# NFAA field & FITA field



## rpdjr45 (Jul 28, 2007)

I think the FITA game is simpler to shoot and to run. These events are kissing cousins and each has unique qualities. I'd love to see them merge. Say keeping the unmarked/marked days, but shoot four arrows. Keep the birdie as a walk up for at least one or two of the six FITA birdie targets. I would keep the simplicity of the FITA bow divisions, compound, Olympic recurve, and bare bow (there is a long bow division with wood arrows in FITA, and I believe Arizona has the only FITA field tournaments with such a division contested). But as the old saying goes: "That ain't gonna happen!" We are hosting a FITA Field/Hunter Round in December. Our nfaa field range is also marked with red and blue markers for the first 14 targets. We'll shoot FITA rules on the field range, and on the Hunter round range we'll shoot regular NFAA rules.


----------



## wa-prez (Sep 9, 2006)

I've shot primarily NFAA style field, but also some FITA Field.

Washington has both events. We recognize NFAA divisions and styles at the Field, and NAA / JOAD divisions at the FITA Field.

I like NFAA field better, because I don't like the unmarked round, and don't care for the EXTREME shots FITA field organizers think are necessary.

I wish NFAA had an 80cm target for the 80 yard shot however!


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

For the opposite reasons I like fita better. My back ground is 3d and fita field is sort of 3d on steroids. I like the unknown yardage and the narly shots. Looking forward to the washington state fita at evergreen - those boys can set a course. I just wish we had more of both here in Montana. 

Matt


----------



## wozie (Jul 21, 2005)

FITA Field. Three classes, Compound, Oly recurve, Barebow-----------done.


----------



## rpdjr45 (Jul 28, 2007)

A-Men!


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

rpdjr45 said:


> A-Men!


AA-Men


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

I love the FITA classes...and I have said lord knows how many times that I wish the NFAA would go that route...heck the 3D groups should do the same. 

BUT that has nothing to do with preferring one style of field to the other guys..... 

I don't care for the unmarked portion....and since 99.99999% of the field around here is regular old NFAA style field that's my pick. BUT I do wish that more ranges were built like some of the FITA field courses. If you want flat and or easy angles and terrain...that's what indoors and regular FITA is for. :wink:


----------



## pilotmill (Dec 10, 2008)

FITA hands down, less classes, unknown distance day and the fact they are never the same.


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

Brown Hornet said:


> I don't care for the unmarked portion....


Same here. IMO, archery competition should be about accuracy in shooting and not accuracy in range estimating.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Arcus said:


> Same here. IMO, archery competition should be about accuracy in shooting and not accuracy in range estimating.


Do you really think they are "estimating" the yardages in FITA field's unmarked portion? If so, you need to read Kirk Ethridge's revised edition of "Professional Archery Technique":

There is a "System", and those FITA field shooters are far from "estimating" the yardages...they flat KNOW it; marked or not! Kirk got blasted and possibly worse when his first Edition came out years ago. 
Chapter 7, entitled, "Debunking Range Estimation" (starts on p. 85 of the first edition) had the 3-Ders in a literal uproar...cuz Kirk "debunked" and exposed the methods to the madness. That isn't all that is in the book, but for FITA field shooters, Kirk was spot on in his assessments in this book. 
For example, Kirk says, on page 87 of the First Edition (and this really got him blasted with controversy and hostility from the 3-Ders..but he spoke the TRUTH).."This type of tournament apparently requires the archer to "guess" the distance to the target. This is a myth. The great 3-D and FITA field archers do not "guess" the distance to the target, *They KNOW it."* Oh, this chapter only gets better from this point forward and things are "straightened out" in a hurry.

You don't play for money on a friend's basement pool table...and you don't go out and ante up $125 or more on an entry fee to go out and GUESS the yardages either...unless you like donating your check to those that are NOT guessing, that is.

Want a good read and to learn about this "myth" you've been basically duped into believing? Here's the link:

http://www.amazon.com/Professional-Archery-Technique-Kirk-Ethridge/dp/0964631202 

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## fanio (Feb 1, 2011)

There is also a (free) booklet available from FITA about what is allowed in the rules and what isn't, here: http://www.archery.org/UserFiles/Do...lications/02_Downloads/Field_Guidelines-e.pdf


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

field14 said:


> Do you really think they are "estimating" the yardages in FITA field's unmarked portion? If so, you need to read Kirk Ethridge's revised edition of "Professional Archery Technique":
> 
> There is a "System", and those FITA field shooters are far from "estimating" the yardages...they flat KNOW it; marked or not! Kirk got blasted and possibly worse when his first Edition came out years ago.
> Chapter 7, entitled, "Debunking Range Estimation" (starts on p. 85 of the first edition) had the 3-Ders in a literal uproar...cuz Kirk "debunked" and exposed the methods to the madness. That isn't all that is in the book, but for FITA field shooters, Kirk was spot on in his assessments in this book.
> ...


