# Whos qualifed to give advice?



## jelmore (Sep 24, 2013)

Over the last couple of years I have read ALOT of threads on AT and learned ALOT. Some great advice and insights from this forum in particular. I have little interest in becoming a pro archer but am not a beginner either and strive to have the strongest shot possible for the few competitions I do enter as well as hunting. I have noticed a couple trends regarding advice given on these forums.

1. None of the successful professionals follow all or even most of the guidelines and principles that are traditionally taught by the "certified" coaches. When questioned about this, the usual response is, "well they are naturally gifted" or "they found something that works for them". So it seems to me that there is a gap between the basics of archery and the highest level.

2. There are some people on these forums that go about researching and learning, trying to bridge this gap to becoming a more successful shooter. They have built up a library of knowledge and experience and try to pass it on to others to improve the shooting of somebody like me, who is not a pro but also not a beginner, but finds a lot information lacking in the traditional dogma of the established archery school of thought.

I'm sure there a lot of intermediate archers like me who are interested in reading and learning about more advanced archery theories and applications and appreciate the enthusiasm and effort put out by others to offer their experience,advice and suggestions on more than just what color strings would look cool. Thanks.


----------



## f40mcd (Jan 28, 2012)

Archery is not a cookie cutter sport. Elite level archers all have found the minute details that work best for them. Those of us out there actually teaching others the sport create our own encyclopedia of information by our own experience shooting and teaching others. You're a problem solver and learn by failure. Research helps but you can't count on it to be fact unless it's equipment related most often. 

Just my thoughts. 


USA Archery Instructor
Penn State University Archery/Bowhunting Instructor
CrossFit Coach 
#ishootelite


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Like f40mcd, no two Pros (or really good shooters) are the same, but what they do they do religiously, repetitively. If one Pro noted it's Reo Wilde and him leaning back, not good form, but one that you can well see "works" for him. So it's not really a gap, but a mold (basics) that can be shaped to the individual.

For your post, thanks.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

While every archer needs to find what works "best" for them, coaches can not know that in advance. They will teach you a way (right or wrong) that they can dissect problems from.
If your looking for form advice, not many coaches will steer you in Reo's direction.... because they are not experts in Reo's form and how/why it works.
They are experts in the form they teach, and can find those problems more easily on something they know.
Simply being an expert in fixing jet aircraft doesn't mean you know how to fix cars.

As for who is qualified to give advice? The answer is a question:
Who is asking what?
Someone can be a great coach, yet not know the answer to YOUR problem.
Someone else may have very little coaching experience, but knows your problem inside and out. Chances are that the experienced coach is more likely to have more answers, but it's no guarantee.

One must weigh the knowledge and experience of whomever is giving the advice.
Some will argue about what is the best solution. Try what they say, and maybe give more weight in future discussions about your issues to the one that got it most right.

There is no universal coaches exam that I know of that will prove so&so is the best coach for you. But you can look at their past accomplishments as an indicator of how well they might help you.


----------



## Anarchist_Otter (Mar 26, 2013)

It doesn't matter what you do so; long as you do it consistently. People over think archery, and as a coach I stress fundamentals over everything. The biggest thing I have found is that form is an expression of self. And allowing leeway for that expression is important. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk


----------



## jelmore (Sep 24, 2013)

I wanted to start this thread after reading the thread about Braden G. Cbrunson said, "you have the front end to hold steady and the back end with as little movement as possible, everything else is mental garbage"(paraphrasing). This is exactly where Im at with my shooting and exactly what I needed to hear. But 6 months ago this wouldn't have fit me. I guess my point is, I would hate to see people stop posting on this forum because they're not certified or aren't pros. The back and forth interplay is where some real gems of information come out. I always thought Ron W. was kind of grumpy and a little combative but I learned a lot from the posts where him and Padgett and others went back and forth. For what it's worth, I think this is one place where reading on the internet isn't just a bunch of crap.


