Australia's Recurve World Target Team

[Marcus]

Rumour is that the team is

David Barnes, Tim Cuddihy, Matt Gray and Andrew Lindsay

Deonne Bridger, Melissa Jennison, Jo-Ann Galbraith and Jade Beatty

Well done, with some of the scores shot it should be a great event! They'll do well this year

[Aarleks]

If that is the team it is a formidable one. I am particularly looking forward to seeing how they all fare in the lead-up events. I think they go to three Grand Prix and one or two others besides the WACs.
Agree that this should be a great year for Australian archery. I wish them all the best of luck.

[frommy]

Aarleks,

Perhaps you could look to turning off the "This sentence is false" bit which does detract from the main body of your well meaning message.

[Aarleks]

:D :D Hehehe... It even fools me sometimes :roll: . However, if you think about it it only refers to itself. I'll try and think of some thing equally pretentious to take its place. :P

[mike]

if you think about it it only refers to itself

OOOOH that will keep my mind busy for hours...:turn-l:

[Aarleks]

Mike, lol :lol: :lol: . Love the emoticon.

[mike]

The more I think about it the more I am dumbstruck by its pure, unadulterated logic!

[Aarleks]

It's a trick the Philosophy lecturers play on 1st years. I believe it is one of the few pure paradoxes.
Speaking of signatures, what the hell does yours mean? :D

[Zoe]

If you look at Mike's signature, I believe you'll find that your question has now become obsolete. Muhaha! :scrambleup:

[Aarleks]

Ahhhh....... I see I have been done! :oops: :lol: :lol: :D I think I shall take the hook out of my mouth and swim into the corner... :lol: :icecream:

[recurve boy]

It's a trick the Philosophy lecturers play on 1st years. I believe it is one of the few pure paradoxes.
How does one determine the "pureness" of a paradox? I'm betting someone who studies languages knows a way out ...

[Aarleks]

According to the hair-died-black-only-watches-small-budget-films-has-a-penchent-for-female-1st-year-students lecturer who spouted this at us for six weeks, the pureness of a paradox is "a factor of its unresolvability". In this case it is unclear whether the sentence is true or false. It can be either, yet, paradoxically, neither at the same time. "It remains unresolvable both philosophically and gramatically, ergo paradox".
This man was the king of the pretentious in this world, and my signature is a homage (make sure you pronounce it "omahge" :lol: ) to his wankerdom. Also I find it funny, but that's just me!!! :o

[Clare Barnes]

Getting off the topic of sentences that are truely false or falsely true for a moment...... :-? :o

The final WAC selction results are at:

http://www.archery.org.au/results/select/select.html

FINAL RANKINGS
WOMEN Ranking Points
Ranking Archer Final
1 Deonne Bridger 21.25
2 Melissa Jennison 20.5
3 Jo Ann Galbraith 13.75
4 Jade Beatty 11
5 Marianne Rieckman 2.25

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MEN Ranking Points
Ranking Archer Final
1 David Barnes 30
2 Matt Gray 29.25
3 Tim Cuddihy 24
4 Andrew Lindsay 22.5
5 Campbell Hodgson 15
6 Micheal Fisher 9.25
7 Robert Turner 5.25
8 Robert Welsh 4.75

[recurve boy]

How are ranking points determined? Any scores to go along with that?

[Clare Barnes]

recurve boy,

The whole selection process for the Recurve WAC team is detailed at:

http://archery.org.au/docs/select2003rec.pdf

I've not seen any Matchplay scores for the 3rd selection shoot, the ranking round scores were listed on another thread:

http://www.archery-forum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=82787

[Aarleks]

Thsnks for that Clare. Good to get back on topic too!! :roll:

[Clare Barnes]

Mmmmmm?? Not sure about that Aarleks - I was quite enjoying the diversion! :-?

Perhaps we're lucky there are even 4 people allowed in each team (male/female, recurve/compound) for the WACs. :o

At the FITA meeting in mid-February it was proposed "To change number of entrants in the World Outdoor Target Championships from 4 to 3 competitors".

"As resulting from the debate and final vote the bylaw change is rejected", was the comforting phrase that followed. :)

And, at about the time FITA was seriously considering decreasing the possible competitor numbers, 2Dogs told us that:

"Did you all know that the World Champs will be an open tournament. In an effort to increase participation they have opened it up to anyone who wants to enter. No need to be part of an offical team, pay the entry and go". :roll: :roll:

[Zoe]

At the FITA meeting in mid-February it was proposed "To change number of entrants in the World Outdoor Target Championships from 4 to 3 competitors".

Claire, what's your take on that?
Is it one of those initiatives to allow archers from a greater number of countries to compete at a WC level (which may be unfair to a particular archer, yet good for the sport globally[a debate that goes on in all sports- especially at Olympic selection time], or is it something more sinister?
(did they actually talk about reducing the set number of archers in a WC tournament?)

[Clare Barnes]

Me work out how FITA thinks..... you're kidding? :o

The summary on bylaws didn't say who proposed the change. I don't think it would allow more countries to participate as presently any member country can compete and have 4 competitors in each team, so it would in effect decrease the number of archers able to shoot.

What I quoted was all that was written about it half way down page 1 in:
http://www.archery.org/rule_book/BylawsSummary.pdf

[James Park]

For as long as I can remember there has always been a max of four competitors in each section from each member country for the World Target Championships. There has never been a maximum total number of competitors, but I guess the limit would be that all of the competitors in a particular division need to be able to shoot at the same time so that they get the same conditions.
Australia first sent competitors back in 1965. In 1965 we sent four competitors:
Ladies: (52 competitors)
Del Roache 1102+969 11th
Men: (118 competitors)
Hans Wright 1085+1129 7th
Bob Leach 1030+1031 27th
Ken McTaggart 788+820 105th
With a stronger third man, Australia may have obtained a place in the mens team event. They finished 12th.
There has never been a restriction on the total number of competitors.
In WAC99, the number of competitors was:
Ladies recurve: 127
Ladies compound: 59
Mens recurve: 163
Mens compound: 118
The cut for the matchplay is 64 archers in each division.

For the World Field Championships, there is a limit of three competitors in each division per country. That is: men and women for each of recurve, compound and barebow. This has primarily been done to fit the archers onto the courses. This, in effect, places a maximum of 24x4=96 archers per division, as you want all the archers in one division to shot the one course simultaneously. The most number of courses I have seen at these events is three (Slovenia and Austria), where for each division you shot two of the courses, one unmarked and one marked.
In the World Field the typical number of competitors is not large. For 1996 it was:
Ladies recurve: 21
Ladies compound: 33
Ladies barebow: 18
Mens recurve: 49
Mens compound: 56
Mens barebow: 38
Hence, it is generally relatively easy to make the cut of 16 in the ladies events and the mens barebow, but very difficult to do so for the mens recurve and compound. Making the second cut in any of them is difficult. "18th in the Ladies barebow" is a very different thing to "18th in the mens recurve". In 1996 I finished with an equal score to that of the highest ladies compound but did not make the cut.

[Marcus]

Yeah at the WFC in Canberra lint shot 179/180 in the cut to 8 and finished 5th. I think Bryce only dropped 3 or 4 points and just missed te cut. That's tough competition.

[frommy]

Marcus, from my experience "lint" will always have that affect on a "te cut". :D

[Marcus]

I'm using a keyboard I'm not use too, give me a break! :P