a href="http://www.lancasterarchery.com/archery-classic-register/#header">
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 125

Thread: X=6 Pro Scoring: One year in how do you feel now?

  1. #76
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    5,988
    Here's the solution: Get this big mother target face that has a spot in the middle that doesn't really count for anything and count the big white scoring area around it as 5. The rest of the target will be scored as 3. Then everyone will have a chance for a 560... no wait, some folks will still shoot a lot of 3's. Maybe we just make the whole face a 5 and then everyone will be happy. No wait someone may miss the butt entirely... so we'll give Mulligans (and a trophy) for those that can't hit the butt. In the case of the Pro's we'll just have to split the pot amongst the 560 shooters. And by the way, out of state NFAA members will not be awarded prizes because we don't want any real competition going on and those nasty out-of state people might just steal our $7 trophy.
    Quality Stabilizers at reasonable prices:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305413
    Now offering affordable stack weights:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305373

  2. #77
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    5,988
    Quote Originally Posted by r49740 View Post
    Ok, well we happen to get more than 5 people to show up around here to shoot, so that's all well and good. But basically what it comes down to is that you have an opinion that may or may not help the game, and instead of giving a thought as to why that is, you try to be condescending to those that ask what it is exactly you are talking about. And since you have no valid reasoning besides it just is what it is, or we're all lost and worthless, or just heres a question to deflect, then all you have is an opinion just like the rest. Difference is some have some valid reasoning behind their opinion of which there hasn't been a reasonable argument against.
    I've given my reasoning, you seem to be blind to it.
    Last edited by EPLC; July 2nd, 2014 at 11:59 PM.
    Quality Stabilizers at reasonable prices:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305413
    Now offering affordable stack weights:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305373

  3. #78
    Actually what you said is no one has any hope since they disagree with you, complain about out of state shooters(which no one mentioned or complained about), stating people want it easier to shoot a 560(which no one said), and that there is illusions that some chase(except you wont answer what those illusions are), and wont seem to respond to questions people had with the logic you have compared to the logic they have in how it would make it harder for those to make up mistakes, and would widen the gap. Generally in discussion on a topic, one may ask a question or two to understand position of someone else, and then that person with said positions answers as explanation, and the conversation moves forward in a constructive manner. Apparently that doesn't happen here.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    5,988
    Quote Originally Posted by r49740 View Post
    Actually what you said is no one has any hope since they disagree with you, complain about out of state shooters(which no one mentioned or complained about), stating people want it easier to shoot a 560(which no one said), and that there is illusions that some chase(except you wont answer what those illusions are), and wont seem to respond to questions people had with the logic you have compared to the logic they have in how it would make it harder for those to make up mistakes, and would widen the gap. Generally in discussion on a topic, one may ask a question or two to understand position of someone else, and then that person with said positions answers as explanation, and the conversation moves forward in a constructive manner. Apparently that doesn't happen here.
    Here's my case... plane and simple. The animal round was dead until they added the spot for the extra point. And yes, it widened the gap but it also provided a way to make up points. As a result the animal round is now a viable part of field archery once again. I believe the X=6 will work the same way but on a larger scale. Granted that counting the X as 6 takes away the mystique of a perfect 560, but it does provided a comeback possibility which can be exciting... with the 112 extra points available anything can happen so the field of possible winners widens greatly.

    Also, what you are missing is that the change has already taken place... where the Pro's go the rest will follow... they have to. The only question is how long will it take for the Herbert Spencer crowd to accept the inevitability of the situation.
    Quality Stabilizers at reasonable prices:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305413
    Now offering affordable stack weights:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305373

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Ildy
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by EPLC View Post
    Here's an interesting fact: Look up Field Archery in Wikipedia... not even a mention of the NFAA. Interesting
    That's because the NFAA merely adopted the IFAA rounds, no involvement in creating the rounds.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    5,988
    One more: In the standard scoring round w/o the X=6 a great shooter (doesn't matter which great shooter as there are many) shoots a 4 on the first target... or has a bad target or two early on in the match. Because there is no possible way he can make up those points he has to hope the other contestants miss... it's the only way he can win. If the X is counted as a 6 he still has a chance and still is in control of his/her own destiny.
    Quality Stabilizers at reasonable prices:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305413
    Now offering affordable stack weights:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305373