----------



## WhitBri (Jan 30, 2007)

In archery it is really hard to go from advanced level to pro type level shooting. None of us are pros or shooting pro level shows how hard it is. We all want it right. But we have to find it ourselves I believe once you get to a certain level only you can get yourself to the next. A good coach can probably help you from lapsing backward but to move forward its on you. It's probably 90% mental as they say and the small tweaks are only something you can feel and see. No one shooting Vegas 300s has a dl two inches too long that the AT crowd can see in a photo. Yet we all come on here looking for that nugget that may help. Good luck to all in the search. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bgviii (Feb 16, 2010)

I view this site often and find it useful and entertaining. I think the real issue is terminology. "Advice" insinuates a more experienced individual giving suggestions to a less experienced individual. This is where ego and tendency to elevate oneself above another comes into play. I've started several threads on this site seeking a "sharing" of information. Because I ask a question does not mean that I'm inexperienced, a poor shooter, or don't know equipment or haven't had excessive experience with lots styles. It simply means I'd like to hear how others do it. Nothing more, nothing less. Most of it I've heard all before and it's usually the same stuff from the same people. But it's fun to talk archery and hear others views and every now and then someone mentions something i've forgotten or a new perspective. This site is nothing more than that. A sharing of information. Whether you are promoting your own gain, or knowledge , or just like to help people, ultimately, we like to talk about the thing we love and this is where we can do it. It's really all this is...to everyone..whether they know it or not.


----------



## duc (Jul 18, 2009)

A GOOD coach works on your head. They know most of the other stuff is just fluff.


----------



## duc (Jul 18, 2009)

Let me add. A GOOD coach will work on a few fundamental tenets of good shooting. One of them is a regimented TRAINING regime and not pi$$ing around endlessly with bow/arrow/release configurations.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I have been in the teaching profession for over 20 years and I have failed to reach students every year since I started and right down my hallway another teacher reached those students, I have also seen kids from that teachers class struggle and then after being in my class have tons of success. The key here is to realize that there is no one coach that can teach every student and have a successful outcome, having a variety of coaches is the key. Here on archery talk we have people to choose from and a guy just has to do his homework and seek out the coach that he feels comfortable with and enjoys working with, I recommend people all the time to go and watch the griv thing a week videos for example. That resource is a great tool of mine to give a shooter a different look and presentation to what I was trying to get across to them. 

The toughest issue we will always have is '100 PERCENT COMMITMENT', all of the top shooters have 100% commitment to the methods and approaches and equipment that they are using so when they present it to a forum it is hard for them to debate or discuss. They want to present it as the gospel and not have to hear any breakdown of why or why not it should be done that way, Why? Because their shooting and scores and contracts depend on those decisions being the best one and for them to allow doubt to creep in is a bad thing, so over time we lost those shooters as members here.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

By the way you never know who will be that coach, about 4 years ago I was sitting with my mom at a restaurant between volleyball matches. I had no idea what was about to happen but once it did I cried like a little baby, my mom is the most non competitive person I know and she never played a single sport in her life. On this day she opened up and in about 10 minutes she had affected me as a coach and player like nobody else ever had, this little lady had so many simple things to say that no coach I had ever had could have put them together in such a profound way. Like I said I cried like a little baby.


----------



## duc (Jul 18, 2009)

Padgett. You just said the magic words. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT COMMITMENT.


----------



## subconsciously (Aug 22, 2009)

A good coach will have a coaching philosophy. Coaching is easy, coaching to win is not.

A truly good coach is one that knows he is at his limit with his student.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

subconsciously said:


> A good coach will have a coaching philosophy. Coaching is easy, coaching to win is not.
> 
> A truly good coach is one that knows he is at his limit with his student.


Well said........


----------



## jelmore (Sep 24, 2013)

So. I can completely understand that the best shooters in the world have found certain things that work for them that stray from the fundamentals. BUT what is wrong with people trying to figure those little things out and passing them on to others to try and improve without getting bashed. i.e Padgett and RCR. I think if there was millions of dollars to be won in archery there'd be a lot more people trying to do this.. 
I agree with Duc, that at a high level it's mental. You may shoot a 300 with 50+ as an average but fold when the adrenaline hits. You may be an advanced shooter but an intermediate competitor. That's why, for the most part, I don't buy the "he's just naturally talented" for archery. More like "he's got more drive and work ethic" or "he's got a super stronger mental game" or even "he's had better circumstances to be great" when it comes to the great shooters like Reo, Levi etc.. Thanks.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

This is something naturally talented; "he's got more drive and work ethic" or "he's got a super stronger mental game." For some this comes easy and for others a life's struggle.

