Hi-tech cheating

[Schme1440]

Iam lucky to have shot all 3 types of bows (compound, recurve and tradtional bows) and 2 of the a high competitive standard.

They all have their similarities but to shoot them well you need different skills. Each bow has its different areas of expertise. You can not compare a traditional wooden bow to a recurve or a compound. That just shows (as you have admitted) your ignorance to the whole sport.

Compounds are the peak of accuracy in modern times. The recurve is the Olympic Bow and the ultimate goal for a recurve archer (target archer) is to win the olympics and the traditional bows may use modern materials and techniques but the basics are hundreds of years old.

Each bow has its use's and purpose and should never ever be compared. If we have modern materials and techniques for manufacturing why should we not use it to create the most accurate device for firing arrows that we can? This short of "oh its not what we used 200 years ago so its cheating" mentality did not get us to where we are today. The last time we shunned modern technology we had 800 (i think some one will correct me) years of hell on earth called the Dark Ages.

I respect your opinions but maybe somethign as controversial as this shoudl stay an opinion and never be discussed.

Oh and Im not just b**ching at you. As many people on AIUK now I am hankering after a longbow my self yet I shoot one of the most modern recurves on the market.

*Sigh* Rant over!

[simon m]

different disciplines promote different expectations.

For example my best portsmouth this year so far is 552 (using the smaller ten ring remember) and i was a little dissapointed with it and want around 570

Yet friday night a recurve archer on the target next door scored 550 (using the bigger ten ring) and was absolutely made up.

By those examples a longbow or trad archer would be rocking to get 500+


I like the technology and tuning required to get my bow to shoot well, which is why I shoot compound ( although some days i wish i could just string it and whack some arrows down range like the trad archers I shoot with)

[Murray]

Originally Posted by Rougie

I shall be honest with you: I think I need more experience in archery and with the different disciplines (Even modern ones) before continuing this arguement further.

Good idea

Bottom line is, different strokes for different folks. Each dimension of the sport has its own skillset. Taking your argument to the ridiculous, you could say that shooting at known/marked distances, or targets which are not running towards you flailing swords and shields is cheating But that's another story!

I suppose one could object to pretty much everything having moved away from its origins these days. Carbon graphite bicycles, silly looking pistol grips on fencing equipment, special body suits on swimmers, the modern rifles and pistols used in Olympics - there are many such examples.

If one really wants to be pedantic about this, then only yew long bows or hand-made sinew, wood and horn composite bows would be permitted in the olympics with wooden arrows. How likely do you think that is?

How about we substitute matchlock muzzle loaders for modern match rifles and pistols?

The world has moved on as has its technology. Embrace it and stop living in the past. One day compounds will be in the Olympics - hasten the day. I don't believe anyone has the right these days to try to force everyone else to accept and adopt their beliefs. I think that's called a dictatorship and I would have thought the world has had enough of these. Let's not bring them into sports as well.

I think we should move with the times. However for those that want to dwell in the past - that's fine. YOU do it, I don't want to

[GeoffT]

Personally, I think using a bow is cheating. The real skill comes when throwing the arrows.

[OpaNL]

Here's a carefully picked example.... Distances and targets are the same for outdoor compound and recurve.

Current world records for 144 arrow FITA women:

Compound: Jamie van Natta, 1402
Recurve: Sung-Hyun Park, 1405

Opa

[N.Vodden]

I was having this discussion with some friends at the club, ie the differences between different types of archery due to thier equipment, and my personal opinion is that it boils down to the nature of the bows themselves.

A 'traditional' bow, the longbow, Hun bow etc are weapons. They were designed as killing/hunting instruments with the readily available and best materials of the day.

A modern bow like a recurve with sights stabs rests etc or a compound, is not 'designed' as a weapon, its designed from the ground up to be a precision tool and as accurate as can be. Modern materials and knowledge have been used to give the archer as much of an edge as possible, improving consistency and taking out as many errors as possible during manufacture.

thats my 2 cents, 'weapon' design, versus 'accurate marksmans tool'

[raktor]

Originally Posted by N.Vodden

A modern bow like a recurve with sights stabs rests etc or a compound, is not 'designed' as a weapon

Not really true for compounds - most of the popular american brands are designed for hunting with target use a bit of an afterthought (eg the migration towards parallel limbs etc)

[greydog]

Originally Posted by Rougie

Personally I don't think it's cheating as long as the bow is made entirely out of wood, has no 'modern modifications' (Like scopes and all that), and was used thousands* of years ago - Such is where 'traditional' comes in.

I mean, if it was good enough for the Mongols, it's good enough for me!

:/

Even longbows were considered 'state of the art' at one point in history, and small changes in the design and materials used lead to more stable and consistant bows being produced, so picking one point in history and saying any design advancement after that is cheating doesn't make alot of sense.....if you want to be a traditional purist, throw rocks

[emdrum]

I think there is another point here that got missed in the flurry of responses to the "c" word, which possibly answers the question - why?

To give some context, I have a magyar bow that I shoot for fun, a recurve for fun and also for competition, but when I am seriously competing I shoot compound. This isn't because the compound has more toys to cheat with. After all, everyone else on the line has much the same toys as I do. It's because compound is less forgiving.

On a traditional bow it's okay to miss a few times. If your arrows go wide, well that's to be expected. It's part of that discipline (which is not to say that some trad archers do not apply the same levels of concentration and technique and achieve correspondingly high scores because of it).

But if you are going to get near a competitive score on compound EVERY arrow has to be perfect. This is true of all the other disciplines, particularly modern recurve, but nowhere else is it so immediately obvious when lose your concentration for a split second and muck up the shot. And as you get closer and closer to that elusive perfect round, the pressure mounts and it gets harder and harder.

So why the toys? Well, the toys remove all the other sources of error. The bow shoots the same every time, the scope means that you are sure to see the target, the release is just a tool to make sure the string is let go clean and doesn't snag on the tab or on the fingers.

All of which leaves one source of error - The archer.

No excuses. You see?