FITA Field Rule Changes

[MikeD]

Originally Posted by Desert Archer

As for the 6 instead of just an X, again it's crap. The whole point is to break ties. there are two possible methods to break ties already. Why is it now an improvement to add points?

Dave

Presumably it's the same mentality that came up with making the X count 10 for compounds with the rest of the gold being 9. The could've gone for x is 5 and the rest of the spot becomes 4...

As you say, it's crap.

[Stylisht]

Originally Posted by MikeD

Presumably it's the same mentality that came up with making the X count 10 for compounds with the rest of the gold being 9. The could've gone for x is 5 and the rest of the spot becomes 4...

As you say, it's crap.

No - I think Field needs a change like this. Just as FITA 18s did. They could have gone for X being 5, and rest being 4 - which would have been just as effective for compound; however recurves are getting to the stage where they need this as well. For development of the sport... it is good step, maybe not the best. But by no means "crap."

[MikeD]

Originally Posted by Stylisht

No - I think Field needs a change like this. Just as FITA 18s did. They could have gone for X being 5, and rest being 4 - which would have been just as effective for compound; however recurves are getting to the stage where they need this as well. For development of the sport... it is good step, maybe not the best. But by no means "crap."

Are the very small minority that get maximum scores getting anywhere near maximum number of Xs? If not they can still be separated for results. Surely an archer that gets a maximum is more consistent and therefore better than one that gets more x's, but throws the occasional arrow into the 4?

If they are then something needs to be done, but increasing the maximum score effects everyone not just that very small minority. That effect is negative for the long bows or barebow archers.

How about shooting 4 arrows at each distance, like the IFAA? Introducing longer distances (70m, 80 yards), like the IFAA. More targets on the course say 28, like the IFAA.

Oh and 4 minutes ought to be enough time to shoot 4 arrows, target archers shoot 6 arrows in that time, so perhaps 3 minutes for 4 arrows would be appropriate.

[Ceri Jones]

Originally Posted by Stylisht

Shooting times - reduced to 3 mins from 4 mins.

Scoring - X will now be scored as 6.

Opinions?

April the 1st already????

[Stylisht]

Originally Posted by MikeD

Are the very small minority that get maximum scores getting anywhere near maximum number of Xs? If not they can still be separated for results. Surely an archer that gets a maximum is more consistent and therefore better than one that gets more x's, but throws the occasional arrow into the 4?

If they are then something needs to be done, but increasing the maximum score effects everyone not just that very small minority. That effect is negative for the long bows or barebow archers.

How about shooting 4 arrows at each distance, like the IFAA? Introducing longer distances (70m, 80 yards), like the IFAA. More targets on the course say 28, like the IFAA.

Oh and 4 minutes ought to be enough time to shoot 4 arrows, target archers shoot 6 arrows in that time, so perhaps 3 minutes for 4 arrows would be appropriate.

3 is fine, maybe a little hard for some on unmarked, but for the rest... fine.

And for the first question that ask - yes, the top shooters are getting near the top number of Xs. But it's not the fact that the scoreboard can be separated by X count - it's making it easier for the television and spectators to see the difference. To be honest - to most people, I can't see it affecting them much.

Why is it negative on barebows and longbows? Their scores are going to change, but so are the goalposts. So what?

As for more targets on the course - you can do this, but the top shooters (compound) are still going to max them. As for longer distances - yeah, but IFAA members shoot a bigger spot I believe? It's something that could change, but not easy to put in the finals rounds (60m is a long way to fit in an 8 target field course where you have to have spectators).

And April 1st? What's the joke. FITA have made a good rule change.

[Marcus26]

When the current FITA Field round started they did score like this, and guess what, it was a failure.
This is a MAJOR screw up by FITA. It will cause a decline in FITA Field participation in a major way.
Right now alot of people enjoy FITA Field because they can get within 10 points of the best guys when in a FITA they would be beaten by 80. This will simply widen the gap again which will discourage many from competing.
It also changes the way you approach the game. A 4 now is a killer, but now a 6 6 4 is better than a 5 5 5. So it really rewards the ones who throw wild shots.

Stupid rule.

Originally Posted by Stylisht

No - I think Field needs a change like this. Just as FITA 18s did. They could have gone for X being 5, and rest being 4 - which would have been just as effective for compound; however recurves are getting to the stage where they need this as well. For development of the sport... it is good step, maybe not the best. But by no means "crap."

[Stylisht]

Originally Posted by Marcus26

When the current FITA Field round started they did score like this, and guess what, it was a failure.
This is a MAJOR screw up by FITA. It will cause a decline in FITA Field participation in a major way.
Right now alot of people enjoy FITA Field because they can get within 10 points of the best guys when in a FITA they would be beaten by 80. This will simply widen the gap again which will discourage many from competing.
It also changes the way you approach the game. A 4 now is a killer, but now a 6 6 4 is better than a 5 5 5. So it really rewards the ones who throw wild shots.

Stupid rule.

It rewards people who throw stupid shots?! ...a 6 6 4 beats a 5 5 5, but a 6 6 6 beats both. No thrown shots there.

Most scores in this country are not 710+, even for compounds. Don't know about Australia.

[Marcus26]

Neither in my area. 690-700 is a winning score around here

[bimble]

Originally Posted by Stylisht

It rewards people who throw stupid shots?! ...a 6 6 4 beats a 5 5 5, but a 6 6 6 beats both. No thrown shots there.

And XXX is better then 555. Are there honestly that many people who watch who wouldn't understand that two people could have the same score, but one be in the lead with more X's??

[Stylisht]

Originally Posted by bimble

And XXX is better then 555. Are there honestly that many people who watch who wouldn't understand that two people could have the same score, but one be in the lead with more X's??

Non-archers? Might find it easier to understand? I think that is the direction they are going.