And I believe the right circumstances gives a person a leg up.... I don't believe in Olympic athletes being the world's best, not when so many weren't in the right place at the right time to be noticed for some ability to be "groomed" for the Olympics. I grew playing sports. &*^%^% school systems. I saw classmates sitting on the bench that had more desire to play than "daddy's" kid that got to play every game. Who notices someone's athletic ability when sitting on the bench? It's still going on today. 

I don't have a problem with someone passing on tips and "little things" as long as they aren't taking soul credit, totally their idea.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

jelmore said:


> I guess my point is, I would hate to see people stop posting on this forum because they're not certified or aren't pros. The back and forth interplay is where some real gems of information come out. I always thought Ron W. was kind of grumpy and a little combative but I learned a lot from the posts where him and Padgett and others went back and forth. For what it's worth, I think this is one place where reading on the internet isn't just a bunch of crap.


So far, fortunately, the efforts by an insecure few to make this forum exclusive have failed and, IMO, that's a good thing. As I said earlier, if you really truly need to not be bothered by shooters that are below you, you really need to not look for your coaching/pats on the back on here (or any internet forum). One recently declared that she was off to the OTC to get away from the noobs, and IMO that was exactly what needed to be done in her case. 

The real difficulty of a truly exclusive forum is a) coming up with a workable "qualification standard" and b) enforcing it. Neither of those are really workable on an internet forum of any kind. In person it's possible, but on here.... no.

As for Ron W. I personally highly enjoyed his input, but I agree he offered too much group therapy to the insecure individuals who engaged with him - Padgett, Robert and Sonny and some others, of course, being notable exceptions (nothing insecure about these gentleman for sure). People who can't handle any form of criticism or questioning without a tantrum I simply direct to a good friend, spiritual advisor or etc. for help with their troubles. If their blood pressure still remains high, I then advise them to simply not read my posts. Ron W. you could tell had had a long shooting career and really did have a lot of great information to offer, but he persisted with the therapy needs of his contestants for a little too long, long after he should have sent them elsewhere for help with their difficulties. IMHO, of course.

As for me, I never offer "advice", only personal experiences with any issues that are the topic of the thread and how I either a) solved them or b) am still struggling with them. At my shooting level, I just admit it up front to get it out of the way: I don't consider myself qualified to actually advise someone else unless it's concerning an item I really have come up with a solution for (and there are a precious few of those). I find the best posts from others tend to be of a similar nature.

Just my .02,

DM


----------



## jelmore (Sep 24, 2013)

Great post dmacey. thanks.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

If you haven't gone to coaching schools and seminars then you are encouraged to keep your mouth shut. 

There are plenty of people on here with no credentials that know much more than some of the coaches with credentials. You just have to sort through the information and find what works for you.

If you only want information from certified coaches, do your posting in the coaches corner.


----------



## Sasquech (Dec 15, 2014)

In short the guy with the answer that will work for you. May be a coach of 30 years or a guy 2 years out of the box with a great coach that taught him or her a gem that just fist your issue the key is having a mental filter and the open mind to see if it works and discard what doesn't work for you with out feeling the need to tear down a poster that was genuinely trying to help but has an answer that might not work for your specific situation and physical makeup. 

This sport has a lot to do with build and variations in build( body shape) . Coaching is often adapting those standard methods to the individual to help them achieve their goals. 

And I agree multiple coach exposure is confusing some times but the same thing said in different ways can accomplish a lot.


