" tournament. Well, we came up against some of the issues discussed here - we planned on going to the Pacific Coast Championship, but two things turned us off about it and we didn't go: 1) Barebow archers shoot the same course as everyone else, which is 30m - 50m - 70m - 90m. I don't know about you, but it seems that shooting the same 90m target barebow as the OR or compound shooters isn't really, shall we say, 'welcoming'. 2) Since my son is still 17, they said he would be ineligible for any awards since barebow isn't a division for youth. Still, I tried: "Son, do you want to get up really early and give up the weekend and shoot at targets really far away and compete against OR and compound archers, and by the way, you're ineligible for any awards?" SON: "no". (well, actually I phrased it rather differently, but still, "no"). 

All this despite the fact that the FITA Coach's Manual, Barebow Module on the World Archery site says "...barebow archers shoot up to 50 meters". 

You all know - those of us who like barebow admire it for the simplicity and purity (and also because it doesn't take half an hour to set up). Does archery intend to exclude those individuals? I'm happy to hear of limbwalker's proposal for barebow at outdoor nationals (thanks for that!).


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

If I remember correctly that barebow module is mainly for Field events, which has the maximum 50m distance. WA does not recognize barebow for any event other than Field and 3D. So technically allowing Barebows to shoot a 1440 round is in violation of WA standards. Fortunately there are a lot of tournaments here in the US that have event organizers that will allow Barebow shooters to shoot.

What we all barebow shooters need to do is to attend and compete in these events even if they don't have a barebow class. Any barebow shooter can compete in the Recurve class. The recurve class does not mandate the use of a sight, clicker, or stab. They just allow it as a choice. I wonder how long before releases are allowed 

Learning how to shoot 70 and 90 meters is just another tool to put into your shooting tool box. It helps you to be a better all around archer. Instead of looking at it as being unwelcoming, look at it as an exciting challenge. There is nothing better then watching the jaws drop from a compound shooter when they see you hitting gold at 90m with a barebow.

A lot of the rules within the overall archery community doesn't make sense from time to time. Take for example the elimination rounds that the Recurve and Compound people shoot. One would think the compounds get the more challenging task. But in reality, the Recurve shooters shoot 70m and the compound shooters shoot 50m. If we follow that logic, then barebow shooters should shoot 90m, and the longbow shooters doing 110m

Anyways, take every chance to shoot tournaments with your barebows. Don't let the event organizers think that nobody shoots barebow anymore. Lets flood their tournaments so that they will have to recognize the barebow shooters as being a serious class, and then they can start to address the silly rule differences between different organization.


----------



## _JR_ (Mar 30, 2014)

Mr. Roboto said:


> Anyways, take every chance to shoot tournaments with your barebows. Don't let the event organizers think that nobody shoots barebow anymore. Lets flood their tournaments so that they will have to recognize the barebow shooters as being a serious class, and then they can start to address the silly rule differences between different organization.


You're right, and I agree (and we should have gone to that tournament!). And besides, it's immensely satisfying to perform at distance (although for my son and I the satisfaction is just to hit the target face - and that's at 83m, the longest available practice distance we have).
Domo arigato. 
- Jeff


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Yeah, not everyone has a range where we can shoot all the distances we want. Have you thought about standing 7m behind your normal shooting line when no one else is there to get that 90m? That is what I do to figure out my odd gaps. Sometimes I shoot in front of the starting line, and other times I shoot behind the starting line. We just have to adapt and overcome. That is one of the great things about barebow shooters - we adapt and overcome.

Pete


----------



## knotdodger (Oct 2, 2005)

My friend Steve has shot the full Fita's 90.. 70.. 50.. 30..m at some of the events here in Michigan.. He is usually 
the only barebow archer shooting. He could shoot masters , but shoots Senior. 

I have shot barebow just practicing with him at 70 and 90.. All I can say is .... 90m is no joke....hehehe 
I will not mention any of my scores at 90m.


