# Barebow - Lancaster Style



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

Some ado was made in the lead up to the "unique" equipment allowed in the barebow class. I was wondering what those who shot it used and saw others using. As well, what effect did these differences have over "normal" setups.

Cheers


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Most shot long rods, couple short rods and a couple with nothing. Most didn't didn't use a clicker. Grayson, Mark, and Jared used clickers. Forgive me if I missed anyone. I debated weather or not to bring the long rod or just go Fita bb. In all my practice rounds with it, I only averaged about 6 points better, but I am shooting at a pretty good level right now. Last year, a short rod gave me about 10-15 points over the fita bb rig, but my average last year was quite a bit lower than it is right now. I hope that helps.  .


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

I thought, in the 15 seconds of coverage I saw a string clicker and a few long rods. Thanks for the info. Any trends or insight on what risers were there. I think I saw a Gillo and the new CD Contender. 

Cheers


----------



## hammer08 (Aug 28, 2012)

The WF25 was the riser I remember seeing the most of. I also saw a good amount of spigarelli risers.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Are they looking at standardizing on a particular federations BB format for next year or sticking with the run what you brung class like this year?


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

There might me an adjustment to the rules.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Lord I hope so. Barebow doesn't need another way to define it. We have too many already.

Just imagine what it would do to the Olympic ranks if there were 4 or 5 different definitions of what an "Olympic" bow is. It would shred them, just as Barebow has been shredded by the multiple sets of rules.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

I agree. This is one of the curses we have. A lot of the time I think we have been an after thought and get a lot of mish mash rules. Just makes it hard to transition sometimes.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Demmer said:


> I agree. This is one of the curses we have. A lot of the time I think we have been an after thought and get a lot of mish mash rules. Just makes it hard to transition sometimes.


Yep, I agree. I wish it was WA rules across the board.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Bigjono said:


> Yep, I agree. I wish it was WA rules across the board.


Praise God. I actually spoke my mind and had two guys who know what they are doing, agree with me. LOL.

Seems that happens less and less often these days.  ha, ha.

Well, we can always hope and pray, right?

I don't know of anyone who will argue that a WA barebow is not a barebow. But as soon as folks start slapping stabilizers, wheels and clickers on them, it's pretty hard to call it a bare bow with a straight face.


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

I'd be ok if the NFAA and IFAA just commonized. But hey were still the only country still measuring things in inches and yards and driving in MPH's.


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

I'm cool with WA rules. My NFAA 300 tournament and practice PB's are still what I shot with a FITA legal barebow setup. Not really sure why I changed.............


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

SBills said:


> I'm cool with WA rules. My NFAA 300 tournament and practice PB's are still what I shot with a FITA legal barebow setup. Not really sure why I changed.............


That's impressive. That 12" stabilizer I used last March to set the TFAA record was worth at least 10 points/rd. for me. Makes me think the previous record should stand, and mine should have a "*" next to it. 

I can't imagine what a difference both that and a clicker might make. 

I was just beside myself when NFAA chose to allow the 12" stab., as that took us one step further from unifying the division. Not what we need at a time when we're fighting for legitimacy.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

I think if Lancaster keeps growing and adopts WA bb rules we could even get some Europeans to come and shoot with us. That and those set of rules might even draw a couple of wooden bow archers to come out and play. Right now I don't think either will under these rules.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Another vote for WA rules across all organizations!

-Grant


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

Yes. 

Do what everyone else is doing. 

Odd ball rules will ensure barebow in the USA will stay a small, niche sport. 

Align with what barebow does across the world and 
IMO more people will get involved. Especially if the barebow rules are simple and straight forward. 



grantmac said:


> Another vote for WA rules across all organizations!
> 
> -Grant


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Personally, i like the NFAA / IFAA Barebow rules (that have been around for several decades) and see no reason why every organization should change to match WA. That's why we have different organizations in the first place. And quite honestly, when the US arm of WA doesn't exactly give a flip about Barebow, why should any other organizations follow their lead?

Besides, it's not like it's very difficult to swap between a long rod and a set of counterweights. I know people make a big deal about changing equipment, but it took me all of about two minutes at the club yesterday.


----------



## pencarrow (Oct 3, 2003)

And then there is , what, where, and how you can do with your fingers. I have been turned away from 3 tournaments for string walking.
Cheers
Fritz


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

limbwalker said:


> That's impressive. That 12" stabilizer I used last March to set the TFAA record was worth at least 10 points/rd. for me. Makes me think the previous record should stand, and mine should have a "*" next to it.
> 
> I can't imagine what a difference both that and a clicker might make.
> 
> I was just beside myself when NFAA chose to allow the 12" stab., as that took us one step further from unifying the division. Not what we need at a time when we're fighting for legitimacy.


Well in all truthfulness those two scores were an anomaly for the year. So while the 12” stabilizer didn’t necessarily improve my bests it did smooth out the distribution and my best Louisville scores were last year with the stabilizer. Just not good enough to beat John and DeWayne.


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

pencarrow said:


> And then there is , what, where, and how you can do with your fingers. I have been turned away from 3 tournaments for string walking.
> Cheers
> Fritz


Well the rules everyone here seems to agree with would allow stringwalking should the archer choose. Which is the way it should be IMO.


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

While there, did any of the gurus talk to the Lancaster Guys about the division, and potential changes for next year?


----------



## hawghunter2585 (Mar 16, 2010)

I don't think it is necessarily a matter of changing rules just to conform to WA BB rules, but adopting consistent equipment rules between organizations would certainly foster more competition for US barebow, and I think Lancaster was a prime example. Looking at this year's Classic attendees and comparing it to 2014 IBO Trad Worlds, there were participants from at least 7 different IBO classes that came and shot in a single class, and it made for some tough competition. And it is not always the equipment that is hard to change, but transitioning from stringwalking in IBO RU to gapping in NFAA Trad definitely takes time.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Hawghunter2585,

You make a good point. More liberal rules, like NFAA/IFAA Barebow allow more shooters to compete as-is. That's another reason I like them. It seems if the point is to get more shooters in attendance one would lobby for rules that are less restrictive, not more.


----------



## j.conner (Nov 12, 2009)

I like WA barebow equipment classification too. Lack of FW/SW is an issue with the others and IMHO a stabilizer is not barebow. I think it would be best if the national archery organizations would sync up their equipment classes.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Here is a question for you guys and the more liberal rules. How many came because of the liberal rules? I guarantee next to 0 if not zero. These same people would have shown up if it was fita bb rules and the level of competition would have been the same. I will revert to my previous statement and say that these liberal rules will never bring anybody in that wouldn't come otherwise, and fita bb will 100% more likely bring in wood bow guys and maybe over seas guys over than people who strictly shoot ifaa or nfaa barebow rules. To me, its pretty clear what the rules should be for the best interest of the class. I just hope that powers that be see this and decide for themselves. Making rules that everyone can come and play doesn't necessarily make it right or bring in the most shooters. It that was the case, just make us shoot in the recurve class and anything will go.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

John,

I love you like the fashion-impaired brother I never had, but we simply disagree on this point. How many people flew over from Europe to shoot in the Open or Olympic Recurve classes, which are identical to WA? I’m guessing I could count them on one hand with fingers to spare. If the World Cup weren’t the same time and place as the Vegas shoot, you probably wouldn’t see many of them there either.

About 20 years ago the NFAA instituted a class identical to WA Recurve. They even have a pro division. Last year at the indoor nationals only 69 people shot that class, and that includes males, females, adults, seniors, silver seniors, master seniors, and pros. We had better than half that many at our little state championship last year. How many Recurve class archers attended the USA Archery indoor nationals last year? Several hundred, I believe. Clearly, the NFAA changing things to accommodate FITA shooters doesn’t work. 

The NFAA Barebow rules have been largely unchanged for several decades, and Traditional for nearly that long. I don’t see the point of having the NFAA change things around to accommodate the two or three people they may attract. As the past two decades of NFAA Freestyle Limited Recurve (FITA Recurve) have proven, it doesn’t work. At the risk of offending folks here, which isn’t my intent, it seems most FITA shooters don’t want to attend anything that isn’t a FITA shoot. That's unfortunate.

You said yourself that everyone who shot Barebow at Lancaster would have been there with more restrictive rules, so why is the opposite not true? Were there actually people who said they would have gone had Lancaster banned stabilizers and clickers? And with respect to the clicker, you know as well as I do that at least two of those gentleman shoot clickers to control TP. I’m not trying to pick on either of them because I have a world of respect for those guys, but how well do you think they would have shot without one?


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

No one will ever get all the archery organizations to align and make Barebow equipment the same. There are different organizations because people didn't like what the next one was doing. NFAA came into existence in 1939 and has been the leader in rules and equipment for field archery IFAA followed WA is doing as it choses IBO is the same. different games different rules. Lancaster and Vegas are doing what I think is right leave your sight home and lets see who is at the top that day. One other thing for those of us who think WA Barebow doesn't have a stabilizer give me a brake !!! just because your short don't mean you can't make it happen. WA just passed a 12.5 mm rule to limit the length of your stabilizer you can build a riser to get an advantage. 
If you are a competitor as I and others are build a bow that matches the Tournament you are competing in and go shoot. 
Gary


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

Gary did you mean 12.2cm?


----------



## GLaw1 (Feb 23, 2014)

I am relatively new to this sport but I think shooting with a stab or clicker definitely gives an advantage in the bare bow class. If the rules allow you to shoot with "add-ons" then be prepared to shoot that way if they give you better results.


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

Both John and Jason make good points. I have been shooting a full stabilizer V-bar setup most of this year because I am string walking, and by my State rules that puts me in barebow class anyway. That said I have been steadfast for years that philosophically I like the FITA/WA rules for both longbow and barebow best.

Add in IBO and ASA interpretations of barebow recurves and things just get muddier. I guess my opinion would be for Lancaster to match either IFAA or WA rules. The archers who want to shoot it will adapt from there. Any if I am being greedy I would ask NFAA to do the same. 

As a side note, lots of barebow discussion in this forum lately. Pretty cool.


----------



## Soundarc (Mar 21, 2006)

J. Wesbrock said:


> John,
> How many people flew over from Europe to shoot in the Open or Olympic Recurve classes, which are identical to WA? I’m guessing I could count them on one hand with fingers to spare. If the World Cup weren’t the same time and place as the Vegas shoot, you probably wouldn’t see many of them there either.


The difference is that the Olympic Recuvre and Compound archers have plenty of large indoor tournaments to go to in Europe (such as Nimes this weekend). The Barebow archers do not have this opportunity. Therefore I think it is very possible some would decide to come to Lancaster if WA rules were used.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Scott,

Not to sidetrack things, but I hope you're shooting sectionals in a few weeks. I'll be in AMBB with my recurve again.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

As you can see I don't do metric well lol 12 mm very small


SBills said:


> Gary did you mean 12.2cm?


