Reflex/Deflex Longbows

[Yew Selfbow]

There's a debate at the moment within the longbow community regarding the future use of the Reflex/Deflex longbows that have appeared on shooting lines over the past couple of years. In a recent editorial, Ted Bradford, editor of the Glade magazine accused those who shoot this type of bow of cheating. Those that support the use of this type of bow highlight 13th to 16th century historical pictorial evidence of the deflex/reflex design. The matter was discussed at the recent B.L.B.S. A.G.M. but as far as I'm aware no decision as to the future use of the bow was made. The arguements against the bow, centre around longbow specifications laid down by the B.L.B.S and adopted by G.N.A.S. stating that a long bow on full draw should describe a continuous arc, a characteristic the deflex/reflex bow clearly does not possess.
So the future use of the deflex/reflex longbow is in some doubt ...

[Macbow]

I have never shot an ELB. Does the R/D design offer that much of a performance boost to merit the "cheating" accusation? Surely if there is historical evidence that R/D designs were in use so long ago (I have seen some very old Scottish pictures of archers with recurves) the trad hardcore would be satisfied.
From my own experience, I own some of the world's top high performance R/D AFBs but I actually shoot better with a much slower but more stable & forgiving mild reflex bow. I am seriously considering taking a "step backward" for next season's comps as I am just more consistent. However, for the top shooters whose form is much better than mine to return to Hill-style straight longbows after enjoying the extra performance of an R/D bow would be a backwards step too far. I suspect the ELB R/D users may feel the same and yet another bow class/division will be made until the next divisive issue comes along.

[Yew Selfbow]

Mac.. you raise some really interesting points.
I can't comment on the performance of the reflex/deflex bow because I haven't actually shot one, but the "charge" (if I can use that term) against them is, that the reflex/deflex bow, allows for faster limb speed, therefore affording better cast and the opportunity for the user to attain an improved distance with a lower poundage bow. This puts the archer with a conventional "straight limbed bow at a disadvantage because to attain the same performance he/she will need to use a bow of much higher draw weight. The historical evidence pointing to the existance of the bow in the middle ages comes mainly from the paintings and tapestries of the period. In fact bows with a definate reflex are depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry. I think there's little doubt that these bows existed, but, the B.L.B.S. is essentialy an organisation shooting in the tradition and style of the Victorian / Edwardial era when reflex/deflex bows were not in common use.

[joetapley]

http://tradtalk.com/forums/attachmen...achmentid=1152

[tel]

Originally Posted by joetapley

http://tradtalk.com/forums/attachmen...achmentid=1152

WHAT ON EARTH.....?

[tel]

the B.L.B.S. is essentialy an organisation shooting in the tradition and style of the Victorian / Edwardial era when reflex/deflex bows were not in common use.

Shouldn't it be the B.V/E. L.B.S in that case?

[Macbow]

Not quite sure what you are meaning joe - the link is to a photo of a new bow design by O L Adcock (I think) where he is putting his ACS limbs onto Olympic style risers. Way too much metal for my tastes!

[Tom]

Surely the simplest solution would be to have two classes of longbow. One for ELBs and one for R/DLBs. I'm not sure how the BLBS purists would take it but it would stop the 'cheating' claims.

Hmm...actually on second thoughts maybe it wouldn't stop the 'cheating' claims. Recurve archers seem to always be complaining about 'cheating' compound archers, and longbow archers seem to brand everyone else 'cheaters'.

All in jest of course...

[tel]

Hmm...actually on second thoughts maybe it wouldn't stop the 'cheating' claims. Recurve archers seem to always be complaining about 'cheating' compound archers, and longbow archers seem to brand everyone else 'cheaters'.

I know a lot of this is probably 'tongue in cheek', but are there any archers that are seriously bothered about what is happening in another class? I can see the argument if some have a distinct advantage in the same class.....

[Tom]

Originally Posted by tel

I know a lot of this is probably 'tongue in cheek'.

How did you guess? My tongue was almost through my cheek.

Seriously though, I can't see a problem with subdividing the longbow class if it prevents any advantages gained by using a different design.