Simple, inclusive, functional traditonal recommendations

[BowmanBjorn]

ok in an attempt to be constructive. lets assume that the TTA guidelines for what ever reason are not up to scratch. we can argue that one way or the other all day with no real benefit other than stroking egos.

SO lets start from the top here and work through a suitable set of OZBOW RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BOW CLASS.

some questions:
1. How many classes should there be
2. what is the benefit to the archers of having these classes
3. For each class what are the defining features
4. what are the common limitations that apply to all classes

from here we can begin to discuss and plan out our guidelines.

my EXAMPLE and it is only an example!:

classes:
1. Historical: equipment as it was made and used pre 1900
2. traditional: materials and bows styles pre 1960
3. NEO Trad: modern materials and bows using no wheels, cams etc.

what is the benefit:
1. historical shows the golden era of archery and a richness of heritage (norse, medieval, mongal etc)
2. represents the image of traditional the majority of people have
3. allows performance junkies and newbies to join in and see how far they want to crawl down the rabbit hole.

defining features:
1. Historical: equipment and materials pre 1900.
2. Traditional:longbows, semi recurves, recurves, flatbows, yumi, horsebow etc. limited to materials that were available and in use at the time in bows. i.e no carbon or foam etc to be used.
3. NEO TRAD: anything goes as long as it doesn't have wheels!

common rules:
- no stabilising aids
- no siting aids
- no release aids unless it was of the period of bow you are shooting (i.e thumb ring with a horse bow)
- no draw aids i.e kisser buttons, clickers etc.


so boys and girls lets start to work this through. again i think the important part when looking at categories is to think about how adding a category BENEFITS the traditional archery community rather than just adding categories for the sake of it.

[GrahameA]

Morning.

What are the underlying intent/philosphies?

eg Is the intention that the divisions should be evolutionary or should each division be separate and distinct and thus stand alone?

From what you have written you appear to favour both which has the potential to become 'messy'.

Whilst you have not mentioned arrows, my opinion is that they are an integral part of the issue and should be included from the start.

(p.s Two divisions sounds good.)

.....
You may wish to roll things into a single, topic as you now have two topics running on the same thing.

[BowmanBjorn]

Thanks Graham,

I agree arrows play an important part. I think the use of arrows of the era made of materials of the era should clarify it ie. Carbon shafts were not available pre 1960 for example so they aren't valid for the trad devision. Similarly alloy shafts weren't commercially available pre 1900 so they would be suitable for that devision.

For the NEO Trad devision anything goes so Brian on the tapered carbon laser beams!

This thread was started to start from scratch with the previous post in apologies to TAA being a little to messy.

I open to public comment on the structure of the categories and that's what I'm attempting to get from all shooters I tweeted in this thread.

I believe that guidelines can be developed that allow all shooters to have a great time while remaking true to the heritage of traditional archery while also including those that are just starting to dip their toe in.

[Roadie]

I and my friends who travell to Trad shoots are Happy with the way they are set up. It is simple Really if you are not happy with the current rules, don't go to the shoot. Be Brave and set up your own shoot the Way you want it,and see who turns up, That way we can see who wants what. Cheers Roadie.
All I want to do is and .

[BowmanBjorn]

I'm much the same i don't care which devison I get lumped in I just want to shoot.

But it would appear on here that the sentiment isn't shared and that there are plenty of complaints on the rules of all clubs/ and organisations.

I was hoping to get a consensus that aloud everybody (or as close as possible) to be cumfortable and consistent.

As for clubs running their own rules it's exactly what we do up in Mossman we run our own "trad" rules which the club members we have are happy with.

For those that are competitive it does make it challenging to compete if they aren't able to work under a consistent frame work though.

Nobody out there interested in getting involved with developing some guidelines?

[BowmanBjorn]

I guess I can make a start with an easy category and we can go from there.

junior category
- age limit: 12 years old
- bow type: anything goes that doesn't have pulleys or wheels
- arrow type: anything goes
- field/ target points only no broadheads unless on broad head target range and under the supervision of an adult
- no sighting aids, natural marks or timber characteristics withstanding
- no external stabilising aids
- no draw checkers, kisser button or any other draw measuring aid
- no mechanical release aids

So what do people think? Is this a workable category? Are you happy with the above suggestion. Are their improvements you can see?

[greybeard]

But it would appear on here that the sentiment isn't shared and that there are plenty of complaints on the rules of all clubs/ and organisations.

I've heard of very few, can you document them? Quite often it is the same two or three people recycling their gripes.

....For those that are competitive it does make it challenging to compete if they aren't able to work under a consistent frame work though.....

Where does the fault lay? at a club level or the various archery associations.

...... Nobody out there interested in getting involved with developing some guidelines?

I think you've got it in one. Over the years I have found those who complain the most are the ones that sit on their backsides and do nothing.

Remember, whatever guidelines are formulated for ‘traditional’ equipment they must be backed up by fact and not based on the whims of the advertising company promoting the product at all costs.

Daryl.

[Kendaric]

Remember, whatever guidelines are formulated for ‘traditional’ equipment they must be backed up by fact and not based on the whims of the advertising company promoting the product at all costs.Daryl.

Quite true. Funny how people buy into it. People want to believe.

One could also get quite tired of hitting ones head against a brick wall, trying to keep getting back to that point.

There is a difference between shooting in a 'traditional manner', and shooting traditionally. It is a small semantic, but for some (probably not the majority) an important one.

Shooting in a 'traditional manner' is, for the most part, just shooting a non compound barebow with timber arrows. If that is your traditional, then good for you.

Trad events and the TAA can not be seen as one and the same. Little Arrows will very much vouch for that.

TAA is between a 'hard place and a rock' so to speak. It should stand for the epitome of true traditional archery, but it is made up of a committee that has different ideas of what traditional archery should be, and inclusion is seen as a big thing, as people need to justify their investment, or in some trad examples, lack of investment.

There was a reason that the old saying that 'a camel is a horse designed by a committee', sprang into existence.

But at least they made a start on something. Nothing is perfect the first time around. I was just happy that they recognised the semi recurve/modern longbow as being separate from longbow. I don't really care about the rest (my bad), and I don't shoot the last three divisions, so I refer to those that do, and know it better, what it should be. The pressure button on recurve, I found a surprise and probably should be removed. Most trad events stipulate a non mechanical rest only, or off the shelf.

It is a fine line between traditional archer and barebow shooting with timber arrows.

For the most part, most trad shooters don't care about the distinction. There is nothing wrong with that, and most trad events cater for that. It is all about the numbers and having a good time, whether you are doing it half ass-ed or not, but it can't be strictly called traditional, in the true sense of the word. Trad doesn't really mean traditional, it just implies it, and is just a pretense.

On the whole, I think TAA definitions are pretty apt, just a few small modifications would see more accurate.

Whether Trad events use these guidelines is up to them.

BowmanBjorn, Neo Trad could just be called barebow. Sounds better and is more accurate.

[BowmanBjorn]

well i was warned that this would be a fruitless effort

Greybeard i'd make a list of the offending people and comments but it would just turn ugly.

as for who is at fault with inconsistency thats a good question i'd have to say a mixture of the governing bodies and the clubs/members in equal measure.

unfortunately i've found that the loudest criticisers are also the least constructive when given the chance.

Kendaric, i agree there is a difference between shooting traditionally and shooting in a traditional manner or any other variation on the theme. hens the reason for us to discuss some alternatives to allow people to start out shooting in a traditional manner with the view to shooting traditionally in a "period correct class" if they so choose.


i also agree TAA has a challenging position to fill but i don't think they should be limited ti Shooting traditionally but encompass both shooting traditionally as you put it and shooting in a traditional manner.

Happy for Neo Trad to be called Barebow its only a class after all

[BowmanBjorn]

so no comment on something as simple as the junior devision proposal?

or are we all saying its a lost cause and BJORN should go a play with his special toys in the padded room?

[bstan86]

Quite often it is the same two or three people recycling their gripes.

Daryl.

The squeaky wheel gets the oil Daryl......

[Kendaric]

i also agree TAA has a challenging position to fill but i don't think they should be limited ti Shooting traditionally but encompass both shooting traditionally as you put it and shooting in a traditional manner.

Understandable position, but I feel that it is for Trad events to decide on this inclusiveness, and for the TAA to stand for its names sake. Trad events and TAA are not one in the same.

One must cleans ones own house, in order to promote or sell it. Let the neighborhood worry about itself.

[greybeard]

.......TAA is between a 'hard place and a rock' so to speak........

So whose fault is that?

......The squeaky wheel gets the oil Daryl......

Get rid of the squeaky wheel and replace it with one that works.

Another saying; If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem.

........Greybeard i'd make a list of the offending people and comments but it would just turn ugly.....