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Excuse me if I'm wrong, but as those who know me can attest to, I am a relative newbie to North America. Barebow from here seemed lacking or almost non existent for many years on the international scene with Ty, Scott and maybe one other flying the flag. It seems of late that this is changing in a big way. I think that if you want international BB shooters to start coming here, you need to align rules with what most shoot. I think last years EBHC which is IFAA sanctioned only managed 15 men in BB which is quite sad when compared even to Lancaster. 
I think money and time have more impact on shoot numbers than equipment restrictions in some cases. My buddy from the UK has talked about coming over for the iBO Trad worlds but he weighs that up against the big shoots in Europe with maybe 100 to 150 guys in his class and that's where his money gets spent. Now a BB shoot like Lancaster, offering genuine prize money, that has potential to stir interest in Europe.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

The barebow rules will never be uniform for the following reason. Most of the archers in these barebow styles are interested in themselves and not for what is in the best interest of barebow archery. Everyone wants to stick with the rules that allow them to be at their best rather compromise and adapt to rules that will universally bring us all together. Case in point is the NFAA, an organization that is run by the inmates . Any little whim seems to be voted in when someone threatens to quit if they don't get their way. I personally don't care which barebow rules are used as long as we get one set of uniform rules for all the organizations to adhere to. The only way that is going to happen is for all of us to put aside our self interest, and sacrifice for the good of the barebow class. With enough pressure from us, and that includes the rest of the world, we could effect those changes.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

itbeso said:


> The barebow rules will never be uniform for the following reason. *Most of the archers in these barebow styles are interested in themselves and not for what is in the best interest of barebow archery.* Everyone wants to stick with the rules that allow them to be at their best rather compromise and adapt to rules that will universally bring us all together. Case in point is the NFAA, an organization that is run by the inmates . Any little whim seems to be voted in when someone threatens to quit if they don't get their way. I personally don't care which barebow rules are used as long as we get one set of uniform rules for all the organizations to adhere to. The only way that is going to happen is for all of us to put aside our self interest, and sacrifice for the good of the barebow class. With enough pressure from us, and that includes the rest of the world, we could effect those changes.


I largely agree with this, but I don't think it's actually possible to differentiate barebow archery from the people who compete in the class. Barebow archery doesn't actually exist independent of archers. I really can't think of barebow archery as having an interest unto itself.


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

Really Ben? That has not been my experience (with trad/barebow). Most I know shoot whatever the class allows. Most have their opinions, but roll with it. For me I don’t care if I have stabilizers or not. Why the NFAA cares how the archer aims is anybody’s guess. Glad that Rob and Lancaster were smart enough to allow this.


----------



## hammer08 (Aug 28, 2012)

Thoughts from the perspective of a beginner..

It would be great if all organizations adopted the same Barebow rules. WA Barebow rules would be fine with me. IFAA Barebow Recurve rules, although a little less "bare" would be fine. What I'm saying is I want to shoot no matter what the rules are. So I'll take the time to practice and shoot as well as I can within the rules of the class. 

Now most of the shoots close to me and I'd imagine a lot of the shoots around the country are under NFAA or IBO rules. So I set my bow up to shoot those shoots. If I'm being selfish I'd say keep Lancaster the way it is. It keeps things simple and doesn't make me change my setup for just one shoot out of the year. 

If we want Barebow to grow in the US maybe we should change to WA rules since everyone thinks those set of rules are the best. Although I'm genuinely interested to know why WA rules are considered to be the best among you guys.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

SBills said:


> Really Ben? That has not been my experience (with trad/barebow). Most I know shoot whatever the class allows. Most have their opinions, but roll with it. For me I don’t care if I have stabilizers or not. Why the NFAA cares how the archer aims is anybody’s guess. Glad that Rob and Lancaster were smart enough to allow this.


Scott, you are missing my point. If there are 10 events with 10 different set of rules with 15 people attending each because the other 85 don't like that particular set of rules as opposed to 10 events with 1 set of rules and 100 people attending all ten, which is the best scenario? That , and the fact that I hate having to change my equipment for each tournament I go to. Ridiculous. Like I said, I don't care what the rules are, Just make them uniform. If not, you are going to get all your future tournaments with the same 10-20 participants in them and please don't reference Lancaster. I, and others showed up at Lancaster, to support the fact that they cared enough to include us in their tournament and put us in a money class, me knowing full well that I was going to be embarrassed by not being prepared for indoor shooting. There is an old saying, : united we stand and divided we fall " and I think that applies to the recurve barebow class. Baseball, soccer, track and field, hockey, these sports are played worldwide with uniform rules which everyone knows going in. They have played with the same set of rules since birth. That is what barebow recurve needs, in my opinion.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

hammer08 said:


> Thoughts from the perspective of a beginner..
> 
> It would be great if all organizations adopted the same Barebow rules. WA Barebow rules would be fine with me. IFAA Barebow Recurve rules, although a little less "bare" would be fine. What I'm saying is I want to shoot no matter what the rules are. So I'll take the time to practice and shoot as well as I can within the rules of the class.
> 
> ...


Hammer, I'm not sure if WA rules are the best but I think the point is that they are the rules that the majority of the rest of the world goes by. I think the thinking is that to make the rules uniform, it would be easier to go in that direction than to try to get everyone to adhere to any other organizations rules. I had no problem with Lancasters rules, I just think a set of rules that were uniform would be better so we could shoot the same setup for every tournament.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Warbow said:


> I largely agree with this, but I don't think it's actually possible to differentiate barebow archery from the people who compete in the class. Barebow archery doesn't actually exist independent of archers. I really can't think of barebow archery as having an interest unto itself.


You do a good job of making my point. If the archers only care about their own self strengths, then there will soon be no barebow archery because of the selfishness and lack of unity among those shooting that style.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I for one don't think WA rules are the best LOL I like my 12" stabilizer and I don't care for stringwalking. WA and NFAA are very close except for those two rules. For me to shoot WA I just change from 12" stabilizer to a short one. not really as big of a deal as some here say it is.


hammer08 said:


> Thoughts from the perspective of a beginner..
> 
> It would be great if all organizations adopted the same Barebow rules. WA Barebow rules would be fine with me. IFAA Barebow Recurve rules, although a little less "bare" would be fine. What I'm saying is I want to shoot no matter what the rules are. So I'll take the time to practice and shoot as well as I can within the rules of the class.
> 
> ...


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I think if Lancaster keeps growing and adopts WA bb rules *we could even get some Europeans to come and shoot with us*. That and those set of rules might even draw a couple of wooden bow archers to come out and play. Right now I don't think either will under these rules.


An excellent observation John. I hadn't thought of that, but I bet you're right. 

Jason, you bring up some great points:



> Personally, i like the NFAA / IFAA Barebow rules (that have been around for several decades) and see *no reason why every organization should change to match WA.* That's why we have different organizations in the first place. And quite honestly, when the US arm of WA doesn't exactly give a flip about Barebow, why should any other organizations follow their lead?


I don't think that's the case here. We're just talking about this one event, not an entire organization.



> That's why we have different organizations in the first place


There are lumpers, and there are splitters. Lumpers are fine so long as there are enough participants. We suffer from low participation in barebow archery, so IMO splitting isn't the answer right now. It only hurts us in the eyes of the compound and recurve faithful. 



> And quite honestly, when the US arm of WA doesn't exactly give a flip about Barebow, why should any other organizations follow their lead?


This is changing. How do I know? Because I'm the chair of the USArchery barebow committee right now, and just today I submitted more recommendations for changes to the USArchery barebow program. But I can tell you a big part of the reason USArchery, and the NAA before them didn't take barebow archers very seriously was because of low participation. The low participation was a product of splintered factions of barebow/trad archers all over the place. 



> Besides, it's not like it's very difficult to swap between a long rod and a set of counterweights. I know people make a big deal about changing equipment, but it took me all of about two minutes at the club yesterday.


I've noticed before that we disagree on this. During my equipment seminar last year, I demonstrated to the class what a difference just that 12" stabilizer made in tuning. It was equivalent to 80 grains of point weight, or over 1/2 spine size. Same arrows, same bow. Only change was that 12" stabilizer, and the point weight. This is a big reason I shot well at our TFAA state indoor, and then shot poorly a week later at the USArchery Indoor Nationals. I didn't have two setups and I had to commit to training with one string crawl (none, as per NFAA rules). Perhaps a more experienced barebow archer would have been able to go from one to the next in a single week. I was not. At least, not to high level. It was either one or the other.


----------



## Chris1ny (Oct 23, 2006)

Barebow at Lancaster, are compounds allow?


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

itbeso said:


> Hammer, I'm not sure if WA rules are the best but I think the point is that they are the rules that the majority of the rest of the world goes by. I think the thinking is that to make the rules uniform, it would be easier to go in that direction than to try to get everyone to adhere to any other organizations rules. I had no problem with Lancasters rules, I just think a set of rules that were uniform would be better so we could shoot the same setup for every tournament.


WA BB rules is most likely the best rules we have. Most of the world uses them and some of the national shoot use them here.
To make rules so that one or two shooters is their most comfortable environment is pretty silly. It sounds like someone else I know. We are here to draw more people in and not please one or two. The biggest group of recurve we have in the us is the one that play with wood bows. We need a set of rules that can potentially bring some of them in. Making rules that allows everything but a sight will never bring them in. WA bb is the closest thing that will be a compromise of everything. 
I agree with John. If you work your butt off for tune, you can't simply change your gear and whammo. Trust me, I know.


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

Sorry Ben, I had misunderstood you and read that as trying to get rules that suit a person across the board vs archers only attending the events that suit them. We are on the same page, make them the same and your comments it post #40 are spot on IMO.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

For those that don't know NFAA Barebow allows compounds. In fact the way the rules are written, one could use a crossbow if you remove the sights and shoot off the fingers.

I am all for a common set of rules.

But one thing for sure is that WA rules only allows barebow in their Field and 3D events. That in itself drives people away from Barebow. If WA formally allowed Barebow in their indoor and outdoor target shoots, and had world championships, there could be a huge push towards common rule sets.


----------



## hammer08 (Aug 28, 2012)

I'm up for anything. I just want to shoot.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

SBills said:


> Sorry Ben, I had misunderstood you and read that as trying to get rules that suit a person across the board vs archers only attending the events that suit them. We are on the same page, make them the same and your comments it post #40 are spot on IMO.


:thumbs_up


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

John,

I know we’re only talking about one event here, but this is the same conversation we’ve all had before about different organizations. You even brought up the NFAA and their 12” stabilizer rule for Traditional. I figured it was fair game. 

