Compound Bows - "they are easy aren't they".

[pwiles1968]

I take all the comments with a smile and a laugh, "its not a proper bow", "its cheating", "they are easy to shoot aren’t they", it is a running joke with myself and one of the guys at the club.

I know compounds are more accurate and scores are likely to be higher, but as I have never shot a recurve (other than my initial lessons) I don’t know is it easier to get your classifications with a compound, someone said to me last night that people who go from recurve to compound hit a higher class in a very short time, so someone who is struggling to get a second class with a recurve could change to compound and be a 1st class in no time at all. This is implying a 1st class compound archer is basically not as good as a first class recurve archer.

Before we get into the We are better than them debate all I want to know is For those who have switched to from recurve to compound what has been your experience? I know scores will be higher but Have you advanced more quickly or been at a similar classification?

[Stace]

Although I switched from recurve, I never shot with it long enough to get a classification but shot a second class National 3 times with the compound. I've only been shooting compound about 2-3 months at the most.

I'm not sure I agree with a compound being 'more accurate', it makes aiming easier with the let off and rear site but the bow isn't 'more accurate' in itself. Faster maybe but not more accurate otherwise every compound archer would be GMB.

Classifications are adjusted for compound shooters to take this into account and one thing that compound 'knockers' have to realise is that we are competing against other compound archers so there goes any advantage that we may have had.

Compound shooting, when done properly, is no less technical or easier than recurve really. The only difference is the higher bow speeds and sighting advantage.

Archery moves on, as all sports do. Some purists prefer longbow, some prefer recurve but I think I can also probably speak for you too being an engineer, that some us of prefer the more modern technology.

[ben tarrow]

I have 3 friends who were all struggling to make bowman in recurve after between 1 and 3 years. Changing to compound, they are all making good MB and one is trying to make GMB, just 2 years after switching.

However, I was a 1st class archer, about 1/2 way to Bowman after 4 years recurve. My switch to compound was necessary due to an injury but has been disasterous in that I now shoot worse compound than i did recurve.

make of that what you will

[Christopher Lee]

I started out on Oly recurve before switching to compound, not because I was struggling, but because I became an Instructor and had no time to put in the necessary training needed for performance.

A properly tuned recurve is just as accurate as a properly tuned compound from some sort of appropriate shooting machine, but the advantage compounders have is the use of magnified scopes, a rear sight, lower holding weight and higher manageable poundage, making a compound easier to shoot, but not necessarily more accurate.

Taking all those factors into consideration, I have the utmost respect for recurve archers who have achieved whatever level of proficiency they have attained. Also, I would roughly convert the following:

RECURVE FITA COMPOUND FITA

1000 1100

1100 1200

1200 1300

1300 1400


If it were not for my advancing age and poor health, I wouldn't mind giving Oly recurve another go, now that I have a little bit more time on my hands.

[sarahjrd]

My sister had been shooting recurve for 3 years, she was not doing too well and was losing intrest so my parents bought her a compound to try and keep her intrested as the whole family is involved in archery. It kept here intrested for a while but once she saw she was not doing any better with the compound she gave up completly.

There was no increase in her scores but even a decrease. We have calisfications like yours in Ireland so I dont know what standard she was at befor and after she switched. I dont think its true that scores will get hugly better after switching straight away. I think its just down to comitment. And maybe change is good for people. It gives them a new start.

[geoffretired]

I shot to almost MB with recurve. Had to change to compound. Shot reasonably well but developed TP so never made the progress I half expected. However, I feel they do give an advantage in getting the form right as they give the light holding weight at the part of the shot where some tend to show weaknesses in their form. Low bow shoulder and better body alignment are easier to learn when the body is less strained.

[Adam]

It's true that compounds are less physically demanding to shoot, and many archers will see a quick jump in classification (i.e. within a couple of years), but there are (difficult) issues involved in shooting a compound that recurve archers just never encounter. Target panic is a prime example. I don't think I ever came across a recurve archer with a full-blown case of the yips, but it is more common than many admit among the compound brigade, and it can strike anyone irrespective of ability or experience.

Mind you, after that jump in classification, progress almost inevitably slows down, and the margin between good and very good, whilst small, becomes very hard to bridge.

If my memory serves, Marcus wrote that the defining feature of a good compound archer is "unbelievable mental strength" and I think this is pretty much on the mark. No matter how much the bow type helps you, you've still got to shoot the arrow in the middle to win and the pressure to do this (with each and every arrow) when shooting compound is what undoes many archers.

That said, compound can be great fun and I'd recommend it to anyone.

Adam

[h20vrrq]

I started off shooting recurve in 1986, wasnt doing too bad, shooting good 2nd class scores but not in any danger of getting to first class for a while. I switched to compound in late 1989 and within 1 year I had my MB and just missed out on GMB, winning some decent tournaments on the way.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by h20vrrq

I started off shooting recurve in 1986, wasnt doing too bad, shooting good 2nd class scores but not in any danger of getting to first class for a while. I switched to compound in late 1989 and within 1 year I had my MB and just missed out on GMB, winning some decent tournaments on the way.

I'd hazard a guess that with the number of people shooting compound today (rather than 17 years ago) you may find things a touch more competitve.

Adam

[h20vrrq]

I'd hazard a guess that with the number of people shooting compound today (rather than 17 years ago) you may find things a touch more competitve.

Wasnt really about being competative, more a point of being more successful classification wise when switching to compound. Recurve or compound, still had to shoot the required scores, I found it a lot easier with a compound.

To be honest, I'm not that competative now, I have my goals, but I'm not out to win tournaments, I just really enjoy my archery more now than I ever did. Its all good fun