Hey Mick,
Been a real funny week.
Two events covering the scope of fun with timbers.
* last week at the National field I was in the starting group of myself and two master ladies longbowers. At the end of our first couple of targets we felt obliged to advise the judges that we had shot the centre out of the targets and it would not help the top flight compound and recurve archers. Muchly amused with tongue in cheek as we did so.....moments like those ....
*Today, another field shoot.....Bad day at the office.....
doing a field event, get out my best timbers, same mass, same spine.....spent hours on them after the Nationals to make sure they were up to scratch with no loose points.....bet you can see where this is heading....
You know how top flight compound and recurve archers get upset when $30 arrows shatter if they hit a point and rightfully mutter about longbow archers doing the wrong thing [and quite rightfully]?
Scream through the course, looking like the real deal....next 5 targets broke eight of my twelve arrows on points and inserts... another archer finished the course with two of his carbons intact out of twelve.....he never found or removed a single one.....I did.
The target butts were based on clamped telephone books with a glued face screwed on to the butt by drill. Out with the leatherman 4 screws by 5 butts out and in......complaints from those behind.....keep smiling....
Any guesses where the points and inserts are now?
Got over it had a nice day shot a horrible score.
Kevin
Traditional Archery Divisions
Moderator: Moderators
-
longbowinfected
- Posts: 2040
- Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 5:42 pm
Me computer challenged Grahame 
. I really appreiciate your taking pity on me - again 
3 DIVISIONS . Simply because I am not sure people are ready to embrace a a 2 division competition and 3 divisions is fairest in giving people an opportunity to shoot against there peers
Please note I am all for resolving the divisions debate and appreciate the 2 division argument
Richard has also hit the nail right on the head - numbers folks think of the numbers
Len , Richards tri laminate bow is all wood and would shoot in traditional primitive class . Its a very old method of constructing bows
Mick you have highlighted how competition brings out the gotta win in a lot of folks with your point on switching from wood to alloys just because its perceived by some as a big shoot . I beleive you would see a similar phenomenom emerge if people perceived one type of bow held an advantage over another in a combined modern bow division and diversity could suffer . I also believe its at the heart of the Horsebow question .
As for one good reson Mick may I suggest that White Hawk has the answer for fibreglass limbed Horsebows - materials they are constructed from clearly puts them in the modern recurve division . I have stated before that I believe if a natural materials Horsebow was available for similar money[ ie Bamboo and timber laminate ] this issue would solve itself - Come on Bowmakers / importers there's money to be made .
We are also discussing whether or not Longbows should have there own division with this poll and in other threads . I believe they should as they have a long history of competing in seperate divisions to recurves and the general trad archer out there would find too much change to quickly challenging . Also these proposed rules / definitions must promote divercity and if the price for now is an extra division , Good.
Lets all remember these proposed rules / definitions are being trialed and are not set in stone and will evole . They are not meant as a complete set but an addemdum to each clubs existing shoot rules and controlling format of the shoots is up to the clubs . The goal is for a set of uniform rules / definitions so a travelling archer for instance is not shunted from division to division at differant trad shoots .
regards Perry
. I really appreiciate your taking pity on me - again 3 DIVISIONS . Simply because I am not sure people are ready to embrace a a 2 division competition and 3 divisions is fairest in giving people an opportunity to shoot against there peers
Please note I am all for resolving the divisions debate and appreciate the 2 division argument
Richard has also hit the nail right on the head - numbers folks think of the numbers
Len , Richards tri laminate bow is all wood and would shoot in traditional primitive class . Its a very old method of constructing bows
Mick you have highlighted how competition brings out the gotta win in a lot of folks with your point on switching from wood to alloys just because its perceived by some as a big shoot . I beleive you would see a similar phenomenom emerge if people perceived one type of bow held an advantage over another in a combined modern bow division and diversity could suffer . I also believe its at the heart of the Horsebow question .
As for one good reson Mick may I suggest that White Hawk has the answer for fibreglass limbed Horsebows - materials they are constructed from clearly puts them in the modern recurve division . I have stated before that I believe if a natural materials Horsebow was available for similar money[ ie Bamboo and timber laminate ] this issue would solve itself - Come on Bowmakers / importers there's money to be made .
We are also discussing whether or not Longbows should have there own division with this poll and in other threads . I believe they should as they have a long history of competing in seperate divisions to recurves and the general trad archer out there would find too much change to quickly challenging . Also these proposed rules / definitions must promote divercity and if the price for now is an extra division , Good.
Lets all remember these proposed rules / definitions are being trialed and are not set in stone and will evole . They are not meant as a complete set but an addemdum to each clubs existing shoot rules and controlling format of the shoots is up to the clubs . The goal is for a set of uniform rules / definitions so a travelling archer for instance is not shunted from division to division at differant trad shoots .
regards Perry
Last edited by perry on Sat Apr 05, 2008 10:15 pm, edited 6 times in total.
