How would you categorise this bow?

[longbow steve]

http://sports.webshots.com/album/575853892EGIeNZ
Checkmate longhorn, would you place it in longbow division at our "Trad shoots" or recurve division?
Despite its shape I would expect it to be in the longbow division due to the string not touching the belly of the bow at brace? What rae your thoughts? Steve

[Gringa Bows]

going by the shape of it strung i would call it a recurve,or maybe a hybrid,but it's what ever the owner wants it to be ..................Rod

[Mick Smith]

Steve

Personally, I'd be inclinded to put it in with the longbows, as the string doesn't touch the limbs other than at the tips.

How would this bow fare under Perry and Greybeard's rulings?? I believe that these rules will be the ones that matter in the future of Australian trad shoots.

Mick

[Stickbow Hunter]

I guess I don't have to reply as you know my answer Steve but I will anyway.

That is clearly a semi-recurve, always has been and always will be. People may want to change its name but that doesn't change what it is by design. The limbs reflex/recurve when strung so it is a recurve. The string not touching at the tips has nothing to do with what type of bow it is. That nonsense only came in common use in recent times by manufacturers wanting to get their semi-recurves called longbows so they could tell all and sundry how fast and great their bows are.

I guess that doesn't really answer your question regarding some Trad shoots rules.

Jeff

[longbow steve]

From memory the rules Daryl and Perry penned if the string only touches at the nocks it should be a longbow.
Thanks Jeff, I agree it is a semi recurve and we already discussed what your opinion would be via PM .
No matter what the archer is in control of it's accuracy but one would hate to win the longbow division with a recurve .

[muntries]

I'd categorise that as a very very nice looking bow!! I remember eyeing those up before I bought my current bow (funds and finances being the final factor )

[Roadie]

OK so they are calling it a LongBow, so let them complete in the Modern LongBow Division, as that is what it is a Modern Longbow, or else in Recurve because that what it looks like. A Tradational Bow it ain't. Just my opionion Cheers Roadie.

[Len]

No way is that a longbow. Even when strung its reflexed so how can it be a longbow ? Its too short to be a real longbow anyway

[bps]

OK so they are calling it a LongBow, so let them complete in the Modern LongBow Division, as that is what it is a Modern Longbow, or else in Recurve because that what it looks like. A Tradational Bow it ain't. Just my opionion Cheers Roadie.

??? didnt see that comming !

[GrahameA]

Read what the rules say.

MODERN LONGBOW DIVISION.

A one piece or takedown bow that is either flat laid, reflexed or deflex reflexed with fibreglass and / or carbon fibre as back, belly or core laminations.

http://www.ozbow.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6160

[Jeffro]

Ive said it before and ill say it again.
I think they all should be the same division .recurve and longbow and anything in between.
The longbow shooters seem to outshoot the recurves at most of the comps ive been in recently anyway.
As long as its wooden and shot with your fingers and has no sights there is no advantages or disadvantages.
It all comes down to how gooder shot you are
Agreed or disagreed?


It would save clubs the hassle of tallying up 10 different divisions and bring down the number of prizes by the same ammount.
If you win one of those comps then you really have something to crow about
if your a bit of a crow that is

[Mick Smith]

Whilst I agree with you there on a technical basis Jeffro, there are some good practical reasons for having recurves and longbows separated into two bow divisions.

Some of the clubs here in Victoria have been shooting events with recurves and modern longbows lumped together in the one division for a while now and one thing I've noticed is some diminished hope of ever winning a trophy, by many. When you have 40 or 50 blokes all competing for the one prize, there's bound to be many who will be disappointed. I believe it has even lead to fewer numbers of people attending many shoots.

I now believe that is better to award separate prizes to the recurve and modern longbow divisions, as it keeps up a keen interest due to the greater possibility of winning something. I don't particularly care, but I know of many who do. I think it is worth the trouble and expense of the extra trophies.

I must admit, it's a bit of a turn-around in my way of thinking, but in the past I looked at it from a different perspective.

