Archery Talk Forum banner

1 - 20 of 53 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,359 Posts
Death of the Fita round ... that would be a bummer, imo.

Maybe they could also put a speed clock on baseball innings...

If you alter some 'things' too much, it stops being that 'thing' and becomes something else.
 

·
Archery Coach
Joined
·
23,297 Posts
IMHO *******izing the sport in order to engage in the futile hope it becomes as spectator friendly as basketball or beach volleyball in order to get the almighty television dollars is ultimately going to doom the sport
 

·
Genesis 21:20
Joined
·
22,541 Posts
I'll start the clock now for just how long it will take USArchery to act on the new JOAD and Adult Achievement pin scores and distances for the new format. Especially since they haven't yet completed the updates since the last WA congress changes...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,334 Posts
Denise's comments in the USAA PR are excellent and get to the point of the debate.

Personally, as someone who has had some small involvement in both the competition side and the presentation side of our sport, I am on record as opposing the elimination of the 90M round. My opinion is that WC's are for the archers, everything else is for spectators.

Changing the team round to set play is a good idea and will do much to increase the spectator interest of the team round. Killing 90 won't make WC ranking rounds any better- they are NOT spectator events no matter what distance is used- and will eliminate an important element of our sport in my view. If I had to make a snap judgement we would have men rank at 90 and women at 70. One of the best ever dramas of our Olympic sport was in 1988 when Jay Barrs became the only man in modern Olympic history to win the Gold Medal at 90M (last pass of the Grand FITA round). THAT was a test. It is a core element of our sport going back to the 1600's when 100 yards was heavily weighted in the York round and its predecessors.

WA is making some very good moves, not only with modernizing the team round but making a real effort to get mixed team into the Rio Games. But I hope the possible move away from 90 repels as many congress delegates as possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Denise's comments in the USAA PR are excellent and get to the point of the debate.

Personally, as someone who has had some small involvement in both the competition side and the presentation side of our sport, I am on record as opposing the elimination of the 90M round. My opinion is that WC's are for the archers, everything else is for spectators.

Changing the team round to set play is a good idea and will do much to increase the spectator interest of the team round. Killing 90 won't make WC ranking rounds any better- they are NOT spectator events no matter what distance is used- and will eliminate an important element of our sport in my view. If I had to make a snap judgement we would have men rank at 90 and women at 70. One of the best ever dramas of our Olympic sport was in 1988 when Jay Barrs became the only man in modern Olympic history to win the Gold Medal at 90M (last pass of the Grand FITA round). THAT was a test. It is a core element of our sport going back to the 1600's when 100 yards was heavily weighted in the York round and its predecessors.

WA is making some very good moves, not only with modernizing the team round but making a real effort to get mixed team into the Rio Games. But I hope the possible move away from 90 repels as many congress delegates as possible.
Well stated gt. makes sense to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,782 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
581 Posts
This is another case where decisions are made around WC and Olympic viewership, which I don't disagree with on a world stage. My assumption is that they will keep it with a new name, but not use it on an international level and everyone is happy.

But my question is if it's officially eliminated, I'm assuming that it will not be used at Nationals. And if I remember right, most were calling to go back to the Double FITA, not eliminate it. Hope USAA takes these things into consideration in future decision making. If not, I'll still show up flinging arrows :)
 

·
Desert Island Trading Co.
Joined
·
4,777 Posts
Doesnt the World Cup do the qualifications at 50M and then shoot 70M for the heads up for Recurve and Compound? It looks like the field is already being shortened. Its on the horizon.

I personally like the Double Fita and think it should be used for the Nationals.


Chris
 

·
Field Fanatic
Joined
·
448 Posts
I personally like the Double Fita and think it should be used for the Nationals.


Chris
I have not shot a National Outdoor since they have changed from the Double FITA. I used it for vacation and 90% of members of USArchery will never shoot any tournament higher than that. I am glad they think about the Membership once and awhile lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
I think it would open up more ranges for competitions. There is only one range near me that has 90m. Though it is a blast to shoot, the elimination of the 90m would allow for those shooting lower poundages to be able to more easily hit the target (i have to bottom my sight out in order to hit 90, even with my light arrows and #34)
 

·
Genesis 21:20
Joined
·
22,541 Posts
70/122, 50/80 and 30/60 would be a fine day of shooting. ;)

Look, if we aren't shooting a full one-day fita very often anymore, then someone needs to address the question "why not?" and do something about it.

Having to deal with travel and lodging expenses in addition to spending two full days only to shoot 144 arrows will be the death of recreational target archery.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,594 Posts
The proposal to cut 4 distance FITA from World Championships was made for two consecutive Fita Congresses in 1997 and 1999, if i well remember.
Proposal was done at that time by France, but faced a strong opposition from American countries and by FITA Target Archery Committee (I was part of it) and by FITA Technical Committee. The Congress at large majority rejectd the proposal.
As GT says, one thing is to take in consideration the TV needs and the necessity to stay in Olympic Games, the other is to kill any part of archery dedicated to archers. You can't have archers shooting half of the year at 18 mt and second half at 70 mt only. It's simply boring, and will end up to everyone going 3D only.
The other important side of the matter is that reducind continuously number of arrows and distancies is flattening the field, making very difficult to make rankings witout a lot of coin tosses, and very difficult to create "image" for the archery cahmpions.
Last but not least, no 90 mt means also a stop in technology development for bow and arrows. Not good for industry and for general market. Expensive equipments and edge technology are needed at longer distancies, only. Edge technology drives reserch and marketing, and generate revenues for sponsorships. In this regard, the real good move should be change OR distance from 70 to 90 mt!
I also hope that in Congress we will find again majority to oppose to this change.