Perhaps I've been "duped" again, but is not the intent of unmarked distances to make you estimate the distances? If so, this would have nothing to do with how someone could "beat the system." If my premise is correct, then I stand by my statement. (On a separate note, you seem to have to yell in your posts to get your point across, e.g., caps, exclamation points, bold type.)


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Arcus said:


> Perhaps I've been "duped" again, but is not the intent of unmarked distances to make you estimate the distances? If so, this would have nothing to do with how someone could "beat the system." If my premise is correct, then I stand by my statement. (On a separate note, you seem to have to yell in your posts to get your point across, e.g., caps, exclamation points, bold type.)


They are shooting perfect scores on the UNMARKED portions of FITA field and have done so for years. You simply have to learn your setup, how things appear, and then obviously make the shot, too. 
The techniques that Kirk outlines WORK; otherwise they wouldn't be in the book. He was chastised for letting the cat out of the bag, ridiculed as "not knowing the REAL story" about 3-D and all that, but when it gets right down to it...having something to work with is better than paying your fee for you to go out and "guess" when you could work on your game and go out and "know" way more closely than you can "guess" or "estimate".
Yes, I cap for emphasis...hard to use voice inflexions from a keyboard, now isn't it?
If you would read his book...he includes what happened to him when he was in "your" position on the learning curve. Quite interesting, really...but he did something about it! Plus what he tells you about is completely within the rules for FITA field, too. Back then, some of the "stuff" was against 3-D rules...but how can they "prove" you are "gapping" or "framing" when they cannot see thru your eyes, scope or pin gaps, and how can they stop you from learning how things "fit" within said scope or pin gap? If they cannot prove it, then they certainly can only suspect it and cannot do anything to you for it.
field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Why in the world is there a price of $148 on that book? 

I think that is one I would have to get USED :chortle:


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Brown Hornet said:


> Why in the world is there a price of $148 on that book?
> 
> I think that is one I would have to get USED :chortle:


I thought at first it is a typo, but apparently.... Thanks for bringing this up. Obviously, I'm not the publisher or the seller...but something is way amiss, here.

But that put aside...shop around on the internet...you can get the 2nd edition for way less than that...$22 or so...and some of the original are available at a decent price too. I"m not going to list those websites, but just google the book and you can find them on e-bay or other sites and avoid the "meat heads" that are trying to sell the book at that price over $140....What a world we live in, huh?

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Brown Hornet said:


> I love the FITA classes...and I have said lord knows how many times that I wish the NFAA would go that route...heck the 3D groups should do the same.
> 
> BUT that has nothing to do with preferring one style of field to the other guys.....
> 
> I don't care for the unmarked portion....and since 99.99999% of the field around here is regular old NFAA style field that's my pick. BUT I do wish that more ranges were built like some of the FITA field courses. If you want flat and or easy angles and terrain...that's what indoors and regular FITA is for. :wink:


Agreed...sorta. Can't say I've ever run across a FITA field course in Wyoming. :darkbeer:

But the agreement comes in on having no problem with encouragin and expanding the use of those crazy extreme shots that FITA is known for, and that I have seen in pictures or video. Heck, my home NFAA field course doesn't have a precisely level shot at any of the 56 bales...but there's room for some really fun shots if people were willing. I suggested it once...there was not a ton of enthusiam for making it 'harder'...


----------



## rsw (May 22, 2002)

If the Casper field range is still around, it wouldn't be a bad stand in for a FITA field range.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

rsw said:


> If the Casper field range is still around, it wouldn't be a bad stand in for a FITA field range.


The last I knew the Casper Mountain range was still there, but the Hunter side is a lot different from what it was in the 1970's and 1980's.
Can you imagine today's folks that are used to getting back to the club house after only 14 targets having to shoot ALL 28 Targets before getting back to the club-house?
The field side, the last time I shot it around 2004 or so...was still set up with the first 14 heading down the valley, and then you dig your way back up outta there to finish back up at the club-house on target 28. Tough ups and downs, sidehills, and that last tough 50 yarder as Number 28 always cleaned people's clocks, hahaha.
Then, on the Hunter side, the tough, steep down CLIFF 23-20 always got people's attention, along with the wind bluff targets. Same thing...targets 1-28 and NOT back at the club-house after only 14 targets.
I remember in the 70's starting at 8:30 AM and being done with 56 targets by around 3Pm to 3:30PM...and we shot the 224 scoring shots with RECURVE bows, too. Plus all the climbing up and down the slopes and dales and valleys.
But alas, we were young bucks back then. I don't know if I could do 56 targets in one day now or not, because first I'm an old man, and secondly, our conditioning isn't the same these days. Lastly, since it takes 5 hours or more for only 28...we'd need 12 or more for 56 in one day...and we'd run out of daylight! hahahahaha.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

rsw said:


> If the Casper field range is still around, it wouldn't be a bad stand in for a FITA field range.


It's still there, and completing a major updating. Lay-out will remain, just better bales, etc. 28 field/hunter on 1 side, and 28 animal on the other. The field/hunter side presents way more challenges IMO, but the animal side is fun too.

