# Poll: Definitions for Advanced-Intermediate Competition Archery



## Rick! (Aug 10, 2008)

This forum has avoided defining what constitutes an Intermediate or Advanced Competition archer for over a year. I want to make a proposal in the form of a poll to create a quantitative measurement of an archer's skill level to get the conversation started. The goal of this is to maybe bring some of the back channel tips and conversation back into plain sight to promote the exchanges that this forum was created to do. That can happen by knowing where an archer is in their shooting and determining the level of effort to provide (or not) and shape how an archer should bring forth a question. So, vote away.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Avoided? I hardly think so. No voting needed. Still a fairly young forum there have been adjustments. Many Posts have been removed because they were basic. Some were kept due to interesting. The Pro forum was replaced with Target Gear and Tuning.

I'm far from a intermediate archer and not what I call a advanced archer, but better than average.


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

Unless you are trying to create an elite section where everyone needs to supply credentials to comment, what is the point of "defining" the category?
If this is the case, AT dose offer the ability to create groups, from this feature you can invite whomever you wish and control not only the admission but also weather it is open to public viewing.

GRIM


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

I agree with Sonny. It can be very difficult to ascertain from score alone what a person's ability is to convey more advanced archery technique to others. 

Take my own position for example. Prior to my last shoulder surgery, going by your standards, I was a strong intermediate shooter. I averaged in the upper 290s on a 5-spot face with x counts in the mid 40s and my field scores were in the low 520s (the 3-spot was still a nemesis to me due to my astigmatism) and I successfully made the podium at a national event. I have taught archery to beginners for the past 9 years and have been the assistant head coach for an adaptive archery program for the past 6 years producing one student being named to the US Archery Para Archery Team for the past 2 years. 

But since the surgery I struggle to break a 510 in field and and my indoor game can only be classified as pathetic. Do I feel this will eventually resolve? I surely hope so, but if going just by score alone, I would not currently meet your stated requirements to be considered a worthy of contributor to this site. 

So, where would you draw the line???


----------



## antlers21 (Jan 1, 2005)

I agree with above.....


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

I've already voiced my position on this matter, but I'll reiterate it. It's up to AT and its moderators who can post in this forum and what they can post. The forum rules, to my knowledge, don't say posts must meet the approval of so-and-so or a poster must demonstrate a "performance standard" at the pleasure of so-and-so. 

As you all know, several attempts have been made to intimidate me into deference and accepting censorship by certain posters; I've seen the same thing attempted by them against other posters in the past with lengthy, boring, group-therapy type threads for the attackers, resulting in bans and all kinds of messes. However, because of the way the rules on AT are structured, I've judged those attempts as illicit and have ignored them. I continue to post at the pleasure of AT and Mahly, the real moderator of this forum.

So, I hate to say it, but, though we can vote on such a thing, such a "performance standard" can really only be assessed and imposed by ArcheryTalk and enforced by its moderators. They're the hosts of the forum and whether we like it or not, they have the final say-so on the content.

Finally, even if there were "demonstrated performance standards" and other credential requirements, it's virtually impossible to actually verify those credentials on an internet forum. Whoever it is actually banging on the keyboard at the time can't actually be proven to hold the required credentials - anyone can invent anything they want with a bit of typing skill and no one can actually be the wiser.

So I agree with the rest. This poll probably won't actually gather much in the way of useful information.

DM


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Saw some replied and had to look. Odd, the poll didn't show when I first replied, not that it would have mattered. I am not voting. That and I prefer 3D over spots of any kind and not that I wasn't any good at shooting spots, Indoor, Outdoor and Field.
And it was in the early stage of I/A that 3D was determined a target event. And then the ASA Known 45 and 50 yardage classes were started to draw spot shooters as well as those who couldn't judge yardage all that well. Now that Hoyt and others have added contingency money to the K50 even Jesse Broadwater stated of trying the "rubber targets."

Seeing the scores in the poll I had to laugh. Many have placed in and won State Championships with less than shown.

It's been a good many years ago I personally spoke with Jay Barrs when he was the head of ArrowSport, PR branch of the ATA. He stated that there were some 60,000 members of the big organizations. I doubt that number is 80,000 today. So where are the vast number of organization members? Shooting at local clubs and no higher than State level....


----------



## Ned250 (Aug 10, 2009)

Are we talking scores in practice, scores in league or local shoots, or scores in big tournaments? I know you want to put a real life number on the definitions, but it's still too subjective IMO.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

Ok, here's my proposal:
- you're I-A if _you_ consider yourself I-A
- you need to be at least 38% as awesome as Sonny.

Well, I don't meet that last one, but..... 



DM


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

If your practice scores would place you in the top 50% of your division at Nationals that would be intermediate.
Absolute numbers tend to ignore age, equipment and gender. That is easily achievable without the pressure of competition. If a person can't shoot practice scores in the range this section would be a good place to read but not post.

Grant


----------



## cbmac (May 24, 2006)

Rick! said:


> This forum has avoided defining what constitutes an Intermediate or Advanced Competition archer for over a year. I want to make a proposal in the form of a poll to create a quantitative measurement of an archer's skill level to get the conversation started. The goal of this is to maybe bring some of the back channel tips and conversation back into plain sight to promote the exchanges that this forum was created to do. That can happen by knowing where an archer is in their shooting and determining the level of effort to provide (or not) and shape how an archer should bring forth a question. So, vote away.


Thought this nonsense was over. The idea of this form is to promote discussion of high quality on competitive archery topics and info - not to control or label who can participate. I'd say the form has evolved quite well since it opened. Moderators seem to be keeping it under pretty tight control.


----------



## JF from VA (Dec 5, 2002)

cbmac said:


> Thought this nonsense was over. The idea of this form is to promote discussion of high quality on competitive archery topics and info - not to control or label who can participate. I'd say the form has evolved quite well since it opened. Moderators seem to be keeping it under pretty tight control.


Totally agree. Do those who qualify as Intermediate or Advanced get special login privileges?


----------



## subconsciously (Aug 22, 2009)

Almost 2 years ago - and many whiskey drinks.

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2158136

99% of us know what is legit info and what is not. I'm pretty sure I could out shoot Terry Wunderle, but not out coach him. Great shooters do not always make great coaches and great coaches don't always make great shooters.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

That's another good point. If this (or any) forum becomes "a good place to read but not post" for only a select number but not others at the pleasure of who-knows-who, that's no guarantee at all that the quality of information the does get through will improve or even stay the same. Some of the self-described 300-57x gamers on here (who won't be named) don't have output much above anyone else on here, in my judgment. and in some cases it's pretty poor at that. 

I've learned a lot from posters whose shooting level is completely unknown to me - I've used what they've said and it has really helped. And some whose level I do know is very high and some whose level I do know is very low too. 

so I agree, it's very difficult, if not impossible, to establish a correlation between a claimed shooting level and the quality of info that I've seen on here. To me, it's almost uniformly excellent already and since it ain't broke, I don't think it needs fixing.

DM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

GRIMWALD said:


> Unless you are trying to create an elite section where everyone needs to supply credentials to comment, what is the point of "defining" the category?
> If this is the case, AT dose offer the ability to create groups, from this feature you can invite whomever you wish and control not only the admission but also weather it is open to public viewing.
> 
> GRIM


I'd like to figure this one out. Can you deny certain people access?


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Every once in a while someone posts something worth reading, but for the most part it seems this place has just become a coffee club for old timers that don't even shoot competitively. 

I don't think guys that actually shoot come here for dime store coaching. Most I talk to would like peer counseling, and quite frankly, intermediate, to advanced shooters are not what is dominating the threads. I think Rick is just about spot on and he is by no means alone. There are a lot of guys out there who agree. I'd like to see them come forward. Speak up. 

I'm personally more interested in looking into this restricted group thing. It would be nice to have some dialogue about things like dealing with tournament nerves without some guy chiming in to tell how he deals with nerves shooting 290 games in his back yard.


----------



## erdman41 (May 6, 2009)

cbrunson said:


> Every once in a while someone posts something worth reading, but for the most part it seems this place has just become a coffee club for old timers that don't even shoot competitively.
> 
> I don't think guys that actually shoot come here for dime store coaching. Most I talk to would like peer counseling, and quite frankly, intermediate, to advanced shooters are not what is dominating the threads. I think Rick is just about spot on and he is by no means alone. There are a lot of guys out there who agree. I'd like to see them come forward. Speak up.
> 
> I'm personally more interested in looking into this restricted group thing. It would be nice to have some dialogue about things like dealing with tournament nerves without some guy chiming in to tell how he deals with nerves shooting 290 games in his back yard.


Yup totally agree. Restricted group thing has my interest up.


----------



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

cbmac said:


> Thought this nonsense was over. The idea of this form is to promote discussion of high quality on competitive archery topics and info - not to control or label who can participate. I'd say the form has evolved quite well since it opened. Moderators seem to be keeping it under pretty tight control.


The voice of reason.


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

cbrunson said:


> I'd like to figure this one out. Can you deny certain people access?


You can access the group options from your profile page, on the far left side about midway down there will be a couple of links to either join a group already established or to set one up your self. As far as who has access to the group will depend on how you set it up, a private group will be by invitation only. Weather once you are part of the group, anyone can give an invite or just the person who set up the group, I don't know. I have never asked to join a group nor have I been asked, so you will have to determine those parameters.