"To my deep morticication my father once said to me, 'You care for nothing but shooting, dogs and rat catching, and you will be a disgrace to yourself and all your family.' "
- Charles Darwin
- Charles Darwin
Southern Fox and Dances with Dingoes instead of posting from the sidelines ask yourselves why neither of you put up this poll . I have asked repeatedly for constuctive help with this and I would love for all and sundry too PM me , I am happy then for someone else to post coordinated information and not my opinion either but a compromise to project a spirit of fairness instead of going in circles
As it was , someone suggested a poll and then left it up for me to stuff up and Grahame to fix , evidence the above works . Thanks again .
As it was , someone suggested a poll and then left it up for me to stuff up and Grahame to fix , evidence the above works . Thanks again .
"To my deep morticication my father once said to me, 'You care for nothing but shooting, dogs and rat catching, and you will be a disgrace to yourself and all your family.' "
- Charles Darwin
- Charles Darwin
I'm not picking on Len here and let me make that clear right away. 
However, Len's suggestion indicates the direction in which this issue of bow divisions will go.
The majority are advocating 3 divs. Len is suggesting, sort of, that perhaps a div for DF/RF might be needed as well and eventually someone will decide that horsebows really are a different category, that shelfed (?)and unshelfed (?) bows are different and need separate divs....do you see my point??
I still think 2 divsions and no exceptions is the only answer. However each to his own poisoned chailce
However, Len's suggestion indicates the direction in which this issue of bow divisions will go.
The majority are advocating 3 divs. Len is suggesting, sort of, that perhaps a div for DF/RF might be needed as well and eventually someone will decide that horsebows really are a different category, that shelfed (?)and unshelfed (?) bows are different and need separate divs....do you see my point??
I still think 2 divsions and no exceptions is the only answer. However each to his own poisoned chailce
"You want me to do WHAT???"
Lord Cardigan's reply when told by Lord Lucan to charge the Russian guns with the Light Brigade.
Lord Cardigan's reply when told by Lord Lucan to charge the Russian guns with the Light Brigade.
-
Mick Smith
- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 9:09 pm
- Location: Surf Coast Victoria
Perry
I appreciate your answer to one of my questions. I can understand that in the 3 division system already outlined, horsebows should probably fall into the recurve division, but I posed my question in an overall sense. I'll try to reword the question. Why, when longbows and recurves share so many things in common, such as fiberglass laminations, a very similar build method, very similar performance, why should they have separate divisions when modern horsebows are dissimilar to both recurves and longbows in so many ways, in that they don't have fiberglass laminations, they're built in an entirely different way with solid glass limbs and timber syhas, etc, no shelf, yet horsebows are lumped in with recurves just because of the shape of their limbs? The shape of the horsebow limbs is about the only thing that is actually similar to a recurve.
The point I was trying to make was, if it's fair enough for longbows to have their own division just because of one small difference in the way they're made, why shouldn't horsebows have their own division too, because they have several differences to both longbows and recurves in the way they're made as well.
The funny thing is, I'm not advocating a separate horsebow division at all. I'm simply trying to point out an inconsistency with the current 3 division system. To me, it would make much more sense to lump all modern bows in together. They all perform in a similar manner, so why try to separate them?
I already think that under the current 3 division system, you will find many of the more competitive types will seriously consider buying themselves a high performance severely deflex/deflexed 'longbow' to enhance their prospects. I also think that many archers will be so entrenched in their current bow type, they will never change. Many will have no reason to change, as they can shoot the pants off anyone already. I honestly don't think the average trad bow shooter will be able to gain any real advantage in shooting a different style of bow, any perceived advantages will be just that, they will be only in their minds. I'm not advocating that modern horsebows be allowed into the historical division, therefore their use will not offer their owners any advantages. Under your new rules, the really hi-tech recurves with adjustable limbs, etc aren't allowed, so people seeking technical hi-tech advantages would continue to be stymied. I think this would also be the case under any 2 division system as well.
The bottom line for me is - I'm convinced that no matter what type of bow that you shoot, it will make very little difference to how well you shoot. The act of shooting an arrow is controlled by the archer, not the bow. However the best archer in the world won't shoot well with second rate arrows. Arrows do make a difference. A perfectly straight arrow and one that weighs exactly the same as the others in the set and one that is spined within a fraction of perfection to the others in the set, will have to shoot better than even the most fasdidiously made wooden arrows.
