new ABA rules on aluminium arrows?

[Kendaric]

My mistake, TAA has already set guidelines to bow types - including hybrid.

http://www.traditionalarcheryaustralia. ... ines-1.pdf

It is just the Trad Events that choose not to exercise these distinctions.

[Kendaric]

As far as traditional interpretations go in an Australian sense. Virtually all our early descriptions come the Americans or the English anyway like it or not. I am not aware of any Australian invention of major development in Tradional archery equipment that would give us the right to call it our own.

True enough - but it is traditional archery in Australia, and terminology was as it was perceived here during the time prior to the compound, whether it was borrowed or not.

The traditional longbow here, that was used mostly in the last century here in Australia was typically the Howard Hill style. He himself called it a semi-longbow, to distinguish it from the ELB. The ELB is considered a Historical longbow in Australian terms. It is all relative to the language and the period prior to the compound.

[toby]

So maybe the Hill style bow should be called a semi longbow as Howard called it if that's correct or maybe an American flat bow as this describes the limb profile.

[GrahameA]

Morning.

... It is just the Trad Events that choose not to exercise these distinctions.

Perhaps it worthwhile asking, "Why"? What was the outcome of the 'Market Research'?

Refer 'Consensus' previous in this topic.

[Kendaric]

So maybe the Hill style bow should be called a semi longbow as Howard called it if that's correct or maybe an American flat bow as this describes the limb profile.

I think it has been referred to as the American flat bow before, but that I believe tends to be reserved more to the shorter wide limb version.

[BowmanBjorn]

Pure speculation but I wonder if all of this name distinction is irrelevant. I highly doubt the English shooting English Longbows back in the 1500's called them English Longbows etc.


I think the reality is that a bow is a bow, is a bow. And they weren't caked much more than that. It's funny that every sport seems to require a distinction of rules and sub categories as more people become involved. The nature of "traditional archery" is bizarre.

Is traditional archery about bows that have been around for a fixed period of time or purely bows that exist pre the compound bow? Who defines this as the "traditional period" and what gives them
The right to define this period? A consensus would be required.

If we are arguing over what the Australian term "traditional archery" defines then we are a lost cause. I certainly think "traditional archery" is more about the mind set of the archer than it is about the bow or arrows shot.

Traditional archery whether it be hunting are competition all stems from a central point. Competition between woodsmen in the dark ages, competition between horseman in the Mongol era etc proving their ability to hunt, fight and protect with their chosen weapon. The best archer of the time one the tournament regardless of the bow they used.

Anyways I should stop trying to push my opinion, that's what makes us unique our opinions and beliefs. What makes us great is our ability to understand and accept all archers for their opinions and beliefs regardless of if we agree or not.

[GrahameA]

Evening Bjorn

Pure speculation but I wonder if all of this name distinction is irrelevant. I highly doubt the English shooting English Longbows back in the 1500's called them English Longbows etc. ...

Correct. I suggest you do a search for Paston on this site and read about Margaret Paston.