Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
2008/2009 IV Rules
Options
-
21-09-2008 8:03pm#1With regard to the last few posts of this thread , are there any rules that need agreeing on or finalising before the first arrow of the new IV season is shot?
With all the long meetings, hand waving and shouting we done last year one of the only points to come out was that rules cannot be changed during a season. I know there were some changes decided on after UL to be implimented this year, were these voted in and are they viewable online anywhere so there can be mistaking which set of rules are being used once it all kicks off in November? Each club probably got a paper copy of the new proposals but with the Summer come and gone I'd bet half of us have lost them somewhere along the line. If they need to be voted in, could it be done electronically before DCU rather than after so the days of 2 hour post-IV meetings could be over?0
Comments
-
Yes there are rule changes and so forth but some were only voted in on principle and the wording is in the process of being changed. I'll meet up with anyone that wishes to help me do this over the weekend but I ain't traveling too far as it's just not worth it
So people know the important changes are- only six shoots make up the IV league (this leads to the problem of which shoots are no IV this year if NIUM have a shoot)
- advanced Barebow move to 40cm face once they score above 450
If i think of anything else I'll let you know here0 -
Private Ryan wrote: »
- only six shoots make up the IV league (this leads to the problem of which shoots are no IV this year if NIUM have a shoot)
I think the Carlow shoot (national student champs) should not be a league IV. We were thinking of only having a 30 arrow qualification round this year because it was such a long day last year.
If this is agreed then it wont be possible to have it as an IV as only 30 arrows will be shot by each archer.
We might have a team knock out though instead.0 -
-
Private Ryan wrote: »There is also certain ambiguity in relation to years grace that needs defining.
Whats the ambiguity on years grace? Current definition in rules seems to cover it:
Eligible Competitors
(1) All students enrolled/attending a full time course in a college at the date of an intervarsity are eligible to shoot for that college at that intervarsity and for the remainder of the season.
(2) Years Grace – If an archer is not enrolled/attending a full time course, they can still compete during the season, if in the previous season they were able to compete. Provided the previous season was not a Years Grace.
(3) A person can defer their Years Grace, by one season and compete in the following season instead.
(4) An archer should always compete for their current college. Or if they are on Years Grace then the college they competed for last.0 -
Private Ryan wrote: »
- advanced Barebow move to 40cm face once they score above 450
WHY? Going to save myself some time and just repost the previous explaination and arguements. Read the WHOLE thing as it
is necessary to understand the reason why putting barebow onto 40cm faces is not good for the league (remember the league itself it your
single greatest responsibility, not individuals, clubs or national archery, etc.)
Deciding the Categories of a League is not a simple matter, you need to think of every possible outcome of any change, how it effects
the Teams prizes, Individuals prizes, how those scores will effect the teams and individuals, is it fair and still keep people challenged.
How will it last over time, when 10 years from now noone who was part of the decision is around, when noone remembers why anything
was decided.The following is long, but please read it all.
The original thinking behind the different categories and barebows was something like this.
In IVs we have Recurve, Barebow, Compound and Longbow. And there are two types of prizes Individual and Team. The goal is the treat
each category fairly so that no one category gives an overwhelming advantage in terms of Individual or Teams prizes. Now each of these
have basic differences. How do you compare a Recurve score with a Longbow score? We could apply modifiers, Barebow score +20% =
Recurve score, but the 20% is just made up, everyone feels cheated and there will be constant arguments over the %, it will go up and
down, depending on the people in charge (do not even begin to trick yourself into believe this would not happen). So if the we can't directly
compare scores because they are different, then lets treat them as different. Each Category as a separate section.
So we have Recurves competiting again Recurves, Barebows against Barebows, etc. Now reality sticks its ugly head in, 90% of people will
be Recurve, 8% Barebow, and 2 odd balls shooting Compound and Longbow. (Compound might go up to around 5% over time). So the people
in Recuve feel abit slighted, they have to beat 60 other people to get a prize, but if they were in another category they would just need to
beat 3-4 people.
Also because there are so many in Recurve, if you are starting out, you can be pretty sure you will never win anything, too many people
ahead of you. So it becomes viable to split Recurve into Advanced and Beginners. Immediately comes the question "What is a Beginner?".
This went through several phases, used to be Time, you were a beginner for 1 competition, then we tried 1 year. But if I told you someone
had being shooting for 1 year and nothing else about them, you could not give any sort of guess how well they could shoot. They might be
World Champions, or not be able to hit a barn. So Beginner was then decided on performance.