Tom and Len,
I think we are of the same mind on this issue. Why trouble ourselves with formulating separate divisions for modern bows when there's an almost endless variety of them and more variety still on the way in the future. It simply makes much more sense to put them all together in the one modern division. So far no one has even attempted to answer my question of why there should be a separate longbow division and a separate recurve division when certain longbows will outshoot certain recurves and vice versa. It just doesn't make sense.
The only way it would make sense, would be to go back to the old ABA rulings of measuring the amount of deflex/reflex in some longbows and putting some of them in with the recurves again. I don't think most modern trad archers would appreciate that very much, as these are really just modern longbows that happen to be a bit more efficient than their transient predecessors.
I like the simplicity of the 2 division system. I detest the inconsistencies of the 3 division system.
Mick
I appreciate your answer to one of my questions. I can understand that in the 3 division system already outlined, horsebows should probably fall into the recurve division, but I posed my question in an overall sense. I'll try to reword the question. Why, when longbows and recurves share so many things in common, such as fiberglass laminations, a very similar build method, very similar performance, why should they have separate divisions when modern horsebows are dissimilar to both recurves and longbows in so many ways, in that they don't have fiberglass laminations, they're built in an entirely different way with solid glass limbs and timber syhas, etc, no shelf, yet horsebows are lumped in with recurves just because of the shape of their limbs? The shape of the horsebow limbs is about the only thing that is actually similar to a recurve.
The point I was trying to make was, if it's fair enough for longbows to have their own division just because of one small difference in the way they're made, why shouldn't horsebows have their own division too, because they have several differences to both longbows and recurves in the way they're made as well.
The funny thing is, I'm not advocating a separate horsebow division at all. I'm simply trying to point out an inconsistency with the current 3 division system. To me, it would make much more sense to lump all modern bows in together. They all perform in a similar manner, so why try to separate them?
That's a fair enough comment.Mick you have highlighted how competition brings out the gotta win in a lot of folks with your point on switching from wood to alloys just because its perceived by some as a big shoot . I believe you would see a similar phenomenon emerge if people perceived one type of bow held an advantage over another in a combined modern bow division and diversity could suffer . I also believe its at the heart of the Horsebow question .
I already think that under the current 3 division system, you will find many of the more competitive types will seriously consider buying themselves a high performance severely deflex/deflexed 'longbow' to enhance their prospects. I also think that many archers will be so entrenched in their current bow type, they will never change. Many will have no reason to change, as they can shoot the pants off anyone already. I honestly don't think the average trad bow shooter will be able to gain any real advantage in shooting a different style of bow, any perceived advantages will be just that, they will be only in their minds. I'm not advocating that modern horsebows be allowed into the historical division, therefore their use will not offer their owners any advantages. Under your new rules, the really hi-tech recurves with adjustable limbs, etc aren't allowed, so people seeking technical hi-tech advantages would continue to be stymied. I think this would also be the case under any 2 division system as well.The bottom line for me is - I'm convinced that no matter what type of bow that you shoot, it will make very little difference to how well you shoot. The act of shooting an arrow is controlled by the archer, not the bow. However the best archer in the world won't shoot well with second rate arrows. Arrows do make a difference. A perfectly straight arrow and one that weighs exactly the same as the others in the set and one that is spined within a fraction of perfection to the others in the set, will have to shoot better than even the most fasdidiously made wooden arrows.
Tom and Len,
I think we are of the same mind on this issue. Why trouble ourselves with formulating separate divisions for modern bows when there's an almost endless variety of them and more variety still on the way in the future. It simply makes much more sense to put them all together in the one modern division. So far no one has even attempted to answer my question of why there should be a separate longbow division and a separate recurve division when certain longbows will outshoot certain recurves and vice versa. It just doesn't make sense.
The only way it would make sense, would be to go back to the old ABA rulings of measuring the amount of deflex/reflex in some longbows and putting some of them in with the recurves again. I don't think most modern trad archers would appreciate that very much, as these are really just modern longbows that happen to be a bit more efficient than their transient predecessors.
I like the simplicity of the 2 division system. I detest the inconsistencies of the 3 division system.
Mick
There is no use focusing on aiming if you don't execute the shot well enough to hit what your are aiming at.
Hi Len,
At the North Albert Trad shoot nobody had a problem with flat bows, reflexed or deflex/reflex bows being placed in the 'Modern' division.
Daryl.
At the North Albert Trad shoot nobody had a problem with flat bows, reflexed or deflex/reflex bows being placed in the 'Modern' division.
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!....
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!....
I am also in favour of wooden arrows only.
It takes time and some skill to match a set of wooden arrows, to each other and to the bow.
Each set is also slightly different from the last.
With modern materials, you buy the arrows, points etc, cut to the length you know they spine properly at and attach all the bits. Very little skill needed after the first set.