  7. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by EPLC View Post
    Here's the solution: Get this big mother target face that has a spot in the middle that doesn't really count for anything and count the big white scoring area around it as 5. The rest of the target will be scored as 3. Then everyone will have a chance for a 560... no wait, some folks will still shoot a lot of 3's. Maybe we just make the whole face a 5 and then everyone will be happy. No wait someone may miss the butt entirely... so we'll give Mulligans (and a trophy) for those that can't hit the butt. In the case of the Pro's we'll just have to split the pot amongst the 560 shooters. And by the way, out of state NFAA members will not be awarded prizes because we don't want any real competition going on and those nasty out-of state people might just steal our $7 trophy.
    what your saying is that the dot on this big mother doesn't count for anything? I thought that it was a 5. There aren't but maybe 2-3 people in the whole country that are able to hit 112 of them in a row with out missing one. From what I read in your threads, that you want the guys that can't keep hitting all of the dots in a row to be able to come thru the back door & catch the very few that have the nerves to keep hitting them all.
    Sounds like Wash DC where everyone should have an equal chance. As for those nasty NFAA out of state shooters, You can only shoot for awards in the state or section that issued your card.
    Mike LePera
    Britesite.US

  8. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by brtesite View Post
    what your saying is that the dot on this big mother doesn't count for anything? I thought that it was a 5. There aren't but maybe 2-3 people in the whole country that are able to hit 112 of them in a row with out missing one. From what I read in your threads, that you want the guys that can't keep hitting all of the dots in a row to be able to come thru the back door & catch the very few that have the nerves to keep hitting them all.
    Sounds like Wash DC where everyone should have an equal chance. As for those nasty NFAA out of state shooters, You can only shoot for awards in the state or section that issued your card.
    Bingo! What is so interesting is that "They" are so willing to have "catch up points" for the OUTDOOR field/hunter/animal rounds...but are vehemently AGAINST having a "7-ring" "Catch up point" for those that miss the X-ring a couple of times??? So, INDOORS they have the same situation...miss a single "X" and you are out of it...and INDOORS that is ok with them...but OUTDOORS, however, "they" are all for the extra point so that they can "catch up" if they shoot a "4" or three...sure seems a bit "off canter" to me. OK OUTDOORS, but won't have any part of "catching up" INDOORS? WTH is with this line of thinking?
    Of course the thread is about the outdoors and the "X for 6" scoring.
    Just let it float and SHOOT THE SHOT! Author of: "ProActive Archery", "The Puzzled Archer", "The Puzzled Cyclist".
    -field14 (Tom D.)

  9. #84
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chesterland, Ohio, United States
    Posts
    1,948
    OK, you don't get much more average Joe than me. In fact, I'm below average.

    In the last 3 years of competing in OAA Shoots (Ohio chapter of NFAA) I've been at the very bottom of pretty much every shoot I've attended.

    At last weekend's State Field, I was again dead last in AMFS. I love to shoot, and I'm trying to get better, but I don't seem to be advancing much. The field round day I shot bad, and ended with a 504 total. I shot the half hunter round much better, and probably at the top end of my score for 14 targets at 261. I shot bad on the Animal, first time I have ever shot it, and I'm not afraid to admit I was a bit intimated by some of the targets, not sure why.

    So, I'm against X=6. I don't see it as a way to make up points. Sure, for the top 2 or 4 guys in a division that may be what it is, but looking at the entire field, it just makes the top that much farther away than the bottom.

    So, if the top shooters are shooting 555+, and if I'm *ON* I can pull off 520+. There is 35 points, not really close, but as I practice and get some hits up there, get more consistent, and say I can start scoring 270 on 14 targets, now I'm in the 540's, and then the top shooters seem to be in range then.

    You put in the X=6 and now they have jumped out so far ahead of me, why freaking bother? I'm already seriously considering why I keep going to the OAA shoots other than the fact I enjoy shooting them, but at what point do I say, I'm really not competing, so why plop down 40 bucks to shoot for the weekend?