GRIM


----------



## bigHUN (Feb 5, 2006)

I am fully supporting the scoring 300/600 also at least 1385+ for FITA and 540+ Field to be called an advanced shooter ranking. 
Also I am a big advocate for stripping down a great number of coaches without personal records (in subforum up North I steer a pot so baad some time ago, got some real enemies but who cares).
I am hoping that this "coffee club" trend would be locked out, we have a decent number on the posters list really enjoying repeating stories.
Here and there I am finding some nice articles but once the conversation is turning towards technical details I am trying to be polite but oh man I can not read it through sometimes.

I am voting for a restricted group, regardless if I would be posting anything or not.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Well, this "coffee club" is just that. We are all here and some questioning is somewhere else. There is no face to face one-on-one. 99.0% of everything in I/A from day one could probably be answered through ArcheryTalk's General Archery Information Forum, updated that it is not. The only thing is General Archery Information gives information, not human contact, where I/A has.


----------



## bullzeye2 (Jul 3, 2014)

I would like to know what criteria would be used to gain the privilege of posting. I'm from Alberta, Canada and almost no one up here shoots 5 spot and given our climate outdoor target doesn't have a big following. I shoot indoor 3 face fairly well and indoor and outdoor 3D very well. On top of that I have been coaching for 11 years age groups from 7 to 60 and every skill level. I don't post often because I quote honestly think it's more amusing reading the polar opposite advice that is given out to the same questions. So would I qualify to be in the club? I'll bring Tim Hortons 😛

Sent from my SM-G870W using Tapatalk


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

SonnyThomas said:


> Well, this "coffee club" is just that. We are all here and some questioning is somewhere else. There is no face to face one-on-one. 99.0% of everything in I/A from day one could probably be answered through ArcheryTalk's General Archery Information Forum, updated that it is not. The only thing is General Archery Information gives information, not human contact, where I/A has.


Well I think the situation has resolved itself. Sounds like the Advanced guys have finally come up with the right idea with their "restricted group thing". I support them 100%, they should go do that, in another group somewhere else where they can go be as Advanced as they want all they want. I'll even be glad to help them set it up if it'll speed it along - Best idea I've heard on here yet!

DM


----------



## cbmac (May 24, 2006)

dmacey said:


> Well I think the situation has resolved itself. Sounds like the Advanced guys have finally come up with the right idea with their "restricted group thing". I support them 100%, they should go do that, in another group somewhere else where they can go be as Advanced as they want all they want. I'll even be glad to help them set it up if it'll speed it along - Best idea I've heard on here yet!
> 
> DM



:set1_draught2:


----------



## LMacD (Mar 16, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> Every once in a while someone posts something worth reading, but for the most part it seems this place has just become a coffee club for old timers that don't even shoot competitively.
> 
> I don't think guys that actually shoot come here for dime store coaching. Most I talk to would like peer counseling, and quite frankly, intermediate, to advanced shooters are not what is dominating the threads. I think Rick is just about spot on and he is by no means alone. There are a lot of guys out there who agree. I'd like to see them come forward. Speak up.
> 
> I'm personally more interested in looking into this restricted group thing. It would be nice to have some dialogue about things like dealing with tournament nerves without some guy chiming in to tell how he deals with nerves shooting 290 games in his back yard.


I agree. 

I think at the very minimum, it's worth taking a moment to consider that the title of the forum rather strongly suggests that it's competition focused and that those who are doing the competing are at least shooting at an intermediate level [to be fair, I'm not completely sure what "intermediate" means]. With that in mind, I think cbrunson's post above is both pointed and fair. [Incidentally, I almost certainly would *not* make the cut.]

I compete at least monthly, invest in top quality gear, maintain it impeccably, spend time tuning [employing various methods of such], blank bale so much I honestly consider it fun, practice regularly and with focus [I don't "fling arrows", ever], read as much as I can, etc, but...right here and now, I've not competed enough, won enough, become consistent enough and/or learned enough to have much to share beyond platitudes with folks who, for example, are shooting 300 games at the range but drop a 10 or two when the chips are down. All to say, it's no loss to them for someone like me to be on the sidelines. Just objective truth. Sure, it's fun to chime in and participate in the granfalloon by offering "something", but given that I've had - I think - two incidences where a comment that I've posted yielded an "agreed", both of which were observations and not actually shooting related, then perhaps a shooter of my skill needs to look in the mirror and realize that "my two cents" **with regards to competition** are worth pretty much that at this point in time. 

That said, no matter which direction the forum takes, I would like to continue to have the ability to read the posts and contact folks via a PM. Archers helping archers and all that


----------



## nochance (Nov 27, 2008)

reminds of the old "who should be "ALLOWED" to wear jerseys" argument


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

bigHUN said:


> I am fully supporting the scoring 300/600 also at least 1385+ for FITA and 540+ Field to be called an advanced shooter ranking.
> Also I am a big advocate for stripping down a great number of coaches without personal records (in subforum up North I steer a pot so baad some time ago, got some real enemies but who cares).
> I am hoping that this "coffee club" trend would be locked out, we have a decent number on the posters list really enjoying repeating stories.
> Here and there I am finding some nice articles but once the conversation is turning towards technical details I am trying to be polite but oh man I can not read it through sometimes.
> ...


Good point. The thing I think people are missing is that it isn't about a small group of elitist wannabes wanting to single out those who are not worthy. It's about collecting a group of people that are serious about shooting competitively and have some little things holding them back. 

If a guy is just starting out and wants to be more competitive, that's great. These coffee clubbers and JOAD coaches can really provide some good information to get them going, but it's not intermediate or advanced. Maybe that's all that will ever happen here and it's okay, but I know a lot of guys that contact through PMs wanting more than the everyday dribble that comes out of the few regulars that don't shoot, or claim to shoot hundreds of Xs without ever missing. That garbage is just back patting fluff that even most newbies see right through. I'd highly suggest a name change to "Beginners target archery". Those guys could still come and be experts of shoulder recovery and continually drudge up form basics. 

I've seen a lot of very, very qualified guys post here that I'd love to have posting and sharing their tips to success that won't post here anymore because they don't want to argue with someone that is not even close to their own ability. Yes, some of the best coaches aren't the best shooters, but that doesn't mean that because you can't shoot you are a good coach. 

Myself, and many others I talk to don't come here looking for a coach. We come here looking for peers. I've found a few and I have had some great support and conversations with them, but not in the open forum where it could benefit many more people. That is what makes this forum discouraging.


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

dmacey said:


> Well I think the situation has resolved itself. Sounds like the Advanced guys have finally come up with the right idea with their "restricted group thing". I support them 100%, they should go do that, in another group somewhere else where they can go be as Advanced as they want all they want. I'll even be glad to help them set it up if it'll speed it along - Best idea I've heard on here yet!
> 
> DM


From your comment "they" must have gone ahead and set up their own group. I haven't received my invite yet!!! 
That's just rude LOL!!!!!
I would hate to be the one who set up the group, for all intent and purpose they would become a mini moderator. What happens if the group doesn't like who you invite to join, could make for some bad blood?
Oh well, this isn't the first group that has rejected me nor will it be the last.


GRIM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

LMacD said:


> I agree.
> 
> I think at the very minimum, it's worth taking a moment to consider that the title of the forum rather strongly suggests that it's competition focused and that those who are doing the competing are at least shooting at an intermediate level [to be fair, I'm not completely sure what "intermediate" means]. With that in mind, I think cbrunson's post above is both pointed and fair. [Incidentally, I almost certainly would *not* make the cut.]
> 
> ...


I wouldn't for a minute suggest that someone not feel worthy of commenting because they don't meet the criteria, but for certain, understand that there is a lot to learn that isn't in the books of pages from one or two "experts" of the game. When a difference of opinion comes up, I would certainly want to know what experience or ability qualifies a person's position in the matter. I can gauge a lot of statements made here by my memories of my own progression. There are hurdles I've conquered and many yet to come. sharing those without "coaching" has helped some others, and some of those guys have helped me. That is what peer groups do.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

GRIMWALD said:


> From your comment "they" must have gone ahead and set up their own group. I haven't received my invite yet!!!
> That's just rude LOL!!!!!
> I would hate to be the one who set up the group, for all intent and purpose they would become a mini moderator. What happens if the group doesn't like who you invite to join, could make for some bad blood?
> Oh well, this isn't the first group that has rejected me nor will it be the last.
> ...


Well every forum has some lot of these nothing-left-to-learn types looking for someplace to get away, so I'd be surprised if AT also didn't have some support for private/restricted-access groups. Worse comes to worse I would imagine something could be arranged custom with AT. I wish them well in their endeavors somewhere else, thank you very much.

Meanwhile, I'm sticking by my at-least-38%-as-cool-as-Sonny definition for I-A .

DM


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

I won't be voting, but only because I don't want to influence anyone else vote.

There are a few things I would like to touch on though: My replies are in bold/Italics 




dmacey said:


> I've already voiced my position on this matter, but I'll reiterate it. It's up to AT and its moderators who can post in this forum and what they can post. The forum rules, to my knowledge, don't say posts must meet the approval of so-and-so or a poster must demonstrate a "performance standard" at the pleasure of so-and-so.
> 
> 
> So, I hate to say it, but, though we can vote on such a thing, such a "performance standard" can really only be assessed and imposed by ArcheryTalk and enforced by its moderators. They're the hosts of the forum and whether we like it or not, they have the final say-so on the content.
> ...






cbrunson said:


> Every once in a while someone posts something worth reading, but for the most part it seems this place has just become a coffee club for old timers that don't even shoot competitively.
> 
> I don't think guys that actually shoot come here for dime store coaching. Most I talk to would like peer counseling, and quite frankly, intermediate, to advanced shooters are not what is dominating the threads.
> 
> ...