I’m glad you’re working with USA Archery to get them to notice Barebow again. I think it’s a horrible shame that you needed to do that in the first place. It seems the NFAA is actively embracing barebow archery while USA Archery would rather it not exist. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but someone told me USA Archery doesn’t even have a Barebow class at the JOAD nationals? I don’t understand that—it’s a recognized class with achievement pins and all, but they’re not welcomed at nationals? Very sad.

With respect to tuning, I’m not sure what to say. I make sure the mass weight of my setup stays the same and I don’t have any major tuning issues. With my outdoor setup I can run one internal weight and a long rod, two internal weights and a short rod, or two internal weights and two 12-ounce counterweights. The only tuning changes I had were a turn here or there on the plunger tension. Admittedly I’m not the best shooter around, but with that setup I was able to break 490 on an NFAA field round and 290 on an NFAA indoor round with the long rod. I shot 814 on an NFAA 900 round with the short rod and set a new state FITA Barebow outdoor record with just the counterweights.

Yesterday at our club I decided to strip the clicker and long rod off my indoors setup, switch to FITA Barebow and shoot an indoor round. Without any nock point or plunger adjustments I managed to squeak out a 539 with four hard glance outs (shooting a single spot). And this is from a guy who uses a clicker to control TP and hasn’t shot FITA Barebow in almost a year.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Demmer,

I've seen you kick butt with a nock point so high I thought your arrows were going to do summersaults. If I'm not mistaken, Dewayne does the same thing.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

That's outdoors when rules deem it necessary for me. Lol Indoors, that's a whole different animal.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Mr. Roboto said:


> For those that don't know NFAA Barebow allows compounds. In fact the way the rules are written, one could use a crossbow if you remove the sights and shoot off the fingers.
> 
> I am all for a common set of rules.
> 
> But one thing for sure is that WA rules only allows barebow in their Field and 3D events. That in itself drives people away from Barebow. If WA formally allowed Barebow in their indoor and outdoor target shoots, and had world championships, there could be a huge push towards common rule sets.


Pete, what comes first, the chicken or the egg? If you and many more want to get these changes made, then there has to be an effort made by the barebow community to effect those changes by getting more participants to the major WA and USA tournaments that do allow barebow competition. Once those numbers are in place, it is much easier to argue for our inclusion in the rest of the Championship tournaments. It is a sad fact that , before the last couple of years, there has been very little participation in the WA barebow classes in the United States. It takes sacrifice to secure a spot for the future generations of barebow archers. Part of that sacrifice will involve attending archery tournaments that don't necessarily fit into your comfort zone of competition. Not everyone is willing or able to do that for various reasons. One of the primary tournaments of interest for barebow archers this year should be the USA archery outdoor target nationals held in early July in Decatur, Alabama. Barebow was eliminated from this tournament last year because of lack of participation. There has been a strong outcry from our community resulting in the barebow class being reinstated this year. John Magera ( Limbwalker ) is heading the effort to finalize a shooting program for the barebowers at distances which should be representative for our class. I think we can determine our own destiny, we just need enough barebow archers to take the initiative to further our prospects.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

I think one thing this thread shows is how much passion there is for Barebow shooting here now. We all chop and change to fit in with various events or federations so there's no eliteism, just a desire to make things better for the class as a whole.


----------



## High Plains (Feb 29, 2008)

hammer08 said:


> I'm up for anything. I just want to shoot.


Me too.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Jason, there's no question you're one of our top sightless shooters in the U.S.. Fact is, you're probably so good you're overcoming the change in tune from one setup to the next. Guys like me need all the help they can get if they are going to compete with you, Demmer and the rest of the big boys of barebow 



> It seems the NFAA is actively embracing barebow archery while USA Archery would rather it not exist. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but someone told me USA Archery doesn’t even have a Barebow class at the JOAD nationals? I don’t understand that—it’s a recognized class with achievement pins and all, but they’re not welcomed at nationals? Very sad.


I agree, but I prefer not to dwell on the past when it comes to USArchery and Barebow. I've been tasked with helping them develop the future of modern American barebow archery within USArchery, and we're making good progress. We will have male and female barebow National Outdoor Champions crowned in all age divisions this summer in Decatur, Alabama. That's a big deal. There will be men's and women's Indoor National Champions crowned soon at the 2015 USArchery Indoor Nationals. And if our committee is successful, barebow will be offered as a division at Indoor Nationals for all ages in 2016. As many here already know, one of my students helped the recurve and compound archer earn the Bronze medal in Croatia for the Junior US Men's team at the World Field Championships, a team fielded by USArchery. This, along with all the recent barebow archers in movies and television (did any of them have stabilizers? ) has USArchery's attention right now, and we plan to take full advantage of that.

But to do so, we need to show unity. Participation speaks louder than anything, as numbers are hard to ignore.

I was thinking about this topic earlier today, and a real good question came to mind that may illustrate the problem we have as barebow archers...

When you think about recurve or compound target archery, what are the biggest events in the U.S. that *all* the top compound and recurvers attend? That's actually a pretty easy list to make. And even if all of them aren't there, there are enough of them at those few events to really draw a crowd and drive competition to it's peak.

Now compare that to barebow. What are the biggest event(s) that our top barebow archers attend? Answer - it's a bit all over the map. 

Personally, I'd love to see a "non-affiliated" event like Lancasters become THE premier barebow indoor target event in the world. But it will take an honest look at the rules to make it so.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Slight tangent:

Here in Canada they hold all 3 national outdoor events (WA 3D, Field and Target) at the same venue or at least within driving distance over the course of a week and a half. It sure makes things a lot more economical from a travel standpoint. However barebow isn't offered for target unfortunately.

-Grant


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

But Grant, in Canada, everyone gets along... eh?  

Seems nobody in the US can get along anymore.  Sorry barebow isn't offered for target though. Our own USArchery was perfectly content to just follow World Archery, and only offer barebow in field. Well, I think we can do better than that. There is no rule that USArchery can only offer what WA offers. None at all. USArchery can, and does, offer more divisions at it's events than WA does.


----------



## Ms. X Hunter (Nov 14, 2014)

limbwalker said:


> > It seems the NFAA is actively embracing barebow archery while USA Archery would rather it not exist. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but someone told me USA Archery doesn’t even have a Barebow class at the JOAD nationals? I don’t understand that—it’s a recognized class with achievement pins and all, but they’re not welcomed at nationals? Very sad.
> 
> 
> I agree, but I prefer not to dwell on the past when it comes to USArchery and Barebow. I've been tasked with helping them develop the future of modern American barebow archery within USArchery, and we're making good progress. We will have male and female barebow National Outdoor Champions crowned in all age divisions this summer in Decatur, Alabama. That's a big deal. There will be men's and women's Indoor National Champions crowned soon at the 2015 USArchery Indoor Nationals. And if our committee is successful, barebow will be offered as a division at Indoor Nationals for all ages in 2016. As many here already know, one of my students helped the recurve and compound archer earn the Bronze medal in Croatia for the Junior US Men's team at the World Field Championships, a team fielded by USArchery. This, along with all the recent barebow archers in movies and television (did any of them have stabilizers? ) has USArchery's attention right now, and we plan to take full advantage of that.


Still a newbie here, but I'd like to add my $.02

At our state's recent MC Championship, I met a girl who was shooting BB relatively well. She is part of a JOAD club in Oregon (WSAA allows all USAA members to join the competition), and explained that she would soon be starting Oly Recurve because the environment encouraged that and didn't really care for BB shooters. I could tell that she loved her style of shooting, and enjoyed the extra challenge of Barebow shooting.

I'm not a BB or Trad shooter, but I admire the skill it takes to do that style. John, I'm glad that you're is taking steps to add a BB division to all the USAA Championships. Archery isn't just about getting to the Olympics - its about growing and perfecting in something you love.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I couldn't have said it better.

Seeing Barebow on the same footing with Recurve and Compound is personal to me. Not a lot of folks know this though.

I was a Barebow archer in 2003 when Larry Skinner walked over and first tried to convince me to try Olympic. I shot Barebow with a group of guys in Southern Illinois, and after struggling with my old target panic (the reason I had been snap-shooting "instinctively" for the 15 years prior) when I tried to aim with the arrow, Larry suggested I put a clicker on and try Olympic. I finally did, and the rest is history as they say, but I always felt like I had never met my goal with Barebow, even through all those years I shot Olympic. I shot (and still shoot) Olympic for years because that's what folks wanted to see me shoot at the many demonstrations I did, but I really couldn't wait to pick up where I had left off with the barebow. 

The other reason, and probably an even bigger reason, is that I watched my oldest daughter quit JOAD because she loved to shoot barebow and didn't want to compete with the Olympic recurve. She was a very good barebow archer, but after she had worked her way about halfway through the recurve achievements, there simply was no way for her to compete or continue to earn achievement patches (back then, they were patches and not pins). So she quit JOAD, and that just about broke my heart.

She is 22 now, but she knows very well that I'm doing all I can to see to it that other young ladies and young men who love barebow won't have to be faced with that same choice.

But I'm not doing this alone. Not at all. I've just picked up where Skip Trafford and others have left off and I'm guided by a very capable committee that I'm blessed to be a part of.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

John,

Thanks again for everything you're doing to revive Barebow in USA Archery. I'd hate to see where it'd be without you involved.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ah, it would be okay. Skip would still be leading the charge, backed up by a fine group of other dedicated BB enthusiasts.  

I'm just taking a little off Skip's plate for now. He's done a lot for BB archers that they will never know about. If he hadn't greased the skids while on the board, we wouldn't even be talking about Barebow at Outdoor Nationals right now.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

itbeso said:


> Pete, what comes first, the chicken or the egg? If you and many more want to get these changes made, then there has to be an effort made by the barebow community to effect those changes by getting more participants to the major WA and USA tournaments that do allow barebow competition. Once those numbers are in place, it is much easier to argue for our inclusion in the rest of the Championship tournaments. It is a sad fact that , before the last couple of years, there has been very little participation in the WA barebow classes in the United States. It takes sacrifice to secure a spot for the future generations of barebow archers. Part of that sacrifice will involve attending archery tournaments that don't necessarily fit into your comfort zone of competition. Not everyone is willing or able to do that for various reasons. One of the primary tournaments of interest for barebow archers this year should be the USA archery outdoor target nationals held in early July in Decatur, Alabama. Barebow was eliminated from this tournament last year because of lack of participation. There has been a strong outcry from our community resulting in the barebow class being reinstated this year. John Magera ( Limbwalker ) is heading the effort to finalize a shooting program for the barebowers at distances which should be representative for our class. I think we can determine our own destiny, we just need enough barebow archers to take the initiative to further our prospects.