    Maybe the ASA is so successful right now is the class progression level. If I were closer ASA tournaments, I can take my freestyle setup and start out in Open C, all known, but there are win out thresholds. You reach a certain level and time to move up. Then you can go K45 and K50, or go into the yardage judging classes.

    There is nothing like that in the NFAA. I want to shoot freestyle equipment, I'm in the same class as the top shooters. That is fine, but I wonder if there would be more participation if there was path to advancement, there by putting winning something (I'm not talking about getting something for nothing) in reach.

    So, X=6, honestly, really isn't the issue, as keeping it as 5 doesn't really address keeping people involved, but I think it is a step backwards. A more skill based class system is probably what is really needed here, in fact I'll go out on a limb and say that is why ASA is growing so well. There are a few equipment classes for different styles, then you have a known and unknown path, and then finally the skill classes.

    I seriously wonder if the Field game had the ASA equipment and skill classes applied to it, if you couldn't get it to take off like a rocket?

    I think we need to focus less on the fact that 3d shoots animal targets, and more on the equipment and skill level classifications.
    Strother Wrath - 60# 29.5" QAD Pro HD, Hogg Father, Doinker Elite Supreme Hunter, T.R.U. Ball Pro Diamond Xtreme

    PSE Supra Max, NAP SmartRest, Doinker Elite Supreme, Spot-Hogg Hogg Father & Spark Pro, T.R.U. Ball Absolute 360/HT 3 Pro

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    midwest
    Posts
    1,462
    let`s mention one thing more about 3-D they now use the 14 ring for catch up,even Levi Morgan used it to his advantage to win last weeks pro 3-D shoot. so why not keep the x as a point for 6 but for all shooters in the outdoor shoots and in the winter like field14 says use the 5-6-7 point rule ,just makes for a more exciting ending,its just time to make a few new changes for the good of archery. don`t tell me a sloppy 300 29 x is better than a 299 55x that`s bullcrap ,that 300 was dang lucky not good .

  11. #86
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    5,988
    Quote Originally Posted by brtesite View Post
    what your saying is that the dot on this big mother doesn't count for anything? I thought that it was a 5. There aren't but maybe 2-3 people in the whole country that are able to hit 112 of them in a row with out missing one. From what I read in your threads, that you want the guys that can't keep hitting all of the dots in a row to be able to come thru the back door & catch the very few that have the nerves to keep hitting them all.
    Sounds like Wash DC where everyone should have an equal chance. As for those nasty NFAA out of state shooters, You can only shoot for awards in the state or section that issued your card.
    This is exactly the problem. This game has been protected to the brink of extinction by this kind of posture. What this game needs is shooters! These protective rules, closed shoots, etc. continue to make it as difficult as possible for the numbers to increase. If you guys have the intention of taking this game with you you're headed in the right direction. Keep up the good work!
    Quality Stabilizers at reasonable prices:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305413
    Now offering affordable stack weights:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305373

  12. #87
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chesterland, Ohio, United States
    Posts
    1,948
    Quote Originally Posted by EPLC View Post
    This is exactly the problem. This game has been protected to the brink of extinction by this kind of posture. What this game needs is shooters! These protective rules, closed shoots, etc. continue to make it as difficult as possible for the numbers to increase. If you guys have the intention of taking this game with you you're headed in the right direction. Keep up the good work!
    X=6 does nothing to increase shooters.
    Strother Wrath - 60# 29.5" QAD Pro HD, Hogg Father, Doinker Elite Supreme Hunter, T.R.U. Ball Pro Diamond Xtreme

    PSE Supra Max, NAP SmartRest, Doinker Elite Supreme, Spot-Hogg Hogg Father & Spark Pro, T.R.U. Ball Absolute 360/HT 3 Pro

  13. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by EPLC View Post
    This is exactly the problem. This game has been protected to the brink of extinction by this kind of posture. What this game needs is shooters! These protective rules, closed shoots, etc. continue to make it as difficult as possible for the numbers to increase. If you guys have the intention of taking this game with you you're headed in the right direction. Keep up the good work!
    yes we do need the shooters.

