[limbwalker]

Yea, it's kind of a mystery what the intent is. And, who "owns" the IP if his method and materials were developed on site at the OTC using USOC/USArchery sponsored athletes. It gets very complicated... I always wonder if/when the non-profit implications kick in. I mean, if a non-profit organization's facilities and staff are being used to create for-profit materials, isn't that illegal? Even things like the Astra shot trainer is advertised as being developed at the OTC. Where are those profits going then? I'm sure if it was illegal, then someone woud have cried foul by now. Not saying it is, but I certainly don't understand how it isn't.
John

 

[m013690]

John,

But who would be the one to cry foul? The sorts of things you are alluding to would most likely be investigated as the result of a tip to the Fraud, Waste and Abuse process. Since you work for the governmnt, perhaps this is familiar to you. I'm not saying it's illegal either - you guys would have much better opinions on that, since you're closer to the source. But the point is that lots of things go on in lots of places that are either illegal and/or unethical, but it'll either be overlooked or ignored until someone blows the whistle. In a non-profit like USAA, it's unlikely to come from outside, because it's just not a big enough, intrusive enough, or offensive enough (to some people) organization to generate the kind of animosity that might result in an audit or "anonymous tips" that another government or quasi-government organization might have. And internally, if the organization's focus is strictly on archery, perhaps they simply don't have someone on staff who sees these things in that light.

We (as the greater, general, human "we") all too often foreget that something that is "common sense" to me, isn't necessarily so obvious to someone with a different set of experiences, background, priorities, training, education, etc. I'd like to hope that all of the complaints expressed here are simply the result of USAA not knowing that there's a demand signal for these things. But, again, I'm not as close to that organization as many of you, so I might be way wrong there.

 

[kshet26]

I have no thoughts on the legality of it, but I think certainly a part of the lack of information is probably staffing and budget. It might be seen as 'pro-active' and typically when everyone in an organization is busy or there isn't enough money to go around as it is, 'pro-active' tasks tend to fall by the wayside just to keep your head above water.

I know there have been threads talking about how the USAA is nickel and diming the membership, but having access to a quality source of information on the NTS (videos on form, bulletins on changes, white papers, common issues and injuries, etc) would definitely be something that I would pay for. Make it good, keep it updated, and I'd be willing to pay $50 a year on top of my membership just for access.

 

[limbwalker]

M,

There is a lot that is discussed here that the leadership in USArchery is completely unaware of. And that's fine. It's not their job to monitor discussion forums. As for who would cry foul? I don't know. Someone who had "enough" and wanted it investigated, I guess. I think that coach Lee is a very intelligent man and surely would have made sure the ability for him to continue to "own" his products and IP was part of his contract with USArchery. Surely he would have known he would be producing a 2nd volume to his book, and would want to keep those profits instead of seeing them go back to the USOC or USArchery. Where the line gets blurred, IMO, is when clearly for-profit interests (sponsors, private companies) use the RA's - who are effectively USArchery/USOC "employees" and the facilities of the non-profit USOC to develop and produce products for their own profit. Heck, one could argue that they've used volunteer coaches and students to further the development of these products, without any contracts or compliance or waivers by those being used as a testing pool.

I'm not trying to or willing to accuse anyone of wrongdoing at all. I hope and expect that all these concerns about financial gain, IP and non-profit status are worked out beforehand and everything is above board...

But at the end of the day, if the IRS has bigger fish to fry, then they just simply overlook "small" matters such as these.

But more "on topic" - whatever needs to happen to get good quality instructional videos out to the masses should be done. I understand, from a source who should know, that one instructional video was attempted and it turned out to be a disaster, creating more harm than good because coach Lee was not personally involved to produce the video. So, without his involvement, I'm not going to want any of this information rushed out on video.

John

 

[Warbow]

But more "on topic" - whatever needs to happen to get good quality instructional videos out to the masses should be done. I understand, from a source who should know, that one instructional video was attempted and it turned out to be a disaster, creating more harm than good because coach Lee was not personally involved to produce the video. So, without his involvement, I'm not going to want any of this information rushed out on video.

John

Well, I've go the "BEST Beginings" video by Don Rabska and the non-profit Easton Sports Foundation--I don't know if it is related to the video you are talking about. BEST Beginings is a tutorial video that also features a discussion with Coach Lee, so it was made in cooperation with USA Archery and Coach Lee. It was a DVD for coaches teaching what was then "BEST Method" and it was to have a companion book. Because KSL Shot Cycle/BEST Method/NTS is a moving target the video was out of date before it was even published, and the production of the companion book was abandoned. The DVD and book were made for those of us teaching archery to beginners and intermediate archers in JOAD programs as opposed to RAs. They were not highly technical and expensive book for elite shooters and coaches.

I was very disappointed to see the attempt to make accessible USA Archery coaching information available fail--an attempt that was given up on, I speculate, in part because it was largely supplanted by Coach Lee's privately published, for profit book. Coach Lee's for profit books always seem to manage to be the only current information on the "Whatever it is called today" system taught by USA Archery.

I believe that Easton Sports Foundation *donated* the DVDs to USA Archery so they could be sold by USA Archery to raise money. Inside the Archer, not so much. (Not that I'm not grateful to have a copy of Inside the Archer, it is an important book--more so because there is no official training material at that level by USA Archery). I don't believe that any of the money from Inside the Archer goes to USA Archery, but unless USA Archery pays Tyler a salary, or gives him significantly more benefits than he pays for, I wouldn't expect any of his end of the profits to go to USA Archery.

I've got a copy of BEST Beginnings if anyone wants to see it, though it is perhaps now more of historical interest than instructional interest--though I think most of what it teaches is still valid.

 

[TomB]

Well, I've go the "BEST Beginings" video by Don Rabska and the non-profit Easton Sports Foundation--I don't know if it is related to the video you are talking about. BEST Beginings is a tutorial video that also features a discussion with Coach Lee, so it was made in cooperation with USA Archery and Coach Lee. It was a DVD for coaches teaching what was then "BEST Method" and it was to have a companion book. Because KSL Shot Cycle/BEST Method/NTS is a moving target the video was out of date before it was even published, and the production of the companion book was abandoned. The DVD and book were made for those of us teaching archery to beginners and intermediate archers in JOAD programs as opposed to RAs. They were not highly technical and expensive book for elite shooters and coaches.

I was very disappointed to see the attempt to make accessible USA Archery coaching information available fail--an attempt that was given up on, I speculate, in part because it was largely supplanted by Coach Lee's privately published, for profit book. Coach Lee's for profit books always seem to manage to be the only current information on the "Whatever it is called today" system taught by USA Archery.

I believe that Easton Sports Foundation *donated* the DVDs to USA Archery so they could be sold by USA Archery to raise money. Inside the Archer, not so much. (Not that I'm not grateful to have a copy of Inside the Archer, it is an important book--more so because there is no official training material at that level by USA Archery). I don't believe that any of the money from Inside the Archer goes to USA Archery, but unless USA Archery pays Tyler a salary, or gives him significantly more benefits than he pays for, I wouldn't expect any of his end of the profits to go to USA Archery.

I've got a copy of BEST Beginnings if anyone wants to see it, though it is perhaps now more of historical interest than instructional interest--though I think most of what it teaches is still valid.

I agree. I still use BEST Beginnings for my Basic Archery Class I teach at Victoria College and it works well and as you say is still valid.

 

[limbwalker]

No, not the video I'm referring to.

the non-profit "Easton" Sports Foundation... Think about that for a minute...

John

 

[Warbow]

No, not the video I'm referring to.

Wow. So there is more than one video that has died as the result of the lack of a coherent training plan :mg:

the non-profit "Easton" Sports Foundation... Think about that for a minute...

John

Not sure what to make of it. Non-profit, in and of itself, doesn't mean good or bad.

 

[limbwalker]

Think a little more... You'll get there...

The video I'm referring to died when the "adult supervision" realized the help was working unsupervised... As it should have.

I just wish the adult supervision would finally decide what they are in this for. The money, or the sport.

John

 

[Warbow]

Think a little more... You'll get there...

I dunno. When I was a kid my dad asked me "How do you keep a turkey in suspense?" I said "I don't know. How do you keep a turkey in suspense?" "I'll tell you tomorrow." The next day I said, "Dad, it's tomorrow. What's the answer? How do you keep a turkey in suspense?"

I can be a tad slow sometimes... :embara:

 

[Warbow]

I agree. I still use BEST Beginnings for my Basic Archery Class I teach at Victoria College and it works well and as you say is still valid.

I should have asked this earlier. How do you use it?

 

[TomB]

I should have asked this earlier. How do you use it?

After a couple of weeks of shooting so they have context, I show Best Beginnings as well as select videos of people doing their shot process correctly. Ironically the Athens Olympic video is what I use most often in conjunction with the Best Beginnings DVD.

 

[kshet26]

The Next Level video series by Brady Ellison?

 

[Warbow]

The Next Level video series by Brady Ellison?

Gotta say that instruction is not as good as I had hoped. There is some solid information in the video and they are worth checking out, but the videos are over produced with close ups that are way too short (though you can pause the video), jump cut together and divided into too many segments with fancy graphic interstitial bumpers you have to fast forward through. Brady is not as experienced as an instructor as he is as an archer. The videos represent just another fragmentation of the USA Archery NTS instruction, which highlights the lack of official instruction materials by USA Archery.

 

[Warbow]

After a couple of weeks of shooting so they have context, I show Best Beginnings as well as select videos of people doing their shot process correctly. Ironically the Athens Olympic video is what I use most often in conjunction with the Best Beginnings DVD.

Thanks. It is interesting to know what tools and techniques other folks are using.

It would be nice if USA Archery would train up someone and post video of them demonstrating an officially approved exemplar of the system--a model that is designed to show the system in its most idealized form rather than the personalized adaptations that top archers use. I'm not saying that person needs to shoot that way when they train or shoot in competition, but that they should be able to model it for demonstration purposes. It is part of breaking down the system to teach it--even if NTS is adaptable, it needs to have a clear starting point which adaptations are made from--not that top archers real shooting styles are bad examples, just that their personalization of NTS are not part of the model and we (well, I) need clear examples of which is which...

It would also be nice if they kept a version history of the system, the way software does, to show when they make changes and why. It would be good to know if I'm teaching the Windows Vista version of BEST/NTS or the Windows 8 version...or if it would be better to roll back to NT :dontknow: (Is there a open source Linux version of BEST?)

 

[kshet26]

It would also be nice if they kept a version history of the system, the way software does, to show when they make changes and why. It would be good to know if I'm teaching the Windows Vista version of BEST/NTS or the Windows 8 version...or if it would be better to roll back to NT :dontknow: (Is there a open source Linux version of BEST?)

Yeah some technical bulletins would be nice. Whenever a JOAD comes back from a camp, it's clear how much they change the technique from what's in ITA. I can go through the chapters and point out things that are no longer 'correct'.

 

[Warbow]

Yeah some technical bulletins would be nice. Whenever a JOAD comes back from a camp, it's clear how much they change the technique from what's in ITA. I can go through the chapters and point out things that are no longer 'correct'.

Yeah, I think there is a problem when they are rolling out the techniques to the students first and not the teachers--not that the JOAD kids are anything but the most important part of JOAD who may exceed local expertise, but they are being sent back to their regular instruction/coaching program without care and feeding instructions for their new NTS techniques.

 

[limbwalker]

Yeah, I think there is a problem when they are rolling out the techniques to the students first and not the teachers--not that the JOAD kids are anything but the most important part of JOAD who may exceed local expertise, but they are being sent back to their regular instruction/coaching program without care and feeding instructions for their new NTS techniques.

And have been for some time now... This is a problem with the current training system for coaches. The "real" NTS coaches of the future will be the former JDT's and RA's.

When one of my students was able to make a few JDT camps without me in 2007, I told him I could no longer be his personal coach. He was shocked. I agreed that I could continue to help him with his equipment and his mental preparations, but I no longer recognized the technique he was being taught to use, and therefore, he was going to have to make a coaching change. It took some time, and a great deal of discussion to convince him of this. He didn't want to find a new personal coach, but I insisted that he did, and that he stayed with the program too. I don't think he's ever forgiven me for that, but for the sake of his shooting, it was the best thing for me to do.

It put me in a very awkward position as a personal coach, and I've talked to many more personal coaches that have had to deal with the same thing. Many of us simply cannot afford to travel to the OTC to attend enough camps to stay "current" on this seemingly ever-changing method, which leaves very few coaches that are (IMO) qualified to be personal coaches for these archers.

John

 

[Warbow]

And have been for some time now... This is a problem with the current training system for coaches. The "real" NTS coaches of the future will be the former JDT's and RA's.

The ones that don't drop out...

...which is a problem. Because those who will be left are the ones who managed to survive the system who may make up a non-representative sample of people who might think the program's techniques are right for everybody even if they actually are not. If, for instance, you were to subject JDT and RA program archers to being whacked them in the head with an oar, some would drop out, but those that stay in the program may get the idea that going through what they did is key to the program. It is potential recipe for sycophancy--not saying that is what will happen, mind you, but that that the number of people the JDT and RA programs have chewed up skews the population somewhat.