I completely agree with you Ben. Numbers matter. That is why I am going to the Oregon Barebow Challenge (a USAA sanctioned event) this weekend. And it is part of the reason I am going to Vegas this year (the other part is to learn from you guys and gals). If the USAA FITA Field is in Spokane, I will definitely be there (its only a 6 hour drive to get there). I would like to do the USAA Outdoor Target, the NFAA Outdoor Field, and the USAA FITA Field. Money will determine which and if any of these that I can do. It is a lot of money to me, but I am willing to help support the numbers.

I can totally understand when an organization cancels an event due to lack of participation. Why go to all the work in having a national championship for a class when only 1 person shows up to be given the award as opposed to having to earn it. If I was running the event I would make that call also. Apathy does a great job at destroying the motivation to continue doing all of the thankless behind the scenes work running an event..

But there also should be some sort of an incentive for people to want to expend vast amounts of time and money to compete. I am not saying money needs to be that motivator.

Several years ago, the US Traditional championships used to be the weekend before the US Outdoor Nationals. The year they decided to split those two event to be at different locations and time really hacked me off. That was the year I was going to go to the Outdoor Nationals. Mark Applegate's scores is what motivated me to stick with the Trad/Barebow division for those FITA rounds. The motivator for me at that time was I was going to shoot the Traditional shoot, and then stay and shoot at the Outdoor Nationals. 6 days of shooting for 1 air fare cost 

Anyways, I am here to support Barebow and Trad shooting the best way I can, - to shoot at the events and as many as I can afford to go (well as many as the wife will let me go to - I keep trying to talk her into switching from Oly to barebow there may be hope there since she is taking an interest in this string walking concept). So hopefully my participation helps motivate the growth of the class.

Pete


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Mr. Roboto said:


> I completely agree with you Ben. Numbers matter. That is why I am going to the Oregon Barebow Challenge (a USAA sanctioned event) this weekend. And it is part of the reason I am going to Vegas this year (the other part is to learn from you guys and gals). If the USAA FITA Field is in Spokane, I will definitely be there (its only a 6 hour drive to get there). I would like to do the USAA Outdoor Target, the NFAA Outdoor Field, and the USAA FITA Field. Money will determine which and if any of these that I can do. It is a lot of money to me, but I am willing to help support the numbers.
> 
> I can totally understand when an organization cancels an event due to lack of participation. Why go to all the work in having a national championship for a class when only 1 person shows up to be given the award as opposed to having to earn it. If I was running the event I would make that call also. Apathy does a great job at destroying the motivation to continue doing all of the thankless behind the scenes work running an event..
> 
> ...


Pete, I know very well that money is a big factor in getting to tournaments these days. It is tough to spend a lot of money on equipment and then have even greater outlays spent on doing the thing that you enjoy. I don't have the answers as there are so many tournaments from the different organizations that it is impossible to make all the big ones. Last year, I only shot twelve tournaments the whole year and half those were local. This year, I am going to try to make the USA archery outdoor target even though it will be in a miserable place( weather wise). I enjoy the target and field competitions much more than the 3-d events. The old days were much simpler as there were only four or five major events a year to attend. One of the things the barebow crowd lacks is sponsorship, help in getting to the big tournaments. It always helped to have equipment and money allowances for tournaments when I shot pro freestyle. Maybe that should be an order of business for our crowd, seeing if we can generate a following of recurve and arrow manufacturers to help ease the pain.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Good for you Pete. I hope to see you in Decatur. I hope we have enough Barebow target archers show up there that USArchery realizes they need to keep Barebow in Outdoor Nationals. 

If you think about it, one of the oldest archery competitions in this country was barebow at the NAA Outdoor Nationals. The bows may be made of metal now, and the rounds may be a little different, but we still need to ensure there are always barebow archers at our nation's oldest outdoor target archery event.


----------



## trevorpowdrell (May 8, 2012)

It would really help if we had the information about the format for barebow at NAA Outdoor Nationals. 
Any idea when this will be decided ?


----------



## wanemann (Oct 7, 2010)

grantmac said:


> Slight tangent:
> 
> Here in Canada they hold all 3 national outdoor events (WA 3D, Field and Target) at the same venue or at least within driving distance over the course of a week and a half. It sure makes things a lot more economical from a travel standpoint. However barebow isn't offered for target unfortunately.
> 
> -Grant


I don't think this is so. I have shot a few target competitions with my barebow, Canadian target records shows barebow records, and nationals last year had a few entries, mind you not many.


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

J. Wesbrock said:


> Scott,
> 
> Not to sidetrack things, but I hope you're shooting sectionals in a few weeks. I'll be in AMBB with my recurve again.


When the heck is Sectionals? I went look and can not find any information regarding a shoot location and date in Michigan. The NFAA website still has only 2014 dates and info as does our state website. If it is the same weekend as last year I am out as we have a local shoot at our club all weekend and I am the shoot chair person. I'll start a separate thread on the sectionals to not muddy this up more.


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

Never mind I ended up finding it. Curious they have a live link to 2014 info. They need to kill that https://www.nfaausa.com/great-lake-sectionals

Anyway proper link here and yes I'm out. https://www.nfaausa.com/sites/default/files/GL Indoor Sectionals all sites.pdf


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

At the NFAA site, under the tournaments tab, click on calendar, and you'll see the "Great Lakes indoor sectionals" listed with a link to the schedule and locations:

https://www.nfaausa.com/sites/default/files/MA Indoor Calendar.pdf


oops, too slow


----------



## deadeyedickwc (Jan 10, 2010)

john thanks for all you do


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

trevorpowdrell said:


> It would really help if we had the information about the format for barebow at NAA Outdoor Nationals.
> Any idea when this will be decided ?


Soon. Our committee's proposal had barebow archers from Bowman up to Senior (adult) shooting one distance closer than their recurve counterparts (this idea came from the WA field rules, where barebow archers shoot one set of stakes closer than the recurve archers). So in other words, Cubs would shoot 30M, Juniors/Seniors shoot 60M, etc. Same 122cm face, same # of arrows (72/day). The only difference is the masters. We felt they could still handle 60 meters, even though their recurve counterparts are also shooting 60. Since I routinely shoot 60M outdoors with several "masters" division archers, this made sense. They want to shoot with the seniors because many of the masters archers are in fact, better than most seniors anyway.

The proposal also recommended that if there is a sufficient # of participants in each division, they will participate in the matchplay event. Teams is a work in progress. We suggested they put barebow archers in with the recurvers at the appropriate distances, but they balked at that. So we'll have to see what happens this year and go from there.

Again, participation heals all.  If we have plenty of outdoor barebow target shooters in Decatur, then many of these things will get decided in favor of the future of barebow archery. If not, then we will all be subject to the same marginalization we've "enjoyed" for decades now.

deadeye, it's my pleasure, but again, I'm just carrying the water that was brought to me.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

wanemann said:


> I don't think this is so. I have shot a few target competitions with my barebow, Canadian target records shows barebow records, and nationals last year had a few entries, mind you not many.


It was not offered when I sent in my registration. I was offered to shoot in recurve with the Oly guys.
Also having not shot a 90m FITA and having my bow set-up for Field and 3D distances I wasn't exactly interested in making a fool of myself at the national level.

All of this is part of the reason I'm gravitating towards compound. I can shoot almost any event with the same equipment and the rules are basically static.

-Grant


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

John so all arrows shot at 60 meters and just 72 arrows per day for 2 days?


----------



## wanemann (Oct 7, 2010)

grantmac said:


> It was not offered when I sent in my registration. I was offered to shoot in recurve with the Oly guys.
> Also having not shot a 90m FITA and having my bow set-up for Field and 3D distances I wasn't exactly interested in making a fool of myself at the national level.
> 
> All of this is part of the reason I'm gravitating towards compound. I can shoot almost any event with the same equipment and the rules are basically static.
> ...


cant speak to nationals but at provincials in Ontario they have always accommodated me and few others with barebows even when it was just me. It was at target provincials when I decided to go the oly recurve route, I had to shoot 70m, and my arrow tip was in view of my concentration at draw full draw, it was then I realised my point on was 70m, next thing ya know I was aiming for the first time with my bow, shot a Canadian barebow 70m record that day(people said all you have to do is hit the target ever arrow and its yours well that wasn't exactly true I had to average a 6 to get the record.) I thought this aiming bit is fun, ill get a real sight and see where this goes. but I hear ya, rules seem to change often and interest was lacking my neck of the woods anyways too bad I enjoyed the challenge of it.

wayne


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

As a relative newcomer I think Lancaster got it right. They basically said "shoot what you got". That lead to a successful turnout of 41 Barebow archers I believe. I think we turned a few heads while we were there. I overheard a few archers talking about going Barebow next year. And John Werts Barebow clinic had several non Barebow archers in attendance. The Barebow bunch at Lancaster was mostly very friendly and open and eager to spread the Barebow gospel.

That being said, I think a defined set of rules for Barebow would be helpful. In my experience, from IBO, to PA state rules, to NFAA, etc...there is too much variety. I would like to see one set of rules so I can shoot the same equipment EVERYWHERE. Its expensive enough to travel to these shoots, with the cost of everything, and virtually no prize money for the majority of us. I can't be spending money on a variety of risers, limbs, plungers etc..... Once I tune a rig for one class I hate to take it apart and set it up for something else....that's a pain always tuning and retuning. Would be nice to use the same bow setup for everything. 

We also need to grow locally, in our own communities. Without growth locally, there will be no growth on a national level. So it all starts at home. 

Shooting the Classic was an absolute blast, great experience that I could not have gotten anywhere else. Looking forward to next year.

Tony


----------



## BubbaDean1 (Dec 20, 2014)

Tony the barebow guys were "mostly friendly" you were not talking about me, right? Good to meet ya and put a face with the name. AS far as rules go as long as there are different organizations there will be different rules. It is just a fact of life. I shoot ASA, some NFAA and a little IBO so I only worry about my set up being legal there. Not sure what IFAA or WA rules are and somewhat don't care because I don't participate in their tournaments.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I think Lancaster got it right. They basically said "shoot what you got".





> That being said, I think a defined set of rules for Barebow would be helpful. In my experience, from IBO, to PA state rules, to NFAA, etc...there is too much variety.


I'm having trouble reconciling those two statements. Because now we have one more set of rules - Lancaster Classic rules. And the longer that set of rules is in play, the more guys you'll see attend that event with long rods and clickers. It's the natural progression of things. 



> AS far as rules go as long as there are different organizations there will be different rules. It is just a fact of life. I shoot ASA, some NFAA and a little IBO so I only worry about my set up being legal there. Not sure what IFAA or WA rules are and somewhat don't care because I don't participate in their tournaments


In other words, you're doing what we all do right now - pick one or two sets of rules and set up for those because you can't do all of them. My point is that were the rules more consistent, there's a good chance you'd have shot an event under IFAA or WA by now. 

Five sets of barebow rules will be the death of us. 