Staff shooter Dream Shot Archery makers of Twisted Minds bowstrings. 
Hoyt Pro Comp Elite XL 51#
AXcel Acheive sight. Hamskea rest


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Lets not forget that certified coaching credentials are very easy to come by in archery.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

dmacey said:


> One recently declared that she was off to the OTC to get away from the noobs, and IMO that was exactly what needed to be done in her case. DM


Please, DM, do not put words into my mouth. I stated I was going to the OTC because:
1) I was taking responsibility to increase my personal knowledge and experience of coaching methods and approaches--I believe anyone who has become credentialed to instruct/coach in any discipline has a responsibility to the community to take part in regular continuing education opportunities. 

2) I was not stating or inferring that I was going to the OTC to get away from the noobs on this forum, but to state that I would not be able to regularly check into this site to comment due to the symposium schedule. 

I have not nor will I attack any individual person, but I will voice concern if people continue to imply a greater level of experience than they actually hold for whatever reason. I believe the new people visiting this site have the right to know poster a who writes of shooting 20, 30, 40+ 60X games in a row may not be accurately portraying their actual competition level of experience. Yes, they may have some very good nuggets to share, but it should be done in the light of complete honesty and transparency. We do not need this forum to be jaded as the Gen Pop forum was by the long-time poster who did post some very good information, but for whatever reason, had to tarnish their reputation by claiming they were something they were not for personal gain.

We are supposed to be I/A competitive archers discussing between ourselves various means of becoming better I/A competitors. That was the original basis of creating this forum and that is the foundation it should return to. The noobs can read the threads and learn, but leave the posting of advice to those who have real-world experience (notice I did not say credentials).


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

EPLC said:


> Lets not forget that certified coaching credentials are very easy to come by in archery.


USA Archery and NFAA are currently in the process of repairing this situation especially for level 3 and above coaches.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

montigre said:


> We are supposed to be I/A competitive archers discussing between ourselves various means of becoming better I/A competitors. That was the original basis of creating this forum and that is the foundation it should return to. The noobs can read the threads and learn, but leave the posting of advice to those who have real-world experience (notice I did not say credentials).


The problem though, as I've stated before, is that who is a "noob" and who is an "I/A competitive archer" isn't up to <edited> anyone. Nobody to my knowledge requires your permission or approval to post in this forum or run what they have to say by you before releasing it; that's entirely at the pleasure of Mahly and AT, not you.

So what that means is, for the time being, you _have to tolerate_ posts from persons whose "real-world experience" can't be verified (that is, almost everyone) and tolerate content you may not agree with. Sorry. That's just life on the Internet, for better or for worse 

What I would suggest, again, is that you simply (and politely) concentrate on the content of the posts, and not who you think the poster is and start diverting threads accordingly. I'm fully sympathetic with the desire to verify the source, I think we all get that. But for the level of information you're looking for, this is, with all due respect to AT, not the right place to look for it. The OTC, OTOH, I think was the correct choice for you.
As always, YMMV.

DM


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

dmacey said:


> The problem though, as I've stated before, is that who is a "noob" and who is an "I/A competitive archer" isn't up to <edited> anyone. Nobody to my knowledge requires your permission or approval to post in this forum or run what they have to say by you before releasing it; that's entirely at the pleasure of Mahly and AT, not you.
> 
> 
> 
> DM


I must disagree to an extent.
This forum has from its inception been a self moderated forum, again, to an extent.

My main role here is to enforce hard rules (attacks/bashing/trolling etc) and to move threads that should be moved.

The names you listed have been here a long time (from the beginning I believe), and know the rules, and structure.
I have NO problem with them (or anyone else that knows this forum well) making POLITE corrections to inappropriate or ill placed posts.

Honestly, if people would read the stickies, I (and others concerned) would have a lot more free time


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

Mahly said:


> I must disagree to an extent.
> This forum has from its inception been a self moderated forum, again, to an extent.
> 
> My main role here is to enforce hard rules (attacks/bashing/trolling etc) and to move threads that should be moved.
> ...


Agree, Polite is the operative word. I was only referring to attempts to moderate or intimidate posters by some for merely prejudiced reasons; I was in no way insinuating that any _content_ was above criticism or correction. I welcome as much correction, criticism and even contention over the _content_ of my posts as anyone cares to offer. 