So now we Advanced Recurve, Beginner Recurve, Barebow, Compound and Longbow. In each category you are up against people of roughly
the same skill as you.
Advanced Recurve is the hardest, it has the most people and people stay in the category, they don't move on. That can be fustrating but
it means your victories mean alot.
Beginner Recurve is great to start out in, you might not be at the top straight away, but as people pass the cut off point they move onto
Advanced, so you are certain that as you get close to the cut off point you are going to be one of the top Beginners.
Barebow is a little tricky, there aren't too many people in it, and people stay in the category. So you will have times where it is very competitive,
4-5 people all about the same at the top. And sometimes you will have one person dominate it for a few years. There are also not enough people
in it to split into Advanced and Beginner Barebow. If more people do Barebow then it can become like Recurve.
Compound and Longbow have really just 1-2 people in them, so while we shouldn't stop people from shooting the way they enjoy, they can't
really be called categories yet. In time there might be more Compounds and it will then become like what Barebow is now.
So now we have individual categories that are relatively fair. The type of bow you shoot doesn't penalise you or give you and advantage. And
people are grouped with people of roughly the same skill, as much as possible. We could break it down more, but when your category has less
than 10-15 people, winning becomes meaning less.
Now onto the Team prizes, team scores consist of 5 individual scores. We have different categories, how do you make them all fair in terms of the
team prizes.
Advanced Recurve is first up, this is the basis for all IVs realistically. They shoot 40cm targets as that is the worldwide standard.
They will make up the majority of your team score. On average the best archers will be here.
Beginner Recurve is next, if they also shoot 40s you have two problems. They will never be part of the Team scores and they will miss alot.
So having Beginners on 40s does one thing well, it drives people out of the sport. The alternative? Have them on 60s, and have the cut off point
to move into Advanced at 400 points. So what does this do, when people start they are hitting the target, and a score of around 400 generally
puts you onto your Team score. Also 400 is around the point where peoples progress starts to slow down on 60s. Improving from 400 to 450 on
60s is much harder than getting from 350-400. When people move to 40s they only drop around 100 points, do it is not too big a shock, and it is
not too hard to make back the 100 points so you don't get annoyed by find yourself losing to the remaining Beginners.
Barebow - If you have them on 40s, the Beginners will miss alot, and Advanced will get annoyed fast that their 449 as barebow is worth less than
someone with a sight hitting 450. So you put all Barebows on 60s, new barebow archers can hit the target, and advanced barebows can feel the
fact they have no sight is acknowledged. Also it should be mentioned, that a Barebow shooting 450 on a 60cm, is roughly equivalent to a Recurve
shooting 450 on a 40cm, but having Barebows on 60s does not feel as artifical as using a 'modifier'.
Compound and Longbow - Compounds shoot the Vegas faces, scores of 1-5 are not counted and their 10 is smaller. This is the standard. Longbows,
well put them on 60s with the Barebows, if more people start shooting Longbows then this should be reviewed.
So now each of the Categories contributes to their team fairly equally. Recurve Advanced and Beginner is the backbone of every team. But it is not
conclusive that if you got all your team to shoot barebow, you might have an advantage, or not. To be safe each team is limited to have only one
score from the Barebow category, same for Comoound and Longbow. So at most your team score would consist of:
1 Barebow
1 Compound
1 Longbow
2 Recurve
Now to actually answer the topic
- Keep All Barebow as a separate category but move all to 40s
If you move all Barebows to 40s it is bad for the Beginner Barebows, and unfair to the Advanced. So I hope we can safely ignore this option
- Move All Barebows into the Recurve Categories.
So Advanced Barebows are against Advanced Recurve, and Beginner Barebow are against Beginner Recurve. This is unfair as Barebow is not
Recurve, you can not pretend it is. So i would hope that this is ignored also.
- Move just Advanced Barebows into Advanced Recurve.
This is the most common suggestion (always comes from Recurves by the way). The arguement comes from the fact that they are dominating
the Barebow category they need to progress and be challenged and they give high scores to their team.
First issue: they are dominating they Barebow category, no solution to this, it is due to the fact that barebow has low numbers, I'm afraid you
will have to live with it. Sometimes Advanced Recurve will be dominated also, it will just happen more often in Barebow.