If they don't like the existing rules let them start their own organization and set the rules but I guess that wouldn't work because they would have to get off their backside and do something.

I attend quite a few traditional shoots at different venues during the year and I am quite happy to work within the host clubs rules.

Daryl.

[Kendaric]

as for who is at fault with inconsistency thats a good question i'd have to say a mixture of the governing bodies and the clubs/members in equal measure.

I could be wrong about this, but I would imagine that the varying governing bodies would try and work in with each other where they can, with similar guidelines or divisions, all be it perhaps under slightly different names and points of interest. It is probably not as clear cut as it would seem.

In TAA's case, being the new comer as an incorporated archery body, it is a double edged sword I would imagine. The TAA has been around for a much longer time than this of course, as an ideal, but not as an incorporated body.

[GrahameA]

Morning All.

... Trad events and the TAA can not be seen as one and the same. Little Arrows will very much vouch for that.

That TAA and Trad Events are widely separated may be a good thing or it may be a bad thing.

TAA is exactly where it wants to be. It is not

between a 'hard place and a rock' so to speak.

it has chosen to place itself in that position.

... as for who is at fault with inconsistency thats a good question i'd have to say a mixture of the governing bodies and the clubs/members in equal measure.

In my opinion it lies primarily with the governing bodies as they did not take a lead. Irrespective people got together, shot events and enjoyed themselves. They did it without the need of a large rule set. The governing bodies were not interested (and may still be not) as the people who shoot Trad are a very small fraction of their membership and generally are able to organise and take care of themselves.

[Kendaric]

The governing bodies were not interested (and may still be not) as the people who shoot Trad are a very small fraction of their membership and generally are able to organise and take care of themselves.

True, but it was a small step forward in the right direction when ABA recognised the Trad peg. There is some harmony between the various shooting desciplines, and whilst I may be wrong, I would imagine that it part of TAA's goal.

[greybeard]

I and my friends who travell to Trad shoots are Happy with the way they are set up.......

....But it would appear on here that the sentiment isn't shared and that there are plenty of complaints on the rules of all clubs/ and organisations ......

Strange 'plenty of complaints' and yet not one reply from the so called complainers with suggestions or ideas to formulate rules/guidelines. Can they actually come up with an original idea?

......For those that are competitive it does make it challenging to compete if they aren't able to work under a consistent frame work though......

They may have to be satisfied with attending ABA or 3DAAA shoots.

Daryl.

[little arrows]

sorry bowmanbjorn I shall get the thread back on track soon..... I guess there is a couple of answers to the Junior rules - there aren't any juniors on this forum and the people on here do not have any juniors either.....

pressure buttons are not allowed on Recurves as per the guidelines, - (I am following this up right now)
sue

[GrahameA]

Evening All.

... pressure buttons are not allowed on Recurves as per the GUIDELINES ...

Hi Sue.
This is from the TAA Equipment Guidelines http://www.traditionalarcheryaustralia. ... %20(2).pdf

Recurve
...Arrow rests, pressure buttons etc. are permitted.

Unless you know/are aware exactly what rules are being quoted it is easy to become confused.

(Life used to be simple and then people decided to make it more complicated.)

[GrahameA]

Evening All.

If you really want to come to grips with this stuff may I suggest you make yourself aware of the following at least.

FITA Book 4 Field and 3D Rulebook
http://rulebook.worldarchery.org/PDF/Of ... -Book4.pdf
The USA Archery Trad Rules http://usarcherytraditional.org/EquipmentRules.html
ABA Rules
3DAAA rules
The TAA Equipment Guidelines.
The GNAS Rules around Longbow http://www.archerygb.org/tools/document ... 354%5D.pdf
The IFAA Rules. http://www.ifaa-archery.org/index.php/s ... 1/articles

And by the time you have finished reading all of that you may start to understand the complexity of some of it and the Guidelines that were developed a few years ago (attached) will start looking not as bad as some people make out.

[little arrows]

yep they are the guidelines I'm reading.................... I don't really think I need to do much more reading Grahame. I'm going to just go and do, and let this thread get back to it's original line.

so bowmenbjorn perhaps you could try something for the cubs. ie Same as adults just from halfway to the target

[GrahameA]

Hi Sue.

yep they are the guidelines I'm reading.................... I don't really think I need to do much more reading Grahame. I'm going to just go and do.

The Rule Set we usually shoot to is looking pretty good. It would be even better if people did not make up rules about fletching. The US has a very nice rule which will resolve Bjorns question super quick.