(No more bold/italics)

This is the very first post that was the seed for this thread



subconsciously said:


> Target Forum:
> 
> Does anyone think it would be possible to get a forum started that would include serious archery competition information and not "this bow vs. that bow" bull crop. I mean mature adult talk about target archery. A place where we can seriously discuss form, mental game, tuning and general archery above a 8th grade level. Maybe there is a forum for this and I'm missing it.
> 
> Please let me know.


I'd like to think we're close to that. Sure there can be some silly bickering, but when you put a group of intermediate, and especially advanced shooters in the same room and ask something about technique, your going to get replies from people who have spent a lot of time doing it "the right way", and suggesting they are doing it the "wrong" way will be met with some "resistance".

We have had that before, we will likely have it again. 

This forum is unique in that:
1)It's design and forum specific rules are all the product of members input.
2)We don't allow even sponsors to make advertisement style posts
3)Personal attacks and brand bashing are held to a higher standard
4)Our forum members are the hardest to "define"
5)This forum was ALWAYS meant to have a certain level of self moderation. It is not only acceptable, but _encouraged_ that members here politely inform others of threads/posts that do not fit.

Many think this is already a snobby or elitist forum. And honestly, I'm OK with that. We wanted a forum for Int-Adv archers to be able to discuss more advanced issues than what bow is best, or what color of vanes should I buy. I have moved DOZENS of threads that simply don't belong here. MANY because they were pointed out (reported) to me by one of you.

If you look at the amount of traffic that remains, we have a total of 12 threads that someone posted in in the last week (not counting 4 that were moved or deleted last week alone...that's 25% of threads moved for a given week). 
We could further restrict who posts here, but I would suggest that would result in so few active topics, that no one would bother talking Int-Adv archery at all.

Here's another way to look at it. Don't ask "What is an Int-Adv shooter?" Ask "what is not?" What is not, in my mind, are novices, and pros. We have wanted to bring the level of discussion above the Novice level, and I think we have done that. In the past, some have wanted to elevate that further and have a pro only section. Where ANYONE could READ, but you needed credentials to post/reply. We had a total of I think 2 threads in a YEAR there. Basically everything they wanted was given to them, and no one could think of anything to talk about.

So as far as this all goes, it's STILL up to everyone here, we ALL have a vote, or input. If we collectively decide we want to change things in this forum, we have the unique ability to change what this forum is and how it is to be run.
Threads like this are VERY WELCOME!!! Even if the majority disagrees with a proposal or idea, the INPUT is always welcome in my book.


----------



## XForce Girl (Feb 14, 2008)

cbrunson said:


> I wouldn't for a minute suggest that someone not feel worthy of commenting because they don't meet the criteria, but for certain, understand that there is a lot to learn that isn't in the books of pages from one or two "experts" of the game. When a difference of opinion comes up, I would certainly want to know what experience or ability qualifies a person's position in the matter. I can gauge a lot of statements made here by my memories of my own progression. There are hurdles I've conquered and many yet to come. sharing those without "coaching" has helped some others, and some of those guys have helped me. That is what peer groups do.


I agree. 
I enjoy reading some of the posts in this forum however, I tend to not post here because I have seen how some of the others are treated. I'm not worthy.

Some of the "moved" posts needed to be moved. But, what is wrong with someone who isn't an intermediate shooter asking questions? Maybe they want to be an Intermediate or Advanced shooter and came here looking for advise?

I do not like some of the patronizing answers that have been given to those who posted here not knowing that they weren't worthy.


----------



## iceman14 (Jan 25, 2011)

cbrunson said:


> Every once in a while someone posts something worth reading, but for the most part it seems this place has just become a coffee club for old timers that don't even shoot competitively.
> 
> I don't think guys that actually shoot come here for dime store coaching. Most I talk to would like peer counseling, and quite frankly, intermediate, to advanced shooters are not what is dominating the threads. I think Rick is just about spot on and he is by no means alone. There are a lot of guys out there who agree. I'd like to see them come forward. Speak up.
> 
> I'm personally more interested in looking into this restricted group thing. It would be nice to have some dialogue about things like dealing with tournament nerves without some guy chiming in to tell how he deals with nerves shooting 290 games in his back yard.


:thumbs_up


----------



## aread (Dec 25, 2009)

We can restrict access and topics on this forum more and more until we restrict it out of existence. That would be a shame. There is a lot of great information and great members who post here. I hope we don't lose it by becoming too restrictive.

Allen


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

XForce Girl said:


> I agree.
> I enjoy reading some of the posts in this forum however, I tend to not post here because I have seen how some of the others are treated. I'm not worthy.
> 
> Some of the "moved" posts needed to be moved. But, what is wrong with someone who isn't an intermediate shooter asking questions? Maybe they want to be an Intermediate or Advanced shooter and came here looking for advise?
> ...


I think a lot of the "patronizing" answers are not meant to be (though, I'm sure some are). We have always asked members to POLITELY suggest that the questions being asked doesn't fit this forum. Being a text based medium, it's up to everyone to decide for themselves, how patronizing/condescending those suggestions are. I have seen people breathed for saying something as simple as "This type of question is probably better suited for _________ forum". You can't get much nicer than that, but people make up in their minds the attitude of the posts they read.

The suppose the point isn't to restrict WHO can post, but what the topics/replies should be. You can be BRAND new to archery, and ask "how do you calm your nerves after 1 gets away in a big shoot that you KNOW is very close?" No one is going to jump you for that (if they do, let me know). At the same time, if your Reo Wilde (or equivalent) and come in asking "I don't know which Brand X bow to buy, what do you think?", it's gonna get moved. 
That's one reason I personally don't like the idea of "qualifying" to post here.

YOU are WORTHY to post threads/replies. Just keep those topics within the Int-Adv Competition realm (or someone might suggest you take that elsewhere...hopefully they are polite)

It is something of an elitist group in that there is a somewhat specific range of topics to discuss. Other forums have similar restrictions (don't go to the Coach's Corner asking what color of vanes to buy either LOL!). Remember, WE asked for a forum to discuss the more advanced topics of competition archery. 

If you feel your being mistreated....or see someone else being mistreated, hit the little triangle with the exclamation mark (report post) on it. I have a job and a life LOL! I don't always see everything as it's being posted.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

> Final say, yes. But we ALL get to say what we would like to see. This forum is, and has been from the start based on the suggestions of AT members (myself included before I was a "Mod"), and will continue to be. The best I can do is listen to what everyone has to say and propose/base rules on that. So while it is ultimately up to AT and the Mods, everything here is based on input from the members. These forums are for US.


Ok, thanks Mahly, couldn't have said it better myself...

DM


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

Perhaps the Mods should add the group function to the general forum, I just checked and most of the groups are not private so the masses can still see the content without disturbing the direction that the group is moving in. If someone who is not in the group whishes to join they can request admission or direct their question to a general form to get a broader range of answers.
Bring the groups to the main floor of the forum may also help in building the group membership to help with their adgenda.

GRIM


----------



## archeryshooter3 (Apr 12, 2011)

Ok heres my 2 cents, to me the intent of this forum isnt who you are or how you shoot. Its about the TOPICS BEING DISCUSSED are more technical and advanced beyond what a beginning or casual archer is needing.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

XForce Girl said:


> I agree.
> I enjoy reading some of the posts in this forum however, I tend to not post here because I have seen how some of the others are treated. I'm not worthy.
> 
> Some of the "moved" posts needed to be moved. But, what is wrong with someone who isn't an intermediate shooter asking questions? Maybe they want to be an Intermediate or Advanced shooter and came here looking for advise?
> ...


I wouldn't ever restrict who is posting, only WHAT is being posted, and the direction threads are going. To me there is nothing wrong with letting others know what your experience level is. The dishonest ones are easily identifiable anyway. 

The focus of a peer group should always be "this is what has worked for me", or "this is what Mr Pro says he does", or anything as an offering rather than instruction. You should never feel less than worthy.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

Fully agree with you.


archeryshooter3 said:


> Ok heres my 2 cents, to me the intent of this forum isnt who you are or how you shoot. Its about the TOPICS BEING DISCUSSED are more technical and advanced beyond what a beginning or casual archer is needing.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

It's been a while, and I quickly looked through the original thread about starting this sub forum, but I remember this as being a way to start a platform to discuss target archery. Then somehow it became a who's got a bigger shoe size contest and turned into I&A and now it's trying to become exclusive once again? 

I'm all for staying on topic in this sub forum, but the post flow in it at times barely sustains itself. Take away from that and you're left with not much else to have. In my honest opinion, I think the other direction should be the way we are going. Promoting discussions and bringing in new members to the target side of archery.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

RCR_III said:


> Promoting discussions and bringing in new members to the target side of archery.


That's what the General and Coaches forums are for. After they've gotten some string time under their belts, they will be better prepared to respond to the others in this forum in a constructive manner and in a way that would allow them to be able to take something valuable from the discussion. To get into a long discussion about why you set your arrow on your rest in relation to the arrow's nodes is not going to help an aspiring target archer very much, but such a discussion would help a more seasoned archer pick up a few extra points in their game where an advanced archer would just say, "there's an app for that."


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

We have got to be more patient with people, it might take one post or one week or one month or two years to get through to some people. That is why visiting these same topics over and over is so important because every time they get discussed there is a slightly different way each and every one of us write out our thoughts and sooner or later they can finally get through to the people that needed to see them.

One thing to consider is confidence in your choices right now, when I go to the iowa pro am here in two weeks I am going to have a game plan for the weekend on how I am going to do things and I am going to be 100% confident in that plan. Isn't that what we are supposed to do? If I talk here on archery talk about that plan you are going to hear me talking about how confident I am in that plan and that it is the best choice for me to do well in the tournament. So yeah, it might take a person pointing out the stupid stuff in my plan for me to actually see the flaws in it and I might not see it today or next week but hopefully in time I will see what that guy is trying to give me and then i can move on.