In my opinion arrows are more than half of trad. I would reather see fibreglass bows being shot with wood arrows in trad than a selbow shooting carbons admitted.
It takes time and some skill to match a set of wooden arrows, to each other and to the bow.
Each set is also slightly different from the last.
With modern materials, you buy the arrows, points etc, cut to the length you know they spine properly at and attach all the bits. Very little skill needed after the first set.
In my opinion arrows are more than half of trad. I would reather see fibreglass bows being shot with wood arrows in trad than a selbow shooting carbons admitted.
Ed Lomax
http://www.bujinkanadelaide.org.au/
http://www.bujinkanadelaide.org.au/
-
longbowinfected
- Posts: 2040
- Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 5:42 pm
Spot on Ed
Greybeard,
One of my mates shot with a reflex deflex 64 inch carbon laminated rocketship longbow in a field shoot yesterday admittedly without much tuning / time to figure out gaps. I used matched timbers with a low poundage flat laid modern longbow and beat him. We both had fun.
at the end of the day, who cares? Would I want the same bow if it was going to be given to me as a present by my family like his did? Maybe.
Think I would prefer one of len's warbows / ELBs but made to 50# instead of 80#. Is it going to happen? no. Life moves on.
Kevin
Greybeard,
One of my mates shot with a reflex deflex 64 inch carbon laminated rocketship longbow in a field shoot yesterday admittedly without much tuning / time to figure out gaps. I used matched timbers with a low poundage flat laid modern longbow and beat him. We both had fun.
at the end of the day, who cares? Would I want the same bow if it was going to be given to me as a present by my family like his did? Maybe.
Think I would prefer one of len's warbows / ELBs but made to 50# instead of 80#. Is it going to happen? no. Life moves on.
Kevin
never complain....you did not have to wake up....every day is an extra bonus and costs nothing.
-
little arrows
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Sun Feb 29, 2004 2:14 pm
- Location: Sunshine Coast QLD
Hi Kevin,
Daryl.
I think your words reflect the thoughts of many trad archers.longbowinfected wrote: I used matched timbers with a low poundage flat laid modern longbow and beat him. We both had fun.at the end of the day, who cares?
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!....
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!....
Mick I am aware of the Horsebows constructed in the manner in which you speak - but what of the Horsebows that are constructed in a modern recurve manner such as the Samick SKB's , Yumi's and a pair of bows marketed by Kustom King simply named Horsebow and Horsebow express . Are these regarded in the same class as the bows you speak of , or are they to be deemed modern recurves . Once again the manufacturers have thrown a curve ball at us .
The small differance you talk of is just as apparant with Horsebows and the diversity of there construction , yet another inconsistency in trying to define things . You just can not cover all the bases
As far as the high tech trad bows go I am not comfortable with their exclusion but once again it was a decision made taking into account the general feeling amoung the trad community that they are regarded in the same light as carbon arrows , folks just are not ready to accept them
If a movement starts towards these bows in the same manner as it has with the deflex reflexes there's more compromise on the way and more people will push against the wheels[ bad pun ] of a changing tradition .
This is a good reason to draw a line in the sand , the problem is where do we draw it .
There really is no comparision between the games the governing bodies offer us and what we seek in the trad shoots we run . Each trad shoot is differant to the other where the governing body shoots are highly structured to be the same .
Perhaps there is a hangover from years of only a very few trad shoots and being swamped with governing body shoots , people naturally have integrated aspects of the governing body shoots initially , hence peoples desire for 3 divisions perhaps - dont know just a theory .
I repeat I personnally am not against 2 divisions but seems the general trad community is used to 3 and we need to cater for the attitudes of the day. The attitudes will change over time , just not as quickly as the equipment advances .
Its late . regards Perry
The small differance you talk of is just as apparant with Horsebows and the diversity of there construction , yet another inconsistency in trying to define things . You just can not cover all the bases
As far as the high tech trad bows go I am not comfortable with their exclusion but once again it was a decision made taking into account the general feeling amoung the trad community that they are regarded in the same light as carbon arrows , folks just are not ready to accept them
If a movement starts towards these bows in the same manner as it has with the deflex reflexes there's more compromise on the way and more people will push against the wheels[ bad pun ] of a changing tradition .
This is a good reason to draw a line in the sand , the problem is where do we draw it .
There really is no comparision between the games the governing bodies offer us and what we seek in the trad shoots we run . Each trad shoot is differant to the other where the governing body shoots are highly structured to be the same .
Perhaps there is a hangover from years of only a very few trad shoots and being swamped with governing body shoots , people naturally have integrated aspects of the governing body shoots initially , hence peoples desire for 3 divisions perhaps - dont know just a theory .