But the person I was just talking to, who shall remain nameless, made some downright offensive, and just absolutely uncalled-for, personal comments about some other posters before declaring her departure to the OTC in another thread, which are not what I would expect from someone claiming to be a professional. I felt that that behavior needed to be called out, is all. That's all I'm referring to here. 

When it comes to correcting and criticizing content, IMO, the more the merrier no matter how wrong my offerings are deemed to be. That's how I learn here and I totally welcome that.

dM


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

DM, it is quite easy to discover who the noobs are. ASA, IBO, USA Archery, and NFAA record the scores and accomplishments of their competitors. If you do not compete, you do not have a record...it is that simple. I have no issue with noobs, we were all there at some point. I do have issue with noobs or less experienced shooters providing advice in an I/A forum....:wink:


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

montigre said:


> those who have real-world experience (notice I did not say credentials).





montigre said:


> DM, it is quite easy to discover who the noobs are. ASA, IBO, USA Archery, and NFAA record the scores and accomplishments of their competitors. If you do not compete, you do not have a record...it is that simple. I have no issue with noobs, we were all there at some point. I do have issue with noobs or less experienced shooters providing advice in an I/A forum....:wink:


And what if the majority of "experience" was accrued before those organizations started making results available online? I shot as many as 13 national level 3D tournaments in a single year in the mid 90's. Now I'm getting back into it after a 15 year break. Some of the equipment is different, but not much has changed with regards to shooting a bow and arrow. Noob? Maybe in terms of how long I've been a member of AT, and maybe in the eyes of those who don't know me or what I've experienced, but I'm not unfamiliar with national level competition, cameras, shoot-offs, etc....


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

nestly said:


> And what if the majority of "experience" was accrued before those organizations started making results available online? I shot as many as 13 national level 3D tournaments in a single year in the mid 90's. Now I'm getting back into it after a 15 year break. Some of the equipment is different, but not much has changed with regards to shooting a bow and arrow. Noob? Maybe in terms of how long I've been a member of AT, and maybe in the eyes of those who don't know me or what I've experienced, but I'm not unfamiliar with national level competition, cameras, shoot-offs, etc....


I agree, but in your specific case, the content of your questions and responses indicate you've had significant string time as a competitive archer. I do not believe anyone here has placed you into the category mentioned in my post.... :wink:


----------



## duc (Jul 18, 2009)

The reason top shooters stop posting here IS because of people like you. I don't say this out of any malice. I know unfortunately that you will take this personally. You did say you were open to criticism didn't you???. I suggest, for the sake of the the people who are attacking, you keep your comments to yourself. Driving the very experienced people away from this forum isn't the intent of this thread but this is what it has become because of your comments. Don't qualify yourself to judge others here. This is what you are doing. 
Who should we listen to???? Unfortunately most here aren't qualified to say. The irony of it all.


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

I don't think there's any group or groups that can be singled out as causing a decline in the number of top-level shooters that participate here. There some that are off-putting from every level from newbie to World Champion, and some that take offense where none was intended, again regardless of experience level. IMO, it's a lack of tolerance that goes both ways and the attempts to categorize people and determine who is and is not qualified to answer questions is a clear demonstration of such.

As far as correcting or chastising someone for posting a "general" message in "I-A", I don't see the point. After the topic has been created, the OP has no ability to move or retract the topic, so just let the moderator decide and take whatever action they feel is appropriate. Fortunately, we have one that has more tack than most of the other self-appointed forum leaders. The same lesson is taught to the person that made the error, just in a less embarrassing manner and with less likelihood the topic will devolve into bickering over whether it is/is not appropriate for I-A. The easiest way to avoid a fight is not picking one in the first place, not to insult someone and then expect them to slink away in shame. 

$0.02


----------



## duc (Jul 18, 2009)

Which is what has been have done. (answering your last sentence)
Macey has created a pi$$ing match, intended or not. There is NO REASON whatsoever to single out people here. Again, This thread has turned into something that it shouldn't be. 
With all due respect, two points: 
These posts are why people who know don't post here (already said)
This thread should deleted. Nothing more will come of it. People have take it upon themselves to be judge, jury and exacutioner. Do you not see this??????
I believe this forum was created to cater to the last few percent of target shooter. People who are looking for the last few points. It has turned into nothing more than a general discussion forum attracting the same people who like to hear the sound of there own voice.
So endeth the lecture.