    Can you make a list of what will bring in the shooters. I don't mean the 6 rule. Actual restructuring of the system that will do it . Then give it to your director to bring it to the floor. You see what ever you want to do is in the hands of the 50 directors, not some mythical group Called the NFAA in Yankton. Or better yet take over the directors job & you do it.
    Mike LePera
    Britesite.US

  14. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by EPLC View Post
    This is exactly the problem. This game has been protected to the brink of extinction by this kind of posture. What this game needs is shooters! These protective rules, closed shoots, etc. continue to make it as difficult as possible for the numbers to increase. If you guys have the intention of taking this game with you you're headed in the right direction. Keep up the good work!
    So out of state shooters cant win the $7 trophy that you are laughing about others within the state that aren't the top shooter constantly still wanting a snowballs chance with the scoring the way it is of winning the same $7 trophy. Which one is it? And FYI, I shoot multiple state events. I can only win the $7 trophy in one state(although the two I have shot it give out better awards than $7 trophies), the state I am affiliated with, but I can shoot in both all I want. As I stated before which apparently went unread, we always got a large crowd from Indiana to shoot out Ohio shoots. Was never a problem.

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Dixie County, Florida
    Posts
    4,780
    Quote Originally Posted by EPLC View Post
    Here's my case... plane and simple. The animal round was dead until they added the spot for the extra point. And yes, it widened the gap but it also provided a way to make up points. As a result the animal round is now a viable part of field archery once again. I believe the X=6 will work the same way but on a larger scale. Granted that counting the X as 6 takes away the mystique of a perfect 560, but it does provided a comeback possibility which can be exciting... with the 112 extra points available anything can happen so the field of possible winners widens greatly.

    Also, what you are missing is that the change has already taken place... where the Pro's go the rest will follow... they have to. The only question is how long will it take for the Herbert Spencer crowd to accept the inevitability of the situation.
    You are completely ignoring facts that we already have with last years scores.

    Some scores from 2012 and 2013 for comparison.
    2013
    Winning score-1888
    20th place -1755
    Difference -133

    2012
    Winning score-1704
    20th place - 1688
    difference - 16

    2013
    Average of top 5-1866.4
    Average of 11-15 - 1811.8
    Difference of 54.6

    2012
    Average of top 5- 1700.8
    Average of 11-15- 1692.4
    Difference of 8.4

    Right now some of the pro's think like you do. They think that if they drop a few points they can make it up with X's. The reality is that the guys who have the mental toughness to not drop points are also shooting at those same X's and are going to hit more of them and extend their lead even further. The numbers bare out what I'm saying.

    Over the next few years you will see the pro ranks start shrinking as more of them realize they no longer have any chance to win or even finish high. This will start having an affect on pay out. It will be interesting to compare the number of pro's who shot in Yankton this year to how many make the trip back in three years.
    Recovering Golf Addict

  16. #91
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    5,988
    Quote Originally Posted by ccwilder3 View Post
    You are completely ignoring facts that we already have with last years scores.

    Some scores from 2012 and 2013 for comparison.
    2013
    Winning score-1888
    20th place -1755
    Difference -133

    2012
    Winning score-1704
    20th place - 1688
    difference - 16

    2013
    Average of top 5-1866.4
    Average of 11-15 - 1811.8
    Difference of 54.6

    2012
    Average of top 5- 1700.8
    Average of 11-15- 1692.4
    Difference of 8.4

    Right now some of the pro's think like you do. They think that if they drop a few points they can make it up with X's. The reality is that the guys who have the mental toughness to not drop points are also shooting at those same X's and are going to hit more of them and extend their lead even further. The numbers bare out what I'm saying.