----------



## _JR_ (Mar 30, 2014)

Mr. Roboto said:


> Yeah, not everyone has a range where we can shoot all the distances we want. Have you thought about standing 7m behind your normal shooting line when no one else is there to get that 90m? That is what I do to figure out my odd gaps. Sometimes I shoot in front of the starting line, and other times I shoot behind the starting line. We just have to adapt and overcome. That is one of the great things about barebow shooters - we adapt and overcome.
> 
> Pete


Funny you should mention standing 7m behind the line - that's kind of how I get the 83m. 
My longest available space is at Target #14 at the Lake Sonoma Field Archery range; it's 80yds (73m). I can go back about 10m more before I'm in the trees and bushes, so that's still only 83m. http://www.scbarchery.net/gallery/range-photos-field-side/


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Nice looking field range you have out there.

If you are hitting anywhere on the paper of that 65cm target at 83m (even at 80 yards) consistently, you are doing very well. Remember, the 90 and 70m targets are shot on the 122cm target (almost twice the diameter of the Field target). I wouldn't be discouraged, I would be very encouraged by that. Your shooting form will be the same for that 83m distance as it would be for 90m.

I would suggest that you continue to fine tune those long distance target shooting skills, and then take an occasional road trip to a club that has a 90m target, and shoot it enough to get your gaps. Then when you are used to shooting those 65cm targets, you will be crushing that 122cm target all day long.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Mr. Roboto said:


> \
> A lot of the rules within the overall archery community doesn't make sense from time to time. Take for example the elimination rounds that the Recurve and Compound people shoot. One would think the compounds get the more challenging task. But in reality, the Recurve shooters shoot 70m and the compound shooters shoot 50m. If we follow that logic, then barebow shooters should shoot 90m, and the longbow shooters doing 110m


Compound shoots the 80cm 6-ring target at 50m. It's really not easy if there is any kind of wind.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

grantmac said:


> Compound shoots the 80cm 6-ring target at 50m. It's really not easy if there is any kind of wind.
> 
> -Grant


Correct. It's effectively the same degree of difficulty, if not mathematically a hair more difficult. Typically, 50M scores were about 5 points lower than 70M scores on a full fita.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

From a mathematics point of view this doesn't seem to make sense. The velocity of the arrows from compound bows are around 300 ft/s (90m/s) and the velocity of the arrows from recurve bows are around 200 ft/s (60 m/s). This means that that the time of flight for a compound bow is about 0.55 seconds for 50m and about 1.15 seconds for a recurve at 70m. (neglecting air drag).

For the same wind velocity on the same arrow, the sideways movement is directly proportional to the flight time squared. That means the windage factor for a compound arrow at 50m is 0.30, and for a recurve arrow at 70m is 1.3. So if the wind was enough to move the arrow 1 scoring ring on the 80cm target at 50m, that same wind would move the same arrow 2.9 scoring rings on a 122 cm target at 70m. 

Mathematically, it looks like the compound has a tremendous advantage over the recurve when it comes to the wind.

Granted compounds shoot different sized arrows than recurves and different shooters have different initial arrow velocities, but this speed advantage in the wind makes the 50m distance on a 80cm target an easier shoot than 70m on a 122 cm target.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Shooting a compound in the wind isn't about what is happening to the arrows, but what is happening to the archer. Lower holding weight really starts to show it's downsides when the wind gets up. Why else do you think target bows are 55-65% let-off?

6-ring 80cm at 50m is just a tougher target in my experience regardless of the equipment.

-Grant


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

80cm at 50m is a tough one regardless if it is a 6 ring or a full 10 ring. It kicks my butt with a simple recurve. It doesn't take much to pluck one off the target at 50m.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

The reality is that a 80cm 6ring target is really describing not a 80cm size target, but a 40cm size target (with an 8cm center eye), right? I think that's why it's so burdensome psychologically for some people. The size of the target, not the bullseye, is what wigs them out. You could make the size of the bullseye 12.2cm and it would still be burdensome to many. That's my theory as it pertains to me, anyway.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

That is an interesting thought. I never thought about the size of the spot affecting one's shooting. For me, the size of the spot never even comes into the thought process, probably because I rarely get to aim on paper. At 50m my gap is about 30cm below the center of the target. So on a 10 ring target, I am aiming at the bottom of the 3 ring. But the 6 ring target, it gets to be a bit tougher because there is a lot of hay below the paper.


----------