As far as set play for teams is concerned, Ithink it is a logical development of the format.

But for mixed team round, I think 2 archers only are not enough to make a good spectacle, and I'd prefer to see 4 on the line. My personal opinion, of course.
 

·
Genesis 21:20
Joined
·
22,541 Posts
It's simply boring, and will end up to everyone going 3D only.
Or fita field, which is even less spectator-friendly than what we have now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
665 Posts
The slow death of the FITA round started at the 1992 Olympics. This was the first time an elimination round was used in either the World or Olympics. One only need to recognize that most sporting countries live to bring home Olympic medals. These countries are mainly funded by their government in order to bring home an Olympic medal. Thus, the need to train specifically for the Olympic event. Each country has slowly moved more of their training and tournaments to just the qualifying 70 meter rounds and elimination rounds. It is just a natural progression. No matter how much you may love the 90 meters and the 4 distances in a FITA round, the training and the tournaments will steer itself towards what is used in the Olympics. Does this really affect archery? Not really. It just puts a different approach to shooting. Most people who have never shot a FITA round would never miss it. Those who have love it, but so did the 900 round and American round and York round lovers. I am sure there are other rounds used over the years that have lost out due to progress. The Olympics may have transformed our sport from traditional to new age but it does work.

In my first National Target Championships I shot a full FITA, a 900 round and then an American round. I loved it. A couple of years later it was changed to a full FITA and two 900 rounds. Some people were extremely upset that they dropped the American round. A few years later the double 900 round was dropped and a double FITA was the norm. As one person told me years ago, "The only thing that does not change is change." You can pooh, pooh this round all you want and say it is not good for the sport, but from everything I have heard and seen, the round used in the Olympics is bringing in people who have never seen archery shot before and those people love the excitement and thrill of watching that last arrow that will determine the champion. Is it what a Toxophilite wants? Hell no! They want to shoot that long distance for the beauty and challenge, but for the spectator these rounds have brought on a lot more spectator interest than ever before. I have yet to hear anyone say that today's new round is like watching grass grow. That's what was said about the double FITA round. Although I love the double FITA round and am so glad that was what was used to choose a champion years ago, the new age of archery is still evolving into that spectator event. Maybe not to the levels of beach volleyball or track and field, but still it is a core sport now for the Olympics. A few years ago archery was on the chopping block to be eliminated at the Olympics. What a turn around and my hat is off to those who made these changes to keep us in the Game (pun intended).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38,292 Posts
IMHO *******izing the sport in order to engage in the futile hope it becomes as spectator friendly as basketball or beach volleyball in order to get the almighty television dollars is ultimately going to doom the sport
Remember Olympic fencing scoring was changed from the classic touches against to touches for, because they thought people were too stupid to understand the idea that a lower score is better--must be the reason why nobody plays or watches golf :p

Just like USA Archery, almost all of FITA's money comes from its relationship to the Olympics, so... :dontknow:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,790 Posts
I guess my question is why do the lower levels of shooting need to emulate the Olympics? Less than 1/10 of 1% ever have a chance at shooting at that level. I understand why changes are being made to make the Olympic Archery program more viewer friendly but forcing the other 99.99% to follow suit when they have already expressed displeasure at it makes no sense.

I like to shoot different distances. 90M is difficult even for a compound shooter. But being forced to shoot only 50M (or any other set distance for compounds) because "that is what they want to do in the Olympics" is not that much fun. I enjoy the FITA round. I do not wish to see it eliminated. I believe that is what was stated several times at the meeting at the US Target Nationals last year. This ain't rocket science. Give the masses what they want and let those who are shooting at the Olympic level shoot the Olympic style tournaments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
665 Posts
I guess my question is why do the lower levels of shooting need to emulate the Olympics? Less than 1/10 of 1% ever have a chance at shooting at that level. I understand why changes are being made to make the Olympic Archery program more viewer friendly but forcing the other 99.99% to follow suit when they have already expressed displeasure at it makes no sense.

I like to shoot different distances. 90M is difficult even for a compound shooter. But being forced to shoot only 50M (or any other set distance for compounds) because "that is what they want to do in the Olympics" is not that much fun. I enjoy the FITA round. I do not wish to see it eliminated. I believe that is what was stated several times at the meeting at the US Target Nationals last year. This ain't rocket science. Give the masses what they want and let those who are shooting at the Olympic level shoot the Olympic style tournaments.
The FITA round will go the way of the 900 or American rounds. They will be shot in the local levels. To determine a national champion with the old round is not fair to those who are training for the Olympics. At the nationals we are wanting to find out who the best is in the nation so we should follow WA rules (it's in the USAA's bylaws by the way). However, it does not mean that archers could not form there own "sub-nationals" to have a double FITA round shot. Sort of like the Senior Games. They use the 900 round and it appears to be very successful.

It would be simple to do and chances are it would grow larger than the Nationals and just maybe that is what is needed for the USAA. One of the most enjoyable Nationals was when the double FITA was included, almost all archers were housed in dormitories and in the evenings there was a lot of socializing which is what archers do best. Now, the big question is who wants to do it? It takes massive amount of funding, lots of volunteers and then finding a small town like Oxford, Ohio to be the base. Any takers?
 
1 - 20 of 53 Posts
Top