    Over the next few years you will see the pro ranks start shrinking as more of them realize they no longer have any chance to win or even finish high. This will start having an affect on pay out. It will be interesting to compare the number of pro's who shot in Yankton this year to how many make the trip back in three years.
    You say the ranks will drop, I say they won't. I think we will have to agree we disagree. As far as who is right and who is wrong time will tell. Regardless of the end result, the game of field archery needs to have the same scoring system for all, regardless of which one it is.
    Quality Stabilizers at reasonable prices:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305413
    Now offering affordable stack weights:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305373

  17. #92
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Dixie County, Florida
    Posts
    4,780
    Quote Originally Posted by EPLC View Post
    You say the ranks will drop, I say they won't. I think we will have to agree we disagree. As far as who is right and who is wrong time will tell. Regardless of the end result, the game of field archery needs to have the same scoring system for all, regardless of which one it is.
    True, time will tell. I think you will see more NFAA pro's going over to the ASA Known 50 where they can compete.

    Whatever scoring they use, I'll be out there lobbing arrows.
    Recovering Golf Addict

  18. #93
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    5,988
    Here's some facts: Since 2008 the overall trend for male FS shooters at the NFAA Outdoor Nationals is slightly up but this can be very misleading as the only FS subgroup that is actually trending upwards is the 50-70+ age groups. Every other FS class is trending down... including the Pro class. This is a death march and something has to be done about it. (note that 50+ = SMFS, SSMFS & MSMFS)
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by EPLC; July 4th, 2014 at 02:33 PM.
    Quality Stabilizers at reasonable prices:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305413
    Now offering affordable stack weights:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305373

  19. #94
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Dixie County, Florida
    Posts
    4,780
    Quote Originally Posted by EPLC View Post
    Here's some facts: Since 2008 the overall trend for male FS shooters at the NFAA Outdoor Nationals is slightly up but this can be very misleading as the only FS subgroup that is actually trending upwards is the 50-70+ age groups. Every other FS class is trending down... including the Pro class. This is a death march and something has to be done about it. (note that 50+ = SMFS, SSMFS & MSMFS)
    The last two years have both trended up for the location where they are shot. The way attendance depends on location, it is a little hard to tell. With the 3 year location cycle it will take a little time to really figure out how it is affecting attendance.

    I think the decline in field archery is inevitable and unstoppable. Society has changed. Entertainment now is digital and done in an air conditioned room. People are more interested in being spectators than participants unless money is involved
    Recovering Golf Addict

  20. #95
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    midwest
    Posts
    1,462
    what i do see is just maybe the NFAA better take a look at us older archer`s maybe make a silver silver pro class ,that pro class has not been done yet, maybe it would work ? remember now days there are alot of broken families out there, so somebody needs to help teach these youth kids archery? that`s were grandpa comes in "us the silver seniors ! the group the nfaa seems to want to sweep under the rug" if the nfaa wants more members of all ages it had better learn how to take care of the archers who are members now first , these archers are the backbone of this organization .

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    3,135
    Though I haven't tried it yet, I kinda like the scoring. I am one of those people who either make a great shot and shoot an X or mess something up and get a 4. no 5's for me.

    First of all right now this is only for the Pro division and it isn't going to put an end to field archery. The scoring system is the scoring system and you just have to deal with it. Just try to beat your average and you're all set. Quit complaining. Thats all I have to say about the scoring.

    There is no problem with structure or scoring systems keeping people away from field archery. The problem is finances. I get to pick up my bow only a few times each year. Last time I picked up my bow was for NAFAC in Miami, and thats only because I was able to work while I was there. The next time will be Yankton because I was able to save a little money and shooting for 2 whole weeks in two major competitions is well worth it for me. However I will be making a 20 hour drive to do it because flying would cost an extra $500 plus luggage fees. A flight anywhere is over a weeks paycheck for most people. add in entry fees, hotel, car... you are looking at spending three paychecks for going to a shoot, not including the one you miss from being away. living paycheck to paycheck, many people cant give up a months worth of work for a few days shooting. Just imagine the cost if you had a whole family competing! Plus now people have $150 cell phone bills and $200 cable bills each month to worry about. Why is the senior division increasing? Many of them don't work full time. Heck I remember when I first stopped practicing. It was because I couldn't afford a new dozen nocks every other week.

    Instead of looking at attendance per division, take a look at how far people are traveling to go to the shoots. I bet most attendees are within a 6 hour drive. Convenience is the number one factor in getting attendance at major shoots. As for local shoots, who knows.