Second issue: they need to progress and be challenged, part of this is because barebows shoot 40cm in National Competitions. Once you get
up around 500 on the 60s it does become harder to progress, but if you are serious about progressing to a National Leveling, shooting IVs on
60s is not that big a deal. Really at that level the piece of paper doesn't matter, if you are trying to progress you will be trying to get one
arrow on top of another. Also some people compete at the college level and have no interest in the National level, the League is ultimately
about the college students, do not make a change that will squeeze out an extra National barebow archer every few years if it comes at
the expense of Fairness and Competivness in the League.
Oh and which is better, 449 by Barebow on 40cm, or 450 by Recurve on 40cm? That is a fundemental problem on this, because it devalues
Barebow archers on Individual and Team prizes. So people then offer and 'adjustment' on Barebow scores, say +50 points or +20%, etc.
Which will cause problems forever in the league as the 'adjustment' is contantly argued over and changed, and when even when it is correct
it will pretty much produce the same scores as if the Barebow archer had shot on a 60cm Target ....
Basically moving Advanced Barebows into the Recurve Category might help the handful of Advanced Barebows in National Compeitions (only
5 barebows have broken 400 in the last 5 years). But it is bad for the League.
- Move Advanced Barebows into their own Advanced Category
If you have them on 40s but in their own Category then you have solve some of the issues above, but the issues are still there in terms of Teams scores.
If you have them on 60s you still have the issue of competitiveness. You move from one Category of 5-10 people to two with 2-4 people, which is completely useless.
- Give Barebows the CHOICE to compete as Advanced Recurves
This is what we currently do. That for those Barebow archers that are very good, they can CHOOSE to be considered as Advanced Recurves,
its challengeing, helps them progress, and because it was their choice there is no need to 'adjust' their score.
By the way, i've mentioned a few times that a Barebow score on 60cm is roughly equivalent of the same score by Recurve on 40s. This is from
personal experience swapping back and forth in practice, when i was shooting around 450 on 40s Recurve, on Barebow i was getting around 350
on 60s, I'm assuming that getting used to barebow would bring it up to around 450 and so be roughly even. Also I haven seen many people swap
between Barebow and Recurve over the pervious years and saw the same general change in scores. That after a few weeks, the change in target
face and sight cancel out to leave them on much the same score. However the reason why a numeric adjustment like +50 points or 20% can not work,
is all of this it has to be proven. Which will require extensive research involving hundreds of people, and even then it would have to be taken with a
pinch of salt.
So what option do you pick? That keeps the Categoryies FAIR for both the Individual and Team prizes. And keeps each Category as challenging as possible.0 -
Advertisement
-
As much as I don't want to change the barebows, it was voted on and passed with only one objection at the agm in UL so it is not up for discussion. It is happening and the only thing to be decided in this regard is how to review it at the end of the season0
-
A years grace is intended for people who have completed college. It is not for people who have failed or dropped out. This was never set out in the rules and people have shot after dropping out.
As for barebows shooting on 40cm. I think its a brilliant idea. Its great for personal development. With this new level people have a new goal to aim for, pushing them and hopefully making them a better archer!0 -
A years grace is intended for people who have completed college. It is not for people who have failed or dropped out. This was never set out in the rules and people have shot after dropping out.
As for barebows shooting on 40cm. I think its a brilliant idea. Its great for personal development. With this new level people have a new goal to aim for, pushing them and hopefully making them a better archer!
Years Grace:
Never thought of the dropping out thing. Just change number 2 bolded sections below:
FROM
(2) Years Grace – If an archer is not enrolled/attending a full time course, they can still compete during the season,
if in the previous season they were able to compete. Provided the previous season was not a Years Grace.
TO
2) Years Grace – If an archer is not enrolled/attending a full time course, they can still compete during the season,
if in the previous season they completed their course.
Optional, but could add: An individual can only have one Year's Grace.
Barebows:
As for barebows, well it might be good for the development of the individual, but it that doesn't make it good for the
league, and the league is more important than individuals. Also its a forcing personal improvement on Barebows without
considering the implications on the leagues team and individual results. Would you suggest Recurves that break 450 be
moved to Vegas faces? That would help them improve and make them better archers... and would be equally bad for the
league. What this does to Barebows is put pressure on them to give up barebow and go Recurve once they break 450.