I have changed so much since becoming a member here, I go back and read some of my threads and posts from back when I first came here and it is so easy for me to see the transformation. One of the problems that we have is success, back when I was just starting to learn things I had a weekend at a asa tournament where I sucked for 23 targets. That is all day saturday and then first 3 targets of sunday morning, I zipped open my bag and threw in my hinge release and took out my index finger release. By the end of the tournament I went from 43rd place to 7th place and got my first top 10 and I believe I shot 26 up on those last 16 targets. 

That stupid success caused me to waste almost 2 months trying to do it again with a index finger release and it simply didn't happen, I was lucky and only wasted 2 months where some people waste another few years or decades. These guys are confident in their choices and they just need to see the truth in writing and in person over and over until they can finally get on board with the right person who can lead them.

So with me you are going to get someone who is very confident in what I believe in right now and I am going to do my best to give you the things that have helped me progress. At the same time I can't wait to move on to new levels, right now I am good enough that I feel really good about every part of my shooting and I don't really have any areas red flagged for improvement. So I don't even know what areas I will have that next break through in. I actually think I may be to the point where I just need to shoot some 60x rounds in competition and see the little mental things that allowed me to do it and then I can be competitive at a high level.

One thing I guarantee you that will not ever happen is I will not abandon Archery Talk, this crap of the high level shooters and coaches avoiding us is beyond weak and I don't like it.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

I see your point. I guess I might be a little jaded as to seeing this sub forum as a clique in high school at times when it first started with how some people shunned others and ran them away. Myself included at one time. That's why there's not many people that post in here and more pm's from people saying they don't want to get flammed for posting.


montigre said:


> That's what the General and Coaches forums are for. After they've gotten some string time under their belts, they will be better prepared to respond to the others in this forum in a constructive manner and in a way that would allow them to be able to take something valuable from the discussion. To get into a long discussion about why you set your arrow on your rest in relation to the arrow's nodes is not going to help an aspiring target archer very much, but such a discussion would help a more seasoned archer pick up a few extra points in their game where an advanced archer would just say, "there's an app for that."


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

I agree on the confidence part. I've done that as well. And other high level shooters have too. That's a big part in becoming a high level shooter. Confidence. 

The part on high level shooters and coaches not posting anymore. I don't blame them. They have their own platforms to speak on. They either get paid to do so and if you want their information you pay for it, or they are promoting theirselves and in turn their sponsors too. If you follow John Dudley's podcasts. They follow at times some good discussions we have on here. But he doesn't need to come on here and give advice and have someone that does or does not know him tell him he's wrong. He can go onto his podcast, or at one of his seminars, and teach it how it is from his perspective and not be questioned. The same can be said for GRIV and his thing a week videos. 

So in a way, the confidence we all have in what works for us and the confidence we have in fighting for those issues, ran the top level shooters and coaches off.


Padgett said:


> We have got to be more patient with people, it might take one post or one week or one month or two years to get through to some people. That is why visiting these same topics over and over is so important because every time they get discussed there is a slightly different way each and every one of us write out our thoughts and sooner or later they can finally get through to the people that needed to see them.
> 
> One thing to consider is confidence in your choices right now, when I go to the iowa pro am here in two weeks I am going to have a game plan for the weekend on how I am going to do things and I am going to be 100% confident in that plan. Isn't that what we are supposed to do? If I talk here on archery talk about that plan you are going to hear me talking about how confident I am in that plan and that it is the best choice for me to do well in the tournament. So yeah, it might take a person pointing out the stupid stuff in my plan for me to actually see the flaws in it and I might not see it today or next week but hopefully in time I will see what that guy is trying to give me and then i can move on.
> 
> ...


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

RCR_III said:


> That's why there's not many people that post in here and more pm's from people saying they don't want to get flammed for posting.


This forum really does not need to have a hundred posts a day. Seriously, when you're practicing, you're working on one or two things at a time and for a period of weeks or months. If you use a coach, you're not camping out in their back yard, but seeing them once or twice a year and working from the plan that was developed by you both. Sometimes here people just need to fill the airwaves, and that is okay--not everyone is comfortable with occasional silence, but constant jabber is not necessary to remain viable or an asset. 

With regard to being flamed...hell, I get flamed every couple of weeks by someone... Gotta have a thick skin in this game. :wink:


----------



## subconsciously (Aug 22, 2009)

When people learn to address the question and not the person - things tend to run smoother.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

GRIMWALD said:


> From your comment "they" must have gone ahead and set up their own group. I haven't received my invite yet!!!
> That's just rude LOL!!!!!
> I would hate to be the one who set up the group, for all intent and purpose they would become a mini moderator. What happens if the group doesn't like who you invite to join, could make for some bad blood?
> Oh well, this isn't the first group that has rejected me nor will it be the last.
> ...


And who are you? I don't recall seeing posts here from you. Do you shoot competitively?

I am pretty sure the guy who started the new group is not going to regret it. Especially after seeing the members that have already joined.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Rick! said:


> This forum has avoided defining what constitutes an Intermediate or Advanced Competition archer for over a year. I want to make a proposal in the form of a poll to create a quantitative measurement of an archer's skill level to get the conversation started. The goal of this is to maybe bring some of the back channel tips and conversation back into plain sight to promote the exchanges that this forum was created to do. That can happen by knowing where an archer is in their shooting and determining the level of effort to provide (or not) and shape how an archer should bring forth a question. So, vote away.


My scores (with the exception of lately) fall within the intermediate range. That said, I don't think anyone should be restricted from posting here... and I don't see the OP suggesting that either.


----------



## GrahamJ (Apr 24, 2014)

I should perhaps preface my thoughts with the assurance to ya'll that I am neither intermediate nor advanced according to the poll. I would like to be at some point, though, and I am trying to get there. I almost never post in this forum, because I am not good enough to have good advice-I am still trying to work on the things I am learning here. I find little value, however, in the general forums, because I am not interested in just flinging arrows. I want them to count. I am in favor of possibly creating a private group, but I would really hope that archers like me would still have access to read the forums, if not actually contribute to them. To entirely close off the group from the rest of us who are not in the I-A group but above the "General Forum" group would be a disappointment to be sure.
regards,
Graham


----------



## iceman14 (Jan 25, 2011)

I'm just here to read. The general section gets to be too boring and full of misinformation to surf without wanting to reach through the screen and flick someone in the forehead. Private group is cool, let's guys ramble in peace. I do see how this section is a benefit to people trying to up their game to the int/adv level, and then a group for the people already there to discuss their own thing. Win win in my book. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dunmoab (Apr 4, 2013)

I kinda like the rating system. Not for the reasons originally stated, but to assist readers in whether or not to accept the info written or not. On the same note, this is a dangerous slope to get onto. There are some that know how to coach and diagnose form/shooting issues with great ability......I can't. I'm not a coach! But, my shooting ability has people asking my advice constantly. 
So I see the "rating" system as kind of a double edged sword thing.


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

cbrunson said:


> And who are you? I don't recall seeing posts here from you. Do you shoot competitively?
> 
> I am pretty sure the guy who started the new group is not going to regret it. Especially after seeing the members that have already joined.


Who am I? I am an absolute nobody. 
I have competed professionally but since my wife was diagnosed with cancer, our live have gone a different route. My shooting scores fall well within your guidelines but my talents lean more toward the design and development of some the equipment you may be using. If asked, would I be a party to your group, no. I don't support elitism but I do recognize the need for being able to control any discourse between peers.
Don't make the mistake of ignoring those who don't meet your skill level requirements, we of the masses do and have contributed to others advancing their goals.
As for posting content, quantity is not the same as quality. Also, for the record, I don't mind that you wish to establish your own group. If I had, I would not have suggested the feature in the first place.

GRIM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

GRIMWALD said:


> Who am I? I am an absolute nobody.
> I have competed professionally but since my wife was diagnosed with cancer, our live have gone a different route. My shooting scores fall well within your guidelines but my talents lean more toward the design and development of some the equipment you may be using. If asked, would I be a party to your group, no. I don't support elitism but I do recognize the need for being able to control any discourse between peers.
> Don't make the mistake of ignoring those who don't meet your skill level requirements, we of the masses do and have contributed to others advancing their goals.
> As for posting content, quantity is not the same as quality. Also, for the record, I don't mind that you wish to establish your own group. If I had, I would not have suggested the feature in the first place.
> ...


My reason for asking is because I don't remember anything from you on any subject in this forum until now. There are in fact several people posting on this subject that never contribute to anything of substance. Why do you suppose that is? Why did you find this subject worthy of your input? Is it because it is by nature an argumentative topic? You wouldn't be invited because nobody knows who you are. You don't normally contribute.

I don't buy into this "elitist" accusation crap. There are some guys I've spoken with that admittedly don't shoot higher level scores and agree that the forum is not what it is advertised to be. That's okay if that's what the controlling regulars make it, but there's nothing wrong with a small (or large) group wanting something more. There are some guys here that I look up to that have climbed the ropes and earned higher designation. I'll be damned if I'm going to chastise them for being better than I am. I want to learn from them, not see them pushed away because some guy that hasn't shot for a decade or more remembers something he read in a book, that he finds contradictory.

And as crazy as it sounds, some of those I'd like to learn from are young enough to be one of my kids.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> I don't buy into this "elitist" accusation crap.