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

duc said:


> Macey has created a pi$$ing match, intended or not. There is NO REASON whatsoever to single out people here. Again, This thread has turned into something that it shouldn't be.


While I agree that singling someone out is often akin to picking a fight, there are enough personality conflicts and philosophical differences that a fights can be (and are) initiated in less obvious ways. Again, it's not a one-way street, neither side is blameless. Things will improve when both sides become more tolerant of the others perspective, unfortunately, that's easier said than done.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

montigre said:


> DM, it is quite easy to discover who the noobs are. ASA, IBO, USA Archery, and NFAA record the scores and accomplishments of their competitors. If you do not compete, you do not have a record...it is that simple. I have no issue with noobs, we were all there at some point. I do have issue with noobs or less experienced shooters providing advice in an I/A forum....:wink:


I absolutely agree and I'm sympathetic to your idea, but I'm afraid your definitions of "noob" and "less experienced" are still too nebulous with respect to who should be allowed to post here and who should not. What's the threshold for "noob" vs "not noob"? How did you arrive at that threshold? What scores qualify - indoors, inner-10 or outer 10, outdoors, what? How much and where do you have to have competed to meet your threshold? Your next difficulty is enforcing it. How will you verify that each poster has _actually passed_ your noob threshold? Finally, is there a consensus on this threshold? What level of agreement is there on it among you "experienced shooters"? 
Then there's the matter of regulation of content. If "noobs" are allowed to post, _what_ are they allowed to say and not say?

Do you see the problem here? Do you see why it's probably more practical to simply focus on the content and not divert threads into complaints about who you think the writer of the content is?

DM


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

duc said:


> The reason top shooters stop posting here IS because of people like you. I don't say this out of any malice. I know unfortunately that you will take this personally. You did say you were open to criticism didn't you???. I suggest, for the sake of the the people who are attacking, you keep your comments to yourself. Driving the very experienced people away from this forum isn't the intent of this thread but this is what it has become because of your comments. Don't qualify yourself to judge others here. This is what you are doing.
> Who should we listen to???? Unfortunately most here aren't qualified to say. The irony of it all.


If this is directed at me, I'm not offended at all; I appreciate and respect your comment, and I thank you for it. But please notice the principle involved here - attacking posters rather than posts. That's all I'm pushing back against, attempts to intimidate and regulate _posters_ by a self-appointed few based on a prejudice, rather than simply what the poster posts. This _isn't_ for the benefit of the attackers; it's for the benefit of the ones being attacked.

If someone completely takes apart one of my posts and shows me why it's all wrong, I think that's great. I welcome that, because that's how I learn. But if the response to a question or critique is, say, "you don't compete much do you UncleJane?" or "so what scores have you shot lately?" or the hilarious "sigh....", that's not so Intermediate-Advanced at all and is downright unprofessional - it's a focus on a perceived personality rather than the content of the post involved. Ad Hominum attacks against posters themselves, because they don't pass muster in the attacker's mind is what I think drives the good content away and what I'm addressing. That's all I'm going after here. This keeps happening over and over and the reason is the underlying attacks aren't being addressed - I'm just trying to bring it to light so we can see it and discuss it. Hopefully in an adult manner 

DM


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

duc said:


> Which is what has been have done. (answering your last sentence)
> Macey has created a pi$$ing match, intended or not. There is NO REASON whatsoever to single out people here. Again, This thread has turned into something that it shouldn't be.
> With all due respect, two points:
> These posts are why people who know don't post here (already said)
> This thread should deleted. Nothing more will come of it.


Well, actually, if you look at the history of threads that derail away from content and into fights, attacks are instigated by the idea "I'm being questioned and criticized by noobies! I shoot so awsome, how dare you question/criticize me!?" far more than a contention over the actual substance of what someone might have said. In fact, every single attack against me has been in that form. I can't recall an actual critique or criticism of anything I actually said in a recent thread (please correct me if I'm wrong, though, that may just be faulty memory on my part).