If that was the goal then well done.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 6411
i speak from a team that have a high number of barebows that score on the team score.
the team unanimously agreed without hesitation to go 40 cm faces they wanted the challenge.
and if i remember correctly the decision was made to review the decision next year on seeing how it got on.
if it doesn't work out it can be reversed0 -
as it is, i'm the only barebow from dundalk so i can only speak for myself, but i am looking forward to having the advanced barebow category. it gives us a goal and an incentive to progress. what is the point of shooting high on a 60 when should we go to a non IV we must shoot a 40?
yes, it is more difficult, i don't think anyone argues that, but thats why only the people who can shoot at a 40 will be.0 -
Advertisement
-
Barebow is slowly becoming more of a force in Irish archery and beyond. Close to home, this is evident in the high scores, the turnout at the first national barebow championships, attendence at the all-british champs and top 50 finishes in the World Rankings in the past few years for a number of Irish barebowers. This also feeds into the successes of the Irish Field Squad as a Field team requires one each of a Recurver, a Compounder and a Barebower.
It is good that the IV is trying to push the bar on barebow as (similar to the recurve crowd) many of the top Irish competitors have IV roots.
In terms of the IV league and barebow, it will change the balances - but change is not always bad, its just change. Its not written in stone and can be modified again for the 09/10 season if needs be.0 -
Panserborn wrote: »....In terms of the IV league and barebow, it will change the balances - but change is not always bad, its just change...
Its easy to just call something 'change', change is fine, its good, needed even. However its wrong to say 'its just change' and think that is a valid argument, instead of looking at exactly what the change is. As in most things details are everything, the change to barebow means that in terms of the League team/individual scores, advanced barebows will operate with a sizable (15-30%) handicap compared to every other group.
However as the barebow archers seem to welcome the challenge then I guess try it and see how it goes. But ye should always be fully aware of every detail of what ye do, calling something 'just change' doesn't cut it.
Dermot0 -
-
Panserborn wrote: »I'm not making an argument. There is no argument. The rule change was voted and installed, its reality. I was mearly being conversational.
Argument, as in stating the case explaining and supporting with details the pros and cons of any decision. Such an argument exists for any decision independent of its reality.
You included as part of your explanation on the new rule: "it will change the balances - but change is not always bad, its just change", which is a completely meaningless statement. You should be horrified if anyone ever tries to use that line on you to convince you to agree to anything.
What you should have said was that it is understood that the change applies a handicap on advanced barebow archers for individual and team league tables, but that it is supported by the majority of barebow archers because they want the additional challenge to help progress on a national level. And that considering the size and makeup of teams(mainly recurve) that the impact on team scores and competitiveness shouldn't be too large but that it would be observed closely incase it does overly penalise some colleges that have a larger barebow population than average.
You should also explain the level of understanding/acceptance among clubs on the long term on the impact of the change, which is that over time you will see a smaller percentage of barebow archers in clubs. As it will not be in the interest of the competitiveness of a club to encourage barebow archers due to the handicap built into them with this change.
People seem to want the change, so makes sense to implement it like ye've done, thats all fine, no problem with that. Just seems that people don't seem to understand all the effects of the change, which is never a good thing.0 -
Saying that the rule change will reduce the numbers in the barebow class is not much of a show of faith in the people shooting.
People don't shoot barebow because it is easy, its not, they do it because they like the style of shooting. The majority of archers who train enough to get to 450 will surely relish in the challenge of a next step rather than a feeling of reaching a plateau.
This also gives the beginner archers a better chance to place higher in their category as they are not completely overshadowed by people who shoot a much higher level than them. This will act as an positive thing for people who feel that they will never have a chance of placing well in the current system and possibly encourage more beginners to stay shooting competitions!
Yes it will impact on the teams with mainly barebow shooters (from what i can see mainly GMIT at the moment), but the team event should be there to measure the overall level of a college across a mix of disciplines.
This could possibly be a topic for the future once the real impact of the changes are seen rather than speculated impact.
The rules have always been open for discussion at the IVs and these changes are no different, i'm sure there will be time to evaluate competitor and team views on the rules after the first couple of IVs.
I for one am glad to see progression happening in IV archery and hope this can continue to push the national level up as it has in the past.
Thumbs up guys and good luck for the season from the land of bratwurst and beer!!!0 -
Argument, as in stating the case explaining and supporting with details the pros and cons of any decision. Such an argument exists for any decision independent of its reality.
Just seems that people don't seem to understand all the effects of the change, which is never a good thing.
I won't get into semantics, but I will say that the decision to adapt this rule was not taken lightly. There were many meetings, arguments (whatever your definition), discussions and projections. The effects of the change were well examined and as understood as anything can be without actually shooting the arrows.
On a related thing, to the rule-makers, are ye leaving the Badge Scheme scores the same for the year? Due to the 450 Barebow Advanced rule, do the barebow scores have to be re-evaluated? Also, there were some discussions on raising the final score for compound (550) to something a little more difficult, or, introducing a new level for all categories at 575. Yae or Nae?0 -
mr potato head wrote: »Saying that the rule change will reduce the numbers in the barebow class is not much of a show of faith in the people shooting...