Each side could be made 'better'...but that also tends to discourage people too...in all 56 shots though, there isn't one that is level...


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Rolo said:


> It's still there, and completing a major updating. Lay-out will remain, just better bales, etc. 28 field/hunter on 1 side, and 28 animal on the other. The field/hunter side presents way more challenges IMO, but the animal side is fun too.
> 
> Each side could be made 'better'...but that also tends to discourage people too...in all 56 shots though, there isn't one that is level...


So what I heard about the "old" hunter half in the pines as being done for, due to landowners getting pisssed off is true, then? That is too bad, because when I was working on that range as a member of the Red Arrow Archers in the later 60's and early 70's, there were 28 hunter on the 'pines side" of the ridge, and then 28 Field/Animal on the East side of that ridge line. 1-28 on both sides, and no separate animal range, yet.

Then, I heard that a landowner and club member had it out over one or two of the hunter targets being across the property line. The landowner got royally torqued off and told them to move those targets off his land, and away we go.

One other fiasco was sometime in the early 1980's, "they" pulled every single shooting stake off the field range and piled them up on top of the hill. All this done for the sake of ONE "unmarked yardage" shoot. They didn't have a clue at how hard it is/was to put those shooting stakes in.

The practice area? Oh, in 1970, it was actually solid sagebrush and you had to pick and choose where you could shoot and then either jump over the brush or go around it. Me and a friend by the name of Corky Story spent a solid week up there clearing out all the brush in that practice area and also cleared the brush so there was some parking area to the West of the practice range, too. I have a lot of "stake" in that range even if it has been so very long ago.
Sad to hear that they lost the hunter half, but glad to hear years ago, that the 28-target animal range is a reality. I've actually only shot that animal range twice.
Last time I was on the range musta been around 2004 or so? Cannot remember, but I was luvin' every minute of it. I did manage to shoot the field side with my oldest brother sometime in the early 1990's and mustered myself a 554 on that field side; which to me was a heckuvan accomplishment on a range of that toughness, with all the cuts and sidehills and wind shots. I even musterd a 3X - 19 on that beloved, infamous, dirty rotten 80 yarder that is just below the bluff...what is it, something like target 25 or somewhere thereabouts? It is right after the steep downhill 25 yarder that taxes your "cut ability". I also was able to garner myself a "20" on that infamous #28....the uphill 50 yarder! That is, if that is still the layout?
#2...the 40 yard uphill, followed by #3, the downhill/sidehill/wind tunnel 50 yarder aren't easy either. Both 65's on that 28-target layout are down hill B**ches, too! Both require "cut and bubble", unless you like shooting outer "4's" that is. At the time, my bow was only shooting 221 fps...and I still mustered the 554! Speed? No NEED....knowing what you are doing...REAL NEED.

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

field14 said:


> So what I heard about the "old" hunter half in the pines as being done for, due to landowners getting pisssed off is true, then? That is too bad, because when I was working on that range as a member of the Red Arrow Archers in the later 60's and early 70's, there were 28 hunter on the 'pines side" of the ridge, and then 28 Field/Animal on the East side of that ridge line. 1-28 on both sides, and no separate animal range, yet.
> 
> Then, I heard that a landowner and club member had it out over one or two of the hunter targets being across the property line. The landowner got royally torqued off and told them to move those targets off his land, and away we go.
> 
> ...


Holy mother of skid marks...slow down. :wink: And now thatt I can access again...

I'll see if I can get all the questions answered.

If by the old hunter 1/2 you mean the section down the hill to the west / south-west...yeah, no active range there. The field / hunter 28 is to the north of that, over the ridge that runs from the parking lot west basically. No idea why, but yeah, there were targets across the line. That part still gets used for a 3-D shoot on the mountain though.

No sage left on the practice range, which also has no level spot to shoot from. It runs north from the lot.

28 animal is east of the road, and not as challenging IMO with the cuts and bubble, regardless of target, but it still has is tricks, and home field advantages.

25..the 80...best shot on the course, followed by #2. 25 is also a great place to get out of the wind and get a bow sighted in. There's a couple of good shots on the animal side, but nutt'n compared to the field/hunter IMO. Lay-out on that side is the same.

All the new bales are 'Arrowlast' (I think). Compressed carpet sprayed with bedliner. A real pain when new (thin walled aluminums be ware) but once shot a little, their great, and should last a lot longer. All being put in on concrete pads.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I've shot both and prefer FITA. Not that I'm good at either, but I think its a more interesting game and I much prefer the simplified classes.

-Grant


----------



## pilotmill (Dec 10, 2008)

Grant,

Its not about being good, its about having fun. Well sometimes its more fun if I am shooting X's, not looking for arrows. Gar.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I shoot barebow, I'm just happy when I keep them all on the paper.


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

grantmac said:


> I shoot barebow, I'm just happy when I keep them all on the paper.


Ditto. In fact, one of my goals is losing fewer arrows than the year before.


----------