As was said above, a lot of compound unlimited guys are happy there because they can basically go to any event anywhere, and compete with the same gear. Sure would be nice if we could say the same for barebow.


----------



## BubbaDean1 (Dec 20, 2014)

John probably not. I have little interest in shooting spots whether it is indoors or out. I like 3D the best. As far as IFAA or WA goes most of the stuff(to my knowledge) is outside of the US. Traveling costs being what they are........if I am spending that kind of money to shoot a bow something is going to bleed.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Tony, how is Lancaster's rules the best for barebow? If you took a poll of all the shooters that actually participate in shooting a barebow style bow and asked them what rig will they prefer to shoot, maybe at the most 5% would say what the Lancaster rules were. WA is way more popular around the world than any other set of rules. It only makes sense that is the path we would want to take. Besides, we already have a major target association that uses those rules.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> .if I am spending that kind of money to shoot a bow something is going to bleed.


 

I like that quote. ha, ha. Yea, me too.

3D is really a whole different ballgame. At least IMO it is. Why? Because then you're getting into hunting bows, and not really target bows. At least, that's how I feel it should work and that's how I remember everyone seeing it when 3D first came around. When I shot 3D (so long ago now it was 2D ! ha, ha), I always shot my hunting bows. Everyone did. We all looked at it as practice for hunting shots. 

But barebow target is a different beast. Long metal risers are not something you'd typically find in the deer stand. 

It's not uncommon to see a 3D shooter using a bow they would actually hunt with, but it's pretty uncommon to find a hunting bow at a serious barebow target event. 

So to me, that's where a real change occurs. 

So long as we're punching holes in paper, IMO all barebow rigs should be the same, just as all compound unlimited and all Olympic recurve rigs are the same. 

If we're practicing for hunting, then that's different.

Trying to lure 3-D shooters into an event that allows long stabilizers and clickers is flawed logic IMO. Again, over time, folks will either take advantage of the rules, or just not show up, so that the entire field will basically be shooting long rods and probably clickers too. That's how it works. Given time, the competition drifts to the edge of the rules to remain competitive. In WA, it's stringwalking and weighted risers. Everyone who wants to be competitive does this. In NFAA indoors, it's 3-under, heavy risers, long, slow arrows (to get point on) and now, 12" stabilizers. Again, given a year or two, everyone will be taking full advantage of everything they are allowed to use. As I understand it, other organizations allow long stabilizers and clickers. So if those are allowed, eventually the entire field will show up with them, or not show up at all.

So at the end of the day, being all-inclusive sounds great at first, but really what you've done is written rules that will eventually drive the competition to use everything available to them because folks who use less will get tired of being beaten, or just won't show up at all.


----------



## hammer08 (Aug 28, 2012)

It seems to me that one set of rules is just as arbitrary as the other. How do we go about picking one set of rules? And why should those set of rules be picked over any other set?


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

hammer08 said:


> It seems to me that one set of rules is just as arbitrary as the other. How do we go about picking one set of rules? And why should those set of rules be picked over any other set?


One should try to pick the best set of rules. This is how it is with everything in life. Remember, different sets of rules are NOT equal, different opinions are NOT equal, some are better and some are worse.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Yes, one set of rules is just about as arbitrary as any other.

However, I have an issue with any bow that uses a stabilizer being referred to as a "Bare Bow". It may be unsighted, or sightless, but it's not bare.

Folks want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to be able to claim they shoot "barebow" or "traditional" but still use stabilizers, and in some cases, even clickers and wheels! Good grief! 

Internationally, the commonly accepted definition of "Barebow" is most often that described by WA rules. It's the set of rules that the greatest number of serious barebow shooters compete under, worldwide. And for me at least, they make the most sense. The bow is truly a "bare bow," and they don't restrict you to "touching the nock of the arrow" as per some make-believe definition of what's "traditional." In fact, WA Barebow is not interested in the least in what's "traditional," but rather in what level of competition a person can achieve with a simple bare bow. 

It is an elegant and sophisticated and very competitive division for those who are dedicated to the art and science of shooting a bare bow. No worries about what is or isn't "traditional," no trying to have their cake and eat it too. And the rules are on the equipment, not how it's used. May the best man win. Kind of like stock car racing. Let's test the drivers, not the mechanics. 

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

And having said that, I'm out on this topic. 

I want folks to understand it's the rules I have an issue with, and not the shoot or the organizers. Rob and John and company are some of the finest folks in the business, and I'm glad to call them friends and hope the Lancaster shoot continues to enjoy tremendous success. But then, nearly everything Rob touches turns to gold, so I expect that it will. And I look forward to shooting it someday, whether Olympic or "Barebow..."


----------



## hammer08 (Aug 28, 2012)

Thank you limbwalker. Hard to disagree with everything you just said. 

Looking forward to meeting you someday soon.


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

I would like to add a big PLUS 1 to everything limbwalker has posted in this thread.


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

BubbaDean1 said:


> Tony the barebow guys were "mostly friendly" you were not talking about me, right? Good to meet ya and put a face with the name.


They were ALL friendly, lol. 



Demmer said:


> Tony, how is Lancaster's rules the best for barebow? If you took a poll of all the shooters that actually participate in shooting a barebow style bow and asked them what rig will they prefer to shoot, maybe at the most 5% would say what the Lancaster rules were. WA is way more popular around the world than any other set of rules. It only makes sense that is the path we would want to take. Besides, we already have a major target association that uses those rules.


I am not saying that LAS rules were the best. I am saying that by including all types of equipment, everybody was able to bring and shoot what they had set up, and therefore they attracted a good first year turnout. The intention I believe was to not exclude anyone because they had a rig set up for IBO, IFAA, NFAA or whatever...as the Barebow class was added with short notice and they wanted to ensure a good turnout. So in that regard......mission accomplished.

Now going forward, I agree that they will need to set some standard rules in place. I have no problem with WA rules. WA seems to be basically no clicker, no stab....works for me.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

So which rule format to follow:

Well how about the rules where the winners of the national championships get to represent their country to compete in the world championships. Oh, wait, there are no world barebow target championships. Hence what is the incentive for any organization that wants to keep a tight grip on their own rules to want to make any changes that might make one member to cry foul.

I wonder how many leaders of the different organizations are even following this topic?

So in the mean time, I will let my shooting be proof that there are barebow shooters that will still shoot.


----------



## Stick & String (Feb 1, 2003)

I recently bought a used TEC Riser which is ok for NFAA, but not for WA or FITA barebow (12.2cm rule), but yet it's still a recurve bow. Not that I'm good enough to ever compete with the big name BB shooters, but just another example of different rules, I understand John's frustration! It would be nice to have barebow standardized across the world.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

wanemann said:


> cant speak to nationals but at provincials in Ontario they have always accommodated me and few others with barebows even when it was just me. It was at target provincials when I decided to go the oly recurve route, I had to shoot 70m, and my arrow tip was in view of my concentration at draw full draw, it was then I realised my point on was 70m, next thing ya know I was aiming for the first time with my bow, shot a Canadian barebow 70m record that day(people said all you have to do is hit the target ever arrow and its yours well that wasn't exactly true I had to average a 6 to get the record.) I thought this aiming bit is fun, ill get a real sight and see where this goes. but I hear ya, rules seem to change often and interest was lacking my neck of the woods anyways too bad I enjoyed the challenge of it.
> 
> wayne


I know how that feels. I shot a pretty poor round for last years field nationals only to receive a rather nice letter telling me I'd set a record.

Averaging 6 on the 70m is pretty strong stuff Barebow. I think my best in practice on a still day was around 7.5, but that was ideal conditions.

-Grant


----------



## j.conner (Nov 12, 2009)

I would like to see standard equipment classifications across the national archery organizations. The disparity in classes, in the best case, means no scorecards turned in, or worst case, shooters do not show up. I also think any rules about how the string is held (fingers touching nock, single anchor point, etc.) should be removed - they are essentially unenforceable except at a championship where everyone is watching closely. Pure equipment classes are objective and easily understood. They can even be illustrated with pictures.

One of my pet peeves from a tournament operations perspective is shoots with non-standard equipment classes, where shooters have to figure out what class they are in. The long line at registration and swapping out of scorecards after registration makes it inefficient and confusing.


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

As a newcomer to the sport of Barebow shooting, I have to say that all of these rules for different organizations is very confusing for someone like myself and I see this pushing many new shooters away. If you tell people that you are a Recurve Barebow shooter, it could mean several different configurations. A standardized set of rules, or even rules with minor differences would attract more people. IMO


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

grantmac said:


> I know how that feels. I shot a pretty poor round for last years field nationals only to receive a rather nice letter telling me I'd set a record.
> 
> Averaging 6 on the 70m is pretty strong stuff Barebow. I think my best in practice on a still day was around 7.5, but that was ideal conditions.
> 
> -Grant


Wayne is a good shot Grant, and a damn nice guy, look him up if you both end up at the Nationals. Like me, he got a rough deal in 3D round here but shoots a mean barebow.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

UtahIdahoHunter said:


> As a newcomer to the sport of Barebow shooting, I have to say that all of these rules for different organizations is very confusing for someone like myself and I see this pushing many new shooters away. If you tell people that you are a Recurve Barebow shooter, it could mean several different configurations. A standardized set of rules, or even rules with minor differences would attract more people. IMO


Yup.

IMO, you have target barebow, which should follow WA barebow rules, and then traditional barebow, which should be limited to wood handles, no plungers, no weights, and should handle the needs for 3-D shooters.

John


----------



## Stick & String (Feb 1, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Yup.
> 
> IMO, you have target barebow, which should follow WA barebow rules, and then traditional barebow, which should be limited to wood handles, no plungers, no weights, and should handle the needs for 3-D shooters.
> 
> John


John that's the best I've heard. Target (WA rules) and Traditional BB (wood/off the shelf). A traditional class would really bring in a lot of new shooters to the fold.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> Yup.
> 
> IMO, you have target barebow, which should follow WA barebow rules, and then traditional barebow, which should be limited to wood handles, no plungers, no weights, and should handle the needs for 3-D shooters.
> 
> John


Makes sense


----------



## wanemann (Oct 7, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> Yup.
> 
> IMO, you have target barebow, which should follow WA barebow rules, and then traditional barebow, which should be limited to wood handles, no plungers, no weights, and should handle the needs for 3-D shooters.
> 
> John


Never gonna work makes sense and too logical


----------



## Laurie Borealis (Mar 10, 2012)

I agree with Limbwalker, too. When the NFAA added the 12-inch stabilizer to traditional, I was so dismayed I started to make the switch to USA Archery tournaments even though I have to travel out of state for them. I got in trouble when those stabilizers first started showing up and I told someone their stabilizer looked like a toilet plunger. To me they mar the beautiful lines of a recurve and are incompatible with the simplicity of equipment in trad and barebow. I vote WA BB rules for Lancaster, for the NFAA, for Vegas barebow, for all the organizations. Too many equipment adjustments and too much retuning is required to shoot in different organizations' BB rules. The other big reason I'm with USA Archery now is that I can string walk. Gap shooting a field course in NFAA trad is an exercise in frustration for me, and NFAA barebow is a compound category with long stabilizers. Maybe it's hopeless but I plan to contact my NFAA rep to ask for a rule change so that either the BB category or the trad category syncs with WA BB rules. Seems like there aren't very many compound BB guys anymore...? Couldn't they shoot Bowhunter category, and leave Barebow to the recurves? (Then the barebow shooters could leave the trad category to the wood recurve guys, who seem pretty disenfranchised...) And I wish all the organizations would seek member input on potential rule changes before they vote on them. How many trad shooters in the NFAA got to have input before they added the stabilizers? (And, um, how many barebow shooters are getting to have input on what distances will be shot in Decatur? Just asking...)