As you can see, the thread doesn't agree with you. So I would invite you to combat that image with a strategy change - try addressing _content_ rather than the _poster_ as you're attempting to do here. If you have a quarrel with what someone says, demanding credentials, name-calling and trying to extract deference will NOT achieve the goal of this forum - the exchange of useful information at a TBD "I-A level". 

Instead of "who are you? do you shoot competitively?", "so you don't compete much do you unclejane" or "competition is tough, unclejane", etc., try addressing _what_ your interlocutor is saying and see if the two of you can come up with something useful. Leave the Ad Hominums out. Try it. It's not as hard or ego-puncturing as you might think and you'll be amazed at how much more you'll learn, and how much nicer everyone will be to you.

More generally, I think that's where things start to go awry on these forums, when a few take it upon themselves to attack individuals rather than deal with merely what they say. There seems to be pretty general agreement that that's one of the main problems in this thread also.

DM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

dmacey said:


> As you can see, the thread doesn't agree with you. So I would invite you to combat that image with a strategy change - try addressing _content_ rather than the _poster_ as you're attempting to do here. If you have a quarrel with what someone says, demanding credentials, name-calling and trying to extract deference will NOT achieve the goal of this forum - the exchange of useful information at a TBD "I-A level".
> 
> Instead of "who are you? do you shoot competitively?", "so you don't compete much do you unclejane" or "competition is tough, unclejane", etc., try addressing _what_ your interlocutor is saying and see if the two of you can come up with something useful. Leave the Ad Hominums out. Try it. It's not as hard or ego-puncturing as you might think and you'll be amazed at how much more you'll learn, and how much nicer everyone will be to you.
> 
> ...


What does the title of the sub-forum say? I don't believe the literal sense of the words "Intermediate to Advanced *Competition* Archery", are confusing.

So what do you contribute to that specific interest?


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> What does the title of the sub-forum say? I don't believe the literal sense of the words "Intermediate to Advanced *Competition* Archery", are confusing.
> 
> So what do you contribute to that specific interest?


Exactly what I mean - you're already going after _me_ rather than something I've posted. This is what's causing the pushback you keep getting on here. Again, I invite you to try the simple strategy I just suggested to you: find a post of mine somewhere which contains some archery-related information that you don't agree with. Don't attack _me_ or call names or demand credentials, try attacking _what I said as it pertains to archery_ in that post. 
Let's discuss it. If it's wrong, I do honestly want to know. 
PS: be aware that I might criticize what you say, don't be alarmed by that - it's only an honest attempt to gather information or seek clarification, it's not a personal attack.
Your turn.

DM


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

cbrunson said:


> What does the title of the sub-forum say? I don't believe the literal sense of the words "Intermediate to Advanced *Competition* Archery", are confusing.
> 
> So what do you contribute to that specific interest?


As per the heading and Sticky for this forum;
This unique set of rules will be applied to the Intermediate-Advanced Competition Archery.
1. No bashing. Only topical productive conversation. 
2. *Target Archery questions or instructions only.*
3. Sponsors can post but only on-topic.
More rules to follow as this Forum matures.
4. Equipment issues should be more based around how you use the equipment in competition, vs. what brand is best, or what brand should I buy.
Brand specific issues should be kept to the "Official gear thread"
5. Most tuning questions are best saved for "General Archery Discussion"
6. *NO personal attacks.* Posts/threads containing personal attacks and/or insults will be edited, or deleted. More serious, or repeated violations will result in infractions and or banning.

Anyone have a dictionary? Intermediate; Short and simple, somewhere in between, not a Newbie, not a Advanced. Competing; short and simple, contesting against another or time.

Competing at any level is competing. A local club, state level, Regional or Sectional or National level.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

dmacey said:


> Exactly what I mean - you're already going after _me_ rather than something I've posted. This is what's causing the pushback you keep getting on here. Again, I invite you to try the simple strategy I just suggested to you: find a post of mine somewhere which contains some archery-related information that you don't agree with. Don't attack _me_ or call names or demand credentials, try attacking _what I said as it pertains to archery_ in that post.
> Let's discuss it. If it's wrong, I do honestly want to know.
> PS: be aware that I might criticize what you say, don't be alarmed by that - it's only an honest attempt to gather information or seek clarification, it's not a personal attack.
> Your turn.
> ...


It was a simple question. What do you contribute besides posts like this one?



dmacey said:


> Meanwhile, I'm sticking by my at-least-38%-as-cool-as-Sonny definition for I-A .
> 
> DM


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

This is a forum about performance, specifically competitive performance.
When someone posts that X technique or Y equipment works well for them it absolutely matters what their level of performance is.

The problem is that people have a hard time accepting that they are a below average shooter. It becomes worse when they are so out of touch with what average is that they openly doubt others are capable of performing at what seems to them a very high level when in fact it's nothing that isn't done by many pretty average shooters on a regular basis.

I absolutely support any skill level reading and posting questions. However anyone who is looking to provide input should definitely be prepared to establish what their performance level is or was in the past.


Grant


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> It was a simple question. What do you contribute besides posts like this one?


Here are a couple of examples:
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3274458
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3188065
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3177913
You can do a search for more, but as I bear the burden of proof at this juncture, I've supplied these 3.

Again, find something about _what_ I said _as it pertains to archery_ and criticize it. Don't just demand my credentials or call me "unclejane" - address the _content_ that you find incorrect. As I said, I welcome criticism of what I say, as there's no other way for me to learn.

Ok, go, your turn.

DM


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

grantmac said:


> I absolutely support any skill level reading and posting questions. However anyone who is looking to provide input should definitely be prepared to establish what their performance level is or was in the past.
> Grant


No, there's nothing in the forum rules that says anyone has to "establish what their performance level is or was" to your satisfaction, or "cbrunson"s or "lazarus" or whoever. 
Again I invite you to do the same thing: simply stick to criticizing _content_ rather than posters. Don't worry about credentials or anything like that - just stick to the content. 
You'll get so much less pushback and you'll learn so much more. I promise, it really does work.

DM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

grantmac said:


> This is a forum about performance, specifically competitive performance.
> When someone posts that X technique or Y equipment works well for them it absolutely matters what their level of performance is.
> 
> The problem is that people have a hard time accepting that they are a below average shooter. It becomes worse when they are so out of touch with what average is that they openly doubt others are capable of performing at what seems to them a very high level when in fact it's nothing that isn't done by many pretty average shooters on a regular basis.
> ...


Especially if they want to be taken seriously. I can openly admit guys that can not shoot as well as I normally do have helped me improve. It's not about the highest scoring individual being the most qualified. It's about sharing experiences with people that are dealing with the same issues. I am very interested in hearing from someone that shoots higher scores in completion that in practice, regardless of what those scores are. That is something I struggle with. The guy that finally shot a clean 5-spot in his back yard isn't going to be very helpful, unless he is a psychologist. Then I would expect that to be made known as well.


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> My reason for asking is because I don't remember anything from you on any subject in this forum until now... (snip)


I recognize GRIMWALD's username as someone that has contributed useful and insightful information even if others don't, and IMO that demonstrates the danger of user rankings and sub-forum exclusivity.
Some have great physical and/or mental talents that allow them to record very impressive scorecard totals, others may have a strong understanding of the physiological/mental aspects of archery but for whatever reason lack the physical ability to shoot at the highest level, others may have technical/mechanical archery knowledge that doesn't necessarily translate to them being high level shooters themselves. Is this forum better with, or without, contributions from all three?

I would like to see this forum remain basically unchanged. Segregating the user base by shooting ability or technical knowledge might relieve a bit of aggravation felt by the "experts" when dealing with those they feel less qualified, but it also makes it more difficult for those who are trying to advance to the next level to interact with those that can help them get there.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

A few things (some related to the topic, some to the content of this thread)

We see some "back and forth" between a few member in this thread alone. To ME, the VAST majority of this friction is from people reading intent or emotion. 
PLEASE try to look at questions or comments without doing this when possible. Some questions may be perfectly acceptable, but looked at as offensive (especially amongst this crowd).

If someone is asking you your skill/experience level, that doesn't necessarily mean they are trying to attack you. Try to read questions like that as though Spock was asking them.
This helps prevent you from taking offense at a question that might not have had offensive intent.
For the record, I suspect quite a few in here are well above my personal skill level. That's fine. That doesn't mean I don't have anything to contribute from time to time as a member vs. a Mod. I am not going to be offended by a simple question. Heck, you can ask me if I'm a communist terrorist... the answer is no. No big deal. Being asked a question doesn't mean anyone is accusing you of anything.

That ties into the next point. Some people here feel intimidated to the point of not wanting to post (several have come forward and said so). I think MUCH of that comes from the above. Asking someone a question should not be looked at as an attack. Being told by a member that they don't feel your post is in the right forum is NOT an attack. Often, that is meant to HELP the poster. If someone has a question on what works best in 3-D, yes, you might get a better reply there. If it fits BOTH forums, I might move it to 3-D but leave a "redirect" here so both forums can see the question and reply. If it is MUCH better suited to another forum, I would most likely have an expiring redirect, removing clutter, but allowing those who wish to help to be able to see the post if only for a short time.
NONE of those cases are punitive. Now with the target gear and tuning forum, MOST redirects go there, but some still go to Gen pop or another forum.

We are WAY too easily offended by simple questions, or suggestions that are often meant to help, not insult.

We are kind of a proud group in general. We have put in the time and effort to get where we are. We don't like when someone questions that. I say that we need to put our pride aside a little bit and look at simple questions as just that. DO NOT insert your own ideas of how you might think someone is asking a simple question. 

And if/when you have a disagreement with someone that starts getting personal.... replies here don't help. The P in PM is for "personal". If you think someone is attacking you, PM them and get some clarification instead of calling them out in an open forum. OFTEN you will find out what you THOUGHT was an attack, wasn't meant to be...perhaps they just chose the wrong words to use. 