I don't mean a reduction in the number of barebows right now, I mean over time (ie, 5+ years) when a generation or two of archers have passed through the league. Its not a matter of faith or a speculated impact, there aren't really any unknowns in the system, it is what will happen. When beginners join a club they can be taught recurve or barebow, previously it didn't matter to the club which they taught to people, as they were equivalent in terms of the clubs League performance, now however their will be a slight detriment to teaching barebow, therefore over time this will result in slightly less barebow archers. Its not a big deal, its just a consequence to be aware of.
What I dislike is the fact that the detriment exists, that a single category has a handicap relative to all other categories for the purpose of making them more competitive at a national level.0 -
What I dislike is the fact that the detriment exists, that a single category has a handicap relative to all other categories for the purpose of making them more competitive at a national level.
This is not true. Recurves are devided also Dermot as you well know.
I disagree with your arguement that the creation of an advanced barebow category will discourage people from shooting it. The same agruement could be made for recurve. For example someone starts shooting this year, they shoot 350 in their first competition on the 60 face. They train and train and shoot 410 in the next competition. Now they're on to the 40cm. In practice they're back shooting 300ish. They get disheartened and leave the club. Are we to change the rules just to suit people who find things too difficult???
This is a sport. It's about progression and bettering ones self.
At the minute the top level barebows are giving an unfair advantage to their teams by shooting on 60's. If there is no advanced barebow category then why have an advance recurve. I'd love it and so would the other top recurves we'd bang in 580-590 all day long.
You say it's about what's good for the league and not giving anyone an advantage. By that arguement we should ban compounds until each college has one. We've never had a compound shooter so we're at a disadvantage straight off but we just have to get on with it.
I think at times too much emphasis can be put on the teams and what each archer must do for their college/team. Last year there were rumors of a certain college trying to get a top recurve archer to shoot beginner in the first competition because it was their first IV, but credit to the person they refused to do it. There was also rumors of lots of beginners being good enough to break 400 but only one being brought to each competition to always have a high team score. We're alwas going to have this kind of gamesmanship but what can be done about it. There's always going to be ways of influencing the team score
I disagree we should not have an advanced category in barebow just because it will discourage people from shooting and have a negative effect on the team scores. At the moment letting top barebows shoot on 60's is giving a disproportionate advantage to these teams.
At the end of the day this is a competitive sport if you're good enough to move to the next level (be it recurve or barebow) that's what you do, by staying in the lower level I think it's more of a discouragement to beginners. Because: 1. They have less of a chance of winning something and 2. Having an advanced category to aim for is a huge incentive to improve.0 -
About badges:
I believe the badges stay the same:
white: going from beginner to advance (this now makes sense for barebows to)
black: 400+
blue: 450+
red: 500:
yellow/gold: 550+
It is the same for all shooting styles. I dont think this was laid down in those exact terms but I believe the rules are being rewritten in proper English to try to avoid any ambiguities.
One change was made for score was for the plaque given to "exceptional" archers which was changed for compounders to 565+ as 550+ was deemed too easily achievable (almost a requirement for any self respecting compound archer).- 500+ in the Advanced Barebow category
- 550+ in the Advanced Recurve category
- 565+ in the Compound category
Phil
[/FONT]0 -
-This is not true. Recurves are devided also Dermot as you well know.
I disagree with your arguement that the creation of an advanced barebow category will discourage people from shooting it. The same agruement could be made for recurve. For example someone starts shooting this year, they shoot 350 in their first competition on the 60 face. They train and train and shoot 410 in the next competition. Now they're on to the 40cm. In practice they're back shooting 300ish. They get disheartened and leave the club. Are we to change the rules just to suit people who find things too difficult???
The difference is Advanced Recurve is the single main category of the league, about which all others move, it is the league, all the others are off-shoots. Beginner recurve exists to make it easier for beginners to make a contribution to their team and enjoy competitions and encourge them to stay in archery. Compound and Barebow exist because a few people wanted to shoot them and we didn't want to say no. Barebow was kept on 60s so they could be encouraged to continue in it so they didn't end up shooting 419 on 40cm targets and losing to the recurve guy beside them that shot 420...
-This is a sport. It's about progression and bettering ones self.
Archery is a sport.
This is an Intervarsity League, a competition.
And that is not a trivial difference, its a big ****ing difference, it completely changes what you are trying to achieve.