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Laurie Borealis said:


> I agree with Limbwalker, too. When the NFAA added the 12-inch stabilizer to traditional, I was so dismayed I started to make the switch to USA Archery tournaments even though I have to travel out of state for them. I got in trouble when those stabilizers first started showing up and I told someone their stabilizer looked like a toilet plunger. To me they mar the beautiful lines of a recurve and are incompatible with the simplicity of equipment in trad and barebow. I vote WA BB rules for Lancaster, for the NFAA, for Vegas barebow, for all the organizations. Too many equipment adjustments and too much retuning is required to shoot in different organizations' BB rules. The other big reason I'm with USA Archery now is that I can string walk. Gap shooting a field course in NFAA trad is an exercise in frustration for me, and NFAA barebow is a compound category with long stabilizers. Maybe it's hopeless but I plan to contact my NFAA rep to ask for a rule change so that either the BB category or the trad category syncs with WA BB rules. Seems like there aren't very many compound BB guys anymore...? Couldn't they shoot Bowhunter category, and leave Barebow to the recurves? (Then the barebow shooters could leave the trad category to the wood recurve guys, who seem pretty disenfranchised...) And I wish all the organizations would seek member input on potential rule changes before they vote on them. How many trad shooters in the NFAA got to have input before they added the stabilizers? (And, um, how many barebow shooters are getting to have input on what distances will be shot in Decatur? Just asking...)


Hi Laurie, unfortunately all these ideas will never work because there are way too many archers out there who will work hard to protect their niche rather than work for the good of archery in general. In other words, keep as many different classes as possible so I can find an underrepresented one at some tournament and win a prize. Sorry for the cynicism but this line of thought is the reason archery is so loaded down and splintered. On a brighter note, congrats for the fine turnout on the Oregon shoot. Ben


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Laurie Borealis said:


> I agree with Limbwalker, too. When the NFAA added the 12-inch stabilizer to traditional, I was so dismayed I started to make the switch to USA Archery tournaments even though I have to travel out of state for them. I got in trouble when those stabilizers first started showing up and I told someone their stabilizer looked like a toilet plunger. To me they mar the beautiful lines of a recurve and are incompatible with the simplicity of equipment in trad and barebow. I vote WA BB rules for Lancaster, for the NFAA, for Vegas barebow, for all the organizations. Too many equipment adjustments and too much retuning is required to shoot in different organizations' BB rules. The other big reason I'm with USA Archery now is that I can string walk. Gap shooting a field course in NFAA trad is an exercise in frustration for me, and NFAA barebow is a compound category with long stabilizers. Maybe it's hopeless but I plan to contact my NFAA rep to ask for a rule change so that either the BB category or the trad category syncs with WA BB rules. Seems like there aren't very many compound BB guys anymore...? Couldn't they shoot Bowhunter category, and leave Barebow to the recurves? (Then the barebow shooters could leave the trad category to the wood recurve guys, who seem pretty disenfranchised...) And I wish all the organizations would seek member input on potential rule changes before they vote on them. How many trad shooters in the NFAA got to have input before they added the stabilizers? (And, um, how many barebow shooters are getting to have input on what distances will be shot in Decatur? Just asking...)


Laurie, the 12" stabilizer in trad was a direct result of petitions submitted by states members to the National Meeting where it was voted in by all 50 states representatives. So, the answer to your question is, quite a few. The answer to your question on USA target distances is, John Magera. Normally, this would be a bad thing except, the barebow division is being reinstated this year after a years absence and John has been the one spearheading that effort, so he deserves a little slack on criticism. If, down the road, enough barebow archers dislike the format, then that will be the time for discussion on change. There was discussion in previous threads and suggestions requested so there was definitely opportunity for input. Hope your shooting is going well. Ben


----------



## BubbaDean1 (Dec 20, 2014)

Limbwalker have you shot 3D recently? When you look at 3D most of the competitors are shooting metal risers even in the IBO Traditional class. In my opinion to have a class that is wood riser only would not draw very many people. The sad reality all target organizations face is that no matter what you do the folks that attend things like Compton, Cloverdale and Denton Hill will never come and shoot a target competition. There are big numbers at these "shoots" but they never come to organized competitive events.


----------



## High Plains (Feb 29, 2008)

Interesting thread to say the least and in my opinion a thread and a debate that we need to happen. It is very difficult to please everybody but the good thing is that many here have no issue with compromising. I feel that part of the problems organizations have is the purist Neo-Trad community that complains when they don't get it their way, I think this had had a large effect in my area. I want to thank John for his work on this with USAA.


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

My takeaway from this discussion is it seem there is pretty good support (among some good shooters) to adopt or transition to the WA rules for barebow recurve. It might be a good opportunity for Lancaster as a standalone shoot to push an initiative like this forward. Perhaps with another solid turnout and impressive scores this can get some additional traction in NFAA and also showcase some support in the NAA ranks for this class.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

SBills said:


> My takeaway from this discussion is it seem there is pretty good support (among some good shooters) to adopt or transition to the WA rules for barebow recurve. It might be a good opportunity for Lancaster as a standalone shoot to push an initiative like this forward. Perhaps with another solid turnout and impressive scores this can get some additional traction in NFAA and also showcase some support in the NAA ranks for this class.


:thumbs_up


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> And, um, how many barebow shooters are getting to have input on what distances will be shot in Decatur? Just asking...


I am currently the chair for USArchery's barebow committee, that consists of Liz Coombe (coach and avid barebow competitor), Dee Falks (top ranked coach and IBO/ASA guru), Tom Barker (experienced coach and program leader), and Rodney Estrada (college coach and national judge). Before me, Skip Trafford was the chair, and his experience in national and international barebow is vast. He still provides input to our group, as has Rick Stonebraker, who has been a world class archer with both Olympic and Barebow. 

I did start a thread here last year to solicit input, and we here in Texas have 2 years of outdoor barebow target archery experience at these distances through our TOTS series, so we have had an opportunity to see how they work in the real world. But I do expect we will learn a lot in Decatur. It should be a lot of fun. I will talk to Denise and Sheri about holding a session with the barebow participants to solicit their input at that event. 



> Limbwalker have you shot 3D recently?


Funny you should ask.  My first "real" competitive experience was shooting 3D with a wood hunting recurve, so long ago now that it was 2D! ha, ha. Eventually, our club in E. Texas got some Mackenzie 3D deer targets, and we really thought we were something then!  I participated in the 1990 Texas Traditional Championships in Jacksonville, TX when I was a college student. Placed 4th in that event IIRC, with my 65# Assenheimer recurve and wood arrows. Two weeks later I beat the recently crowned state champion at our local Nacogdoches bowhunters event, shooting nearly a clean round on 28 targets (1 miss and 1 wound), and that 3' tall trophy is still the largest archery trophy I have ever won. It has stood in a place of honor next to my archery workbench for decades now. 

When 3D was just getting started, all of us bowhunters looked at it as an opportunity to practice for the upcoming hunting season. That was the whole point. If we wanted to shoot target archery, we got our target bows and shot the field course on paper faces. At least 25 years ago, there wasn't a lot of confusion about what kinds of bows we were going to shoot at 3D events. We all shot our hunting bows! 

I just looked over the IBO rules again, and they don't have a "barebow" division. Their "Recurve Unaided" division allows clickers, and a 12" stabilizer and string walking. 

Now honestly, who bowhunts with a rig like that?

I think the problems arise when archery organizations try to become something they are not. Mission creep, if you will. World Archery is a target archery organization, not a field archery organization and not a 3-D archery organization. NFAA/IFAA specializes in field archery. IBO/ASA specializes in 3D, which at least at one time, had a very close tie to bowhunting. When these organizations try to become something they are not, this is when we see all the splintered divisions with strange rules. 

IMO, every archer should support every archer organization, and the organizations should all work together. USArchery should handle target archery events, NFAA should handle field, and IBO/ASA should handle 3D. 

I see now where World Archery is trying to bolster their 3D events. Why? Do we not already have a very strong 3D organization?

I digress, but this is where I see the problems coming from.

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I can remember that even as a neophyte teen, how I thought it was beyond strange to see guys throwing long stabilizers and scopes and overdraws onto their hunting bows so they could be more competitive at 3D. I thought it looked absurd for a person to tote a bow like that through the woods. It makes about as much sense to me as hauling an Olympic Recurve through a field course.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Great Idea but its only one shoot a year you are going to need to attach more shooters. If all the top shooters love WA rules so much they should get together write a petition to NFAA sign it and then find a NFAA director or councilman that will submit it. This is how we got the 12" stabilizer rule in NFAA. If you are serious about this show up at Vegas and get it started. Then come to NFAA indoor Nationals in Kentucky and do the same. There will be more Bearbow Recurve shooters at these two shoots than any other. This is how you get it done. Just know its going to take more than two of you. If you really think this will make Barebow Recurve grow then get OFF your butts and get it done!!!!!!!!

This was not directed at SBills its for all here


SBills said:


> My takeaway from this discussion is it seem there is pretty good support (among some good shooters) to adopt or transition to the WA rules for barebow recurve. It might be a good opportunity for Lancaster as a standalone shoot to push an initiative like this forward. Perhaps with another solid turnout and impressive scores this can get some additional traction in NFAA and also showcase some support in the NAA ranks for this class.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I hunt with my Stabilizer and my quiver


limbwalker said:


> I can remember that even as a neophyte teen, how I thought it was beyond strange to see guys throwing long stabilizers and scopes and overdraws onto their hunting bows so they could be more competitive at 3D. I thought it looked absurd for a person to tote a bow like that through the woods. It makes about as much sense to me as hauling an Olympic Recurve through a field course.