> People have take it upon themselves to be judge, jury and exacutioner. Do you not see this??????


All due respect,no, I don't see this at all. In fact, as I've written above, I see that as the _source_ of the infighting problem, not an activity we want to actually encourage. As I've stated before, my vote is we focus on the content of our posts and leave the posters out of it.... 

DM


----------



## Rick! (Aug 10, 2008)

Are you ready for some criticism? Up until this point in the thread, no one responded in this fashion. So, straight away you grabbed a steering wheel and ran the bus over a few folks, none of which have responded to this thread at this point. Why did you feel the need to do this? 



dmacey said:


> So far, fortunately, the efforts by an insecure few to make this forum exclusive have failed and, IMO, that's a good thing. As I said earlier, if you really truly need to not be bothered by shooters that are below you, you really need to not look for your coaching/pats on the back on here (or any internet forum). One recently declared that she was off to the OTC to get away from the noobs, and IMO that was exactly what needed to be done in her case.


Again, why do you feel the need to cast the first stone? Is it answering the OP's question?



> The real difficulty of a truly exclusive forum is a) coming up with a workable "qualification standard" and b) enforcing it. Neither of those are really workable on an internet forum of any kind. In person it's possible, but on here.... no.


The forum is well understood to be Intermediate-Advanced, not Beginner-Intermediate, not Coaches Corner. Why is it so hard to understand that shooters with a whole bunch of string time want to engage each other for self-improvement? 



> As for Ron W. I personally highly enjoyed his input, but I agree he offered too much group therapy to the insecure individuals who engaged with him - Padgett, Robert and Sonny and some others, of course, being notable exceptions (nothing insecure about these gentleman for sure). People who can't handle any form of criticism or questioning without a tantrum I simply direct to a good friend, spiritual advisor or etc. for help with their troubles. If their blood pressure still remains high, I then advise them to simply not read my posts. Ron W. you could tell had had a long shooting career and really did have a lot of great information to offer, but he persisted with the therapy needs of his contestants for a little too long, long after he should have sent them elsewhere for help with their difficulties. IMHO, of course.


Ron was fun to criticize because he couldn't take it. He couldn't get his point across in less than 100 words and wanted to sound intelligent with big words. Archers aren't big word types IMO. If you can say it in less then 3 paragraphs, all the better. Your posts are too wordy also. Stories are for children, I want meat and potatoes and no dessert. 
Your bromance with the three mentioned above should be kept to yourself. We don't need to hear you say it here.



> As for me, I never offer "advice", only personal experiences with any issues that are the topic of the thread and how I either a) solved them or b) am still struggling with them. At my shooting level, I just admit it up front to get it out of the way: I don't consider myself qualified to actually advise someone else unless it's concerning an item I really have come up with a solution for (and there are a precious few of those). I find the best posts from others tend to be of a similar nature.
> 
> Just my .02,
> 
> DM


So, you finally answer the OP's question - you don't qualify to give advice. 377 words to get across your response that only takes 8 words. 

I take offense to your disrespect towards those here that work very hard on their game to get better and want a better quality exchange here. Maybe you should leave here and go to Coaches Corner and offer your services, if they'll take you in there.

Am I qualified to give advice? Yup. Will I give it? I have reservations about it now. I've found other venues to help improve my shooting, along with putting in range time six to seven times a week.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

As with most arguments, I see people having good points on both sides.

One the one hand, yes, the posts should be the important thing to look at, and on the other hand, when a "noob" directly contradicts much more established archers, they better have very good explanations as to why. 

Those that have "been there/Done that" have earned an advanced level of credibility. That doesn't make them right and/or the "noob" wrong, it just means you're going to have to do a really good job of explaining why people should listen to you, and not the more accredited archers.

SOME of this is starting to get personal. No one here came to here complaints about personal issues (this is NOT directed at just 1 individual). If you (and again, you means anyone reading this, not a specific person) have issue with someone else's attitude or demeanor. take it to a PM.