-At the minute the top level barebows are giving an unfair advantage to their teams by shooting on 60's. If there is no advanced barebow category then why have an advance recurve. I'd love it and so would the other top recurves we'd bang in 580-590 all day long.
Advanced Recurve is the purpose of the league, you can drop the advanced if you want, its recurve, the main category. How do the top barebows give an unfair advantage to their team? They shooting on 60s give them about the same score they would get if they put a sight on and shot 40s. Also only 9 people have ever broken 450 as barebow on 60s, and Niamh is still the ONLY barebow to break 500 (admittedly by a big margin)
-You say it's about what's good for the league and not giving anyone an advantage. By that arguement we should ban compounds until each college has one. We've never had a compound shooter so we're at a disadvantage straight off but we just have to get on with it.
Your mistaking trying to make every team equal, and making each category in the League as equal as possible in terms of the team and individual league tables.
-I think at times too much emphasis can be put on the teams and what each archer must do for their college/team. Last year there were rumors of a certain college trying to get a top recurve archer to shoot beginner in the first competition because it was their first IV, but credit to the person they refused to do it. There was also rumors of lots of beginners being good enough to break 400 but only one being brought to each competition to always have a high team score. We're alwas going to have this kind of gamesmanship but what can be done about it. There's always going to be ways of influencing the team score
Well the League is about the teams, that is the entire point, the individual and category prizes are just nice extras that allow people to aim for other goals if it suits and to reward talented individuals. As for the gamemanship, that is a consequence of a competitive league, however on trying to get a good archer to shoot as beginner, note the existing rule:
(2) Beginner. Any archer who has not scored the following at an Intervarsity or Schools competition can shoot as a beginner, if they choose.
400+ points in the Beginner category.
350+ points in the Bare Bow/Long Bow categories.
300+ points in the Advanced/Compound category.
400+ points on a 60cm target in a Schools Competition
You should probably change 'or Schools competition' to 'or other Archery comeptition', that should cover pretty much any case of this happening. Also if a college does get someone to shoot as beginner when they should have done advanced and you only find out at a later date then that archers score should be removed from the records and the results recalculated, as in the existing rules:
Breaking of Rules
(1) If a score should not have been counted, then it should be discounted.
(2) If during a competition an archer is found to be shooting in an invalid category, then every effort should be made to let the person shoot in the correct category of the remainder of the competition. The decision lies solely with the competition host, who should do whatever they deem appropriate for the competition as a whole.
(3) If after a competition an archer is found to have shot in an invalid category or were ineligible to compete. Then the score should not have been counted and should be discounted and the correct results calculated.
(4) Invalid scores must be discovered before four weeks after the final intervarsity of the season. The change in results can take longer, but the invalid scores must be announced to a committee representative from each college within the four weeks following the final intervarsity. After the four weeks no other invalid scores will be considered.
(5) While ever effort should be made to confirm that all colleges are fully aware of the League rules, it is the responsibility of each college to know the rules. Ignorance of the rules is not a valid excuse if the rules are broken.
By the way, does anyone actually read the damn rules?!! If you think the rules allow something which ye would generally prefer not to occur, then change the rules instead of complaining about it. Of course people are going to push the rules as far as they can, have ye met humans before?!
-I disagree we should not have an advanced category in barebow just because it will discourage people from shooting and have a negative effect on the team scores. At the moment letting top barebows shoot on 60's is giving a disproportionate advantage to these teams.
How is it giving a disproportionate advantage to those teams? Barebow score on 60s is pretty much exactly the same as that persons recurve score on 40s. However the reverse of your argument is definitely true, that comparing a recruve shooting on 40s with a barebow shooting on 40s, the recurve has a significant advantage. If you are worried about barebows unbalancing teams then the solution is to limit each team score to 1 barebow at most.
-At the end of the day this is a competitive sport if you're good enough to move to the next level (be it recurve or barebow) that's what you do, by staying in the lower level I think it's more of a discouragement to beginners. Because: 1. They have less of a chance of winning something and 2. Having an advanced category to aim for is a huge incentive to improve.
This is a competitive intervarsity league, the next level is national archery, not extra categories within the league. Yes, having the advanced barebow category to aim for is a incentive, however once you reach it and realise that they guy beside you shot 420 with a sight, you shot 419 without a sight and he gets on your team score but you don't, that is the kick in the teeth.
Dermot0 -
Advertisement
-
The difference is Advanced Recurve is the single main category of the league, about which all others move, it is the league, all the others are off-shoots. Beginner recurve exists to make it easier for beginners to make a contribution to their team and enjoy competitions and encourge them to stay in archery. Compound and Barebow exist because a few people wanted to shoot them and we didn't want to say no. Barebow was kept on 60s so they could be encouraged to continue in it so they didn't end up shooting 419 on 40cm targets and losing to the recurve guy beside them that shot 420...
Recurve is the main category but it is not the beginning and the end of intervarsity archery. You're giving no credit to barebow or compound as archery forms at all by this statement. The other categories are certainly not off shoots. They have become a fundemental part of the league. Your point about someone shooting 419 on a 40 with a barebow being discouraged by getting beaten by a sight shooter hitting 420 is irrelevant. They are in seperate categories individually. I'd feel better shooting 419 barebow anyway.
The point I'm trying to make is the 420 barebow beginner shooter is more disheartened by the fact the 420 recurve beginner has been awarded a prize and now moves up to advanced(progression) while the barebow shooter knows they are a long way off competing with the top barebows because they are all in the same category
Archery is a sport.
This is an Intervarsity League, a competition.
And that is not a trivial difference, its a big ****ing difference, it completely changes what you are trying to achieve.
yes it is a competiton not an unfair bias. Which is what the barebow category was before these changes. Now the top barebows have to compete harder to win the elite group while the beginner barebows can compete amongst themselves and try get into the higher category .....progression.....bettering oneself
Advanced Recurve is the purpose of the league, you can drop the advanced if you want, its recurve, the main category. How do the top barebows give an unfair advantage to their team? They shooting on 60s give them about the same score they would get if they put a sight on and shot 40s. Also only 9 people have ever broken 450 as barebow on 60s, and Niamh is still the ONLY barebow to break 500 (admittedly by a big margin)
Advanced recurve is not the purpose of the league it is a part of the league, admitedly a major part but still a part. Barebows shooting on 60's give the team an unfair advantage because they should be shooting on 40's when they reach a certain level. Just like sight shooters.
Compairing the score someone would get with a sight and barebow is pointless. They are seperate categories. It's like saying I should be allowed shoot on a 60 because compound shooters get a higher score. But for all intents and purposes its a different bow, a different set up AND a different category so the point is moot.
Your mistaking trying to make every team equal, and making each category in the League as equal as possible in terms of the team and individual league tables.
Exactly, making each category as equal as possible. So before with barebow having only one category and everyone shooting on 60's the top guys had an unfair advantage in terms of both team scores and individual tables.
How is it giving a disproportionate advantage to those teams? Barebow score on 60s is pretty much exactly the same as that persons recurve score on 40s. However the reverse of your argument is definitely true, that comparing a recruve shooting on 40s with a barebow shooting on 40s, the recurve has a significant advantage. If you are worried about barebows unbalancing teams then the solution is to limit each team score to 1 barebow at most.
I would disagree. I think any of the top barebows could achieve a higher score with a sight. But that is beside the point, they are in the barebow category. They are exceptional barebow shooters but are getting an unfair advantage by not moving to 40's
This is a competitive intervarsity league, the next level is national archery, not extra categories within the league. Yes, having the advanced barebow category to aim for is a incentive, however once you reach it and realise that the guy beside you shot 420 with a sight, you shot 419 without a sight and he gets on your team score but you don't, that is the kick in the teeth.
Dermot
Once the categories are fair and unbiased they I agree, the next step is national archery.
It's as much a kick in the teeth as when a recuve archer shoots 419 and gets beaten by a compound archer shooting 420 with all their fancy magnified scopes and as little weight as a bag of sugar at full draw on their new fangled release aid instead of on their fingers. So what do you do....train harder....be better.
Gavin0 -
You keep using that argument that "(when as barebow archer) you realise that they guy beside you shot 420 with a sight, you shot 419 without a sight and he gets on your team score but you don't, that is the kick in the teeth."
The same can be said for beginner vs advanced.
If you are an advanced archer you're probably a better archer than anyone still in the beginner category.
Yet a beginner can make the team in front of you since they get higher score
That too is a "kick in the teeth"
But we take it as an incentive to improve and get our place back in the team.
I understand that some of the "veterans" feel that the work they've done to create the league is being destroyed but the league has changed. The changes are there to try to enhance it, and remember those changes are on trial for this season and will be reviewed.
Having been part of the committee, I can tell you that we didn't take these decision lightly so don't be so defensive and let's see how this turns out.0 -
If you think the rules allow something which ye would generally prefer not to occur, then change the rules instead of complaining about it.
There was something in the rules that allowed someting we preferred not to occur, and the rules have been changed to adapt. Nobody is complaining.500+ in the Advanced Barebow category
550+ in the Advanced Recurve category
565+ in the Compound category
Sounds good!0 -
- You keep using that argument that "(when as barebow archer) you realise that they guy beside you shot 420 with a sight, you shot 419 without a sight and he gets on your team score but you don't, that is the kick in the teeth."
The same can be said for beginner vs advanced.
If you are an advanced archer you're probably a better archer than anyone still in the beginner category.
Yet a beginner can make the team in front of you since they get higher score
That too is a "kick in the teeth"
Oh I give up. This isn't a case of comparing Beginner and Advanced in whatever categories. Its comparing Advanced Recurve and Advanced Barebow, the pinnacle of each category in terms of the Team scores.
- I understand that some of the "veterans" feel that the work they've done to create the league is being destroyed but the league has changed. The changes are there to try to enhance it, and remember those changes are on trial for this season and will be reviewed.
Having been part of the committee, I can tell you that we didn't take these decision lightly so don't be so defensive and let's see how this turns out.
No need to invoke the plural if you just mean me, anyways I'll bite. I don't think the league is being destroyed, I understand it to be stronger now than its ever being. I don't think 'veterans' have a greater right to call the league theirs than anyone else, or have greater impact in controlling it than the lowest fresher. But I do think that arguments for and against an idea can be valid and should be understood regardless of who they come from, and be judged on their own merits.
I'll explain my thinking in responding in this thread (and is usual the same reason whenever i post at all in this forum), which is that the original posts outlined the change in rules (and its a minor change) but did not outline the understand and reasoning behind the change. You should always do this, explain every pro and con and reasoning/understanding behind each one and why ye decide to apply the change, that way cut out 99% of disagreements before anyone has opened their mouth (and as an added plus you make sure I almost never post in these forums).
So I posted asking why the change had occured and giving the previous arguments for not making that changed. All I was hoping for was someone to go, "Yes, we understand those are consequences of the change, but we thought reasons A,B,C were important enough reasons that we decided to apply the change anyways." I might have disagreed with the reasoning, but I have no problem with people saying they think I'm wrong and they are going to do what they think is correct.
The reason this thread kept going and going was that not one person indicated that the counter argument was understood. That at the pinnacle of barebow and recurve categories, both now shooting on 40cm targets, the recurve archer has a significant percentage boost to his score relative to the barebow archer due to the sight on his bow. Keeping barebows on 60cm targets gave a balance to the scores, compensating for the lack of a sight, it might not have being an exact match, but it was close to it. All I wanted and still would like is someone to say, yes we understand that, but because of 'A' we think the change is still needed.
PS: Sorry if my posts got quite harsh and defensive, however I was giving the only counter argument in the thread and it seemed noone was trying to understand it (agreeing is something different).0 -
Just saw Gavin's post above #22 , I won't quote it as it will make things harder to read. But I wanted to say, Thanks, that is something like what should have being posted ages ago, I disagree slightly on almost every point, but can finally see some of the reasoning.
That the league is moving to completely separate the individual bow categories. You still have the problem of the team scores, but if you think the individual categories are strong enough to hold their own and be as valid as the team category, then thats manageable. I still dislike the handicap top barebows will have in making their team scores (it is an intervarsity league after all), but thats where ye are making the decision.
I take it that the League will now officially be: Best Team, Recurve, Barebow, Compound, treating the four about equal and dropping the Male/Female categories?0 -
The Overall Categories are:
Best Team, best barebow,best compound, best female recurve, best male recurve.
The recurve section is still split into male and female because it is the biggest section and has enough people to warrant a split.
If the other sections grow in numbers I'm sure they can be split too.
Thanks for the debate Dermot I enjoyed it. I'm glad I got my point accross
0 -
...Thanks for the debate Dermot I enjoyed it. I'm glad I got my point across
Glad you viewed it as a debate, was interesting for me also. Apologies for anyone that felt I was just banging on the people running the league at the moment, that was never my intention or what I felt I was doing.
When I post here it is to ask a question that noone has answered or give a view point that hasn't being properly represented. It doesn't matter too much what the final decisions are, provided all the viewpoints and questions around an issue are understood, once all those are understood then range of correct decisions becomes quite clear and you just pick whichever you feel like. Not going to the full effort of trying to understand every aspect of an issue is letting down the people who choose to give you the responsibility of running things for them.0
Advertisement