# NFAA to many classes



## archer_nm (Mar 29, 2004)

Gary in the senior divisions (senior, silver senior and master senior) there was around 160 shooters and we gave out around 90 total awards. I sent an email out to the council describing just what you are saying, please all of you that read this contact your NFAA state Director and tell the, this has to stop, we have watered down the silver bowls down to nothing and this has to stop.


----------



## ccwilder3 (Sep 13, 2003)

I have no problem with the number of classes. I will make sure and tell my director that I like the way the NFAA has a place for almost everyone to shoot against their peers.


----------



## JF from VA (Dec 5, 2002)

What classes would you propose? I just got back from the National Senior Games and their system seems to work well. In archery they only observe five styles: compound release, compound fingers, recurve, recurve barebow, and compound barebow.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I would add longbow and have only one senior division for each
Freestyle 
Freestyle limited
Barebow
Recurve freestyle limited
Recurve Barebow
Longbow
A senior division for each class
This would give us 12 men champions and 12 women champions. Then adjust youth and cub as necessary.
Gary


JF from VA said:


> What classes would you propose? I just got back from the National Senior Games and their system seems to work well. In archery they only observe five styles: compound release, compound fingers, recurve, recurve barebow, and compound barebow.


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

The simplest would be just to mirror World Archery's classifications. That would have the added benefit of bringing together two major organizations.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

ccwilder3 said:


> I have no problem with the number of classes. I will make sure and tell my director that I like the way the NFAA has a place for almost everyone to shoot against their peers.


You do that. For those of us that cross over to ifaa, fita, and 3-d, there will always be a place for us to shoot, but, when the NFAA spends all its budget on awards and goes broke ,you can sit on your couch whining


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

2413gary said:


> I would add longbow and have only one senior division for each
> Freestyle
> Freestyle limited
> Barebow
> ...


Drop freestyle limited and compound barebow, they are dying classes. Longbow I'm on the fence for unless it sees more participation. The current "Trad" class has rules which exclude most of the really good recurve barebow shooters and should be completely reconfigured to WA rules.



Arcus said:


> The simplest would be just to mirror World Archery's classifications. That would have the added benefit of bringing together two major organizations.


3 classes is perfect. Especially since you can shoot any single-string in Barebow or FSR and any compound in Freestyle. Makes crossing-over into other countries much easier.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Grant don't think I would drop compound Barebow at Darrington the compound Barebow and Bowhunter outnumbered the recurve/longbow shooters two to one


----------



## ccwilder3 (Sep 13, 2003)

itbeso said:


> You do that. For those of us that cross over to ifaa, fita, and 3-d, there will always be a place for us to shoot, but, when the NFAA spends all its budget on awards and goes broke ,you can sit on your couch whining


LOL. I also shoot FITA and 3D and prefer the NFAA. If you think a few bowl are going to bankrupt the NFAA your off your rocker.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

ccwilder3 said:


> LOL. I also shoot FITA and 3D and prefer the NFAA. If you think a few bowl are going to bankrupt the NFAA your off your rocker.


The NFAA consists of 50 state organizations and within those 50 states many individual clubs. If you think all those clubs can survive holding tournaments and having to give awards to all the classes within the Nfaa, then you are off your rocker. If those clubs go under, that is the beginning of the NFAA going under, but then, you're an expert on Nfaa finances. It is obvious you don't have a clue about reality so keep up the party line with your Nfaa buddies that clearly can't see the writing on the wall. Meanwhile, those of us who can see that writing will do what we can to save the NFAA from being its own worst enemy.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Oh, I should have put a big LOL in there just to be cool like you.


----------



## pokynojoe (Feb 2, 2006)

2413gary said:


> I would add longbow and have only one senior division for each
> Freestyle
> Freestyle limited
> Barebow
> ...


Gary, correct me if I'm wrong, but out of the six shooting styles you propose, aren't five of those finger shooters? Are there really that many shooting fingers these days? I'm all for consolidation, but I'm not sure this scheme would play out at the local level. On the other hand, we would probably only have to worry about a couple awards at our tournaments, that would be alright. At any rate, good luck

Joe


----------



## screemnjay (Nov 2, 2008)

Freestyle
Freestyle Bowhunter
Freestyle LTD Recurve
Barebow
Traditional 
That would be my consolidation of classes. I think the major market segments should be at the very least a consideration of the rules makers. The easier it is to accommodate the shooters, the more accessible the organization.


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

2413gary said:


> I here a lot about there are to many classes in the NFAA. I believe this to be true and I think this is one of the reasons NFAA is in a decline mode. I just counted the number of possible NFAA champions we could have not counting youth and cub and Pro 72 WOW!!! Where does this madness end? With the death of NFAA that's where if we don't do something about it. Just last June California held our State Field Championship Shoot we had a little over 300 shooters and we will give out over 140 awards.
> 72 adult champions is utterly Ridiculous. We have done nothing but cheapen our history and past champions.
> If you feel the same as I do call your State director and Complain.
> Help me get something started here or our field archery game will be a thing of the past


Yup.

Just sit all the way through an NFAA awards ceremony. What's really ridiculous is many of these classes seem to only have one or two shooters.


----------



## wa-prez (Sep 9, 2006)

We don't have too many classes, we do have too few shooters. We need a big publicity campaign letting people know about the organization and our events, and NOT just the indoor events!

It seems like only FREESTYLE gets any public exposure, some people I've seen don't even know it is possible to shoot a bow with fingers, or to shoot and score well without sights.

If you think we've got too many categories, look at IBO and ASA 3D!


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

A quick scan through the senior class (classes) Darrington results shows 27 of 36 classes had three or fewer shooters. 14 of 36 (or nearly half) the senior classes had a single shooter and the bowl was uncontested.

Yes NFAA has too few shooters. But given the number of shooters NFAA has right now they have WAY too many classes


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

good point


pokynojoe said:


> Gary, correct me if I'm wrong, but out of the six shooting styles you propose, aren't five of those finger shooters? Are there really that many shooting fingers these days? I'm all for consolidation, but I'm not sure this scheme would play out at the local level. On the other hand, we would probably only have to worry about a couple awards at our tournaments, that would be alright. At any rate, good luck
> 
> Joe


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

this is exactly whats wrong


Eriks said:


> A quick scan through the senior class (classes) Darrington results shows 27 of 36 classes had three or fewer shooters. 14 of 36 (or nearly half) the senior classes had a single shooter and the bowl was uncontested.
> 
> Yes NFAA has too few shooters. But given the number of shooters NFAA has right now they have WAY too many classes


----------



## Soksoda (Apr 2, 2009)

Too many classes makes it easy to have too many champions. I have seen this in other sports, who is the real champion? Why not make it easy. The best wins the bowl. You can have compound men, compound women, compound youth boy, compound youth girl, compound cub boys, compound girls. Then you can do barebow men, barebow women, barebow youth boy, Barebow Youth girl, barebow cub boy, Barebow cub girl. You can have FITA men, FITA women, FITA youth boy, FITA youth girl, FITA cub boy and FITA cub girl. Forget age, forget A, B, C and flight everything. That way there is a chance for more ribbons but only one champion. The reason I feel that age shouldn't play a role is I have seen seniors shoot as good or better than the mens class. If you are that good then why have your own division, or perhaps make a senior division and make it for 60 and over. Just make it more clear as to what is consider barebow. Its easy with compound and FITA. You can win first in your flight but to win the championship you need to be the best.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Eriks said:


> A quick scan through the senior class (classes) Darrington results shows 27 of 36 classes had three or fewer shooters. 14 of 36 (or nearly half) the senior classes had a single shooter and the bowl was uncontested.
> 
> Yes NFAA has too few shooters. But given the number of shooters NFAA has right now they have WAY too many classes


I strongly believe that the old 3-5-7 rule from years ago needs to be reimplemented. If a person is the only individual in a given division/class, then NO AWARD (especially not a Silver Bowl) is awarded. 1-3 shooters = ONE award; 4-6 Shooters = TWO awards; and it takes 7 or more to give out three awards. Flighting? Easy, flighted after there are more than 15 in any division/shooting class, the NFAA has a table for the flighting that is already in the CBL.