I repeat I personnally am not against 2 divisions but seems the general trad community is used to 3 and we need to cater for the attitudes of the day. The attitudes will change over time , just not as quickly as the equipment advances .
Its late . regards Perry
"To my deep morticication my father once said to me, 'You care for nothing but shooting, dogs and rat catching, and you will be a disgrace to yourself and all your family.' "
- Charles Darwin
- Charles Darwin
-
Mick Smith
- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 9:09 pm
- Location: Surf Coast Victoria
I voted for 2 divisions because I know longbowshooters that will outscore me with my recurve so i dont see why recurves , longbows and horsebows shouldnt be in the same division.It would save all the confusion about reflex deflex modern longbows and all that .I also know some that get good scores with their horsebows.
It all comes down to how good a shot you are at the end of the day.END OF STORY
Having said that the primitive division should use non synthetic string material if they truly want to be classed as using primitive gear.
I feel that all this division and debating of the rules etc only serves to turn people away.
Just my 2 cents worth
It all comes down to how good a shot you are at the end of the day.END OF STORY
Having said that the primitive division should use non synthetic string material if they truly want to be classed as using primitive gear.
I feel that all this division and debating of the rules etc only serves to turn people away.
Just my 2 cents worth
I think it is not that trad shooters are not interested in trad comps - but lets see the comps!
Unfortunately I can bet that it will be like waiting for the rain to get a trad comp in Adelaide....
Unfortunately I can bet that it will be like waiting for the rain to get a trad comp in Adelaide....
Ed Lomax
http://www.bujinkanadelaide.org.au/
http://www.bujinkanadelaide.org.au/
Ed
May be worthwhile to pay a visit to Adelaide Archery Club.
I find that surprising. Kevin and Steve would probably agree with me in this in that Adelaide is one of the strongholds of Longbow Archery. You may not get a pure Trad' Shoot but there should be plenty of Longbow competition.ed wrote:I think it is not that trad shooters are not interested in trad comps - but lets see the comps!
Unfortunately I can bet that it will be like waiting for the rain to get a trad comp in Adelaide....
May be worthwhile to pay a visit to Adelaide Archery Club.
Grahame.
Shoot a Selfbow, embrace Wood Arrows, discover Vintage, be a Trendsetter.
"Unfortunately, the equating of simplicity with truth doesn't often work in real life. It doesn't often work in science, either." Dr Len Fisher.
Shoot a Selfbow, embrace Wood Arrows, discover Vintage, be a Trendsetter.
"Unfortunately, the equating of simplicity with truth doesn't often work in real life. It doesn't often work in science, either." Dr Len Fisher.
-
longbow steve
- Posts: 3116
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:29 pm
- Location: BLUE MOUNTAINS
Grahame is right Ed, you have some of the best target archers in the country down there. They definately boulstered the numbers at the AA nationals in Victoria with 7 entrants.
I believe there is plenty more casual shooters in SA clubs with Jo Varden making plenty of bows and John Clarkes Ausbow company supplying from SA. Steve
I believe there is plenty more casual shooters in SA clubs with Jo Varden making plenty of bows and John Clarkes Ausbow company supplying from SA. Steve
there are a few longbow shooters here.
Joe Vardon and his club (Adelaide Archery Club) are target shooters. I ave visited that club and there are quite a few longbow people there, but target shooting gets too monotonous for me after a bit.
At the club I shoot at (Southern Field Archers), when I get time anyway, I am one of only three longbow guys there out of about 60 members. They are good competition though and last year we all topped 300 in our 3d comp scores. Every now and then a couple of extra longbow guys from Eden Field Archers turn up.
I am now looking to help a mate set up a course on his property. He is a member of the SCA and so is looking to set up their target shoot plus a paper field course. Hopefully it can start up soon.
As a side note, last shoot I went to with SFA, one of the wheelybow magnified sighted guys asked one of us longbowers why we all carried 20 arrows or more. To which one of my shooting partners stated "In case there are any French!" We were laughing as much at the joke as at the confused look on his face.
Joe Vardon and his club (Adelaide Archery Club) are target shooters. I ave visited that club and there are quite a few longbow people there, but target shooting gets too monotonous for me after a bit.
At the club I shoot at (Southern Field Archers), when I get time anyway, I am one of only three longbow guys there out of about 60 members. They are good competition though and last year we all topped 300 in our 3d comp scores. Every now and then a couple of extra longbow guys from Eden Field Archers turn up.
I am now looking to help a mate set up a course on his property. He is a member of the SCA and so is looking to set up their target shoot plus a paper field course. Hopefully it can start up soon.
As a side note, last shoot I went to with SFA, one of the wheelybow magnified sighted guys asked one of us longbowers why we all carried 20 arrows or more. To which one of my shooting partners stated "In case there are any French!" We were laughing as much at the joke as at the confused look on his face.