Mick

[bps]

This thread has came out because i asked Longbow Steve the question through PM on what my bow would be classed as .

i dont really care if it is a recurve or a longbow i hardly go to any shoots due to work commitments, BUT i need to know what box to tick if and when i do go to a shoot...

Brad

[greybeard]

This thread has came out because i asked Longbow Steve the question through PM on what my bow would be classed as .

i dont really care if it is a recurve or a longbow i hardly go to any shoots due to work commitments, BUT i need to know what box to tick if and when i do go to a shoot...

Brad

Hi Brad,

If you are not a 'plastic trophy' hunter put yourself in the recurve division.

Some of the officialdom would not have a clue how to classify the bow.

Shoot the bow and enjoy the the pleasure that it brings.

Daryl.

[Stickbow Hunter]

A Tradational Bow it ain't.

I can't agree with you on that one Roadie.

OK so they are calling it a LongBow, so let them complete in the Modern LongBow Division, as that is what it is a Modern Longbow, or else in Recurve because that what it looks like.

The bow by design is not a longbow modern or otherwise and it looks like a recurve because it is.

I now believe that is better to award separate prizes to the recurve and modern longbow divisions, as it keeps up a keen interest due to the greater possibility of winning something.

Mick, if you are classing bows such as the Longhorn as a modern longbow in reality you are back to one division as you would have two recurve divisions and no longbow division at all. By design those bows are semi-recurves not longbows.

i dont really care if it is a recurve or a longbow i hardly go to any shoots due to work commitments, BUT i need to know what box to tick if and when i do go to a shoot...

Simply call it what it is mate, a semi-recurve and enjoy shooting it.

Jeff

[longbowinfected]

One of the few things AA get right is the concept of the length of the bow for adult males but they got it way wrong for the kids.

That bow is 4 inches or so too short to be a longbow and it looks suspiciously like a lovely recurve which looks like a traditional wooden recurve for mine.

Kev

[Mike-dy]

Simply call it what it is mate, a semi-recurve and enjoy shooting it.

Jeff

Semi = Half, or part one of two. If its a semi-recurve why can't it be called a semi-longbow
Can't find a tongue in cheek smiley Jeff

Cheers,
Mike

[GrahameA]

Whilst I agree with you there on a technical basis Jeffro, there are some good practical reasons for having recurves and longbows separated into two bow divisions.

IMHO there are no practical reasons. The equipment shoots very similar and there is not need to have special ranges or targets.

Some of the clubs here in Victoria have been shooting events with recurves and modern longbows lumped together in the one division for a while now and one thing I've noticed is some diminished hope of ever winning a trophy, by many. When you have 40 or 50 blokes all competing for the one prize, there's bound to be many who will be disappointed. I believe it has even lead to fewer numbers of people attending many shoots.

I now believe that is better to award separate prizes to the recurve and modern longbow divisions, as it keeps up a keen interest due to the greater possibility of winning something. I don't particularly care, but I know of many who do. I think it is worth the trouble and expense of the extra trophies.

The reason are not practical reason rather they are suggestions that some people are more interested in a "Win" as to distinct to shooting. And that is fine for those who are driven by such.

I must admit, it's a bit of a turn-around in my way of thinking, but in the past I looked at it from a different perspective.
Mick

Views are always different depending on where you looking from and through.

The more fundamental question is why are you shooting the comp. Is it to win or is is for some other intrinsic value and you have to ask the value of a win? Is it better to win against a field of two or two hundred?

Consider what happens when you get a plethora of divisions and end up with few archers in each division.

[Mick Smith]

Hi Grahame,

On your last point, I believe there's a happy medium when it comes to the number of competitors and the number of prizes available. If a good (if not outstanding) shooter happens to shoot their personal best at any given shoot, they do deserve to win something, I believe.

I've found that the top 10 shooters at most events are very competitive by nature. They're top shooters because they have taken the time and the effort to practice regularly and to ensure their form is spot on. The very thing that has driven most of them, is a desire to win. If you take this possibility away, they will simply lose interest.

At a recent Victorian shoot, I had several people who approached me asking about which bow division rules we had in place. When I advised them that we only had the one modern division, they were despondent, as they already new who the prize winners were going to be, based on previous experiences.