If we are discussing posts and not posters, no one's name should be coming up should it?

This thread is open exclusively because this is part of the "self-moderation" thing. We can't self moderate if we can't discuss what should/should not be allowed.

To that end, my opinion (not ruling) is that ANYONE can post here....provided the post is about Int/Adv Competition. If that post is in contradiction to a number of experienced archers, they are GOING to be questioned on where they developed their ideas. It is perfectly acceptable for someone to inquire about a posters knowledge/credibility (POLITELY). One may not have any credentials, but a simple "it worked for me" can go a long way as well.

Lets stick to the topic and not make things personal. We get it, no one is here to read that (hopefully)

EDIT: I think at least one post came in as I wrote this. Please be clear that this is in response to the thread as a whole and not a particular post.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

Rick! said:


> Are you ready for some criticism?


Of course and I would welcome it, but unfortunately nothing in your post is critical of any information I've posted here. Instead you're merely, and angrily, trying to make the topic _me_ and not anything archery-related that I've offered. You're throwing the same "OMG, a n00b is attacking us experts! How dare you!?" tantrum, which is, of course what I've already addressed in my prior posts.

So I'm afraid I'm not impressed enough to engage any of that. Sorry.

Do you have an issue with anything archery-related I've posted? I'd be more than happy to discuss any errors in my posts, that's how I learn.

DM


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

Rick! said:


> Am I qualified to give advice? Yup. Will I give it? I have reservations about it now. I've found other venues to help improve my shooting, along with putting in range time six to seven times a week.


And I think that's sad that you're taking this so personally and "taking my ball and going home". I for one would completely welcome your input on any of my archery-related posts. 

DM


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

Mahly said:


> To that end, my opinion (not ruling) is that ANYONE can post here....provided the post is about Int/Adv Competition. If that post is in contradiction to a number of experienced archers, they are GOING to be questioned on where they developed their ideas. It is perfectly acceptable for someone to inquire about a posters knowledge/credibility (POLITELY). One may not have any credentials, but a simple "it worked for me" can go a long way as well.


Just for my part, excellent post, IMO. And I'm in no way offended or angry at all, though some of my respondents seem to be. Questioning regarding credentials and experience is, in my view, _perfectly_ justified when it comes to criticizing or debating _content_. Yes, that also means you have to live with not getting an answer, but that's ok when the archery-related content is at issue. It is NOT a forum rule that I know of that it's a litmus test for _permission to post_. That's the apparent thoughts of some and the only thing I'm trying to address here. If I have to live with a restriction on what I say and when and where, "because I'm so awesome and you're not" is not what I consider to be a sufficient justification for obeying it. As I said, I don't think that's a written rule of any kind sanctioned by AT, at least not to my knowledge?. 

That's all I'm saying folks. Please calm down - remember, this is supposed to be fun!...

DM


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

Rick! said:


> Ron was fun to criticize because he couldn't take it. He couldn't get his point across in less than 100 words and wanted to sound intelligent with big words. Archers aren't big word types IMO.


PS: and slightly off topic (so I'll keep this short): since I only joined the forum recently, I went back and read some of the earlier threads involving Ron W. I have to say, without naming names, it was primarily his opponents who weren't the "big word types"; my observation was that it definitely wasn't Ron W. whose vocabulary wasn't up to snuff. I personally think he said a lot of good and useful stuff, a lot of which I hadn't thought about until I read it over the last couple of days.... 

But you're quite right that he persisted a bit too long with his short-on-vocab. detractors (with my "bro-mance" set of exceptions of course). Entertaining, but I'm sure AT had their reasons for the ban which I fully respect. Oh well, an interesting observation on a Sun. morning.

DM


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

I don't know much and I am not qualified to post here but I do from time to time.

A large percentage of my threads on here are moved to tuning or general discussion. 

It is quite apparent that I can't even understand the reasoning behind what is to be posted here and what is not allowed to be posted here.

I need to read and keep my fingers off the keyboard.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

If your unsure why a thread is moved, just ask. If I didn't move it, I'll ask the one that did.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