Ed Lomax
http://www.bujinkanadelaide.org.au/
http://www.bujinkanadelaide.org.au/
Mick, for a bloke that doesnt particulary care, as your very non-competitive, you seem to advocate the case for wooden arrows very stronglyMick Smith wrote:Kevin
I too would continue to use wooden arrows despite what happens with the rules. I shot cedar arrows at the AA state clout championships last year and I didn't feel too disadvantaged. I still believe that by shooting synthetic arrows you're going to have an advantage over those who aren't shooting them, but because I'm very non-competitive, I don't particularly care. Like you, I'm also more than happy to beat my previous PBs.
Mick
For the blokes that do particulary care, may I suggest investing in some alloy or carbon arrows, they are available for all, and dont cost that much
Three things you can never take back, time past, an angry word and a well sped arrow
-
Mick Smith
- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 9:09 pm
- Location: Surf Coast Victoria
Woody
I wasn't the only one advocating wooden arrows. I happen to feel that traditional archery would be worse off, in the long run, if we allowed the full introduction of synthetic arrows in comps. If synthetic arrows became the norm for most people shooting in comps, the heritage and tradition of crafting wooden arrows would be in grave danger of being lost forever. Sure, some old codgers like myself would stick with their timber arrows, but the vast majority of younger people entering trad archery would feel compelled to use synthetics.
It's a lot harder to get wooden arrows shooting acceptably well than what it is with synthetics. I feel that truly competitive shooters would insist on using the arrows that gave them an edge. Any suitably spined synthetic arrow will perform better than the best crafted wooden arrows ever made. For a start, they're can be made much lighter and they will therefore have a much flatter trajectory, making range estimation less of a concern. Synthetic arrows are basically clones of one another, so even the cheaper versions are much more closely matched than pretty well any hand matched wooden arrows.
There's also the cost factor too. Synthetic arrows are more expensive to buy than wooden arrows. This is an important consideration for young people just starting out in trad archery. Sure, it can be argued that synthetic arrows might work out cheaper to buy in the long run, but for a young person just starting out it would be much more affordable, after having just bought their bow, to buy a set of fully competitive wooden arrows.
Besides, I just don't like synthetic arrows. They've got no character and no charm. They're the boring and bland results of high volume and high tech modern industries. I got involved in traditional archery partly in an effort to escape rampant consumerism and the blandness of totally uniform materials.
There's absolutely no reason why everyone can't get their act together and come up with some good workable and straight shooting wooden arrows to use in comps. It's a part of what traditional archery should be all about. That's why I'm such a strong advocate for wooden arrows only.
I have no personal reasons for wanting to see synthetic arrows not allowed in trad comps. It won't effect me personally in any way. I'll just keep on using my wooden arrows in my normal mediocre manner. I'm more concerned about the future of traditional archery in Australia and where it would be heading if we begin to allow synthetic arrows one day and then goodness knows what the next. Why not just leave good enough alone? I would much rather maintain the 3 division concept into the future, in place of my much preferred option of 2 divisions, rather than support the introduction of synthetic arrows for all trad comps. These are just my opinions. You're entitled to yours.
Mick
I wasn't the only one advocating wooden arrows. I happen to feel that traditional archery would be worse off, in the long run, if we allowed the full introduction of synthetic arrows in comps. If synthetic arrows became the norm for most people shooting in comps, the heritage and tradition of crafting wooden arrows would be in grave danger of being lost forever. Sure, some old codgers like myself would stick with their timber arrows, but the vast majority of younger people entering trad archery would feel compelled to use synthetics.
It's a lot harder to get wooden arrows shooting acceptably well than what it is with synthetics. I feel that truly competitive shooters would insist on using the arrows that gave them an edge. Any suitably spined synthetic arrow will perform better than the best crafted wooden arrows ever made. For a start, they're can be made much lighter and they will therefore have a much flatter trajectory, making range estimation less of a concern. Synthetic arrows are basically clones of one another, so even the cheaper versions are much more closely matched than pretty well any hand matched wooden arrows.
There's also the cost factor too. Synthetic arrows are more expensive to buy than wooden arrows. This is an important consideration for young people just starting out in trad archery. Sure, it can be argued that synthetic arrows might work out cheaper to buy in the long run, but for a young person just starting out it would be much more affordable, after having just bought their bow, to buy a set of fully competitive wooden arrows.
Besides, I just don't like synthetic arrows. They've got no character and no charm. They're the boring and bland results of high volume and high tech modern industries. I got involved in traditional archery partly in an effort to escape rampant consumerism and the blandness of totally uniform materials.