    The difference between the person at the top and the person at the bottom isn't always they way things are scored, better or worse equipment, its the shoes they are in.

    Want attendance to increase? Increase minimum wage and use Europe as an example. http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/05/2...cation.europe/

  22. #97
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    5,988
    Quote Originally Posted by ccwilder3 View Post
    The last two years have both trended up for the location where they are shot. The way attendance depends on location, it is a little hard to tell. With the 3 year location cycle it will take a little time to really figure out how it is affecting attendance.

    I think the decline in field archery is inevitable and unstoppable. Society has changed. Entertainment now is digital and done in an air conditioned room. People are more interested in being spectators than participants unless money is involved
    I do not read it that way. The only class that has shown a positive trend is the senior+ classes at each location. Take for example the PA shoots in 2009 & 2012. Overall attendance was slightly down (260 vs. 252) and AMFS went from 122 to 96 while the senior classes jumped from 108-123. The PMFS went from 30-33 shooters that year which was 1 of only 2 exceptions in the down trend). Interesting to note that 2013, the first year scoring X=6, the Pro numbers went up from 13 to 20 as compared to 2010 in that same location. It will be interesting to see how many Pro's shoot this year as compared to 2011 as this will be the second year of the scoring change.

    Other than death and taxes nothing is inevitable and unstoppable if you can adapt in a changing environment. Field archery needs shooters and there are rules in place to keep them away. How smart is that?
    Last edited by EPLC; July 4th, 2014 at 06:11 PM.
    Quality Stabilizers at reasonable prices:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305413
    Now offering affordable stack weights:
    http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2305373

  23. #98
    I know this is digressing a bit, but how many members did the NFAA have in the glory days and how many attended the Nationals, Sectionals, etc. as opposed to now. Tom or Mike, please help here. I am fearful that all this discussion may be useless if the downward spiral continues in attendance. If you totally restructure the game it will no longer be field archery. I just don't think there is really much interest in archery period. I work with 168 people and I haven't found but one that shoots (I should say used to shoot) target archery and only a couple that shoot 3d for fun only because they hunt. I once heard that trap shooting was dying due to sporting clays, but I don't think so. You won't either if you know anything about Elysburg. And yes, like in field archery, there are very few that can flat out crush it in the rigid and structured disciplines of trap. Misses are very costly when you are at the top of the heap, as well they should be.

  24. #99
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Dixie County, Florida
    Posts
    4,780
    Quote Originally Posted by EPLC View Post
    I do not read it that way. The only class that has shown a positive trend is the senior+ classes at each location. Take for example the PA shoots in 2009 & 2012. Overall attendance was slightly down (260 vs. 252) and AMFS went from 122 to 96 while the senior classes jumped from 108-123. The PMFS went from 30-33 shooters that year which was 1 of only 2 exceptions in the down trend). Interesting to note that 2013, the first year scoring X=6, the Pro numbers went up from 13 to 20 as compared to 2010 in that same location. It will be interesting to see how many Pro's shoot this year as compared to 2011 as this will be the second year of the scoring change.

    Other than death and taxes nothing is inevitable and unstoppable if you can adapt in a changing environment. Field archery needs shooters and there are rules in place to keep them away. How smart is that?
    Membership was up 4.5 percent in 2013. That was reflected in participation. I'm not sure what rules you are talking about. If you are talking about the X=6, you only have to look at the NAA's National Field Championship to see that that kind of scoring keeps compound archers away. A total; of 11 adult men shot in that tournament, 4 at 50+ and 7 in senior male. That is the reality of X = 6.
    Recovering Golf Addict

  25. #100
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Hoquiam WA
    Posts
    606
    Quote Originally Posted by x-hunta View Post
    That's because the NFAA merely adopted the IFAA rounds, no involvement in creating the rounds.
    I think that is a little twisted around, I'm pretty sure NFAA created the Field round, and that NFAA existed BEFORE IFAA. I was looking for some history but didn't find it yet.

    The Wikipedia article only refers to the two major International organizations, IFAA and WA. The only national-level organization included there is England, probably someone from England wrote the article.



    Wikipedia fans - you can always write your own article or paragraph and submit it for inclusion.


Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •