Recurve, Longbow, Deflex/ Reflex bow nomenclature.

[longbowinfected]

As I said.......horse/nag/pony has bolted.

[greybeard]

Deleated

[greybeard]

Daryl,

do you agree with D/R flatbow being used on this forum?

Jeff? Grahame?

lets put this to bed shall we

I believe it would be better to call it a D/R bow.

Daryl.

[Goatchaser]

Where did the picture go Daryl, that cleared a lot of the grey areas for me, now it's gone????

[Fanto]

Daryl,

do you agree with D/R flatbow being used on this forum?

Jeff? Grahame?

lets put this to bed shall we

I believe it would be better to call it a D/R bow.

Daryl.

Hi daryl

Fine by me, should let us get on with more constructive discussion

Kind regards
Damian

[greybeard]

Hi Sean, now its back. Perhaps save it to a file for future reference.

Daryl.

Different Limb Designs.jpg (37.43 KiB) Viewed 6788 times

[Goatchaser]

Thanks Daryl, all done. Cheers.

[Chase N. Nocks]

For me the crucial question is how can we say someone's bow is categorically NOT a longbow unless it meets NONE of the various archery associations criteria for longbow.

So it might be said that such and such a bow is not a Longbow according to association A but is according to association B. etc. etc.

It seems to me that you could NOT call a BlackBrook Zeta a STRAIGHT bow, and I would not try to. But I am also not trying to claim that longbows are exclusively straight bows. Also that it is not incorrect to call such a bow a longbow.

As for the dilution of the criteria that makes up a Longbow due to popularity and that popularity is not a good enough reason to change it seems to me that there are many people, and associations and their rules are created by people, hold that Longbows are NOT exclusively STRAIGHT bows. AND I also imagine the very same debates and offended sensitivities when modern laminated straight bows and American Flat Bows were being included in shooting competitions with ELB. I find it incredulous that a part of the reason for the inclusion of the modern bows was naught to do with their recognised popularity at the time and clubs and associations wishing to maintain their memberships as well as competitiveness.

Like Grahame says it is a can of worms, but then again it is not. It depends where your cutoff point is.

If we use a couple of the points made about length AND "compass" action of the bow as being crucial it seems to me that almost EVERY modern bow fails that test.

If we are going to be accurate when refer to bows by their design it seems to me that this apply to all bows we are discussing. So when someone jumps on to the traditional tackle board and says look at my new Howard Hill Longbow. We should be saying that is not a longbow? It is a straight bow, or reflexed or string follow bow.

Sorry I have been trying to respond to this all weekend and have been reduced to trying to type this on a iPad as I have hardly been home to do a proper job.

Cheers
Troy

[bigbob]

Have to agree with all you've just stated Troy.

[GrahameA]

Hi Troy.

Still Jousting at the windmills I observe.

For me the crucial question is how can we say someone's bow is categorically NOT a longbow unless it meets NONE of the various archery associations criteria for longbow.

So it might be said that such and such a bow is not a Longbow according to association A but is according to association B. etc. etc.

Bingo

As for the dilution of the criteria that makes up a Longbow due to popularity and that popularity is not a good enough reason to change .....

I will hold you to that in the years to come.

..... If we are going to be accurate when refer to bows by their design it seems to me that this apply to all bows we are discussing. So when someone jumps on to the traditional tackle board and says look at my new Howard Hill Longbow. We should be saying that is not a longbow? It is a straight bow, or reflexed or string follow bow.

Yes, you should. I will now hold you to that in the future. "Troy said........"

Sorry I have been trying to respond to this all weekend and have been reduced to trying to type this on a iPad as I have hardly been home to do a proper job.

And you probably had a sleep last night as well. The bad news is this ....Knight errants are forbidden from such luxuries as sleep/food/archery. Meanwhile 'Miguel' keep working away at it.

[greybeard]

Troy,

Can you give us an outline of the criteria that you think best describes a longbow based on historical data.

Personally I prefer the description penned by Dennis La Varenne for A.B.A., you may remember this article being posted a few years back. It would appear that A.B.A. made some changes a few years back.

The complete explanation is in the attached word document.

Longbow Definition Dennis La Varenne.doc

(31 KiB) Downloaded 110 times

I believe the following criteria are simple and cannot be misconstrued.

1. Long relative to its user (at least shoulder height)
2. May be made from any kind of material
3. May be of any cross-section (flat, D-section, oval, round, etc.)
4. Limbs must curve only toward the belly when braced (a straight-edge must touch at only one place between handle and nock).
5. When the bow is braced the string must not touch the bow anywhere along the limb except at the nocks.
6. The long axis of the handle must be vertical and in line the long axis of the bow.
7. All sides of the handle must be within 2mm of being parallel to its opposite (straight handled).

Daryl.

[Chase N. Nocks]

Hi Grahame,

How did you know that I was thinking of that adorable frustrating Spanish nutcase.

Should we now get rid of the "Longbow"?

Straight bow, D/R bow, Recurve bow and self bow? is that pushing the topic to the next logical step.

Don't get me wrong I am as fond of the term "Longbow" as the next archer, with the possible exception of the French. And that a straight laid Howard Hill style bow is one of the simplest and most beautiful things that can be done with a lump of wood. But I am one of those bow whores that pretty much all bows are beautiful (not equally) to me in one way or another, even compounds.

There are a couple of points I'd like clarify but I want to script it properly. Hopefully tomorrow.

Cheers
Troy

[Chase N. Nocks]

Hi Daryl,

Is it possible to get a deeper explanation of points 6 and 7. These I must admit not confident in having a full understanding of what they mean or the implications.

I will be brief with better clarity tomorrow. I hope.

A) I don't have a criteria for a longbow that would stand up to scrutiny. And am not claiming to have one.

B) I have limited historical knowledge and resources to historical knowledge. That is why I have asked that those that do have a criteria and apply that criteria and may have drafted a criteria show that historical and logical foundation for those views.

C) that there are a number of archery bodies that speak with generally sanctioned authority from their members that have different views on what constitutes a "Longbow" and on that basis it is not entirely correct to say that person A's bow is not a Longbow when it quite obviously IS according to archery organisation C. Even though we may assuredly be able to say it is not a straight bow.

I have a 58 inch D/R bow which the maker calls a longbow, and when I am talking to my other archery mates about it I say the little longbow. I am being sloppy that is allowed in informal but knowledgeable conversation between enthusiasts HOWEVER I would be careful explain to any new archer that this bow is most definitely NOT a longbow. And only shares with a longbow a minority of characteristics.

Cheers
Troy

[GrahameA]

Hi Troy.

C) that there are a number of archery bodies that speak with generally sanctioned authority from their members ....

That may be an erroneous statement. May I suggest that some views/rules/opinions exist/unchallenged only as a result on a small minority driving them.

Consider the reason why Alloy Arrows are okay for 3D Trad or spend a few years trying to understand the why's and wherefores of the FITA Rulebook.

I would suggest that the complexity/mish-mash is a result of the lack of rigour that was applied at the early stage - it is much harder to withdraw something after it has been accepted. Things work on the principle that 'forgiveness' is easier to obtain than 'permission'.

I am glad you have appreciated the references to the "adorable Spanish nutcase". Are you intending to pen any missives?

[greybeard]

Troy,

From my understanding item 6 refers to a handle [straight back] such as the Howard Hill handle and would exclude handles like the Fox Triple Crown [curved back].

Item 7 excludes sculptured handles such as the Zeta, Fox Triple Crown, pistol grip etc.

I have a 58 inch D/R bow which the maker calls a longbow, and when I am talking to my other archery mates about it I say the little longbow. I am being sloppy that is allowed in informal but knowledgeable conversation between enthusiasts HOWEVER I would be careful explain to any new archer that this bow is most definitely NOT a longbow. And only shares with a longbow a minority of characteristics.

Shouldn't one be prudent and use the correct terminology at all times so as not to perpetuate incorrect bow description. You never know who is listening into your conversation.

Daryl.

[GrahameA]

Hi Daryl and Troy.

Shouldn't one be prudent ... .... You never know who is listening into your conversation.

Or how poorly/inappropriate/taken out of context/etc. they comprehend/assimilate/etc what is said or perceived to be said.

As I said earler on this topic.......

... A small part of the issue is the lack of preciseness of spoken english and similarly is the lack of precision of users. What do people really mean when they say something, what do the hear, etc. ...

[Goatchaser]

this is quite the argument, but as most of us are members of Trad gang, Trad archers, leatherwall and the like where these bows are always referred to as R/D hybrid longbows, which on here we are being told to refer to as D/R bows, not a longbow, not a hybrid and also not a recurve ????? Just a bow is a fairly broad term. I think this argument needs to be discussed with a broader audience, after all archery is world wide, we can't try to change the terminology used in a world wide sport to suit a few clubs in Australia now can we?? Someone please ask the same question on Trad gang.

[Chase N. Nocks]

Hi Troy.

C) that there are a number of archery bodies that speak with generally sanctioned authority from their members ....

That may be an erroneous statement. May I suggest that some views/rules/opinions exist/unchallenged only as a result on a small minority driving them.

Consider the reason why Alloy Arrows are okay for 3D Trad or spend a few years trying to understand the why's and wherefores of the FITA Rulebook.

I would suggest that the complexity/mish-mash is a result of the lack of rigour that was applied at the early stage - it is much harder to withdraw something after it has been accepted. Things work on the principle that 'forgiveness' is easier to obtain than 'permission'.

I am glad you have appreciated the references to the "adorable Spanish nutcase". Are you intending to pen any missives?

Hi Grahame,

I must confess to writing that a little tongue-in-cheek but left it as it was because I figured that it was likely to have been as equally true or equally false amongst the various associations.

Alloy arrows - not taking that bait. another time another topic but some of what is said here likely applies to alloy (or at least non-wood) arrows.

And yes I can see how things become blurred. Especially with officials on the line passing something with best intentions or railroaded into a position by a particularly belligerent archer. Then there is a flow-on and any review of that decision on the line is made even more difficult to retract if said archer has won a trophy or points and other archers are now in the process or proceeded to update their equipment to bring them into alignment with the decision.

I am not sure if there is an easy solution rather it would seem to be quite laborious I imagine with a quite extensive level of codification.

Getting ALL of the various bodies to agree would probably be a convenient step but not essential except where inter-association events have been organized.

Cheers
Troy

[Chase N. Nocks]

Troy,

From my understanding item 6 refers to a handle [straight back] such as the Howard Hill handle and would exclude handles like the Fox Triple Crown [curved back].

Item 7 excludes sculptured handles such as the Zeta, Fox Triple Crown, pistol grip etc.

I have a 58 inch D/R bow which the maker calls a longbow, and when I am talking to my other archery mates about it I say the little longbow. I am being sloppy that is allowed in informal but knowledgeable conversation between enthusiasts HOWEVER I would be careful explain to any new archer that this bow is most definitely NOT a longbow. And only shares with a longbow a minority of characteristics.

Shouldn't one be prudent and use the correct terminology at all times so as not to perpetuate incorrect bow description. You never know who is listening into your conversation.

Daryl.

Hi Daryl,

Thank you.

I was sort of understanding what these meant.

I think that Denis did an admirable job. And as he states

In those days, there were only two kinds of longbow - the classic English traditional longbow which nobody had seen in reality, and the commoner Howard Hill American semi-longbow which had become the standard because of its common use and acceptance. Some Howard Hill designs had a built in reflex in the limbs but most did not.