There's absolutely no reason why everyone can't get their act together and come up with some good workable and straight shooting wooden arrows to use in comps. It's a part of what traditional archery should be all about. That's why I'm such a strong advocate for wooden arrows only.
I have no personal reasons for wanting to see synthetic arrows not allowed in trad comps. It won't effect me personally in any way. I'll just keep on using my wooden arrows in my normal mediocre manner. I'm more concerned about the future of traditional archery in Australia and where it would be heading if we begin to allow synthetic arrows one day and then goodness knows what the next. Why not just leave good enough alone? I would much rather maintain the 3 division concept into the future, in place of my much preferred option of 2 divisions, rather than support the introduction of synthetic arrows for all trad comps. These are just my opinions. You're entitled to yours.
Mick
There is no use focusing on aiming if you don't execute the shot well enough to hit what your are aiming at.
Mick said,
These are just my opinions. You're entitled to yours.
fair enough.
Consider the case of a newcomer to "trad" archery who has yet to aquire the skillsl of crafting serviceable wood arrows.
If no woods equals not shooting in the comps , are you not effectively barring new comers from entering comps, and, if they dont circulate within the trad scene, how do they learn to make their own gear........so when all the old codgers die off, what happens then
Carbon arrows for everyone.....
These are just my opinions. You're entitled to yours.
fair enough.Consider the case of a newcomer to "trad" archery who has yet to aquire the skillsl of crafting serviceable wood arrows.
If no woods equals not shooting in the comps
, are you not effectively barring new comers from entering comps, and, if they dont circulate within the trad scene, how do they learn to make their own gear........so when all the old codgers die off, what happens then Carbon arrows for everyone.....
Three things you can never take back, time past, an angry word and a well sped arrow
Mick,
seriously, I get why people like crafting and shooting their own woods.
I just think the trad scene would be more attractive to a lot more people if they were not compulsory.
Why not have some craft demonstrations and competitions at shoots to keep the old skills alive, maybe a section for bowyers, leatherwork, stringmaking and arrows.
This year at Ballarat, me and Rudd will organise a demo on woods and stringmaking for Saturday evening.
You may be surprised at what a heritic like me knows,.....
Mind you, we do cheat and use power tools when ever possible
Most of the trad bowhunters I know shoot alloys to hunt with and find the no alloy arrows rule a real pain when wishing to go to a shoot.
seriously, I get why people like crafting and shooting their own woods.
I just think the trad scene would be more attractive to a lot more people if they were not compulsory.
Why not have some craft demonstrations and competitions at shoots to keep the old skills alive, maybe a section for bowyers, leatherwork, stringmaking and arrows.
This year at Ballarat, me and Rudd will organise a demo on woods and stringmaking for Saturday evening.
You may be surprised at what a heritic like me knows,.....
Mind you, we do cheat and use power tools when ever possible
Most of the trad bowhunters I know shoot alloys to hunt with and find the no alloy arrows rule a real pain when wishing to go to a shoot.
Three things you can never take back, time past, an angry word and a well sped arrow
-
Mick Smith
- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 9:09 pm
- Location: Surf Coast Victoria
Woody
I know there's a lot of people who shoot carbons and alloys who feel frustrated they can't use them at most trad comps. Apart from what I've already mentioned in my recent post above, I suppose it eventually comes down to ensuring a perceived fairness and a fair go for all.
Probably the only way you could introduce synthetic arrows to trad shoots and maintain fairness, would be to introduce even more divisions. The existing 3 divisions (in most states) would have to be doubled, with divisions for both synthetic arrows and yet another for wooden arrows. It's just not practical.
Maybe a partial solution would be to have the odd comp where synthetic arrows are allowed, like the Ballarat shoot and others.
If someone can come up with a good fair and workable solution that allows for the introduction of synthetic arrows whereby the existing wooden arrows shooters wouldn't be disadvantaged without having to create ever more divisions, I'd love to hear about it.
Mick
I know there's a lot of people who shoot carbons and alloys who feel frustrated they can't use them at most trad comps. Apart from what I've already mentioned in my recent post above, I suppose it eventually comes down to ensuring a perceived fairness and a fair go for all.
Probably the only way you could introduce synthetic arrows to trad shoots and maintain fairness, would be to introduce even more divisions. The existing 3 divisions (in most states) would have to be doubled, with divisions for both synthetic arrows and yet another for wooden arrows. It's just not practical.
Maybe a partial solution would be to have the odd comp where synthetic arrows are allowed, like the Ballarat shoot and others.
If someone can come up with a good fair and workable solution that allows for the introduction of synthetic arrows whereby the existing wooden arrows shooters wouldn't be disadvantaged without having to create ever more divisions, I'd love to hear about it.