Sorry to have drifted from the original topic, but I think this is something that can help the content of this forum in general. That, and I really do NOT like editing posts and handing out infractions :nyah:


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

cbrunson said:


> Especially if they want to be taken seriously. I can openly admit guys that can not shoot as well as I normally do have helped me improve. It's not about the highest scoring individual being the most qualified. It's about sharing experiences with people that are dealing with the same issues. I am very interested in hearing from someone that shoots higher scores in completion that in practice, regardless of what those scores are. That is something I struggle with. The guy that finally shot a clean 5-spot in his back yard isn't going to be very helpful, unless he is a psychologist. Then I would expect that to be made known as well.


I have to agree with this.
Again, asking for "credentials" or just a description of skill level should NOT be taken negatively. And just because you are not on a level of a Dave Cousins or similar does NOT mean your reply is invalid. But when weighting contradicting statements, if someone wants to know more about the posted and his/her expertise, they should be able to ask POLITELY just that.
Now, at the same time, if you reply with an honest description of your skill/experience level and someone says that your "credentials" are not "good enough" to comment, I have a problem with that.

Honestly, with rare exception (which likely resulted in 1 or more infractions) most overtime someone asks for clarification of another poster's qualifications, when given them the person asking for them does not insult that person for not being qualified to post. It's simply so THEY can weigh one person's argument against another's. Treat it as such


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

nestly said:


> I recognize GRIMWALD's username as someone that has contributed useful and insightful information even if others don't, and IMO that demonstrates the danger of user rankings and sub-forum exclusivity.
> Some have great physical and/or mental talents that allow them to record very impressive scorecard totals, others may have a strong understanding of the physiological/mental aspects of archery but for whatever reason lack the physical ability to shoot at the highest level, others may have technical/mechanical archery knowledge that doesn't necessarily translate to them being high level shooters themselves. Is this forum better with, or without, contributions from all three?
> 
> I would like to see this forum remain basically unchanged. Segregating the user base by shooting ability or technical knowledge might relieve a bit of aggravation felt by the "experts" when dealing with those they feel less qualified, but it also makes it more difficult for those who are trying to advance to the next level to interact with those that can help them get there.


Please note that was in reference to not being invited to join a group. I have no issues with a guy pleading his case regardless of his skill level. The question is knowing where he is coming from. 

I've seen enough from you to know that you can work up a 3D model to illustrate the effects of canting a bow and with reasonable mechanical inclination, explain the concept so the majority of less capable folks can understand. I respect that for what it is. Am I going to ask you how to get that extra few Xs to finally shoot a 30x Vegas game? Probably not unless I know you know how to do it, and with some reasonable proof that you either can do it, or have coached people who can. Thus the dime-store coaching statement earlier. 

It's nothing personal. The topic of this thread is just posing a question as to what level constitutes the target demographic, not who or who can not or should not post. I don't believe that was ever suggested by anything other than those in opposition of something that was not proposed.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> It's nothing personal.


In my case it certainly was, with the "unclejane" name-calling simply because I questioned something you said, so I'm afraid I have to call you out on that unfortunately. Sorry about that, but there it is.

Are you going to address any of the content in my posts I provided earlier? If not, I'm considering the matter dropped now.

DM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

dmacey said:


> In my case it certainly was, with the "unclejane" name-calling simply because I questioned something you said, so I'm afraid I have to call you out on that unfortunately. Sorry about that, but there it is.
> 
> Are you going to address any of the content in my posts I provided earlier? If not, I'm considering the matter dropped now.
> 
> DM


No. This back and forth is pointless and ill suited to the subject matter of this topic.

Entertaining? Yes, but I have become more weary of sitting down for a common game of pigeon chess.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> No. This back and forth is pointless and ill suited to the subject matter of this topic.


Which, of course, indicates your real objective is NOT the discussion of I-A archery topics, but is something else other than archery; I'll let the reader discern what that might be. As I suspected. This matter I now consider closed.

DM


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

dmacey said:


> In my case it certainly was, with the "unclejane" name-calling simply because I questioned something you said, so I'm afraid I have to call you out on that unfortunately. Sorry about that, but there it is. Are you going to address any of the content in my posts I provided earlier? If not, I'm considering the matter dropped now.DM


You're still taking all of this too personally....NOTHING in this thread was a personal attack against you. Nothing in the threads you highlighted earlier contribute positively to THIS thread, so I have to ask what was the the intent of referencing them aside from the fact that you became rather argumentative in them as you have become now. 

If I am prepping for a national competition and am having some glitches show up, I would prefer to hear possible solutions from others who have personally been in that situation instead of those who may have analyzed the mechanics at their home range having never shot in a national tournament. 

That is the difference between subject matter content and that is the root of this thread....


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

montigre said:


> You're still taking all of this too personally....NOTHING in this thread was a personal attack against you. Nothing in the threads you highlighted earlier contribute positively to THIS thread, so I have to ask what was the the intent of referencing them aside from the fact that you became rather argumentative in them as you have become now.
> 
> If I am prepping for a national competition and am having some glitches show up, I would prefer to hear possible solutions from others who have personally been in that situation instead of those who may have analyzed the mechanics at their home range having never shot in a national tournament.
> 
> That is the difference between subject matter content and that is the root of this thread....


I provided those threads at cbrunson's request; he wanted evidence that I contributed at least something contentful to the forum so the burden of proof was on me to provide it. That was the purpose behind the posted threads. I'm merely commenting now that he's decided to do nothing with the information he asked for, and that that indicates a motive other than what he claims.

As for the personal attacks, my apologies for not clarifying - those took place in a separate thread (I never claimed, and do not believe, I was being attacked in this one).

PS: as I've stated already several times concerning my shooting level, I've not been in the situation you are preparing for now, so I respectfully submit that you simply disregard my posts and don't read them. I completely agree that I probably couldn't be of help for what you're preparing for.

DM


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

Sigh.......


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

montigre said:


> Sigh.......


Now _you're_ the one taking something personally. I'm serious: don't read my posts if you're looking for the information you say you are. I can't help you because I'm not at your level. It's as simple as that and I've made that concession long ago. Nothing personal intended here and there never was.

DM


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> It's nothing personal. The topic of this thread is just posing a question as to what level constitutes the target demographic, not who or who can not or should not post. I don't believe that was ever suggested by anything other than those in opposition of something that was not proposed.


No, I don't take it personally at all, but there has definitely been support for "quantitative measurement" and "restricted groups", by both the OP and yourself, so that's what I was referring to when I expressed opposition to "user rankings and sub-forum exclusivity"

As for the "target demographic", I feel Sonny answered that by posting the dictionary definition of "Intermediate" and "Competition". I like the current format where anyone that has an interest in competitive archery is free to comment without placing an undue burden on them to prove they are worthy to participate in the discussion. 

I think users build respect and credibility by the way they conduct themselves and by the quality of their posts... and that's a much more reliable metric than post count, score card totals, or whether you get voted into a private/restricted group.

*edit* In case it's not clear, I'm opposed to rankings and/or quantitative measurements as a method to judge the quality of a person's message. What is written in the message body should be judged on it's merit.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

nestly said:


> No, I don't take it personally at all, but there has definitely been support for "quantitative measurement" and "restricted groups", by both the OP and yourself, so that's what I was referring to when I expressed opposition to "user rankings and sub-forum exclusivity"
> 
> As for the "target demographic", I feel Sonny answered that by posting the dictionary definition of "Intermediate" and "Competition". I like the current format where anyone that has an interest in competitive archery is free to comment without placing an undue burden on them to prove they are worthy to participate in the discussion.
> 
> ...


As a peer group we measure our success by our scores or our demonstrated knowledge. Those of us that compete do anyway. I can read books and theorize with the best of them, but until you put those things to the test from behind the string and give an honest effort, you'll never truly know all of the little details that get in the way of perfecting what so many consider a simple task.

How many times do you hear, "You need to get that down on a short or blank bail"? Well, who here would ever go to a competition if they believed they had to have everything perfect before they stepped back to 20? ....or 40? ...or 60? Nobody does it perfectly. That's not what we need to hear. We need to hear how to deal with each of those little inhibitors, when it matters. You say the quality of the posts show who has valid experience? You are exactly right. A bunch of us have discovered who those people are and it seems that credibility *is* a very worthy attribute. Some people like to believe there is some magic, voodoo behind success, and others like to believe it is highly technical. Somewhere in the middle of that is the more realistic belief that a little of both in the right places at the right time are what is most important. It's just a matter of figuring out which is which. A guy at the same level, fighting the same battle may hold the answer to that question, whereas another guy that spends more time reading than shooting is still stuck on one end of the theory spectrum or the other.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

This part I find troubling, after being reminded just now, is that I've seen so many times where people throw out big words and long definitions to explain a topic, or more so argue a point, and it's just as a means of sounding intelligent. Sometimes explanations need that because of the topic, but often times that's not the intent behind it here. 

There's a handful of people, meaning maybe five, that post repeatedly in this sub forum. And that's it. And normally if a thread makes it past three posts, it's seven pages of bickering and arguing. 

All of this makes me think there should be an exclusive group put in place. 

Let this I&A sub forum be the exclusive group where people can argue and bicker. 

Start a new sub forum just for target archery. For those that just want to talk about target archery.

I don't think it should become a what color vane to have deal, but cater towards the ones that maybe are just starting out and about to go to their first tournament or league night and want to know how to keep it all together. Or how do you break through a plateau you've come into and get to the next level. This, all the way to the mental side of the most advanced portions of the sport. 

It may be similar to gen pop, but if it's specialized down to target only, it would be useful. 

Who's in for something like that?

Personally that's what I was hoping this sub forum would be when it started. But man, all that gets done is bickering. To the point I barely come in and not laugh anymore at a lot of things. 

Mahly, let's give them what they want. A group to be in. Make it to where you have to submit a video of score or a score sheet or whatever to be included. 

Then open up a whole new sub forum for people to come into and just talk target archery. Moderated closely to keep bickering and negative factors out. The idea of self moderating with one dedicated moderator can only go so far, until multiple moderators are needed to help with the workload. Multiple meaning maybe even just two. Or three.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

EPLC said:


> My scores (with the exception of lately) fall within the intermediate range. That said, I don't think anyone should be restricted from posting here... and *I don't see the OP suggesting that either*.


I see where the Poster started this and has replied nothing......


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

RCR III, Some people use big words and technical descriptions because they are educated and that is how they normally speak. Are you now going to suggest we moderate someone's diction????


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

montigre said:


> RCR III, Some people use big words and technical descriptions because they are educated and that is how they normally speak. Are you now going to suggest we moderate someone's diction????


If you look at the context and content of that statement in my post, you'll notice I said it's used as a means of sounding smart in an argumentative, and unnecessary way. I also follow up that statement with saying that at times it's a needed means based on the topic and explanation. 

I'm not meaning under normal conversations. I'm basing the statement on when people in here argue and talk for the sake of arguing and talking.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

I think a lot of assumptions are being made regarding "intent" of written words.

Not one person including the OP has suggested limiting access based on the definitions proposed. Nor has anyone alluded to discouraging posting by unqualified persons. The only thing that has been suggested is substantiating offerings with credible sources or experience.

Take RCR III for example. When he makes a statement on a particular topic, he typically will refer to an article he has written or a video that helps illustrate his point. If you read or watch those like I have, you can get an idea of the experience he has that supports his statement on the topic. That is the basic premise of what we are talking about here. Not everyone has a private blog or youtube video channel. Some people just have score sheets and maybe some pictures of targets they have shot very well on. The qualitative substance is the same.

Robert, you want people to read and follow your suggestions. You have done the work to "qualify" your statements. Should you be considered "elitist" because you have provided substance to your statements? Would you not make the same request to those who would challenge your statements?


----------



## Rick! (Aug 10, 2008)

SonnyThomas said:


> I see where the Poster started this and has replied nothing......


So far, everyone is performing to expectations. I knew it was going to be a bit volatile but I felt the topic needed to be put front and center. The thing is is that in a bit over a year I've taken away three nuggets that I've incorporated into my process. I expected better exchanges a little more often. 

The positive is that a suggestion for a group to be formed has been acted on. I look forward to participating in that group. 

The poll will expire on Saturday night.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## iceman14 (Jan 25, 2011)

Substance shouldn't mean elitist to anyone. That's just a sign of jealousy. Substance is credibility in my book. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

cbrunson said:


> I think a lot of assumptions are being made regarding "intent" of written words.


^this


----------



## pwyrick (Feb 13, 2011)

Just for the record, I'm unequivocally on both sides of this issue (LOL). And, I'll state my conclusion up front so that you don't have to read all of my wanderings if you don't want to. At some level of mediocrity or advancement, I have become able to see value without knowing the source. So, I'm not usually offended when someone without my pedigree interjects there thoughts or questions. And, on my good days I am able to be patient with them. On my bad days, not so much.
As a 25 year Navy vet, I wore my credentials on my collar and my chest. As a junior, that helped me seek out experience. By the time that I became a senior, I had learned that experience and knowledge were not always synonymous. As a staff officer, I was often considered to be a somewhat lesser species to line officers. And as a staff officer, I became used to having to prove myself to those who considered their status to be superior to mine. I did what I had to do to earn a seat at the big boy table. And, that is a bit how I see this survey and the discussion. On this forum, some of us will have to work a bit harder to gain respect.
It's nice to know credentials. It helps me get started in relationship with another. And, it's frustrating when someone comes up to me when I'm shooting and tells me where I can buy a real wrist strap. That really did happen. No kidding. And that same kind of thing is frustrating in this forum. So, maybe guys like me, should be willing to have our experience and credentials questioned. And, if I can stand the scrutiny, then I may earn some respect.
As I become more proficient in archery, credentials mean less and less to me. I'm far more interested in whether or not the information has substance and makes sense. Now I've looked a few of you up, and there are some very fine credentials and great depth of knowledge. RCRIII's articles and vids have been a great help as I attempt to find a way to shoot with deteriorating hands. So, I'm not attempting to disrespect anyone's experience. But, I don't know a thing about most of you. So, I have to take apart your explanation to see if it stands up to my scrutiny. And mine is the only scrutiny that I have. 
I have a final question. The poll has no place for 3D specialists to vote. Am I once again a lesser species? (I hope you see the humor in my question.)


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

I'm definitely not an elitist haha I started the blog because I wanted to give a very detailed explanation to questions and subjects that I saw almost every day or week on AT. I couldn't write or explain the topics in detail enough through a forum post. It also was started as a place of reference so people could go to one place and see a lot of topics, versus having to google, search posts, search videos, and give the ole trial and error application that I had went through for so much.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Rick! said:


> So far, everyone is performing to expectations. I knew it was going to be a bit volatile but I felt the topic needed to be put front and center. The thing is is that in a bit over a year I've taken away three nuggets that I've incorporated into my process. I expected better exchanges a little more often.
> 
> The positive is that a suggestion for a group to be formed has been acted on. I look forward to participating in that group.
> 
> ...


Thank you. A little aggravating when someone starts a post and doesn't speak up afterwards. Leaves me wondering....
.
.
.
I hate Facebook, but I'm on it. So many archery groups and so many Pros open for questions. 

I don't ask a lot of question in I/A. For one, I know who to call if I have a problem, know it's me that has confront my issues because I know what to do (and don't do sometimes) and I've PMed with some here in I/A over different issues including my shooting and given to some to go one-on-one with someone is here instead of wading through lots of replies even though they may be good. Like don't have so much in front of you that you can't see. 
Retired, I can do just as I please and I've tried many things offered here in I/A. Got myself in trouble sometimes, but worked things out.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

The devil made me do it.....


----------



## bowman72 (Jan 13, 2009)

Probably not appropriate but very funny and accurate. Reminds me of a guy that works at one of my local archery shops

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk


----------



## bigHUN (Feb 5, 2006)

montigre said:


> The devil made me do it.....


:set1_applaud:


----------



## JF from VA (Dec 5, 2002)

montigre said:


> The devil made me do it.....


+2!


----------



## pwyrick (Feb 13, 2011)

montigre said:


> The devil made me do it.....
> I suppose I should start the walk of shame. Very funny. Thanks.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

+3... great stuff!

DM


----------



## acesbettor (Mar 19, 2009)

I poke my head in this forum every once in a while but there are a few that post in here that just really rub me the wrong way. I think it all started with the "what did you do today" thread where I felt like I was listening to a bunch of old men complain in a barber shop. I keep coming back hoping to pick up some good tips or info but am usually disappointed. Every once in a while there is a good thread with good info but the majority is b.s. 

By the scoring standards proposed in this post, I would be considered advanced with my field and 5spot scores and intermediate on a vegas face. I would have liked this forum to become a place for people who may not be I-A to come and learn and ask questions, not just a few back yard champs to come and pat themselves on the back and parrot what they heard some pro say.


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

IMO, there is more to be learned from the discussion than the poll results, but does anyone have an explanation of the odd poll totals/percentages?


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

It is because of the multiple choice aspect, some made more tban one choice, others didn't.

GRIM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

acesbettor said:


> I poke my head in this forum every once in a while but there are a few that post in here that just really rub me the wrong way. I think it all started with the "what did you do today" thread where I felt like I was listening to a bunch of old men complain in a barber shop. I keep coming back hoping to pick up some good tips or info but am usually disappointed. Every once in a while there is a good thread with good info but the majority is b.s.
> 
> By the scoring standards proposed in this post, I would be considered advanced with my field and 5spot scores and intermediate on a vegas face. I would have liked this forum to become a place for people who may not be I-A to come and learn and ask questions, not just a few back yard champs to come and pat themselves on the back and parrot what they heard some pro say.


I think that is the main issue most have rather than whether or not someone has adequate experience or knowledge. I think by establishing a higher performance level target demographic it should signify that intent. 

You are exactly right. It has become another gathering place for a few that essentially dumb it down. That's not meant to be condescending (for those with touchy-feely egos), it's just what has naturally happened. One of the big questions back in the beginning was how to deal with the newbie questions that came in. The decision then was to send them to the coaches corner or the general pop to ask those questions. It didn't take long and people were chastised for doing just that. I know montigre remembers that well. 

The idea was never to make people feel unwelcome, or to form an elitist group. It was to regulate the content of the discussions to keep it on a more technical or higher skill level. The problem I've seen is that everyone wants to be included. If you say that 295 Vegas scores is the cut off and my average is 293, then I'm going to argue that 290 should be the cut off, but that is completely missing the point. Being at a higher level, I understand all of the obstacles a person will typically have to overcome to get to the level I would very much the same expect to pick up a few pointers from someone who has been through the issues I'm dealing with now. But those discussions are not taking place.


----------



## Ned250 (Aug 10, 2009)

cbrunson said:


> Am I going to ask you how to get that extra few Xs to finally shoot a 30x Vegas game? Probably not unless I know you know how to do it, and with some reasonable proof that you either can do it, or have coached people who can.