The ABA AGM at the time accepted the Howard Hill design as the standard and the rules were written with a description of this bow in mind, but not excluding the English pattern bow or anything similar.

I have heard you use the term "overbuild riser" quite a few time. I've taken you to mean this in a comparative and neutral sense rather than negative or positive but please correct me if I am wrong.

But this brings me back to beginnings and endings to make a point rather than argue a specific case.

The ELB enthusiast could maintain that the Howard Hill riser is overbuilt, has a arrow shelf and does not allow for the "compass" action to take place ergo it is not a Longbow and should not be included. So it seems to me that part of the decision to expand the definition of Longbow to include the Howard Hill bow was the popularity, availability and familiarity of that design at the time that a definition was sort.

Those points could now be argued or applied for succeeding design variations, and it seems they have. The issue amongst archers, I guess trad archers specifically, is that some do not wish to allow any further dilution of the established Longbow "Ideal" (i.e. Plato), while others are more amiable.

Now the appeal to historical compatibility was already compromised (no criticism intended) at that first step. Logically it can now NOT be used as a defense to close down further dilution without discussion or debate. That is MY take on the angst that this subject continues to evoke.

The really funny thing is that I care less about this than some are imagining. At the end of the day I will shoot whatever the hell I want. I treat competition pretty flippantly but there is the added bonus that I am not a very good shot so I have less at stake. Just saving anyone the trouble of pointing that out.

I am happy to enter into a discussion on a universally accepted reference to what constitutes a Longbow. There is quite a bit of variation of opinion amongst archers, independent clubs, forums and associations and that horse has largely bolted but maybe not irretrievably so, just a big job.

Again my main point has been simple: that we just need to be mindful when declaring that another archer's bow is NOT a longbow. What we can say for example is that bow X does not qualify for ABA Longbow but certainly it qualifies for IFAA Longbow. etc etc.

So if someone says - "Hey fellas have a look at my new D/R IFAA legal Longbow", we can say "yeah mate it's a beauty" or "nice mate but there are some flat spots in the strung "D" shape of the bow, you may only be able to shoot FITA Longbow"

And Daryl, I will make more of an effort to not be lazy when talking about the little longbow. Did I mention that it is a two piece 58 inch D/R longbow with an overbuilt riser? I think you would like it.

Cheers
Troy

[Chase N. Nocks]

this is quite the argument, but as most of us are members of Trad gang, Trad archers, leatherwall and the like where these bows are always referred to as R/D hybrid longbows, which on here we are being told to refer to as D/R bows, not a longbow, not a hybrid and also not a recurve ????? Just a bow is a fairly broad term. I think this argument needs to be discussed with a broader audience, after all archery is world wide, we can't try to change the terminology used in a world wide sport to suit a few clubs in Australia now can we?? Someone please ask the same question on Trad gang.

Not me, I am flatout responding here.

Happy if someone wants to link them in and they can join the conversation here.

Cheers
Troy

[greybeard]

this is quite the argument, but as most of us are members of Trad gang, Trad archers, leatherwall and the like where these bows are always referred to as R/D hybrid longbows, which on here we are being told to refer to as D/R bows, not a longbow, not a hybrid and also not a recurve ????? Just a bow is a fairly broad term.

Sean, I am not a member of the groups that you mentioned.

Personally I think that the name Deflex/Reflex bow or the abbreviated D/R bow is very apt. It is a short descriptive title that cannot be misconstrued.

No one is insisting that you refer to the bow as such, it was a suggestion put forward by Fanto and looking for a consensus of opinion.

Just a bow is a fairly broad term. I think this argument needs to be discussed with a broader audience, after all archery is world wide, we can't try to change the terminology used in a world wide sport to suit a few clubs in Australia now can we?? Someone please ask the same question on Trad gang.