----------



## Laurie Borealis (Mar 10, 2012)

itbeso said:


> Laurie, the 12" stabilizer in trad was a direct result of petitions submitted by states members to the National Meeting where it was voted in by all 50 states representatives. So, the answer to your question is, quite a few. The answer to your question on USA target distances is, John Magera. Normally, this would be a bad thing except, the barebow division is being reinstated this year after a years absence and John has been the one spearheading that effort, so he deserves a little slack on criticism. If, down the road, enough barebow archers dislike the format, then that will be the time for discussion on change. There was discussion in previous threads and suggestions requested so there was definitely opportunity for input. Hope your shooting is going well. Ben


Very sorry, I really didn't mean to criticize John M. I love what he's doing for barebow, and his ideas for it. I read post after post that he writes and I think "Yeah!" I've just felt a little frustrated that the organizations' proposals for significant rule changes aren't a little more publicized on their websites with contact info for member input or even an online poll. NFAA insiders knew the 12-inch stabilizer was in the works, but I felt blindsided by it (and so were a lot of trad tournament shooters I know), and I may be wrong but I don't think a whole lot of those reps who voted are trad shooters. I wasn't aware until recently that the way to find out about this stuff is to check these forums. I guess I got the wrong idea about how many people wanted stabilizers because an NFAA state rep told me at a meeting of the Barebow Fraternity that the reason for the rule change was that one guy wanted to be able to shoot 80 yards better. He laughed, and I'm sure now that he was joking but I didn't realize that.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

2413gary said:


> I hunt with my Stabilizer and my quiver


Some days, so do I.

But in my quote, I mentioned long stabilizers, scopes and overdraws.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Very sorry, I really didn't mean to criticize John M


I didn't take it as criticism.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Re: the 12" stab. change for NFAA Trad, I can completely see why they would think that's bringing their trad division more in line with IBO RU. My opinion would be, however, that it's neither barebow, or trad at that point... and to allow a stabilizer but still insist the archer must touch the nock of the arrow seems odd to me. If you're shooting target archery, then use target archery equipment and styles of shooting. If you're simulating hunting shots, then use hunting bows.


----------



## Laurie Borealis (Mar 10, 2012)

limbwalker said:


> I am currently the chair for USArchery's barebow committee, that consists of Liz Coombe (coach and avid barebow competitor), Dee Falks (top ranked coach and IBO/ASA guru), Tom Barker (experienced coach and program leader), and Rodney Estrada (college coach and national judge). Before me, Skip Trafford was the chair, and his experience in national and international barebow is vast. He still provides input to our group, as has Rick Stonebraker, who has been a world class archer with both Olympic and Barebow.
> 
> I did start a thread here last year to solicit input, and we here in Texas have 2 years of outdoor barebow target archery experience at these distances through our TOTS series, so we have had an opportunity to see how they work in the real world. But I do expect we will learn a lot in Decatur. It should be a lot of fun. I will talk to Denise and Sheri about holding a session with the barebow participants to solicit their input at that event.


Thank you, John. That's the first time I've seen a list of who's on the committee. I totally appreciate what you're doing.


----------



## Laurie Borealis (Mar 10, 2012)

2413gary said:


> Great Idea but its only one shoot a year you are going to need to attach more shooters. If all the top shooters love WA rules so much they should get together write a petition to NFAA sign it and then find a NFAA director or councilman that will submit it. This is how we got the 12" stabilizer rule in NFAA. If you are serious about this show up at Vegas and get it started. Then come to NFAA indoor Nationals in Kentucky and do the same. There will be more Bearbow Recurve shooters at these two shoots than any other. This is how you get it done. Just know its going to take more than two of you. If you really think this will make Barebow Recurve grow then get OFF your butts and get it done!!!!!!!!
> 
> This was not directed at SBills its for all here



Thanks, Gary! Good idea. I won't be at Vegas -- but I will circulate a petition in Louisville.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Re: the 12" stab. change for NFAA Trad, I can completely see why they would think that's bringing their trad division more in line with IBO RU. My opinion would be, however, that it's neither barebow, or trad at that point... and to allow a stabilizer but still insist the archer must touch the nock of the arrow seems odd to me. If you're shooting target archery, then use target archery equipment and styles of shooting. If you're simulating hunting shots, then use hunting bows.


I don't see the NFAA doing anything to follow the IBO. Lots of years of unfortunate bad blood there. If anything, the NFAA would be making changes to be more in line with the world org to which they belong, the IFAA. And the IFAA already has Recurve Bowhunter, which is identical to the present day NFAA Traditional class. 

Truth be known, at the time the 12" stabilizer proposal was drafted for NFAA Traditional, the IBO allowed long rods in RU. A few of us used them in Cleveland that year.

Oh, and I string walk a Sky Conquest with a clicker and counterweights in the hunting woods, but that's a secret.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

The NFAA meeting is in April you have a month to write the petition and submit it


----------



## hammer08 (Aug 28, 2012)

Hopefully these thoughts can become reality and some rules will get changed for the better. 

Just so I understand; are you trying to get NFAA Trad rules changed to WA Barebow rules or NFAA Barebow rules changed to WA Barebow?


----------



## gitnbetr (Jan 17, 2007)

I like the idea of going with WA barebow recurve rules. I do not understand how NFAA could justify legalizing a 12" stab for trad and had no idea it was being considered prior to announcement. I'm just a little  biased, but totally in favor of John's observation that NFAA trad records set with the stab should carry an *. Especially Texas state records.


----------



## Laurie Borealis (Mar 10, 2012)

hammer08 said:


> Hopefully these thoughts can become reality and some rules will get changed for the better.
> 
> Just so I understand; are you trying to get NFAA Trad rules changed to WA Barebow rules or NFAA Barebow rules changed to WA Barebow?


Yes, that's a key question now. This is where we need to get broad input, beyond just the people who read this thread or even this forum! But what do people here think?


----------



## Laurie Borealis (Mar 10, 2012)

2413gary said:


> The NFAA meeting is in April you have a month to write the petition and submit it



Gotcha. Thank you.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

NFAA Barebow rules will never change but there is a possibility Trad recurve could change with the right support. You would just eliminate the 12" stabilizer rule and add pass thru the 12.5cm ring rule to start. ( I would hate you the rest of my life I love my 12"stabilizer ) I'm not sure it would make the class grow but its a start


hammer08 said:


> Hopefully these thoughts can become reality and some rules will get changed for the better.
> 
> Just so I understand; are you trying to get NFAA Trad rules changed to WA Barebow rules or NFAA Barebow rules changed to WA Barebow?


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Laurie Borealis said:


> Yes, that's a key question now. This is where we need to get broad input, beyond just the people who read this thread or even this forum! But what do people here think?


No.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Just for the record, I like to see my arrows fly, so I would like to see the barebow competition at 70 meters. Now, I know that won't happen but, that is my wish. Whatever the distance, there will be new records set because this will be the first Nationals with the new distances, so that will be a chance for some of you to get your name in lights, so to speak. Also, I hope it is mandatory for all the officers of USA archery to be at the tournament and outdoors the whole time. July in Alabama can be a bit uncomfortable.:smile:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

J. Wesbrock said:


> No.


LOL. No to what, Jason?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Oh, and I string walk a Sky Conquest with a clicker and counterweights in the hunting woods, but that's a secret.


Yea, but Jason you're weird like that and we can't legislate for weird.  ha, ha.

Well, lots of things to discuss for sure. No wrong answers though. Just need to decide where we go from here.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> but totally in favor of John's observation that NFAA trad records set with the stab should carry an *. Especially Texas state records.


 Of course, if you just come back and re-claim it, we won't need asterisks. 

Gotta admit I did feel a little "dirty" when I was breaking your old TFAA Trad. record with that 12" stabilizer though. ha, ha, ha.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

itbeso said:


> LOL. No to what, Jason?


NFAA changing Traditional to match WA Barebow.


----------



## lamb (Apr 21, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> I am currently the chair for USArchery's barebow committee, that consists of Liz Coombe (coach and avid barebow competitor), Dee Falks (top ranked coach and IBO/ASA guru), Tom Barker (experienced coach and program leader), and Rodney Estrada (college coach and national judge). Before me, Skip Trafford was the chair, and his experience in national and international barebow is vast. He still provides input to our group, as has Rick Stonebraker, who has been a world class archer with both Olympic and Barebow.
> 
> I did start a thread here last year to solicit input, and we here in Texas have 2 years of outdoor barebow target archery experience at these distances through our TOTS series, so we have had an opportunity to see how they work in the real world. But I do expect we will learn a lot in Decatur. It should be a lot of fun. I will talk to Denise and Sheri about holding a session with the barebow participants to solicit their input at that event.
> 
> ...


JOHN 
Really, I bowhunt with a clicker and string walk with my sky conquest. been to Africa 3 times with that same set up. so does larry d jones may be you heard of him. maybe some of these trad guys might try a clicker also so they could learn a little bit about form.Been to denton hill lately .
I would think everybody should be grateful Lancaster had a barebow class . cause it didn't fit certain people's idea of barebow so what. everybody knew the rules before the shoot or they should have.NOW THEY HAVE TO CHANGE THERE RULES CAUSE SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE IT.
If you can't put a long stab on your barebow and tune it in half an hour you probably should stay home any way.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I wasn't aware Larry was using a clicker now. I've never seen him use one. I've also never seen him string walk. Interesting.

I don't have as much experience in the traditional bowhunting world as some, but I have been bowhunting and shooting with traditional archers since the 80's. At one time, I had every issue of Traditional Bowhunter magazine ever published. 

It's very, very rare that I'll ever see a stabilizer or clicker on a bow someone would refer to as "traditional." Very rare. It doesn't matter what rule you make though, there will always be exceptions to it.

Again, we're talking about "BARE bow" here. Sightless is one thing, but Bare - in the minds of most folks - is something more.



> If you can't put a long stab on your barebow and tune it in half an hour you probably should stay home any way.


And there I was just saying there are no wrong answers... apparently there are! LOL.

No need to run this thread into the ground. There's lots of good info above and I think many of us are learning from it.


----------



## RBK (Jun 28, 2011)

I plan to attend the Lancaster Classic Barebow division next year *Because of Their Equipment Rules*. They had an Outstanding Turn Out and I expect it will double next year. I don't have a Barebow Specific Riser so adding weights or a Stabilizer to my 23" Hoyt GMX should really help balances it out. I love shooting Barebow but I started shooting many years ago as a Bow Hunter, you know The Old Pick A Spot, reach anchor and let her Fly. I tried many times shooting paper but just couldn't break the Snap Shooting Tendency. I finally went to Olympic Recurve where using a Clicker solved that problem. I noticed a few Guys at the shoot used under arrow clickers so I thought why not give it a try again. So I ordered a set of Long Limbs for my 23" Hoyt GMX which I have been using as a hunting riser, picked up a Klickety Klick Clicker, added some barebow weights to balance the riser out and now I have a really nice Barebow Rig that I can begin practising with for next year. *So Now What !!!!!!!* We're going to try *FIXING* The Lancaster Classic Shoot Until It's *BROKE*

Rick


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Rick, you do have a point there.
I wasn't lucky enough to go this year but out of interest, what federations rules are all the other classes there following? If they are all from the same federation it might make sense to use the BB rules from there too.
If they leave it as it is or change the rules slightly it won't matter, it will keep growing anyway. BB archery is the new cool, didn't you know


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

J. Wesbrock said:


> NFAA changing Traditional to match WA Barebow.


