Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SimonW How about this one.
18 arrows at 18m on a 40cm face.
Two archers are tied on 170.
Which archer is the "better" archer? the one with more or less 10's.
OK.
Now I say that one of the archers missed and so scored 17 10's and a miss. The other archer at the very most scored 8 10's and 10 9's.
Now which is the "better" archer?
This really happened (as I'm sure some of you know) at the recent European Indoors champs.
Rivollta (sp?) did this in an early H2H round and went on to win the gold medal.
It's a funny one this debate. All the text books say "just shoot one arrow", "shoot a perfect shot", "the arrow before and the arrow after don't matter".
So, we try and shoot a 10 and then repeat this n times.
Then, people want to tell you that the better archer is the one who shoots lots of less than perfect shots.
Hmmmm. I for one would rather count my 10's (or 9's in English scoring) as a measure of how well I'm shooting.
Simon |
Shooting 18m is a lot different to shooting 90m. I can honestly say that I aim at the ten at 18m but I cant say that I'm 'aiming' at the ten at 90m. We are often told that being consistant is the key so I think that the archer who gets all of his arrows in the Gold is better than one who gets half of his arrows in the red and the other half (some of them by luck) in the ten. It's an old saying in target rifle shooting that it's not how good you shoot that counts but how bad you shoot.
You could get a score of 1296 in a Fita without shooting a single ten. Dont know about you but I'd settle for that.