TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

General discussions. Politics, scuttlebutt, whatever: you're getting married, changing jobs, got a gripe or a compliment, dying to get out with the bow etc.....

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#1 Post by Kendaric » Thu Jun 04, 2020 1:20 pm

Seem the TAA has a new proposed Equipment Guidelines draft to be ratified for 2020.

Unfortunately they appear to have got it wrong right from the first paragraph about Longbows:

Longbow refers to the traditional straight end style longbow. In some circles these are also known as American Flatbow’s.


The American Flatbows had wide limbs like a recurve, and were often shorter.

It would have been more correct to describe the traditional longbow as Howard Hill did - The American semi-longbow.

Why add this to the draft now? Seems to me that this is another example of history being re-written.
Last edited by Kendaric on Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:00 am, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
Stickbow Hunter
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 11529
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 8:33 pm
Location: Maryborough Queensland

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#2 Post by Stickbow Hunter » Thu Jun 04, 2020 5:51 pm

I agree wholeheartedly; longbows are not known a American flat bows.

I also had a chuckle at the first sentence; "Longbow refers to the traditional straight end style longbow." If a bow doesn't have straight ends than it isn't a longbow but at least no semi-recurves allowed. Also it appears that English Longbows, African Longbows, Papua New Guinea Longbows etc are not deemed longbows and must be shot in the Primative/Historic division. No biggie I guess.

Also I don't agree with the use of elevated arrow rests on longbows; shoot off the shelf or off the hand as per the bows design.

I'd also like to know what traditions they are upholding by having 'Hybrid' division. No such thing. :lol: Traditionally they were called semi-recurves. The division also excludes reflex/deflex bows it seems so what division do they get shot in, none.

Many of the old recurves of the 1940's, 1950's and even 1960's could not be shot in the Traditional Recurve division because of the materials they were made from. These bows include ones manufactured by Bear & Pearson etc. They might be made from fibreglass, aluminium and steel but they are real Traditional bows unlike the modern monstrosities with ILF fitting etc.

Another thing TAA should do IMO is only allow wood arrows to be shot at TAA State and National shoots. It doesn't't matter if the archers are competing or not; if they are too lazy to knock up some wood arrows then they don't deserve to shoot.

I think TAA needs to understand what Traditional really means and then take another look at the rules.

User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#3 Post by Kendaric » Fri Jun 05, 2020 9:29 am

I'm not sure where the elevated rest (toothbrush) on a longbow ever came from, for this draft. Cant say I have ever seen a longbow use one, though I have on a recurve. It would seem that this was done to appease some idiocratical idea of the draftees or a friend there of.

I see that some english archery retail stores (in traditional gear) tend to call anything that is not an ELB or recurve, an American flatbow. This is more out of ignorance, and probably with a little bit of animosity thrown in.

I'm not sure that the term "Modern Recurve" has any place in such a document promoting traditional archery (and hybrid for that matter). It would have simply been better to have Recurve and Traditional Recurve. Yes, the definitions become blurred when you consider the recurve bows you mentioned. It was my understanding that originally the idea behind the modern recurve division, even before it was separated, was to allow ABA, 3DAAA and AA recurvers to shoot in trad by using wood arrows, and removing sights and stabilizers, to prompt participation and attendance. By the logic of a Modern Recurve Division, then the Hybrid division should have become the Modern Longbow Division - but this was not done because of the aforementioned reason - that and Modern Longbow is just a modern marketing name for what was originally known as a semi-recurve.

I can understand the want to have a separate recurve division that uses a timber riser, and is shot off the shelf. Naming such a division becomes difficult due to the problem you mentioned before.

It is difficult to tell where ELB fits into these new categories. If I am reading it right, it could fit into either longbow or primitive/historical.

User avatar
Stickbow Hunter
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 11529
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 8:33 pm
Location: Maryborough Queensland

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#4 Post by Stickbow Hunter » Fri Jun 05, 2020 4:58 pm

Yeah mate I agree and wonder where some of the thinking came from. Hopefully things will be discussed further and positive changes made.

User avatar
greybeard
Posts: 2847
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:11 am
Location: Logan City QLD

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#5 Post by greybeard » Sat Jun 06, 2020 11:37 am

The following paragraph is from ‘The Origin of TAA's Rules’

“If we are going to be fairdinkum about Promoting and Protecting what's traditional in Australia we should ensure that instead of changing our rules to suit someone’s equipment we have their equipment changed to suit our rules.”

With regard to the following it would appear that you are allowed synthetic core laminations in longbows.

LONGBOW

A longbow can be of any material or use any modern glue in its construction.

MODERN RECURVE

The limbs may be constructed of any material.

TRADITIONAL RECURVE

The limbs must have a wood core. Synthetic core laminations are not permitted.


To quote in part Dennis La Varenne; ‘back in the late 1980s or early 1990s’.

“The reality of life is that any definition from time to time will be the outcome of the factions within organizations at the time who will push their own views. None of us is exempt from that.”

“Different designs will occur from time to time, and their users will want to climb onto an existing bandwagon. If their bows don't conform, they will want the rules changed to suit.”

“However, the problem of having 4 disciplines in practice in Australia will perpetuate the problem unless and until each decides to sit down together to standardise definitions.”

Longbow Definition Dennis La Varenne.doc
(31 KiB) Downloaded 10 times
3D AAA and TAA have since come into play.

I can remember reading in equipment definitions somewhere some time back that ‘in longbow the widest part of the limb cannot be wider than the handle.’

As far as I can work out ‘THE’ Associations do not care about Traditional archery. I believe that they are motivated to increase their membership base and increase attendance at shoots at any cost.

Daryl.
"And you must not stick for a groat or twelvepence more than another man would give, if it be a good bow.
For a good bow twice paid for, is better than an ill bow once broken.
[Ascham]

“If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, of what, then, is an empty desk a sign?” [Einstein]

I am old enough to make my own decisions....Just not young enough to remember what I decided!....

User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#6 Post by Kendaric » Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:59 am

Thanks for sharing the download Daryl, that was interesting. So the Century21 bow started all the problems.
I don't mind Dennis's definition of what is an appropriate length of a longbow based on the archers height (at least shoulder height), as it is my understanding that many composite longbow bowyers recommend a particular length longbow based on the archers drawlength, for the best limb efficiency ie, a 26-27" drawlength is probably best served with a 64" longbow and 16" riser. Perhaps 66" was chosen because most semi-recurves are under 66", so it was also an easier method to help separate them.
Stickbow Hunter wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 5:51 pm
Many of the old recurves of the 1940's, 1950's and even 1960's could not be shot in the Traditional Recurve division because of the materials they were made from. These bows include ones manufactured by Bear & Pearson etc. They might be made from fibreglass, aluminium and steel but they are real Traditional bow
I wonder if this conundrum could be served within the current traditional recurve draft by stating that "Actual recurves produced in the 1940-60's can also be shot in this division. Perhaps these particular bows are not included in the draft, as there are probably very few in shooting circulation, but mostly just in collections. But again, I suppose it is about preserving what is traditional.

It is perhaps why these are only guidelines, not rules, as many shooters just see "trad" as non-compound barebow only. It was surprising the number of shooters that wanted to include carbon arrows, which only supports this hypothesis. If these are only guidelines, then you can be true to the intention. Then individual clubs can then make their own rules based around the true intention, even if not sticking to it.

It is my understanding that Trad was also originally based around the type of arrows you would also hunt with (minus the broadhead). Hence perhaps why ABA insists on at least 12" of total fletching, and also use to (not sure if it does now) state that bows of 50lbs must have at least 125g of point weight. No mention of these requirements in TAA. I could see someone exploit this by using 70g points, 6-9 inch total fletching out of 60lb bow for the flattest trajectory. Hardly a hunting weight arrow.

If you are going to be true to the intention, either absorb hybrid into the recurve division, or if this proves too much resistance (which I suspect it will), re-name it semi-recurve. We have had the hybrid division long enough to transition it to either. The main point goal was to separate it from longbow, where is did not belong.
Last edited by Kendaric on Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:47 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
greybeard
Posts: 2847
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:11 am
Location: Logan City QLD

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#7 Post by greybeard » Sun Jun 07, 2020 3:23 pm

Kendaric wrote:
Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:59 am
I don't mind Dennis's definition of what is an appropriate length of a longbow based on the archers height (at least shoulder height), as it is my understanding that many longbow bowyers recommend a particular length longbow based on the archers drawlength, for the best limb efficiency ie, a 26-27" drawlength is probably best served with a 64" longbow and 16" riser. Perhaps 66" was chosen because most semi-recurves are under 66", so it was also an easier method to help separate them.
With regards to bow length some of the things to take into consideration are;

Bow material, bow design, limb to string angle at full draw and required draw weight. What is it's intended use?

Shorter recurved limbs can take a longer draw length before going into ‘stack’ straight limb bows need to be longer.

Think way before the advent of fibreglass.

Could you imagine a 120# plus war bow being 66” n to n?

A 40# target bow did not need to be 80” n to n.

There is little physical evidence available as to what the layman used centuries ago.

Daryl.
"And you must not stick for a groat or twelvepence more than another man would give, if it be a good bow.
For a good bow twice paid for, is better than an ill bow once broken.
[Ascham]

“If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, of what, then, is an empty desk a sign?” [Einstein]

I am old enough to make my own decisions....Just not young enough to remember what I decided!....

User avatar
greybeard
Posts: 2847
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:11 am
Location: Logan City QLD

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#8 Post by greybeard » Mon Jun 08, 2020 4:31 am

Kendaric wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 1:20 pm
The American Flatbow had wide limbs like a recurve, and was much shorter.
From Popular Mechanics 1941.
Shoot A Bow For Fun.jpg
Shoot A Bow For Fun.jpg (243.07 KiB) Viewed 817 times
Was the flatbow an adaptation of the English pattern longbow.

Was it the result of research done by Hickman showing that a rectangular cross section was more efficient than the 'D' section.

Outdoor Sports magazine circa 1940.

‘Now you can shoot THE NEW American FLAT BOW’

“Lemonwood can be had from most dealers in archery supplies, either in the rough stave or cut to approximate outline. The price ranges from about $1.75 to $3. In ordering you should be careful to say you need a wide stave for a flat bow. The dimensions given are for a bow 5 ft. 8 in. long with a weight (the archer's term for the strength of a bow) of from 45 to 50 lb. at a draw of from 27 to 28 in. This combination is suitable for the average man. When new the bow will draw 5 lb. or more above these figures. For clearness, only the upper limb of the bow is shown on the drawings. The lower limb is similar but slightly stronger. It should be 7/16 by 1½ in. at a point 14¼ in. below the center line; 3/8 by ¾ in. at a point 24¾ in. below the center; and 3/8 by 9/16 in. (instead of 3/8 by ½ in.) at a point 1 in. from the very end.”
AFB.jpg
AFB.jpg (38.52 KiB) Viewed 815 times
Flatbow.jpg
Flatbow.jpg (63.96 KiB) Viewed 816 times
Daryl.
"And you must not stick for a groat or twelvepence more than another man would give, if it be a good bow.
For a good bow twice paid for, is better than an ill bow once broken.
[Ascham]

“If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, of what, then, is an empty desk a sign?” [Einstein]

I am old enough to make my own decisions....Just not young enough to remember what I decided!....

User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#9 Post by Kendaric » Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:00 am

I love these old pictures. I had the same document (see attachment).

Whilst not short, the limbs are quite wide and the handle section narrow. A board bow in many respects. Yes this is an American Flatbow, not a Howard Hill style semi-longbow (where the limb width to depth ratio is smaller for a start) which my understanding the traditional longbow division was suppose to be based (unless it wasn't in TAA, as appose to the definition of ABA Traditional Longbow) Whilst an American Flatbow (and ELB) could both fit into the TAA draft longbow definition, American Flatbow should not be now included in the description if meaning a Howard Hill style bow.
Flat bow.jpg
Flat bow.jpg (362.14 KiB) Viewed 791 times

User avatar
greybeard
Posts: 2847
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:11 am
Location: Logan City QLD

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#10 Post by greybeard » Mon Jun 08, 2020 4:11 pm

I think that the more we delve in to the history of the flatbow in North America and the variations on a theme the one thing that remains constant is that the widest part of the limb is wider than the handle.
Sudbury Bow_Peabody Museum.jpg
Sudbury Bow_Peabody Museum.jpg (52.79 KiB) Viewed 777 times
Sudbury_bow_Wampanoag Bow.jpg
Sudbury_bow_Wampanoag Bow.jpg (11.13 KiB) Viewed 777 times
Once fiberglass / carbon fiber was introduced it created a new ball game.

Having two divisions would make life easier.

Daryl.
"And you must not stick for a groat or twelvepence more than another man would give, if it be a good bow.
For a good bow twice paid for, is better than an ill bow once broken.
[Ascham]

“If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, of what, then, is an empty desk a sign?” [Einstein]

I am old enough to make my own decisions....Just not young enough to remember what I decided!....

User avatar
greybeard
Posts: 2847
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:11 am
Location: Logan City QLD

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#11 Post by greybeard » Mon Jun 08, 2020 6:39 pm

American Flatbow.pdf
(740.44 KiB) Downloaded 7 times
"And you must not stick for a groat or twelvepence more than another man would give, if it be a good bow.
For a good bow twice paid for, is better than an ill bow once broken.
[Ascham]

“If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, of what, then, is an empty desk a sign?” [Einstein]

I am old enough to make my own decisions....Just not young enough to remember what I decided!....

User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#12 Post by Kendaric » Wed Jun 10, 2020 8:59 am

I see that under the traditional recurve division 2019, that the timber riser bow had to be shot off the shelf. The proposed 2020 revision now allows a non-mechanical elevated rest, no plunger button. Whilst in reality, it probably makes little difference to accuracy, the bow being shot off the shelf was a defining trait of this division I thought, but perhaps it has not been deemed so.

I thought this thread would spark more debate on the pros and cons.

User avatar
greybeard
Posts: 2847
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:11 am
Location: Logan City QLD

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#13 Post by greybeard » Wed Jun 10, 2020 3:47 pm

Kendaric wrote:
Wed Jun 10, 2020 8:59 am
I thought this thread would spark more debate on the pros and cons.
By and large I get the impression that most trad archers don’t give a rat’s about what may be considered traditional or not as long as they can participate with whatever gear they have and the rules don’t affect them.

Having two divisions, pre fiberglass and post fiberglass [no compounds] would simplify things.

What was the old saying about archery, 90% ability 10% equipment?
Kendaric wrote:
Wed Jun 10, 2020 8:59 am
no plunger button. Whilst in reality, it probably makes little difference to accuracy
Panic Button.doc
(206 KiB) Downloaded 7 times
Daryl.
"And you must not stick for a groat or twelvepence more than another man would give, if it be a good bow.
For a good bow twice paid for, is better than an ill bow once broken.
[Ascham]

“If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, of what, then, is an empty desk a sign?” [Einstein]

I am old enough to make my own decisions....Just not young enough to remember what I decided!....

User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#14 Post by Kendaric » Thu Jun 11, 2020 11:33 am

greybeard wrote:
Wed Jun 10, 2020 3:47 pm
What was the old saying about archery, 90% ability 10% equipment?
That might have been true once, and I remember the adage, but the modern compound can make the most mediocre archer shoot reasonably well - something they would not have been able to achieve with a compound bows some 20-30 years ago.

I suppose this is part of the appeal of Trad (at least one of the reasons for me), is that you have work at it.