From a hosting club perspective, the club needs to be aware of competitors expectations and wishes. A part of the reason for holding an event is to raise money for your club and to ensure that the maxiumum numbers of people attend your shoot, you must try to make everyone as happy as possible.

I was soundly critisized at this same shoot for not having the same number of divisions for women as for the men. Perhaps I was thought to be sexists of something, but the truth of the matter was that there simply weren't enough women competing to ensure that everyone would take home a prize for just being there. So, we're back to the old balancing act again.

It's hard to win.

Mick

[GrahameA]

It's hard to win.

Mick

There is no win - the best you will get is a compromise.

[Chase N. Nocks]

Simply call it what it is mate, a semi-recurve and enjoy shooting it.

Jeff

Semi = Half, or part one of two. If its a semi-recurve why can't it be called a semi-longbow
Can't find a tongue in cheek smiley Jeff

Cheers,
Mike

Exactly. It's half of each. But the interests of fairplay put them in with recurves. These new longbows simple outclass the "standard" longbows in almost everyway. Funny thing though is that the flexibility of the definition "longbow" was set and limited to the opinions of the top longbow shooters decades ago.


Afterall, if it's laminated with glass.......well it ain't a longbow, is it.

[Mike-dy]

These new longbows simple outclass the "standard" longbows in almost everyway. .

Quote edited for clarity. I believe the archer has more to do with the scores they shoot than the equipment. A better archer will "outclass" a poor archer regardless of the bow used.

Cheers,
Mike

[Chase N. Nocks]

These new longbows simple outclass the "standard" longbows in almost everyway. .

Quote edited for clarity. I believe the archer has more to do with the scores they shoot than the equipment. A better archer will "outclass" a poor archer regardless of the bow used.

Cheers,
Mike

I agree Mike. The archer is the single largest part of the equation. And when it all comes together it is very much a "whole is greater than the sum of the parts" type of thing.

Also the archer that owns one high quality bow. Has it perfectly tuned to his/her shooting style. Has perfectly tuned and matched arrows. Knows the arrow flight intimately from long practice. I envy and respect. I'm one of the other mob ..... my curse and pleasure is that I like a great variety of bows and swap and change almost as bad as a teenage girl going on first date.


There is no denying though that some bows specifically are better than others and that some bow designs are better than others.

[hue]

for my two cents worth mates - it's a recurve and it looks gorgeous!
and who said modern longbows can shoot against recurves, not where i shoot mate! a good recurve archer (trad) will always trounce a good longbow archer - that's why we have different catagories. IMHO

Hue

[Mick Smith]

Getting back to trad shoot rules and bow divisions. This whole discussion takes us back to why the rules were made in the first place. It seems no one can agree on where certain bows belong in the scheme of things.

The deflex reflex longbow has long been a bone of contention in this regard. Some people say it's a longbow and others say its a recurve. When it comes to deflex reflex bows, when to too much deflex reflex going to turn a longbow into a recurve? I would say that at least 90% of all currently manufactured longbows have some degree of deflex reflex incorporated into their design. Where do you draw the line between what's a longbow and what's a recurve?

Personally, I think Perry's, Greybeard's and Graham's rules cover what's what in a very concise manner. The last thing we want at shoots are the trad bow police, telling us what's a longbow and what's a recurve. When someone buys a bow that has been labeled as a longbow by the manufacturer, then who's to say that it isn't, when it comes to trad shoot rules.

If some competitors chose to shoot in the modern longbow division with a bow that has been deemed by some to be less efficient, then who is to blame? If you're overly fussed about it, go a buy yourself something more competitive. I think the trad shoot rules are simple and straightforward and therefore good. It places the modern, deflex reflex longbows in with the longbows in where they probably belong. It's just too confusing otherwise.

It's in common public usage to call these bows longbows and as far as I'm concerned it's too late to try to change it. Anyway, when it's all said and done, a Howard Hill type of longbow isn't really a longbow either. It's a flat bow. I see the Howard Hill type of longbow as a transition bow, bridging the gap between true longbows and modern longbows. How many of larger bow manufactures still manufacture a straight limbed longbow? Not many that I know of.

