Archery isn't taken seriously.... But do ARCHERS take it seriously?

[Kae]

OK, thought of the week (OR, I've got too much work to do and this is more interesting thought of the week, lol).

Archery isn't taken seriously.... But do ARCHERS take it seriously?

Often you may hear archers and organisers complaining that archery isn't taken seriously by other sporting bodies, or the media, or the general public etc, but do you take it seriously as a sport?

For example:

1. Coaches certificates being harder to gain and maintain - surely if we are to improve as a sport, this has to be the case?
2. Travelling long distances to NRS & WRS competitions? If you want to shoot seriously, then you should be ready to travel the distances to get the scores required for national rankings?
3. Effort in general?
4. Should all competitions be made suitable for all levels of archers?
5. Should there be a cutoff, or selection process for over subscribed shoots? (rather than first come, first served?).

THIS IN NO WAY REPRESENTS MY PERSONAL FEELINGS ON ANY OF THESE MATTERS.

But I am genuinely interested in hearing what people think. Although I loath the sport, you hear of the time and effort footballes and golfers put into there sport, the travel and time, and when you then hear someone winging about having to travel outside of there county to get a ranking score for archery, doesn't it seem a bit silly?


Kae.

[Schme1440]

Im sort of with you. One thing I do agree with is having cut off shoots like the masters. Have some premier events which are limited to MB's only. These could be monitored for up and coming talent.

[napolienne]

1) Yes, it does have to be the case, and so it should be
2) Yes you should
3) Whenever there is the slightest possibility that I can shoot, I shoot. I am an addict. I think that counts as effort.
4) Not all - there is a place for closed shoots
5) No. If you're eager (ie you got your entry in to an open tournament on time), you should get to shoot. Or else how are you going to improve? Open shoots should be open.

If we're going to move archery forward in this country we need to be a more professional organisation (we as members of the GNAS, our counties and our clubs). But that shouldn't involve ignoring the needs of those who do see archery as a hobby rather than a calling. Make access to pro coaching, tournaments etc available for those who want it, and encourage people to take advantage of that in the strongest possible terms, but don't force it on anyone.

[Schme1440]

Originally Posted by napolienne

1) Yes, it does have to be the case, and so it should be
2) Yes you should
3) Whenever there is the slightest possibility that I can shoot, I shoot. I am an addict. I think that counts as effort.
4) Not all - there is a place for closed shoots
5) No. If you're eager (ie you got your entry in to an open tournament on time), you should get to shoot. Or else how are you going to improve? Open shoots should be open.

If we're going to move archery forward in this country we need to be a more professional organisation (we as members of the GNAS, our counties and our clubs). But that shouldn't involve ignoring the needs of those who do see archery as a hobby rather than a calling. Make access to pro coaching, tournaments etc available for those who want it, and encourage people to take advantage of that in the strongest possible terms, but don't force it on anyone.

Yes have open shoots but maybe the premier events which lead towards rankings and squad selections should be closed events. Bit like golf.

[geoffretired]

I shoot almost every day.
I take it seriously. I want to get better.I am propared to work at it to get better. I am slowly getting better, at times.
I am not that competitive so travelling long distances to qualify for something doesn't fit in with why I shoot.
I think there needs to be competitions that are open to all levels;after all better archers may choose not to attend, or beginner archers for that matter.
Having some competitions where there is some form of pre-selection would seem like a good idea if the point of those competitions was to select for something like a national team or similar.

[napolienne]

My archer half agrees with you Schme, my coach half doesn't. I think experience of shooting at events like the premiers is what helps drive people to get better.

[Jimster71]

I think competitions restricted by class could be a good idea. It would give some people the impetus to improve their classification in order to attend the more select competitions.

Less skilled archers could enter competitions for their class and know they have a chance of winning something instead of ending up way down the rankings.

[Schme1440]

Premier is ment to be the best. SO why not only allow people who are the best attend? Dont take me too literally im all for beginers competeing its just maybe we should have a tour or selection of shoots nationally of which people have to qualify a bit like the world cup.

1) Yes
2) Yes
3) Yes
4) No
5) No

[napolienne]

Originally Posted by Schme1440

Premier is ment to be the best. SO why not only allow people who are the best attend? Dont take me too literally im all for beginers competeing its just maybe we should have a tour or selection of shoots nationally of which people have to qualify a bit like the world cup.

I agree, I just wouldn't want to see less experienced archers stuck in an entirely seperate tier of competition when they benefit so much by competition contact with the best archers. Retaining some high status open shoots would proabably get around this - but I'm not sure how you could encourage the best archers to turn up if they have a seperate tour of their own.