Your comment there can't be repeated enough. :thumbs_up



Let's say I want to learn more about managing tournament nerves. Am I going to listen to what Reo has to say or to what RandomGuy123 on AT has to say? Of course I'm going to give credence to Reo, because I know he's been there, done that a thousand times. I don't know RandomGuy123 - can I trust what he's offering? Sure he may be right, but I don't know that. Do you put blind faith into a random person's advice?

That's the entire point of this thread, IMO - we shouldn't get so wound up over wanting to understand where a person is bringing their advice/information from. Using score is just a simple (yet non-perfect) way to quantify one's ability.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

cbrunson said:


> . If you say that 295 Vegas scores is the cut off and my average is 293, then I'm going to argue that 290 should be the cut off, but that is completely missing the point. Being at a higher level, I understand all of the obstacles a person will typically have to overcome to get to the level I would very much the same expect to pick up a few pointers from someone who has been through the issues I'm dealing with now. But those discussions are not taking place.


Well, some issues have been discussed to death. Part of the problem is those who say they want to exceed (be better) don't do their part. They have to want it, period. You got it in you and you'll do whatever you have to. Hell, I didn't want to shoot spots, but I felt obligated to when serving on the Board of Directors of the IAA. If I was going to shoot spots then I figured I better give it my best and I did. As soon as my 3 year term was up I quit shooting spots. Only once after did I think of shooting spots and that was the Illinois State FITA Indoor Championship. I had that straight up and down FITA Vegas face just about down pat when two days before the Championship the bottom limb blew on my Martin Shadowcat. Gave me the excuse I needed not to go


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

SonnyThomas said:


> Well, some issues have been discussed to death. Part of the problem is those who say they want to exceed (be better) don't do their part. They have to want it, period. You got it in you and you'll do whatever you have to. Hell, I didn't want to shoot spots, but I felt obligated to when serving on the Board of Directors of the IAA. If I was going to shoot spots then I figured I better give it my best and I did. As soon as my 3 year term was up I quit shooting spots. Only once after did I think of shooting spots and that was the Illinois State FITA Indoor Championship. I had that straight up and down FITA Vegas face just about down pat when two days before the Championship the bottom limb blew on my Martin Shadowcat. Gave me the excuse I needed not to go


Well then let’s give the devil his due. You have somewhat asserted your focal aspect of this sport. Whether or not you have ever been successful in that field is irrelevant to the fact that you should admit that your knowledge and experience with competitive spot shooting is limited. So when we are discussing the challenges of staying focused for 60 consecutive shots at the competition setting, you should not feel the need to interject with the same old picture of your five arrows in a shot out spot on your 3D insert in your back yard, and tell again why you hate shooting spots. That adds nothing of value to the topic. It doesn’t mean you should withhold some mental challenge you’ve conquered that may be related, it just means you are continuing to dumb down the forum by adding to the non-relative post trend.

I’m in the same boat with field or unknown 3D. I am not qualified to give advice on judging yardage because I’m not good at it. I don’t even try. Sure, I could go read some articles or other posts from people who do, and repeat their info but what am I going to do when someone disagrees, or asks for finer details? I would be guessing, or waiting for someone else that knows to chime in and then piggyback their claims. To me that is dishonest and serves no benefit to the person looking for suggestions, so the right thing to do is not say anything at all. This place has had its share of shadow figures that follow other posters like a fan club, blindly backing everything the guy says. Those are the biggest contributors to dumbing the place down.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Ned250 said:


> Your comment there can't be repeated enough. :thumbs_up
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Certainly not perfect, but you learn quickly who the shooters are. It's not hard to see when someone is dishonest. 

This is too small of a community not to. Out in the real world anyway.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

I'm not dumbing down anything. If one wants to be the best they can be then they have to want it, not just say it. A question is posed and we reply. How do we know that person it doing what we told? We are not there to see. A question is posed and we should "read" what's put forth and understand what was put forth, not just the question. I've done it and should do it more. Person asked if he should carry target pins. Hey, this guy sure didn't seem to have been there and I asked of such. And he gave as such. Discussion ended. Someone in here mentioned the color of vanes being not what this forum was for. Well, the need of target pins fell in what I call "color of vanes." 

And you've been paper target shooting for what, 3 years now? I've went the whole route with State sanctioned events, 3D, Indoor (both 5 spot and Vegas face), Outdoor and Field. For State I feel I excelled in both Adult and Senior Adult Free Style and I do have the proof of it. I sure as hell didn't buy all those medals, plaques and patches. Well, I take that back. You have to supply proof to NFAA Headquarters in order to buy your 500 Club patch for Field. That proof must come from the Office of that NFAA Chapter (State), not you. You also have to show your shooter card to State Officials in order to buy the ad-on bars to your Start Pins for Field and Hunter. I chose 3D, not that I couldn't shoot spots.

So one side seem those who want to change I/A. What are you guys going to call your group, the Vegas Face Group? And if you have your little group going this thread should be locked out.


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> Certainly not perfect, but you learn quickly who the shooters are. It's not hard to see when someone is dishonest.
> 
> This is too small of a community not to. Out in the real world anyway.


I agree that it's not difficult to make the distinction, which is why I don't see a need for ratings/rankings/score. 

Out of curiosity, I looked up some of the scores/averages given by some who advocate quantifying members by score and apparently I'm a better shooter than I thought. Regardless, there are aspects of archery that I'm confident enough about to discussion/debate in a public forum, and other areas that I'm not. Making my "score" public would not affect anything except how some may perceive my messages, which I couldn't care less about.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

SonnyThomas said:


> I'm not dumbing down anything. If one wants to be the best they can be then they have to want it, not just say it. A question is posed and we reply. How do we know that person it doing what we told? We are not there to see. A question is posed and we should "read" what's put forth and understand what was put forth, not just the question. I've done it and should do it more. Person asked if he should carry target pins. Hey, this guy sure didn't seem to have been there and I asked of such. And he gave as such. Discussion ended. Someone in here mentioned the color of vanes being not what this forum was for. Well, the need of target pins fell in what I call "color of vanes."
> 
> And you've been paper target shooting for what, 3 years now? I've went the whole route with State sanctioned events, 3D, Indoor (both 5 spot and Vegas face), Outdoor and Field. For State I feel I excelled in both Adult and Senior Adult Free Style and I do have the proof of it. I sure as hell didn't buy all those medals, plaques and patches. Well, I take that back. You have to supply proof to NFAA Headquarters in order to buy your 500 Club patch for Field. That proof must come from the Office of that NFAA Chapter (State), not you. You also have to show your shooter card to State Officials in order to buy the ad-on bars to your Start Pins for Field and Hunter. I chose 3D, not that I couldn't shoot spots.
> 
> So one side seem those who want to change I/A. What are you guys going to call your group, the Vegas Face Group? And if you have your little group going this thread should be locked out.


Again missing the point. It's not in question whether you are qualified by that statement, but rather whether or not your statements fit the topic as it was presented. Much like the direction this topic has gone. You assume that by establishing a range with which the normal person would project as being a level of skill to meet this designation, that it also by nature excludes those who aspire to meet that level of proficiency. That is simply not the case. It puts a sign on the door that says, "These are the guys that are talking in here." When you degrade that designation with remedial topics or comments from the regulars, you show people that what is happening here is not what you advertised.

If it is nothing more than a place to brow beat with buddies then it becomes just another A&E or Mutantville, which is what I think has happened.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

nestly said:


> ....... would not affect anything except how some may perceive my messages, which I couldn't care less about.


I care.

I care a lot. If you have some useful information that may help me with something I'm struggling with I want to hear it. If you are theorizing based on things you've read or heard, I'm not interested. I've probably already heard it several times.

Knowing where I'm at and knowing where you're at could be the difference between you asking for pictures of me at full draw, or discussing the slight shift to the left and down when I begin my release execution. Those people you are referring to in that group know that. They know that they are not at the same level score wise as other people in the group. Conceptually however, they are without question on the same page.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

cbrunson said:


> If it is nothing more than a place to brow beat with buddies then it becomes just another A&E or Mutantville, which is what I think has happened.


I don't think it just happened. It's been this way from day one. I'd say more of glorified General Archery Discussion, held tighter. Yep, I've been caught up in the foray of things, just like this thread. Have I picked up some tips in here? Yes I have and just about from all that have contributed something or I should say our regulars. montrigre, Lazuras, EPLC, RCR, (oh god) you, Padgett and more. So I wouldn't call the forum a failure or needing overhauled. Moderated more strictly, maybe....


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

SonnyThomas said:


> I don't think it just happened. It's been this way from day one. I'd say more of glorified General Archery Discussion, held tighter. Yep, I've been caught up in the foray of things, just like this thread. Have I picked up some tips in here? Yes I have and just about from all that have contributed something or I should say our regulars. montrigre, Lazuras, EPLC, RCR, (oh god) you, Padgett and more. So I wouldn't call the forum a failure or needing overhauled. Moderated more strictly, maybe....


Nor would I. We both know some of these things are brought up for the sake of conversation, and topics like this stir up the hornets nest, which in turn usually brings out some great dialogue, heated or not. (who am I kidding? It always gets heated) 

I'm especially appreciative of the gentleman Gris...? whatever, that proposed the private group feature. It will be used and moderated to the level at which those individuals expect it to. If anything, threads like this one help identify who those people with those interests are, because in effect it has never been about who is better, but rather who shares the same goals with respect to the subject matter.


----------



## subconsciously (Aug 22, 2009)

cbrunson said:


> If anything, threads like this one help identify who those people with those interests are, because in effect it has never been about who is better, but rather who shares the same goals with respect to the subject matter.


Milestone comment.


----------