User avatar
clinglish
Posts: 960
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:40 pm
Location: Perth

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#15 Post by clinglish » Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:49 am

I for one do not understand the drive to "define " the longbow or Recurve. IMO you can easily class these all as Traditional Style Longbow and Traditional Style recurve. We don't see the Compound shooters defining by the bow but by the way it is accessorised so why we continue the path of " My Definition " is the correct one is rubbish. The changes in design have all been driven by improvements in materials and if the English longbowman at Agincourt had access to the same tech they would have used it not quibbled over it. It was the purpose of the weapon. this push is more about splitting us into smaller and smaller groups to spread the Participation trophies around at competition. It is the same thought process which puts the Arrow materials as a defining factor, wood and Aluminium are Trad but carbon aren't, Well there are now Carbon Aluminium hybrids so where do they go?
If anything we should be broadening the definitions and if the shooter next to me is using an ACS CAD designed and CNC machined 3 piece take down whilst I have a Howard hill Style bow so be it I shoot to beat my previous efforts not those around me.
Bowhunting (Hunting for Bows)
Known Carrier of "Fox Bow Fever"

User avatar
Stickbow Hunter
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 11529
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 8:33 pm
Location: Maryborough Queensland

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#16 Post by Stickbow Hunter » Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:57 pm

clinglish wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:49 am
I for one do not understand the drive to "define " the longbow or Recurve. IMO you can easily class these all as Traditional Style Longbow and Traditional Style recurve. We don't see the Compound shooters defining by the bow but by the way it is accessorised so why we continue the path of " My Definition " is the correct one is rubbish.
I cannot fathom your thinking. Why on earth do you think the term longbow and recurve came about? Those words were used to describe the type of bow one was using. Each type of bow has inherent design characteristics which make them either a longbow or recurve or a flat bow etc. If a bow has recurve limbs then it certainly isn't a longbow.
clinglish wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:49 am
The changes in design have all been driven by improvements in materials and if the English longbowman at Agincourt had access to the same tech they would have used it not quibbled over it. It was the purpose of the weapon.
The type of material doesn't make a bow a longbow or recurve etc; it is the bows design characteristics that does that.
clinglish wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:49 am
It is the same thought process which puts the Arrow materials as a defining factor, wood and Aluminium are Trad but carbon aren't, Well there are now Carbon Aluminium hybrids so where do they go?
I get tired of this old argument; time and time again we explain the reason for some shoots only allowing wood arrows is not for the reason that they are traditional and others aren't; the reason was/is to try and get people making wood arrows to ensure the craft of making a matched set of wood arrows is not lost.
clinglish wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:49 am
If anything we should be broadening the definitions and if the shooter next to me is using an ACS CAD designed and CNC machined 3 piece take down whilst I have a Howard hill Style bow so be it I shoot to beat my previous efforts not those around me.
Most definitely disagree. An ACS CAD designed and CNC machined 3 piece take down will never be a longbow regardless of what spin the manufacturers put on them.

User avatar
clinglish
Posts: 960
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:40 pm
Location: Perth

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#17 Post by clinglish » Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:01 pm

Obviously my opinion is invalid as it doesn’t align with yours. I’m not hung up on the variety of “rules “ driven by a certain group in the archery community. TBH most of the people I have met shooting trad don’t care about the details they just enjoy shooting with like minded people. They show off their equipment and creating smaller and smaller groups to attempt to pigeon hole participants isn’t something that positively adds to the event.
But you do you
Bowhunting (Hunting for Bows)
Known Carrier of "Fox Bow Fever"

User avatar
Stickbow Hunter
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 11529
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 8:33 pm
Location: Maryborough Queensland

Re: TAA Proposed Equipment Guidelines 2020

#18 Post by Stickbow Hunter » Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:49 pm

clinglish wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:01 pm
Obviously my opinion is invalid as it doesn’t align with yours.
Don't be ridiculous! I don't happen to agree with your thinking is all, nothing more.

Post Reply