Mick
There is no use focusing on aiming if you don't execute the shot well enough to hit what your are aiming at.
Mick,
No mate, I cant see that. If a blokes truly confident he can make good woods, it shouldnt matter one little bit what you shoot.
If your not confident as to the quality of your woods, alloy or carbon arrows are freely available to all at a modest price.ie, a level playing field.
And please dont tell me that woods are cheaper to make, if a perfect matched set is the aim, you do need to make a lot, to select a few perfect shafts from among them.
Been there, done that.
No mate, I cant see that. If a blokes truly confident he can make good woods, it shouldnt matter one little bit what you shoot.
If your not confident as to the quality of your woods, alloy or carbon arrows are freely available to all at a modest price.ie, a level playing field.
And please dont tell me that woods are cheaper to make, if a perfect matched set is the aim, you do need to make a lot, to select a few perfect shafts from among them.
Been there, done that.
Three things you can never take back, time past, an angry word and a well sped arrow
-
Gringa Bows
- Posts: 6331
- Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 7:09 pm
- Location: Bundaberg QLD
-
Mick Smith
- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 9:09 pm
- Location: Surf Coast Victoria
Woody
I think you will have a hard time convincing most of the users of wooden arrows that they would be exactly as competitive as what they would be if they were using synthetic arrows.
As I've already stated, carbon and alloy arrows can be made much lighter in weight and would therefor have a much flatter trajectory, which would mean they wouldn't have to be as accurate in their estimation of range.
Carbon and alloy arrows don't warp like wooden arrows always seem to do eventually. You can't tell me that a perfectly straight alloy won't shoot a lot better than even a slightly warped wooden shaft.
Synthetic arrows usually have a smaller diameter than wooden arrows and this in itself is benificial in achieving better accuracy.
I've never said it was easy or even inexpensive to make a good set of wooden arrows, but it's possible to make a good set for less than what a set of synthetic arrows would cost. You can buy matched dozen sets of wooden shafts from several sources for less money than even a cheap set of synthetics. Admittedly synthetic arrows are stronger than wooden ones, but you can lose a synthetic just as easlily as you can lose a wooden one. The cost of wooden arrows v's synthetic arrows isn't really an issue.
It all comes back to percieved fairness for all. Why should the shooters of wooden arrows be prepared to allow some shooters a technical advantage and thereby disadvantage their chances of winning? I think I could shoot my favourite wooden arrows nearly as well as what I could if I happened to be shooting aluminiums. Note the word 'nearly'. My wooden arrows are made to my self maintained tolerances, but my tolerances aren't as tight as Easton Aluminum unfortunately.
Anyway, there's lots and lot's of preferred wooden arrow shooters out their, why do you expect me to defend everyone? Let them speak for themselves. It's not even a subject that I'd bring up normally, unless I was individually asked about it. As I said, I'm not particulary concerned whether alloys are allowed or if they're not, at least from a personal perspective.
Mick
I think you will have a hard time convincing most of the users of wooden arrows that they would be exactly as competitive as what they would be if they were using synthetic arrows.
As I've already stated, carbon and alloy arrows can be made much lighter in weight and would therefor have a much flatter trajectory, which would mean they wouldn't have to be as accurate in their estimation of range.
Carbon and alloy arrows don't warp like wooden arrows always seem to do eventually. You can't tell me that a perfectly straight alloy won't shoot a lot better than even a slightly warped wooden shaft.
Synthetic arrows usually have a smaller diameter than wooden arrows and this in itself is benificial in achieving better accuracy.
I've never said it was easy or even inexpensive to make a good set of wooden arrows, but it's possible to make a good set for less than what a set of synthetic arrows would cost. You can buy matched dozen sets of wooden shafts from several sources for less money than even a cheap set of synthetics. Admittedly synthetic arrows are stronger than wooden ones, but you can lose a synthetic just as easlily as you can lose a wooden one. The cost of wooden arrows v's synthetic arrows isn't really an issue.
It all comes back to percieved fairness for all. Why should the shooters of wooden arrows be prepared to allow some shooters a technical advantage and thereby disadvantage their chances of winning? I think I could shoot my favourite wooden arrows nearly as well as what I could if I happened to be shooting aluminiums. Note the word 'nearly'.
My wooden arrows are made to my self maintained tolerances, but my tolerances aren't as tight as Easton Aluminum unfortunately. Anyway, there's lots and lot's of preferred wooden arrow shooters out their, why do you expect me to defend everyone? Let them speak for themselves. It's not even a subject that I'd bring up normally, unless I was individually asked about it. As I said, I'm not particulary concerned whether alloys are allowed or if they're not, at least from a personal perspective.
Mick
There is no use focusing on aiming if you don't execute the shot well enough to hit what your are aiming at.