GNAS rules in FITA shoots?

[mace24]

I think that FITA shoots such as Gents FITA, Ladies FITA, FITA 18 and FITA 25 should be shot under FITA rules all the time rather than some under GNAS rules and some under FITA rules. If the title of the shoot has "FITA" in it shouldn't the shoot be shot under FITA's rules?

e.g. under FITA rules you may shoot two FITA 18's in a day and both scores would count under GNAS only your first score can count.


What do you think?

[Little Miss Purple]

Am I missing something?? I haven't come across a FITA that wasn't shot under FITA rules!!

[mace24]

Originally Posted by Little Miss Purple

Am I missing something?? I haven't come across a FITA that wasn't shot under FITA rules!!

I shot a record status FITA 18 at Welland Valley last weekend where only the first round you shot counted. Most archers who shot a double improved their score in their second rounds.

sorry for confusion!

[Little Miss Purple]

Ah yes, I'm with you now - hadn't thought of it like that!!

[GreenSteve]

Makes sense to me

[Furface]

I think it should be left up to the organiser to determine what level of tournament is on offer. I would guess that there would be a fair bit of extra admin for a shoot under FITA rules. And what would happen in mixed shoots, where some classes shoot FITA rounds, and some GNAS rounds?
In the double question, it depends whether the tournament was advertised as a Double, with no single sections, or a double, with alternative singles, or two singles. If it was a Double, the round counted was a Double, and single scores are irrelevant; If it was a Double, with a single competition running alongside, then the second half should be discounted in the single competition (as you state happened) because, effectively, archers in the first session had more than authorised "practice" for the second session; similarly if it was two singles.

[moo-mop]

I have no problem with GNAS rules on non-record status or GNAS record status shoots, but I prefer FITA rules to be used if possible. I expect WRS shoots to follow the FITA rules and that the best score from any session will win so to speak. However, I don't care if the organisers from WRS want to award double awards too (after all both GNAS and FITA have no such thing as double FITA 18s etc).

I've just had to remind GNAS that I queried whether judges could restrict you to 6 sighters after this happened at the start of a FITA star ie WRS. This sort of thing happened twice under different judges. I believe you can have no practice but that any shooting on the targets is practice and you can shoot as many arrows as you like in 4 minutes under control. So we shall see what is said on that one too.

[Ffish]

Isn't this a bit like asking whether the UK Highway Code can be applied for French roads?

GNAS for GNAS shoots, FITA for FITA shoots. End of.

[k8hex]

Perhaps I'm being picky but I'm sure that if I was capable of shooting two rounds in one day I would like both scores to count.

I can see the point that the second score will be better than the first due to more "sighters" but in the case of those of us (me) who are not just over the hill but halfway down the other side the second score would be affected by muscle fatigue and - if I knew it wouldn't be counted- apathy!

After all that I guess I am advocating FITA Rules for FITA competitions.

I'll go back to sleep now.

[raktor]

Originally Posted by moo-mop

I've just had to remind GNAS that I queried whether judges could restrict you to 6 sighters after this happened at the start of a FITA star ie WRS. This sort of thing happened twice under different judges. I believe you can have no practice but that any shooting on the targets is practice and you can shoot as many arrows as you like in 4 minutes under control. So we shall see what is said on that one too.

I have also queried this on a couple of occasions at FITA stars - and been told that 'sighters' are being shot rather than practice because the shoot is being held under GNAS rules. Looking at the rules above this doesn't seem to be allowable and I would be interested in the response from GNAS.