No good reason to give a "National Championship Silver Bowl" when a person shot against themselves and had zero competition!

As far as PROMOTION of the NFAA goes, once again, IMHO, this is where the leadership of the NFAA has really dropped the ball. I see very, very little promotion of the National Outdoor FIELD tournament. Apparently it is left up to the host club? I also don't see hardly any promotion of FIELD archery period, nor do we see any promotion of the other incentive programs offered by the NFAA either. To me, it shouldn't ALL fall down to the club level for this promotion. So many clubs have "newbies" in there that have heard or learned very little about the NFAA other than pass me down bad information and often times bad-mouthing of the NFAA...by people that don't really know squat about the NFAA.

This is, IMHO where the State Directors just might be dropping the ball with regard to filling in these clubs by personal visits at their events and meetings to fill in the members about the REAL story, or as Paul Harvey always said, "The REST of the story." There is way too much misinformation about the NFAA going around and it should not all fall on the individual members to try to defrock those types of misinformation campaigns.
I've seen the NFAA awards "boards" at Vegas and also at the ATA shows I've attended, but it has been YEARS since I've seen on at any local or State NFAA event. 

The PROMOTION is needed, and this campaign really needs to be launched by the NFAA to promote FIELD...afterall, the name of the organization is the National FIELD Archery Association...and not the National Vegas Shoot Organization?


----------



## archer_nm (Mar 29, 2004)

Tom why would you penalize an archer if he or she is the only one brave enough to make the trip, but you are going to have this problem with too many styles and divisions, I have voiced my displeasure upto and after the vote was taken. The only way it can be fixed is for everyone to demand that your Directors repeal the change or you will vote in someone who will.


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

archer_nm said:


> Tom why would you penalize an archer if he or she is the only one brave enough to make the trip, but you are going to have this problem with too many styles and divisions, I have voiced my displeasure upto and after the vote was taken. The only way it can be fixed is for everyone to demand that your Directors repeal the change or you will vote in someone who will.


EXACTLY... lowering Senior to 50 and the addition of Silver Senior was a big mistake. Guess your recommendation needs to happen!


----------



## TNMAN (Oct 6, 2009)

What's wrong with an automatic combining of classes/styles with the next higher scoring class until a minimum number is reached in each class. Has this already been before BOD? Is this too much like deleting classes? I don't think it is if everyone knows ahead of time.


----------



## archer_nm (Mar 29, 2004)

TN, then you have shooters traveling all the way to Nationals or Sectionals not knowing if they get to shoot as they planned and then guess what happens next they will leave and do something else on their vacations and we will loose even more.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Compound, recurve, barebow is working really well for WA. Then make a team championship and shoot-offs. Allows upsets and recovery from mistakes while still awarding consistency.

-Grant


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

Still like this idea...
Compound unlimited
compound limited (BB)
Recurve unlimted (FSR/OLY)
BB Recurve


Age groups from adult at 17-54, Senior 55-65, MS at 65....... keep it simple and we will actually have more competitors per class. It was discouraging that we only had 4 total longbow shooters at the Outdoor Nationals.... in all age groups. Yet look at IBO turnouts....


----------



## fanio (Feb 1, 2011)

rsarns said:


> Still like this idea...
> Compound unlimited
> compound limited (BB)
> Recurve unlimted (FSR/OLY)
> ...


I like this too. But would say Adult should be 17-65, Senior 65-75, MS 75+.

Publicize that these are going to be the classes; if people cannot accept that a "national champion" should be the BEST (and not the ONLY) person shooting that style, then why would you want to retain them as members? Fine to have extra classes / styles recognized for cubs and juniors, because for them maybe winning a trophy or medal has a lot of value in itself. To me, winning a medal or trophy means nothing if I have not beaten someone to do it. I would rather come 10th in AMFS, knowing I've shot well, than come first and win a big trophy in "Early-Middle-Aged Tall Mens' Purple Metal Longbow Class X" if I'm the only one shooting it.


----------



## TNMAN (Oct 6, 2009)

archer_nm said:


> TN, then you have shooters traveling all the way to Nationals or Sectionals not knowing if they get to shoot as they planned and then guess what happens next they will leave and do something else on their vacations and we will loose even more.


You are probably right. But, I don't think you used the right words in "shoot as planned"---it's that they may not "win as planned". They do get to shoot as planned.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

fanio said:


> I like this too. But would say Adult should be 17-65, Senior 65-75, MS 75+.
> Publicize that these are going to be the classes; if people cannot accept that a "national champion" should be the BEST (and not the ONLY) person shooting that style, then why would you want to retain them as members? Fine to have extra classes / styles recognized for cubs and juniors, because for them maybe winning a trophy or medal has a lot of value in itself. To me, winning a medal or trophy means nothing if I have not beaten someone to do it. I would rather come 10th in AMFS, knowing I've shot well.


I agree totally with you except on the ages, which I personally feel should be adult 17-54, Senior 55-65, Master Senior 65+. Reducing the number of classes would be a hugh benefit to the organization and would put a sense of honor and accomplishment back into earning a silver bowel or plaque and a National Champion or Sectionals title instead of being presented a top award just for showing up.


----------



## zestycj7 (Sep 24, 2010)

Just my .02 worth.
Barebow in my thoughts should be just that, a bare bow, no levels, clickers, max 12" stabilizer, no counter balances no string walking and one anchor.
If you want to shoot with everything sans the sight and relese it should be freestyle, compound or recurve. 
If you shoot a recurve you can have closer stakes than the compound shooters but you are not competing against them.
Don.


----------



## dragonheart II (Aug 20, 2010)

Barebow and bowhunter need to be combined. It is just time. I have enjoyed shooting them and used to rally for keeping them apart but they need to be together. Cams give advantage to shorter gaps vs. stringwalking and dealing with all that does to a bow's tiller and timing, aiming at the dot. They equal out. Longbow class and a trad class? Those should be combined. BHFS needs to become "hunter" class and then freestyle and pro. Eliminate FSL, BHSFL, BH, Longbow. 

Olympic recurve
Barebow
Trad
Freestyle
Hunter
Pro

If adding anything create a "hunter" pro division. The current BHFS has lots of participation. Why eliminate that class? The tops shooters in BHFS can go over to the money division and that brings new opportunity in the ametuer ranks.


----------



## dragonheart II (Aug 20, 2010)

Barebow and bowhunter need to be combined. It is just time. I have enjoyed shooting them and used to rally for keeping them apart but they need to be together. Cams give advantage to shorter gaps vs. stringwalking and dealing with all that does to a bow's tiller and timing, aiming at the dot. They equal out. Longbow class and a trad class? Those should be combined. BHFS needs to become "hunter" class and then freestyle and pro. Eliminate FSL, BHSFL, BH, Longbow. 

Olympic recurve
Barebow
Trad
Freestyle
Hunter
Pro

If adding anything create a "hunter" pro division. The current BHFS has lots of participation. Why eliminate that class? The tops shooters in BHFS can go over to the money division and that brings new opportunity in the ametuer ranks.


----------



## archer_nm (Mar 29, 2004)

All of this posting on AT is good but as I stated earlier you need to convince your Director to vote to eliminate what they created last year.


----------



## Gapmaster (May 23, 2002)

Male, female, youth, cub, senior.

Sight
No sight
Traditional
Longbow

Choose your weapon


----------



## brtesite (May 24, 2002)

archer_nm said:


> All of this posting on AT is good but as I stated earlier you need to convince your Director to vote to eliminate what they created last year.


 Bob, councilman can also put in agenda items


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

I wish I had a great answer for what ails field, but I don't see it as the number of classes. Although I'll expect to see a cross burning in my yard tonite, the first thing I'd do is suggest going back to the 3/5 target, just make it a tiny bit smaller than the 6, 12, 18, 24"???? and go from there. And quit giving bowls to everyone. It's friggin ridiculous. Highest score in each Amateur shooting style/sex from the adult stakes. IE: YA Thru MS gets the bowl. Then a lesser award for each winner of each age/sex division....It doesn't have to be a freakin silver bowl. How about like the sectional ones only maybe twice their size??? Don't change the kids. Give them everything you can. Just my thoughts, but then I've been really sick for the last week and kind of delusional at times...... My guess is we'll all sit around debating what to do and the whole thing is going to burn down around our ears.


----------



## archer_nm (Mar 29, 2004)

Mike why would you make such a statement, I was not born yesterday. Point was the members need to put pressure on the Directors to vote out what they did.......


----------



## wa-prez (Sep 9, 2006)

Unclegus said:


> I wish I had a great answer for what ails field, but I don't see it as the number of classes.
> Quit giving bowls to everyone. Highest score in each Non-Pro shooting style/sex from the adult stakes. IE: YA Thru MS gets the bowl. Then a lesser award for each winner of each age/sex division....It doesn't have to be a silver bowl. How about like the sectional ones only maybe twice their size??? Don't change the kids. Give them everything you can.


_The quote above was edited a little to get to the heart of the idea and cut some of the strong language!_

I was actually already thinking a little along this line. When the Senior Division was initially started, it was described as a "complimentary" division. Adult Archers were ranked within their shooting style according to their score. BUT recognition was also given to the high scores in the Senior Division. 

By both merging the Seniors (and Silver Seniors, and Master Seniors, maybe the Young Adults too) with the general population in their gender, but also listing them separately, we could still get the benefits of comradeship (being grouped together on the course) and competitiveness (being able to compare scores with each other) but it wouldn't so much dilute the recognition of high scores and wouldn't cost the NFAA so much!

I noticed they didn't spend awards presentation time to giving out the Flight awards this year (categories with more than 15 are supposed to be broken into sub-groups of no more than 15, and the second, third ... flights get lesser awards, usually small medals).

States could decide on their own whether to give equal awards or something different to these categories. 

Much as I like being a Silver Senior, I'd rather go this direction than take away my style (Freestyle Limited).


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

JF from VA said:


> What classes would you propose? I just got back from the National Senior Games and their system seems to work well. In archery they only observe five styles: compound release, compound fingers, recurve, recurve barebow, and compound barebow.


do they not also have these classes broken down by age?


----------



## hdracer (Aug 8, 2007)

carlosii said:


> do they not also have these classes broken down by age?


Yes, every 5 yrs...50-54, 55-59, etc...


----------



## hdracer (Aug 8, 2007)

In addition to the gold, silver and bronze medals, they awarded ribbons to fourth, fifth, sixth places. They wanted us old folks to feel special...;-)


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

yes i agree with the 3- 5-7 rule that was mentioned and that should include all young or old too. i did have a son who shot in the harder classes free style , our two children have been taught by my wife and me nothing is easy,both are college grads one is a doctor of medicine.so don`t give me any bull-crap about giving them a trophy in a certain class, when they shot alone .we all know why they shot that class " its easier to get an award" for shooting poorly!


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

Gary... sending an email to you regarding a proposal.... if you agree could you submit it thru Tom.... it may be the only way it sees daylight.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

I am in full agreement with limiting divisions and styles to just a few. BUT, we have gone on so long now with all the small ponds that most archers want to preserve their own pond. Case in point is this thread with many posters offering suggestions that preserve that posters own pond.

Our whole society is infested with people wanting instant gratification for little or no effort or work. Why should field archery be any different, pursuant to the way we have watered down our game with so many different styles?

My fear is that we cannot turn back now without losing a very high percentage of our members.

However, I am willing to try, even though it may simply hasten the demise of field archery.

I would propose the following.

Divisions shoot any equipment
Men
Women
Cub men
Cub women
Youth men
Youth women
Young adult men
Young adult women
Senior men 60 up
Senior women 60 up
Pro men
Pro women
Senior pro men 60 up
Senior pro women 60 up

That is it, 14 bowls, shoot whatever equipment you have or want


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

FS560 said:


> I would propose the following.
> 
> Divisions shoot any equipment
> Men
> ...


So basically if you want to be competitive you have to shoot freestyle.

Can i bring a scoped crossbow?


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

FS560 said:


> I am in full agreement with limiting divisions and styles to just a few. BUT, we have gone on so long now with all the small ponds that most archers want to preserve their own pond. Case in point is this thread with many posters offering suggestions that preserve that posters own pond.
> 
> Our whole society is infested with people wanting instant gratification for little or no effort or work. Why should field archery be any different, pursuant to the way we have watered down our game with so many different styles?
> 
> ...


Jim,
I'm thinking that the above would apply across the board...Indoors AND Outdoors, correct? In addition, the "Flighting System" excepting the PROS would also apply, correct?
So, the Overall Winner of each of the above takes home a Silver Bowl, which is exactly the way it should be, or should be intended to become.


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

FS560 said:


> I would propose the following.
> 
> Divisions shoot any equipment
> Men
> ...


Here's an alternative. Same age breakdowns.

You have a choice between a 40 pound samick sage or 30 pound samick sage. 

Cubs can shoot lighter.

Let's take the tech war out of the discussion with everyone shooting a $200 recurve we'll see who can actually shoot (and lots of people can afford to play).


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

Jim, as bad as I hate to say it, in ten years, I think field will be done if not before then. Then someone can start from scratch again. No one is willing to give up anything.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Unclegus said:


> Jim, as bad as I hate to say it, in ten years, I think field will be done if not before then. Then someone can start from scratch again. No one is willing to give up anything.


I wouldn't say "No one"! The squeaky wheel gets the grease, you know. That, and there is such reluctance to get right down to the real nitty gritty and re-write the CBL, especially the shooting rules and to clear out the muck that is is ridiculous!

I cannot remember who said it, but just a comment was made by an NFAA Director that they (the directors) have already decided that there is no way in hell that they'd institute a dress code; let the PROS do it, but no farther than that. So...what if, just what if, the membership people from each State told their directors to vote IN FAVOR of a dress-code? Would those directors vote as they were told to vote...or would they do as Congress does...and vote however they felt like at the time?

Actually, I don't at all think Field will be done for in ten years. In many areas where motivated NFAA members are aggressively showing people the ropes, the numbers shooting field/hunter is again on the rise. It takes a POSITIVE approach when showing newbies, and 3-Ders the "ropes" and advantages to the NFAA, and its associated shooting rounds and competitions. Besides...the NFAA does far more than just competition between archers....each NFAA member has a whole boat-load of personal achievement awards they are eligible for...but of course the naysayers are nearly totally clueless about this...and won't believe it when they are shown in black and white.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

i like FS560 class system that sure would make things simple and save some money for the NFAA then after those 10 silver bowls are handed out,maybe give $5.00 medals to those kids down to 6 maybe 10 places and all the other classes down to only three $5.00 medals . simple and cheap ! so the amatuer`s in first place get a silver bowl ,which would make a total of 10 and the pro`s should just get money only. " their sponsor`s can buy those trophies for the pro`s " not the NFAA ! "


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

I think it's a good idea, but run it up the flag pole and let's see how many salute it and even better let's see how many new shooters it brings in and how many leave..


----------



## ccwilder3 (Sep 13, 2003)

What would be the purpose of the NFAA if it just became a reflection of the NAA? That seems to be the goal of many on here.


----------



## ccwilder3 (Sep 13, 2003)

Eriks said:


> So basically if you want to be competitive you have to shoot freestyle.
> 
> Can i bring a scoped crossbow?



Of course you can't use a crossbow. That is not the equipment the older FS'ers on here approve of. Their edict is that you may not use the equipment of your choice to compete against peers equipped the same way.

Luckily, I don't think the NFAA want's to cut its own throat just to satisfy the egos of a few people on an internet forum.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

Tom, either the flight system or a score class system could be used.

Eriks, no, a traditional non-sighted shooter would compete in a score bracket class against other shooters of the same scoring ability. 450 on a field round is 450 regardless of the equipment used.

John, I think it would run off a high percentage of our members, but we have to start somewhere, or not.

Regarding running it up the flagpole, look haw many years it took us to get the 5/3 shooting schedule at the nationals and now the cabinet has abrogated it basically out of existence.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

ccwilder3 said:


> Of course you can't use a crossbow. That is not the equipment the older FS'ers on here approve of. Their edict is that you may not use the equipment of your choice to compete against peers equipped the same way.
> 
> Luckily, I don't think the NFAA want's to cut its own throat just to satisfy the egos of a few people on an internet forum.



Crossbows are at the option of the club. this translates to option of the property owner.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

I really would like to add 30 and 50 yard max distances to men, women, senior men, and senior women but that would add 8 more champions to the 18 already.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

don`t you think shooter`s that decide to quit cost the NFAA more than having them shoot in that certain class at that event,i know it does in our state in the MSAA cost more than its worth. i still think FS560 has kinda an answer to a money problem for trophies at the NFAA shoots. or just look back 5 years and see what classes have enough support and take in enough money for that class to keep that class going ,if its a loser get rid of that class. simple-simple solutions .let`s run the flag up the pole and drain those small ponds ! now go ahead and whine ,but it needs to be done soon !if a new class doesn`t make it in two years get rid of that class too !


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

FS560 said:


> I am in full agreement with limiting divisions and styles to just a few. BUT, we have gone on so long now with all the small ponds that most archers want to preserve their own pond. Case in point is this thread with many posters offering suggestions that preserve that posters own pond.
> 
> Our whole society is infested with people wanting instant gratification for little or no effort or work. Why should field archery be any different, pursuant to the way we have watered down our game with so many different styles?
> 
> ...


Talk about preserving you own pond, your idea really takes the cake for idiocy. Four classes- Freestyle, Olympic equipment, Barebow recurve, Barebow compound. No more, No less. Regardless of what some older whiners say on here, it is relative easy in archery to maintain excellence well into your sixties and even seventies. One senior class starting at 65 and no divisions, run what you brung. If you are a senior and want to shoot a style other than freestyle, compete with the younger crowd. In case not everyone on here knows, Jim was (is?) a freestyler from way back. The way his sentiments run, I doubt he ever competed with anything but a release aid in his hand. I have competed in just about every style offered and I am willing to give up my favorite one in order to get the Nfaa back to a credible organization.


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

itbeso said:


> Talk about preserving you own pond, your idea really takes the cake for idiocy. Four classes- Freestyle, Olympic equipment, Barebow recurve, Barebow compound. No more, No less. Regardless of what some older whiners say on here, it is relative easy in archery to maintain excellence well into your sixties and even seventies. One senior class starting at 65 and no divisions, run what you brung. If you are a senior and want to shoot a style other than freestyle, compete with the younger crowd. In case not everyone on here knows, Jim was (is?) a freestyler from way back. The way his sentiments run, I doubt he ever competed with anything but a release aid in his hand. I have competed in just about every style offered and I am willing to give up my favorite one in order to get the Nfaa back to a credible organization.


See, Jim, this is exactly what I'm talking about. You'll never get a majority on anything... It's going to have to hit dead bottom center before anyone will ever be able to rebuild or do anything. And to tell you the truth, Actually, I don't even know if that will help. If the materials and technology had been around back when to create really good life like 3D animals, I don't think field would have been nearly as big as it was. Field just doesn't fill the Niche for the average shooter that 3D does. And on top of that, just take a look at the number of shooters in field that are under the age of 18. Lots of indoor, but very little in field. Back in the late sixties, when I was a teen, our club built a set of cloth and Styrofoam animals with chicken wire frames we topped them with old sets of donated antlers. We even had a life sized elk. That was a really big draw.... Damn they looked rough by today's standards, but the shoot we had every fall using these was the biggest shoot in the state and we gave trophies two feet tall for the winners. I'm not saying call the dogs and piss on the fire, but sadly, I just don't see the interest anymore.


----------



## Archery Power (Feb 4, 2005)

Unclegus said:


> See, Jim, this is exactly what I'm talking about. You'll never get a majority on anything... It's going to have to hit dead bottom center before anyone will ever be able to rebuild or do anything. And to tell you the truth, Actually, I don't even know if that will help. If the materials and technology had been around back when to create really good life like 3D animals, I don't think field would have been nearly as big as it was. Field just doesn't fill the Niche for the average shooter that 3D does. And on top of that, just take a look at the number of shooters in field that are under the age of 18. Lots of indoor, but very little in field. Back in the late sixties, when I was a teen, our club built a set of cloth and Styrofoam animals with chicken wire frames we topped them with old sets of donated antlers. We even had a life sized elk. That was a really big draw.... Damn they looked rough by today's standards, but the shoot we had every fall using these was the biggest shoot in the state and we gave trophies two feet tall for the winners. I'm not saying call the dogs and piss on the fire, but sadly, I just don't see the interest anymore.


Unclegus, So I guess the last one out will have to turn out the lights. THE END


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

Archery Power said:


> Unclegus, So I guess the last one out will have to turn out the lights. THE END


 That's not up to me, the young people are the future and I just don't see many of them out there anymore. Who's going to be out there when my generation is gone?


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

Unclegus said:


> That's not up to me, the young people are the future and I just don't see many of them out there anymore. Who's going to be out there when my generation is gone?


I see tons of kids shooting archery. 

The indoor ranges around here are packed after school. Lots of JOAD kids shooting olympic, lots of barebow kids, some SCA kids. They are upper middle class (for the bay area) kids whose parents are doctors and engineers. In the bay area there are tons of asian kids shooting archery. Around here these are not kids coming from families with a tradition of shooting sports. The young archers are out there in HUGE numbers if the NFAA can figure out a way to market to them. Most of them have never even heard of field archery.

If the NFAA wants a future they need to figure out a way to market to these kids and their parents.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Unclegus said:


> See, Jim, this is exactly what I'm talking about. You'll never get a majority on anything... It's going to have to hit dead bottom center before anyone will ever be able to rebuild or do anything. And to tell you the truth, Actually, I don't even know if that will help. If the materials and technology had been around back when to create really good life like 3D animals, I don't think field would have been nearly as big as it was. Field just doesn't fill the Niche for the average shooter that 3D does. And on top of that, just take a look at the number of shooters in field that are under the age of 18. Lots of indoor, but very little in field. Back in the late sixties, when I was a teen, our club built a set of cloth and Styrofoam animals with chicken wire frames we topped them with old sets of donated antlers. We even had a life sized elk. That was a really big draw.... Damn they looked rough by today's standards, but the shoot we had every fall using these was the biggest shoot in the state and we gave trophies two feet tall for the winners. I'm not saying call the dogs and piss on the fire, but sadly, I just don't see the interest anymore.


Gus, back in the sixties, kids didn't have one tenth the things they have today to occupy their time and to spend their money on. Archery is going to have to accept the fact that there is a lot of competition for peoples time and money. Times have changed, but a lot of old time archers don't have the foresight to change with the times and quit living in the past. You start your post addressing Jim, like you two are the only ones with a clue. I,ve spent more time travelling around the country and world in the last 2 years than you probably have your entire life and I still don't claim to have all the answers but I would bet I have a better grasp of the tenor of archers than either of you do. One thing I know for certain, this country seems to be area specific as to the type of archery that its members prefer to shoot. If people never get out of their area, they are never going to be enlightened to other types of archery. In any event,Going strictly freestyle is not the answer as is not eliminating stock car racing, top fuel eliminator, funny car, etc. all in favor of just having Indy car racing. I'll say it again, we don't need all the archers to agree, all we need is an Nfaa committee to set the classes(4), set the rules, and if the people want to shoot, then they have to follow the rules. The archers should never be allowed to set their own rules and classes!


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Eriks said:


> I see tons of kids shooting archery.
> 
> The indoor ranges around here are packed after school. Lots of JOAD kids shooting olympic, lots of barebow kids, some SCA kids. They are upper middle class (for the bay area) kids whose parents are doctors and engineers. In the bay area there are tons of asian kids shooting archery. Around here these are not kids coming from families with a tradition of shooting sports. The young archers are out there in HUGE numbers if the NFAA can figure out a way to market to them. Most of them have never even heard of field archery.
> 
> If the NFAA wants a future they need to figure out a way to market to these kids and their parents.


Match the JOAD classes and distances, end of story.
That would be 3 classes.


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

grantmac said:


> Match the JOAD classes and distances, end of story.
> That would be 3 classes.


JOAD is kicking NFAA's butt as far as recruiting kids is concerned.


----------



## Mike2787 (Jul 16, 2002)

US Archery also offers more incentive for young archers. Making the USAT and traveling the World to shoot archery tournaments is a huge incentive. If a young person asks my advice, I would steer them in that direction.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Mike2787 said:


> US Archery also offers more incentive for young archers. Making the USAT and traveling the World to shoot archery tournaments is a huge incentive. If a young person asks my advice, I would steer them in that direction.


Mike, all the more reason for the NFAA to make Oly style shooting one of our 4 offered classes. IMO


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

itbeso said:


> Gus, back in the sixties, kids didn't have one tenth the things they have today to occupy their time and to spend their money on. Archery is going to have to accept the fact that there is a lot of competition for peoples time and money. Times have changed, but a lot of old time archers don't have the foresight to change with the times and quit living in the past. You start your post addressing Jim, like you two are the only ones with a clue. I,ve spent more time travelling around the country and world in the last 2 years than you probably have your entire life and I still don't claim to have all the answers but I would bet I have a better grasp of the tenor of archers than either of you do. One thing I know for certain, this country seems to be area specific as to the type of archery that its members prefer to shoot. If people never get out of their area, they are never going to be enlightened to other types of archery. In any event,Going strictly freestyle is not the answer as is not eliminating stock car racing, top fuel eliminator, funny car, etc. all in favor of just having Indy car racing. I'll say it again, we don't need all the archers to agree, all we need is an Nfaa committee to set the classes(4), set the rules, and if the people want to shoot, then they have to follow the rules. The archers should never be allowed to set their own rules and classes![/QUO
> 
> I'm not as "worldly" as you, nor do I care to be, but I know how much I promote field to the 3D shooters and the young kids I shoot indoor with on a non stop basis and I've yet to get but one person to actually come to a field shoot. Doesn't matter if there's four or four hundred classes if there's no shooters. My grandkids live in KY which is a big NASP state. Their school even had an archery team. Bought both of them all of the NASP gear right down to hard cases and dozens of bullets, and a deluxe target for the backyard. That was about five years ago. I don't think they've been shot in well over four. One cheerleads 24/7/365 and the other is the same with skateboarding. Bottom line you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. You can get kids to shoot indoors in the winter. I think there was around a hundred at Louisville. When you get these kids to give up their time for summer activities to shoot field, you'll get my vote. If I thought about it long enough, I just might be out in the garage working on my pro street project or hook up the boat and go fishing. You don't have to practice to fish and you can take a break between casts if you like or do a burn out in front of the house and piss off all the neighbors. Since pretty much everyone agrees I have no idea what I'm talking about, I think I'll eat a bite and then go out in the garage and weld on a subframe.


----------



## Jeb-D. (Sep 21, 2011)

Maybe lump all the equipment classes and come up with an equipment based handicap system (algorithm). Everyone shoots whatever equipment they want. Awards based off the handicap adjusted value. 

It would also add a strategy aspect to choosing your equipment. Crude example, say you are deducted %10 for using a sight. If your personal average is 12% higher with a sight, you would want to compete with one. But if your personal average 8% higher with a sight, you would want to compete without.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

from what i have read on here on these post and not as worldly as some, but just a small country boy , we do need to have way fewer classes and if things start to show signs of alot more people wanting another class,then bring that class back . its time to cut back on these classes ,not worry about that small pond trophy for me,enjoy archery,try to get some more people interested in archery.lets worry about these ten years for now,those retired people just might be the answer to more members ?, me-me-me is not the answer , if we all work together with the NFAA Directors we can solve this small problem in a big world .


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

Jeb-D. said:


> Maybe lump all the equipment classes and come up with an equipment based handicap system (algorithm). Everyone shoots whatever equipment they want. Awards based off the handicap adjusted value.
> 
> It would also add a strategy aspect to choosing your equipment. Crude example, say you are deducted %10 for using a sight. If your personal average is 12% higher with a sight, you would want to compete with one. But if your personal average 8% higher with a sight, you would want to compete without.


I used to race boats under an equipment handicap system.

It's a mess.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

First, I started in 1964 with recurve/fingers/instinctive, then recurve/barebow and have won multiple state championships and sectionals with recurve/freestyle/fingers in the late 1960s. I also won with recurve/sight/release. Yes, I am currently MSMFS and do not need to preserve a small pond or any kind of pond because FS is currently the largest pond in NFAA and will remain so, no matter what changes are made, if any. 

The proposal for divisions of competition without styles would drastically reduce the number of champions at tournaments. Archers would compete against other archers of equal scoring ability in the included score bracket classes but they would be class winners and not division champions.

A traditional shooter would obviously shoot in a lower class than an unlimited freestyler. A 380 score is 380 score, regardless of the NFAA style used. The reality is that a traditional shooter scoring 370 is more talented than a bowhunter freestyle shooter with the same score.

I am not trying to build small ponds for any specific styles, but places for competitive recognition of a variety of styles, all competing together in score based small ponds. This would clearly reduce the number of champions and yet maintain a place for archers to shoot competitively with whatever style they desire.

Obviously, there would have to be a method to prevent a shooter from qualifying in a lower class and then changing equipment upward at a subsequent tournament, yet shooting in the same class.

Any time we reduce the number of styles to freestyle, limited recurve, compound barebow, and recurve barebow, it would effectively be the creation of one large pond and three small ponds thereby eliminating some significantly larger ponds currently in existence.

At the 2012 nationals at Mechanicsburg there were 499 total shooters. 373 were AM, AF, MSM, MSF, SM, and SF.

Freestyle and freestyle limited 373 308 men and 65 women
Limited recurve 14 13 men and 1 woman
Compound barebow 26 23 men and 3 women
Traditional barebow 11 10 men and 1 woman

The conclusion rendered by these numbers is that the three small ponds above are not worth continuing. And I am accused of preserving my own pond.

Pursuant to the numbers above, any cost/ benefit analysis known to man would prove the same.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

Mr. itbeso, you have attacked me three times without cause and with spurious information to defend your attacks. You claim that your identity is well known. You are not known to me, and unless and until you do identify yourself, my opinion is that you hide behind your keyboard.

Your bullying will stop now.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

Jeb-D. said:


> Maybe lump all the equipment classes and come up with an equipment based handicap system (algorithm). Everyone shoots whatever equipment they want. Awards based off the handicap adjusted value.
> 
> It would also add a strategy aspect to choosing your equipment. Crude example, say you are deducted %10 for using a sight. If your personal average is 12% higher with a sight, you would want to compete with one. But if your personal average 8% higher with a sight, you would want to compete without.


That sounds better than the score based classes I just spoke about because it would eliminate sandbagging and then changing equipment to win a tournament. Are you fluent in that sort of math exercise to come up with the algorithms?


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

NFAA already did have a style for Olympic equipment, but as of June 01, 2013 it has been expanded to all divisions, including cub, youth, and young adult.

It is now simply "limited recurve" and includes all Olympic equipment requirements.


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

One of those "small ponders" as you call them set new nfaa and international records. 

Cost benefit analysis? The "non-profit" nfaa is supposed to promote archery, not decide which styles are the most profitable. But maybe I'm wrong. I hear stuff like that at my club too, "we won't make any money on field."


----------



## Unclegus (May 27, 2003)

Jim, remember your place. you're not as worldly and have the finger on the pulse of everything that is going on. Don't let it happen again.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

i do have a question,is the NFAA a non-profit organization ?


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

itbeso said:


> Mike, all the more reason for the NFAA to make Oly style shooting one of our 4 offered classes. IMO


However, an NFAA Oly-style class would not get these young archers a seat on the USAT...So, this suggestion is an exercise in futility.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

FS560 said:


> First, I started in 1964 with recurve/fingers/instinctive, then recurve/barebow and have won multiple state championships and sectionals with recurve/freestyle/fingers in the late 1960s. I also won with recurve/sight/release. Yes, I am currently MSMFS and do not need to preserve a small pond or any kind of pond because FS is currently the largest pond in NFAA and will remain so, no matter what changes are made, if any.
> 
> The proposal for divisions of competition without styles would drastically reduce the number of champions at tournaments. Archers would compete against other archers of equal scoring ability in the included score bracket classes but they would be class winners and not division champions.
> 
> ...


Jim, the point you are missing is that there are a LOT of people in divisions other than freestyle, who have come to the same conclusion that I have and that is the NFAA awards are so watered down that they really don't carry the same glory they once did. The end result of feeling that way is to attend other tournaments where there is a much bigger recognition placed on being a champion. Have the NFAA be a freestyle only organization and see how long it lasts.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

FS560 said:


> Mr. itbeso, you have attacked me three times without cause and with spurious information to defend your attacks. You claim that your identity is well known. You are not known to me, and unless and until you do identify yourself, my opinion is that you hide behind your keyboard.
> 
> Your bullying will stop now.


Jim, I haven't attacked you once unless you consider my disagreeing with you on key points as attacking you. And you calling any0ne else a bully is the most blatant case of the pot calling the kettle black I have ever heard.Please list any spurious information I have posted as I feel I have presented my information on a factual basis.


----------



## zestycj7 (Sep 24, 2010)

Do you all really think by dropping classes it will get more ppl to shoot field or join the NFAA?
Get real, all it will do is force ppl to shoot a class they can not or don't want to spend the money for.
You tell me how putting a bow togeather for the freestyle class is what most ppl can afford to do with the way things are no days.
For alot of ppl they just want to get a bow and arrows and shoot.
What is this sport turning into?
Are we all going to have to learn to speek russian ?
If my little class is dropped I do know I will drop out of the NFAA, I know that will hurt alot (right), but I am just one of what I think will be hundreds or not more. 3-D's are more fun anyways.
I thought this was a free country and we had a right to do something without being forced to do what other want.
Well go ahead and drop all the classes for the little guys and force everyone else to shoot your class, Comrads.
Don.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Unclegus said:


> itbeso said:
> 
> 
> > Gus, back in the sixties, kids didn't have one tenth the things they have today to occupy their time and to spend their money on. Archery is going to have to accept the fact that there is a lot of competition for peoples time and money. Times have changed, but a lot of old time archers don't have the foresight to change with the times and quit living in the past. You start your post addressing Jim, like you two are the only ones with a clue. I,ve spent more time travelling around the country and world in the last 2 years than you probably have your entire life and I still don't claim to have all the answers but I would bet I have a better grasp of the tenor of archers than either of you do. One thing I know for certain, this country seems to be area specific as to the type of archery that its members prefer to shoot. If people never get out of their area, they are never going to be enlightened to other types of archery. In any event,Going strictly freestyle is not the answer as is not eliminating stock car racing, top fuel eliminator, funny car, etc. all in favor of just having Indy car racing. I'll say it again, we don't need all the archers to agree, all we need is an Nfaa committee to set the classes(4), set the rules, and if the people want to shoot, then they have to follow the rules. The archers should never be allowed to set their own rules and classes![/QUO
> ...


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Unclegus said:


> Jim, remember your place. you're not as worldly and have the finger on the pulse of everything that is going on. Don't let it happen again.


Gus, the sarcasm doesn't become you, and remember , you could just as easily be the brunt of mine if I were so inclined, which I'm not.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

montigre said:


> However, an NFAA Oly-style class would not get these young archers a seat on the USAT...So, this suggestion is an exercise in futility.


Montigre, literally or figuratively? Do you not think for one moment that having these young oly style archers shooting field regularly would make them better archers and therefore increase their chances of making a usat team. I was just fortunate to represent the USA at the world games in archery. While there I roomed with our top ranked Olympic style archer, Brady Ellison, who had only a brief intro to field archery before those games. Now , granted , it was fita field , but Brady is hooked and said field was as much fun as he had ever had in archery. It seems to me that every organization is compartmentalizing in order to keep their own little niche going. Imagine what archers we could produce if we got everyone to cross borders and experience all the different types of archery. I have no doubt that field archery would hold its own if not thrive.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

zestycj7 said:


> Do you all really think by dropping classes it will get more ppl to shoot field or join the NFAA?
> Get real, all it will do is force ppl to shoot a class they can not or don't want to spend the money for.
> You tell me how putting a bow togeather for the freestyle class is what most ppl can afford to do with the way things are no days.
> For alot of ppl they just want to get a bow and arrows and shoot.
> ...


Don, don't get your knickers all in a twist.:smile: I am a firm believer in reducing classes, I feel honestly that it is in the best interest of archery, not necessarily in yours or mine, but for the good of archery. There are those on here who want to do away with everything but their style. I think shrinking all the classe down to four is reasonable and feasible. In doing that, you and I are going to have to sacrifice a little , as will many other styles, but the end result will be an organization that will be more credible, streamlined , financially solvent, and a lot more inline with USA and World archery. You're never going to drop out of the NFAA because it's in your blood and Unmarked 3-d sucks in relation to field. Besides Gary, me, Dick Land and others would drag you to the shoots.:teeth:


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

itbeso said:


> Brady Ellison, who had only a brief intro to field archery before those games.


When I say the NFAA and Field archery have a marketing problem, this is what I am talking about.


----------



## Strodav (Apr 25, 2012)

Arcus said:


> The simplest would be just to mirror World Archery's classifications. That would have the added benefit of bringing together two major organizations.


I like this idea.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

i just looked up 3 adult male amatuer classes at the NFAA 2013 Indoor Nationals
adult male barebow 10 shooters
adult male bowhunter 87 shooters
adult male freestyle 184 shooters now tell me what classess should we try to keep ? also who deserves 
more bowls and medals ? simple to see what needs to be done ?


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

those 87 shooter`s from above should have read "adult male bowhunter freestyle 87 shooters"


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

Pete53 said:


> i just looked up 3 adult male amatuer classes at the NFAA 2013 Indoor Nationals
> adult male barebow 10 shooters
> adult male bowhunter 87 shooters
> adult male freestyle 184 shooters now tell me what classess should we try to keep ? also who deserves
> more bowls and medals ? simple to see what needs to be done ?


So there are tens of thousands of kids shooting recurve in JOAD programs all over the US and 184 FS showed up at indoor nats.

Where do you think the GROWTH opportunity is?

Do you market to the audience you have or do you market to the audience you want to grow?


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

Excellent point Erik!


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

itbeso said:


> Montigre, literally or figuratively? Do you not think for one moment that having these young oly style archers shooting field regularly would make them better archers and therefore increase their chances of making a usat team. I was just fortunate to represent the USA at the world games in archery. While there I roomed with our top ranked Olympic style archer, Brady Ellison, who had only a brief intro to field archery before those games. Now , granted , it was fita field , but Brady is hooked and said field was as much fun as he had ever had in archery. It seems to me that every organization is compartmentalizing in order to keep their own little niche going. Imagine what archers we could produce if we got everyone to cross borders and experience all the different types of archery. I have no doubt that field archery would hold its own if not thrive.


Itbeso, first off, congratulations on the opportunity to shoot in the world games, it must have been a wonderful experience. 

Now to answer the post; I meant literally. If someone has dreams of Olympic gold or to win a world championship, the only means of them achieving that dream is to become a member of USA Archery and go forward from that vantage point. If you want to work toward national or world ranking, you MUST be a member of USA Archery--there is no process in place within the NFAA to prepare and nurture the youth for those types of elite competitions. The idea of reciprocal memberships between the archery organizations is a very good idea, but in reality, it will only get a person's foot through the door...Sadly, they will ultimately have to choose which organization has the means to offer them the greatest chance of realizing their individual archery goals. 

To address your second point, in my state we fortunately still have a pretty strong archery following. I have seen that the majority of competitive compound shooters very often cross over, as you say, to shoot the FITA events; conversely, however, there are only a very few of the competitive recurve shooters who would make the same effort and shoot a field round--they have no desire (or incentive) to do so. I doubt this finding would be much different in other regions of the country. I do agree that every archery organization is over compartmentalizing, but unless we somehow fall under a common umbrella, I really do not see that changing anytime in the near future.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

a think we need to first worry about the members we have now . those joad programs are great but have we the NFAA got any of them in past to join ? are we going to ask the directors to recuit these young archer`s ? does anyone even have a plan on how to recuit these young archer`s ? the answer is nope, so lets just worry about our members the NFAA has now.


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

Pete53 said:


> a think we need to first worry about the members we have now . those joad programs are great but have we the NFAA got any of them in past to join ? are we going to ask the directors to recuit these young archer`s ? does anyone even have a plan on how to recuit these young archer`s ? the answer is nope, so lets just worry about our members the NFAA has now.


Why the NFAA is in trouble in a nutshell.


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

montigre said:


> I have seen that the majority of competitive compound shooters very often cross over, as you say, to shoot the FITA events; conversely, however, there are only a very few of the competitive recurve shooters who would make the same effort and shoot a field round--they have no desire (or incentive) to do so.


Many of them have never even heard of field archery. (marketing again)

I took a guy (college kid) I shoot indoor league with up to King's Mt last year. He knew nothing about field archery, he had shot olympic target style exclusively. He had never been on a field range. We walked up to target 1 which is a 25 yard shot downhill towards some redwood trees and his first reaction was "wow, this is awesome".

If you don't reach out to them (and there are way more of them than there are of us, better demographic too) then you'll never get them.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Eriks said:


> Many of them have never even heard of field archery. (marketing again)
> 
> I took a guy (college kid) I shoot indoor league with up to King's Mt last year. He knew nothing about field archery, he had shot olympic target style exclusively. He had never been on a field range. We walked up to target 1 which is a 25 yard shot downhill towards some redwood trees and his first reaction was "wow, this is awesome".
> 
> If you don't reach out to them (and there are way more of them than there are of us, better demographic too) then you'll never get them.


Agree holeheartedly, Erik. Also, people tend to follow a leader. I think when a lot of these young people see a man like Brady showing such enthusiasm for field archery, they will be curious as to why.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Pete53 said:


> a think we need to first worry about the members we have now . those joad programs are great but have we the NFAA got any of them in past to join ? are we going to ask the directors to recuit these young archer`s ? does anyone even have a plan on how to recuit these young archer`s ? the answer is nope, so lets just worry about our members the NFAA has now.


Pete, unfortunately a lot of the old timers have burnt out giving their time and efforts on Behalf of the NFAA. It's extremely hard to give and give after a long period of time. It would be nice to have a fresh group of volunteers to take over the reins but it takes time to develop that kind of love for the sport and there is a lot of turnover in archery, people just passing thru, so to speak.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

Arrowwood said:


> One of those "small ponders" as you call them set new nfaa and international records.
> 
> Cost benefit analysis? The "non-profit" nfaa is supposed to promote archery, not decide which styles are the most profitable. But maybe I'm wrong. I hear stuff like that at my club too, "we won't make any money on field."


NFAA is a non- profit 501c4 and has difficulty breaking even. So, it is not a matter of profit, but one of survival. If we want to continue handing out silver bowls at the rate we do currently, perhaps the dues should be raised to $50. Just imagine what that will do to the membership.

I don't think it is only a coincidence that NFAA has similar difficulties as clubs.


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

It's difficult to believe that the cost of the bowls is making a dent in the nfaa's bottom line. That 501(c)(4) owns a couple of for-profit corporations, last I heard. A few thousand dollars debt out of a couple million dollars.

Tell us how much the bowls actually cost so we can have some perspective. I got to hold another shooter's bowl and the dye from the base leached off it onto my clothes.

Speaking of marketing, does the nfaa pay for the banner ad at the top of the page that STILL advertises the Atlantic City Classic?


----------



## Eriks (Nov 8, 2011)

Arrowwood said:


> It's difficult to believe that the cost of the bowls is making a dent in the nfaa's bottom line. That 501(c)(4) owns a couple of for-profit corporations, last I heard. A few thousand dollars debt out of a couple million dollars.
> 
> Tell us how much the bowls actiually cost so we can have some perspective. I got to hold another shooter's bowl and the dye from the base leached off it onto my clothes.
> 
> Speaking of marketing, does the nfaa pay for the banner ad at the top of the page that STILL advertises the Atlantic City Classic?


30 seconds of googling and I found them for ~$135 each. So all the bowls for field nationals were about $10,000. Not nothing, but compared to salary costs of even a low level employee, not very much.

http://www.classicawards.com/silver-bowl-trophy-p-371.html

I bet if I googled for 10 minutes I could find them cheaper.


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

I doubt they cost $50


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

Eriks said:


> 30 seconds of googling and I found them for ~$135 each. So all the bowls for field nationals were about $10,000. Not nothing, but compared to salary costs of even a low level employee, not very much.
> 
> http://www.classicawards.com/silver-bowl-trophy-p-371.html
> 
> I bet if I googled for 10 minutes I could find them cheaper.


Use BING its better.....


----------



## Jeb-D. (Sep 21, 2011)

FS560 said:


> That sounds better than the score based classes I just spoke about because it would eliminate sandbagging and then changing equipment to win a tournament. Are you fluent in that sort of math exercise to come up with the algorithms?


If there were interest and I could get my hands on some past data (to use as statistics) I could give it a try. 

Another option may be to keep the existing equipment classes, but adjust the stake distances and/or target sizes so that average scores level out across the classes. Awards distributed based on overall score independent of class. 

Either option would require some trial and error and go through a refinement peroid. Just trying to think outside the box.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

Jeb-D. said:


> Another option may be to keep the existing equipment classes, but adjust the stake distances and/or target sizes so that average scores level out across the classes. Awards distributed based on overall score independent of class.


I just got the mental image of the 80 WU lined with 40 different multi-colored shooting stations to accomodate everyone's shooting abilities....


----------



## archer_nm (Mar 29, 2004)

Arrowood, just so you and others know the current web page is not owned by the NFAA, that is why you need to go to the Vegas site to see the latest info. We are in the process of setting up a new one that will make it easier to make the changes and the AC banner will not be seen. Should not be long


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

I haven't seen it for a few days, but the ad for the Atlantic City Classic was here on ArcheryTalk.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

Is Helen Bolnick (spelling?) still running archery at the college there? Perhaps the college plans to bring back that tournament. They were able to utilize state labor and avoid union labor costs. That is why NFAA lost money after buying the Atlantic City Classic.


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

I wouldn't know, but the ad is the nfaa ad at the top of the page here on archerytalk, "join the nfaa, learn to be a pro, Atlantic City Classic, the Vegas Shoot" etc. 

I posted a screen grab on AT's facebook page, the picture wouldn't post here.


----------



## wa-prez (Sep 9, 2006)

Well, I've been watching this thread and the other one about the number of competitive categories NFAA recognizes.

"Too Many Classes"

It still comes down to not too many classes, but too few archers to adequately fill those categories.

I've been shooting almost 35 years (started in 1979) and primarily consider myself a Field Archer, although I also shoot Safari, 3D, Target and Indoor - plus some of the FITA side.

I've always shot Fingers styles, only two arrows in my life with a release.

I started out with Barebow (compound, fingers, no sight). Went also to Bowhunter Freestyle Limited (compound, fingers, fixed-pin sight). For a while, played with FITA Barebow (recurve bow, no sight, fingers). Now mostly shoot Freestyle Limited (compound, fingers, moveable sight with scope) although I go back to the BHFSL for hunting season and for 3D's sometimes.

Started as a mid-twenties age adult, moved up into Senior at age 55, now I'm in the new Silver Senior bracket.

So with that background, here's some thoughts!

If we REALLY need to cut back, I'd rather the Silver Senior and Master Senior (and maybe even Senior) age groups got changed back to "complimentary" status as the Seniors were when they were first brought in. Use the age groups for social grouping, informal competitiveness, and "honorable mention" as "First Place Silver Senior Freestyle Limited". That would allow us to keep the full spectrum of styles.

OTHER option would be (while maintaining the DEFINITIONS of those styles so they could be distinguished for those events that want to do so) combine some of the styles. Barebow and Bowhunter together, Freestyle Limited with Bowhunter Freestyle Limited together, and put Traditional and Longbow back together.

I'd go for language such as the following:
At National and Sectional Championship Tournaments, Barebow will be combined with Bowhunter, Freestyle Limited with Bowhunter Freestyle Limited, and Traditional combined with Longbow. Bowhunter, Bowhunter Freestyle Limited, and Longbow will only be recognized if registrations received by the pre-registration deadline are in sufficient number to place a minimum of seven archers in those styles. Archers pre-registered as Bowhunter, Bowhunter Freestyle Limited, or Longbow will be informed within one week of closing pre-registration whether their style will be recognized so that they can decide to change to a different age group, adapt their equipment, or merge into another relevant style.

Does something on this line make sense? If it has support, I'll feed it to my NFAA Director to submit as an Agenda Item.


----------



## Gapmaster (May 23, 2002)

wa-prez----------

I think you make some really good points. I still do think though that there are to many styles and classes. It's kinda like a different style for every type of shoe and shoe size if someone screams loud enough about it.



> At National and Sectional Championship Tournaments, Barebow will be combined with Bowhunter, Freestyle Limited with Bowhunter Freestyle Limited, and Traditional combined with Longbow.


Good ideas but not sure I agree with Recurves and longbows being combined. I have to think about that one. I'm good with Bowhunter and Barebow being combined and Freestyle Limited and Bowhunter Freestyle Limited being combined.



> Bowhunter, Bowhunter Freestyle Limited, and Longbow will only be recognized if registrations received by the pre-registration deadline are in sufficient number to place a minimum of seven archers in those styles. Archers pre-registered as Bowhunter, Bowhunter Freestyle Limited, or Longbow will be informed within one week of closing pre-registration whether their style will be recognized so that they can decide to change to a different age group, adapt their equipment, or merge into another relevant style.


I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. If Bowhunter and Barebow were combined, do you mean that at least 7 shooters would have to register or no awards would be handed out so in that case they might want to jump to a different group, like freestyle limited? Or do you mean if there are 7 Barebows and only 2 Bowhunters then the bowhunters wouldn't be recognized only the Barebows would? Because the reason I ask is if you combine the two groups ( Bowhunters and Barebows) and just call them all "Barebow" (even if they are shooting Bowhunter style they would still be called Barebow), then what would be the reason to call them or have them think about jumping from that group. (Unless there was less than 7 total and no awards would be handed out in that case) Is that what you mean? Just looking for clarity on my part. I'm not always the smartest guy in the group.

And, just my opinion but I don't think there should even be a senior division of any kind until about age 62, maybe even at least 60. I'm 58 and would no more put myself in a senior group at a tournament than a man in the moon. I get enough reminders at the drive up at McDonalds everyday.

I think most disagreements will come from shooters that are concerned about winning awards. I'm not overly concerned about that at this point in my life and would get just as much satisfaction just competing well against others in my style. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't give them an inch. But just having a higher score on my card would be justification enough and if an award came with it that would be ok, but not necessary. To me a visible sight is a sight and now the disagreements come to play about how they are releasing the string, either with fingers or a release. And, to me shooting fingers and no sights is just that, doesn't matter to me if they gap, shoot split or walk the string. I think combining some of those styles is probably a good idea these days. But, those are just some of my thoughts and really probably don't play into the big skeem of things but I just wanted to put it out there. Also, I think maybe there is no need for A,B and C classes. I think A is enough and that is something to shoot for---- if you want to be good at archery. I never was proud of any B or C class ribbon I ever got. I always wanted Itbeso's blue one. 

wa-prez---
I really do though think you have some good ideas though and think maybe something good could come from it with a little tweaking.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

i would like to bring this point up ,but please believe me i am not trying to make anyone upset.when you say 62 should be the age for seniors ,yes maybe that would work for bare bow shooters, but if you are shooting in the classes like male freestyle those X`s can really matter ,and once you get 55 years of age or older those X`s are a little harder to get. so if you have not shot in the mfs class and shot 300`s with more than 50 x`s do you really feel i am wrong.i am 60 now and even a 300 48x is good now for me,not seeing well,surgeries,less muscle mass, have slowed me down and i bet most people in this age younger and older know what i am talking about.


----------



## Gapmaster (May 23, 2002)

> i would like to bring this point up ,but please believe me i am not trying to make anyone upset.when you say 62 should be the age for seniors ,yes maybe that would work for bare bow shooters, but if you are shooting in the classes like male freestyle those X`s can really matter ,and once you get 55 years of age or older those X`s are a little harder to get. so if you have not shot in the mfs class and shot 300`s with more than 50 x`s do you really feel i am wrong.i am 60 now and even a 300 48x is good now for me,not seeing well,surgeries,less muscle mass, have slowed me down and i bet most people in this age younger and older know what i am talking about.


Ya know what Pete, you are probably right. I really didn't give it alot of thought because I haven't shot freestyle a whole lot. It's pretty hard for me to see the end of my arrow nowdays so there is probably some merit to what you say. I'm really just throwing things out there that maybe someone can work with. Next year I may want to shoot senior division the way my bones seem to ach most of the time and the way my eyes are fading. LOL

At the same time, I don't think this problem can be fixed without it impacting someone and I sure don't want to give the impression I'm singling out the seniors because that's not my intention. But for sure someone will be impacted. No offense, I'm just trying to throw some suggestions out there.


----------



## wa-prez (Sep 9, 2006)

Gapmaster said:


> Good ideas but not sure I agree with Recurves and longbows being combined. I have to think about that one. I'm good with Bowhunter and Barebow being combined and Freestyle Limited and Bowhunter Freestyle Limited being combined.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. If Bowhunter and Barebow were combined, do you mean that at least 7 shooters would have to register or no awards would be handed out so in that case they might want to jump to a different group, like freestyle limited? Or do you mean if there are 7 Barebows and only 2 Bowhunters then the bowhunters wouldn't be recognized only the Barebows would? Because the reason I ask is if you combine the two groups ( Bowhunters and Barebows) and just call them all "Barebow" (even if they are shooting Bowhunter style they would still be called Barebow), then what would be the reason to call them or have them think about jumping from that group. (Unless there was less than 7 total and no awards would be handed out in that case) Is that what you mean? Just looking for clarity on my part. I'm not always the smartest guy in the group.
> 
> I really do though think you have some good ideas though and think maybe something good could come from it with a little tweaking.


So far, there have only been a handful of Longbows coming to the State, Sectional and National tournaments. Lets let them know there IS a place for Longbows in Field, but not separate them from "Traditional" (Barebow Recurve) unless there is a significant number at any given tournament.

I'm trying to say (for example) if there are 7 Bowhunters, they would have their own category, otherwise they would be merged with the Barebows. So I think that is the second of the two scenarios you presented. There would be awards just for the combined "Barebow" group unless there are enough Bowhunters to separate them out. The winner of this combined group MIGHT actually be someone shooting bowhunter style. I think we'd recognize Barebow (and give awards) even if there were only a couple.

Reason to let them know the styles are being merged (or will be separate) - it might make a difference in how they accessorize or how they practice. For example, if a guy who would normally shoot Bowhunter if it is separated knows he is going to be combined with the Barebows, he might want to practice stringwalking the short distances, or might want to put a bubble or stabilizer on his bow to be more competitive among the Barebows. Or maybe they are informed that Senior Bowhunter isn't being recognized because there are only two of them, but Adult Bowhunter IS, as there are seven or more. So he might change his registration from Senior to Adult.

This idea is still in the formative stages, so keep the input coming!


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

wa-prez said:


> So far, there have only been a handful of Longbows coming to the State, Sectional and National tournaments. Lets let them know there IS a place for Longbows in Field, but not separate them from "Traditional" (Barebow Recurve) unless there is a significant number at any given tournament.
> 
> I'm trying to say (for example) if there are 7 Bowhunters, they would have their own category, otherwise they would be merged with the Barebows. So I think that is the second of the two scenarios you presented. There would be awards just for the combined "Barebow" group unless there are enough Bowhunters to separate them out. The winner of this combined group MIGHT actually be someone shooting bowhunter style. I think we'd recognize Barebow (and give awards) even if there were only a couple.
> 
> ...



I like this!


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

wa-prez said:


> Well, I've been watching this thread and the other one about the number of competitive categories NFAA recognizes.
> 
> "Too Many Classes"
> 
> ...


Great ideas!


----------