We can talk all day about whether or not these bows are longbows or recurves, but it won't change a thing.

Mick

[aroadik]

Many years ago, 6-8! I owned a Chek-mate Longhorn and won 1st place in "longbow" division at Hoddywell in W.A. they set the rules, as the string did not touch the limbs except at the noc's and wood arrows were to be used they accepted it as a longbow. I know it is not a longbow but that was there ruling so I begrudingly accepted the trophy. Have fun with a great bow cheers Pete.

[bps]

Its probably just as well the discussion of the bow catagory took place on the forum

At the June Gathering in the Hunter Valley ( after a couple of beers ) no one would agree on anything !!

its been an interesting discussion ....

i might just tick the longbow box to keep the debate going

[perry]

Semi recurve ? marketing clap trap used in the 50's and 60's to try and sell the design. Semi recurve when referring to this bow design is a misinformation that marketing sold as truth. This design is deflex reflex, this is an accurate description of the limb design, semi recurve oversimplifies / ignores the other design features of the limb. It has been used for millenniums

Just as it's marketing clap trap that calls a modern Hill style fiberglass laminated bow a longbow, as stated before they are flat bows. Another case of the truth being put to rest by clever marketing

Without being mischievous we all understand a recurve bow has a goodly amount of string wrapped around the curly bit at the end of the bow, be it working or static. This bow does not.

If this bow is braced too low it is possible the string will touch the limb other than at the string grooves. It is being mischievous to say that braced low it is a recurve. I guess following this you could brace some recurve's so high it would only touch at the string grooves , this is being mischievous - it is still a recurve and just like the deflex reflex it will shoot poorly when incorrectly braced

Its what it is a deflex reflex Flat-bow. What division you shoot in with it ? Depends on the game your playing. Uniform definitions and rules will probably never be achieved. There is simply no way to adequately recognize the myriad of bow designs in Traditional archery without significant compromise from all quarters. Personally I happy to shoot against this design in what ever Trad division the organizers see fit but the rules/ definitions I assisted in drafting a while ago that have seemed to work well place this particular bow squarely in the modern longbow division. "Modern" simply refers to the bows manufactured using fiberglass or other modern synthetics in their construction.

regards Jacko

[Mick Smith]

Whilst the Longhorn might be a nice looking and even a nice shooting bow, it's certainly not the bow I would choose to shoot in a comp, regardless of the division it was in. Personally, I think the back set handle might decrease the 'pointability' of the bow and secondly, I would prefer to shoot a longer bow of at least 64 inches in a longbow. Anyway, that's unimportant as it's just my personal preferences.

I'm just glad the bow in question on this thread wasn't a modern, so called horsebow, with fiberglass limbs covered in leather. There are strong feelings on where this bow belongs in bow divisions, especially in Victoria where they're relatively common. Most times they're shot in the historic division, along with non-shelfed selfbows, etc. There is a strong argument however, that they should be shot in with the recurves. I personally believe they should be shot in with the recurves, as the fiberglass should prohibit their inclusion into the historic class. I believe that once we get over this minor 'hurdle' our standardised rules will proceed without any obstacles.

Mick

[longbowinfected]

I am one of the few shooting AA competitions in NSW using a flat laid longbow. I have competed against all the other main players and it is down to them not the equipment. Yes they are a bit faster but they can also be less forgiving if your form is off a bit. If there is an advantage it is less than a few % which is really only on offer if you shoot really well or have good form consistently....might relate to 60 points difference out of a 1440 points for a Fremantle. I would lose that many points or more with arrows missing or scoring 1, 2, 3 rings. Thankfully something I have managed to reduce. Then again as your scores progress it is harder to get an extra half point per arrow to climb the next few ratings. You still have to practice all the time to take advantage of the opportunity and I do not see every longbower putting in that effort.

The tuning and practice plus natural ability are the real determining factors.
I am quite hapy for deflex/reflex bows to be in the same division and see it as a natural progression in traditional technology...the same as the race for a better timber arrow. It all adds to the sport and the tradition.

Kev