Age Class: No separate categories. All shoot as "Senior."

http://usarcherytraditional.org/EquipmentRules.html

Solved.

[toby]

Grahame does that mean Cubs & Juniors all compete with adults & shoot off the same peg?
I know some people like to win at all costs but beating 6 year olds that's crazy!

[toby]

Grahame I noticed those rules also allowed for gap shooting & strong walking would this be OK as well?

[GrahameA]

Morning.

Grahame I noticed those rules also allowed for gap shooting & strong walking would this be OK as well?

You can read and interpret rule sets and individual rules as well as I can.

[toby]

Sorry, Grahame I was just surprised to see that considering the fuss a lot of people make about any type of aiming.

[GrahameA]

Hi.

Sorry, Grahame I was just surprised to see that considering the fuss a lot of people make about any type of aiming.

My opinion reduced to a couple of Mathematical Equations. There are n! (N Factorial), where n is the number of bodies/organisations/people/whatever involved in the discussion, opinions as to what Trad is and (n!xR!), where R is the proposed number of rules, opinions on what rules should exist. You end up with some large numbers very quickly. Getting consensus is a major exercise in trade-offs, diplomacy, whatever. etc. Thus not everyone is happy all of the time.

[toby]

What is the main problem people have with the Deflex Reflex Longbow / Semi Recurve / Hybrid ?
Is it the terminology used to describe it or is it that people shoot it in the Longbow category at Trad Shoots?

What is the main problem people have with the ILF limb attachment bows ?
Is it the fact that the tiller can be adjusted for different limbs ?

Would combining Longbows & Recurves in one category be possible ?
Would not the best & most competitive shooters shooting to win any comp shooting either Longbow or Recurve want to know if they were better than there opposition regardless of what type of bow they were shooting ?

Also as a few have mentioned earlier Shooting in a Traditional Style & Shooting Traditional in there opinion were different things?
And bow catergories are only a small part of that. If people really want to be pedantic about it all then arrows, string's, finger tabs, gloves, quiver types, release styles & aiming techniques should all be a part of the discussion.
I am sure that there are a lot of people out there including myself that shoot using tabs or gloves, quivers, strings & the like made using some synthetic materials that were not around pre compound era.
Also who decided that for something to be traditional in archery it had to be used prior to the compound era? If that's the case then we should only be using bows & arrows built prior to compounds because anything built after this time would have the advantage of more modern manufacturing techniques, machinery & materials.
And to think years ago I made the decision to swap all my modern compound bows & related gear for the simplicity of Traditional Archery. Simplicity! Who was I kidding.
Bjorn my thoughts on Children's categories'.
CHILDRENS CATERGORIES

CUB – AGES 5, 6, 7, 8
JUNIOR – AGES 9, 10, 11, 12
YOUTH – AGES 13, 14, 15, 16

RECURVE & LONGBOW COMBINED
ANY TYPE ( 1, 2 or 3 piece, Longbow, Recurve, Hybrid Type )
ANY MATERIAL ( Made of Wood, Fibre Glass, Carbon, Plastic, I don't care what they're made of, Remember they're Kids )
ANY ARROW ( Made of Wood, Fibre Glass, Carbon, Plastic, I don't care what they're made of, Remember they're Kids )

ANY CHILD IN THE YOUTH CATERGORY WISHING TO COMPETE IN THE ADULT CATERGORIES CAN DO SO BUT MUST FOLLOW THE ADULT RULES FOR THAT PARTICULAR CATERGORY.

I will try to contribute on what I think on adult categories a bit later when I can find the time to think about it.
I would like to see other peoples ideas also, especially their ideas on Self Bows, English Long Bows, English War Bows, Victorian age Longbows Etc as I know net to nothing about these styles of bows.

Thanks for listening.

[greybeard]

.........I would like to see other peoples ideas also, especially their ideas on Self Bows, English Long Bows, English War Bows, Victorian age Longbows Etc as I know net to nothing about these styles of bows........

Lyonel,

Because of the small numbers of people shooting these types/styles of bows I think it would be fair to the shoot organizers to have one category.

One area that will need consideration is self nocked arrows, particularly if they are not reinforced and possibly another is string material as I believe these are considered safety issues by some organizations.

Arrows and release method as per what was in vogue in the particular time period.

This category could also cater for the bows of the native indigenous people.

Daryl.

[toby]

Thanks Daryl, I was thinking along similar lines but I wanted the input from other people who know a lot more about these types of bows than I do.