Why not? We pretty much had one guy change it to allow a 12" rod. What can't we get a whole bunch of people to change it?


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Demmer said:


> Why not? We pretty much had one guy change it to allow a 12" rod. What can't we get a whole bunch of people to change it?


I suppose folks _can_ change whatever they want. She asked for opinions. I gave mine.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Well, I voiced my opinion about the 12" stab rule ( a solid "NO" ) to our state rep via our state forums. But the rule passed. I may not like it, but that is just the way it is. But the rule doesn't "require" me to put the stab on. Well with my bow, I couldn't add a stab if I wanted to, unless I use duct tape 

With my current bow, I can compete in both WA barebow and NFAA Trad without having to make any changes to the bow. I am just beginning to learn how to do that string walking technique because I have noticed that my scores are better if I can keep my arrow tip on paper. My gapping method has need to lots of improvements for NFAA Trad. The way the system is now, I will learn both methods and use the appropriate one for either class. Ideally I would like to only have to perfect one because it takes a lot of time to do it.

Of all of the rules, I would rather see a common rule on string/face walking. I would rather see this made common before deciding on a 12" stab or not

I am definitely against clickers or any other form of a draw check.

Finally a common rule on the maximum diameter of the arrows.

Pete


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Rick, How would changing the rules to align with wa bb rules kill the class? How many people do you know shoot that style of bow all the time? I cant name any. I am one of many archers that try to shoot every possible shoot that I can. Some of them would be nfaa, us archery, various local shoots and going to vegas. I as well as others can't shoot the same bow for more than three weeks in a row and this is the most frustrating part of our division. We will never reach our full potential whenever we have to keep switching our equipment. Since wa bb rules our shot by the vst majority cross the globe that would be the most logical set of rules to adhere by. I am 100% for the growth of our class and the constant rule changes for organization to organization is what kills our class more than anything.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

RBK said:


> I plan to attend the Lancaster Classic Barebow division next year *Because of Their Equipment Rules*. They had an Outstanding Turn Out and I expect it will double next year. I don't have a Barebow Specific Riser so adding weights or a Stabilizer to my 23" Hoyt GMX should really help balances it out. I love shooting Barebow but I started shooting many years ago as a Bow Hunter, you know The Old Pick A Spot, reach anchor and let her Fly. I tried many times shooting paper but just couldn't break the Snap Shooting Tendency. I finally went to Olympic Recurve where using a Clicker solved that problem. I noticed a few Guys at the shoot used under arrow clickers so I thought why not give it a try again. So I ordered a set of Long Limbs for my 23" Hoyt GMX which I have been using as a hunting riser, picked up a Klickety Klick Clicker, added some barebow weights to balance the riser out and now I have a really nice Barebow Rig that I can begin practising with for next year. *So Now What !!!!!!!* We're going to try *FIXING* The Lancaster Classic Shoot Until It's *BROKE*
> 
> Rick


If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. Lancaster offered you a class to shoot in and you did what? The real barebow archers who have showed up regularly for the last 5 years to support barebow tournaments around the country laid the groundwork for this years Lancaster barebow class and supported it with their bodies on the line. Now, you want to reap the benefits of THEIR hard work and , oh by the way, tell us how the rules should be. NOT.


----------



## RBK (Jun 28, 2011)

John, I agree on one set of rules across the board, World Archery, USA Archery, NFAA ect.....However the Lancaster Classic ( correct me if I'm wrong ) is put on and paid for by LAS. I'm sure their liberal equipment rules were to attract as many shooters as possible. I'll shoot the Classic next year regardless of what equipment rules they decide on. But if they go with WA Rules could I use a Clicker if I get a note from my Shrink that I Suffer from Target Panic :smile:

Rick


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

The Nfaa is an organization that is run by the inmates and not the wardens when it come to equipment rules and changes. I have always been an advocate of creating a committee of long term members to set rules and make everyone abide by them, similar to what golf does. The problem with our sport is apparently, egos, because I don't understand why it would be so hard for the presidents of the archery organizations to get together and adopt uniform rules.. There are always those who threaten to drop out of an organization if they don't get their way, but if we had uniform rules, their threats would be moot unless they just stopped shooting, which is highly unlikely. The confusion can't be corrected by us, the barebow fraternity, look at how many differences there are just on this thread.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

RBK said:


> John, I agree on one set of rules across the board, World Archery, USA Archery, NFAA ect.....However the Lancaster Classic ( correct me if I'm wrong ) is put on and paid for by LAS. I'm sure their liberal equipment rules were to attract as many shooters as possible. I'll shoot the Classic next year regardless of what equipment rules they decide on. But if they go with WA Rules could I use a Clicker if I get a note from my Shrink that I Suffer from Target Panic :smile:
> 
> Rick


Rick, you are right about the rules for Lancaster being set to attract the most shooters available. And because of target panic, I'm not sure the clicker wouldn't bring more archers into WA barebow if it was allowed. My only argument is to get the rules uniform across the board, then let us compete worldwide knowing that everyone else is shooting under the same restrictions. Personally, I think this confusion is a bow manufacturer ruse to get us to buy more equipment to set up for each Organization.:mg:


----------



## RBK (Jun 28, 2011)

itbeso said:


> If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. Lancaster offered you a class to shoot in and you did what? The real barebow archers who have showed up regularly for the last 5 years to support barebow tournaments around the country laid the groundwork for this years Lancaster barebow class and supported it with their bodies on the line. Now, you want to reap the benefits of THEIR hard work and , oh by the way, tell us how the rules should be. NOT.


Hold On ITBESO, I'm not trying to Reap Any Benefits from Anybodies Hard Work. I may not be a Real BareBow Archer because I suffer from Target Panic so I have to shoot Oh God Forbid, Olympic Recurve, were I can use a clicker. All I said was that because of Lancaster's liberal rules I decided to shoot next year because I could use a clicker in their BareBow class. Now it seems to me,everyone wants to tell LAS how they should run their shoot and what equipment rules they should follow. No matter the Real BareBow Archers will be there no matter what rules are in place so asking me how the rules should be wouldn't make much sense. At 67 years old I just want to shoot my bows and have fun, but I will take advantage of anything that will help me shoot better.

Rick


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Omg. Rick, It just clicked on who you are. No pun intended. Lol


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

RBK said:


> Hold On ITBESO, I'm not trying to Reap Any Benefits from Anybodies Hard Work. I may not be a Real BareBow Archer because I suffer from Target Panic so I have to shoot Oh God Forbid, Olympic Recurve, were I can use a clicker. All I said was that because of Lancaster's liberal rules I decided to shoot next year because I could use a clicker in their BareBow class. Now it seems to me,everyone wants to tell LAS how they should run their shoot and what equipment rules they should follow. No matter the Real BareBow Archers will be there no matter what rules are in place so asking me how the rules should be wouldn't make much sense. At 67 years old I just want to shoot my bows and have fun, but I will take advantage of anything that will help me shoot better.
> 
> Rick


Actually, Rob was wise enough to get input from some of the top barebow archers for the initial Shoot, so it is not a matter of anyone telling Rob what to do. I feel confident that Rob will also request input on the rules as we go forward. I don't think anyone complained about the rules that were used. The bigger picture is one of trying to get all recurve barebow competitions to be under one set of rules.


----------



## RBK (Jun 28, 2011)

Demmer said:


> Omg. Rick, It just clicked on who you are. No pun intended. Lol


Yea It's Me, :wink: Hopefully I'll see you at the AZ Sunday

Rick


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Demmer said:


> Omg. Rick, It just clicked on who you are. No pun intended. Lol


Ha Ha Ha.


----------



## RBK (Jun 28, 2011)

itbeso said:


> Actually, Rob was wise enough to get input from some of the top barebow archers for the initial Shoot, so it is not a matter of anyone telling Rob what to do. I feel confident that Rob will also request input on the rules as we go forward. I don't think anyone complained about the rules that were used. The bigger picture is one of trying to get all recurve barebow competitions to be under one set of rules.


I agree 100% And Congrats on the Team Gold Medal in Zagreb':set1_applaud:
Watched it on You Tube !

Rick


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

RBK said:


> I agree 100% And Congrats on the Team Gold Medal in Zagreb':set1_applaud:
> Watched it on You Tube !
> 
> Rick


You're funny.You got me. Thanks for all your efforts for the barebow group.


----------



## Stick & String (Feb 1, 2003)

In searching I found a *definition of barebow: Unassisted, with just a bow and no additional aids such as sights.* So lets make compounds, metal, composite, and wood bows all together in one class called barebow, completely un-aided, shooting off shelves, no elevated rest, no tuning plungers, no clickers, no add-on weights front or back with the exception of within the body of the riser, no stabilizers, and no sights. String walking or gap shooting would be allowed. Maybe the WA would adopt those rules as well.  I'm mostly kidding, but I for one really think the meaning of barebow is getting lost in the shuffle of those looking for a competitive advantage based on modern equipment. For an independent shoot like Lancaster, I think they reserve the right to make the rules as they see fit to draw the largest number of shooters, this was the first year that I remember barebow being included at their shoot, and with the number of shooters that participated, I'm sure they will continue to have a BB class. I support any form of archery that grows interest in the sport . I think Demmer is on the right track in seeking standardization across organizations and we should support him.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I'm good with one set of rules NFAA rules suit me fine preaty much what Lancaster did. And it looks like Vegas is on track for 45 plus shooters using NFAA rules. What a novel thought one set of rules two of the largest Barebow groups in years. Are we growing ?


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Gary, I guarantee you at least they same amount of shooters would have shown up for Lancaster if their set of rules required you to shoot off the shelf. Ild bet my life on it. Gary, I think you are missing the point. Most of these shooters will show up regardless what the rules are. You ask most, and you get the answer I don't care what the rules are. So that begs the question. If most don't care, why not get everything to line up so we can shoot across the board with no hassles. I'll tell you what, if Vegas had a set of wa barebow rules, I and a few others would would have started attending it a while ago. Vegas is a shoot that we are going to, but I'll tell you what, a lot would be happier if the rules were in line with WA bb.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I as well as others can't shoot the same bow for more than three weeks in a row and this is the most frustrating part of our division. We will never reach our full potential whenever we have to keep switching our equipment.


^^^ This.


----------