We know that the limb profile description Deflex/Reflex has been around for a long time so at what stage does it mystically become a hybrid.

The term hybrid is a load of advertising garbage being used by manufacturers to sell more bows.

Can you enlighten us and in twenty words or less tell us what a d/r hybrid bow is.

You ask Trad gang if you are interested.

Daryl.

[Chase N. Nocks]

Have to agree with all you've just stated Troy.

BTW - Thanks Bob. I will shout you a beer when next we meet.

Cheers
Troy

[greybeard]

I have heard you use the term "overbuild riser" quite a few time. I've taken you to mean this in a comparative and neutral sense rather than negative or positive but please correct me if I am wrong.

Troy,

I believe the semi recurves such as the Fox and Zeta if in a slimmed down form would be a lousy shooting platform.

As stabilisers, weights etc. are not allowed under the bare bow rules overbuilt risers are incorporated into the design to get a more stable shooting platform. It is another way to work the rules to gain an advantage.

The ELB enthusiast could maintain that the Howard Hill riser is overbuilt, has a arrow shelf and does not allow for the "compass" action to take place ergo it is not a Longbow and should not be included. So it seems to me that part of the decision to expand the definition of Longbow to include the Howard Hill bow was the popularity, availability and familiarity of that design at the time that a definition was sort.

It has been said; they mated an ELB with an AFB and got HHL.

Daryl.

[GrahameA]

Afternoon Daryl.

... We know that the limb profile description Deflex/Reflex has been around for a long time so at what stage does it mystically become a hybrid.

The term hybrid is a load of advertising garbage being used by manufacturers to sell more bows.

Can you enlighten us and in twenty words or less tell us what a d/r hybrid bow is ...

Exactly!

[Fanto]

Troy,

I believe the semi recurves such as the Fox and Zeta if in a slimmed down form would be a lousy shooting platform.



Daryl.

Hi daryl

I had a look again at the picture of bow types and have two issues to raise

1) there is no semi recurve listed. There is semi working recurved limbs, is that what you mean?
2) the fox and zeta do look like the duo-flex deflex reflex limb bow in the diagram and I think , out of the ones in the picture, this is the style they fit into,

What do you think?

[greybeard]

Hi Fanto,

Thank you for picking up my error, it should have read deflex/reflex. I have yet to find a photo of an unbraced Zeta but from memory it is similar to the Fox.

Daryl.

Fox Triple Crown.jpg (8.78 KiB) Viewed 6672 times

I think the d/r in the sketch is exaggerated.

Different Limb Designs.jpg (6.66 KiB) Viewed 6672 times

[Chase N. Nocks]

Yes they are very similar. The Zeta is definitely a deflex reflex bow.

[Fanto]

hey Daryl

just clearing it up mate

here's a pic of the bow that caused me to start the thread, looks like a match

cheers

[Goatchaser]

Afternoon Daryl.

... We know that the limb profile description Deflex/Reflex has been around for a long time so at what stage does it mystically become a hybrid.

The term hybrid is a load of advertising garbage being used by manufacturers to sell more bows.

Can you enlighten us and in twenty words or less tell us what a d/r hybrid bow is ...

Exactly!

I am guessing the term Hybrid is used to describe these D/R "bows" because of people such as yourselves who say they do not qualify for a recurve or a longbow , so somewhere along the line someone has given them a name of their own and it has stuck , as most people on the sites I mentioned actually refer to them as D/R or R/D "longbows", they are apparently wrong here also by your standards as the bows talked about 9 times out of 10 are around the 58" to 62" range and their compass does not comply with your requirements either. So did it "mystically" become a hybrid or was a title forced upon it by people such as yourselves. I'm out on this one as I can see no end 57 posts and still at square 1. Anyone actually been hunting lately?

[Chase N. Nocks]

Hey Fanto,

Unrelated to the topic but out of curiosity. What bows are they i.e. make and model?

Cheers
Troy