Olympic Selection

[Andrew Lindsay]

My wife has just returned from NZ and informed me that not one Kiwi shot for any Olympic spots.
How can this be?
I have been lucky enough to shoot for NZ at the olympic level and it was something i had always wanted to do and are proud of.
With NZ not sending any archers to the Olympic shoot in Wellington (to get places)i feel that this is the death of competitve recurve archery in NZ which in my view is shocking.
I would be interested in someone telling me how this can happen.
If it comes down to a count of not medalling at the olympics i hate to tell them nothing is certain, and even the best preparation, best training etc
means little on the day of the olympic games in getting a medal.
If Samoa can send any archer why can't NZ !!

[Marcus]

Some countries are getting to the point where spending money on Olympic sports is being stopped. I understand Canada has recently said it will no longer chase Olympic medals as it would rather spend the money on health care.
Perhaps NZ is in the same boat. Of course that should not stop someone paying their own way.
Agree though, will be a shame not to see NZ in that mix.

[Clare Barnes]

I also think some countries choose to spend their money on sports where they have the best and/or realistic chances of medaling, rather than just filling team spots for the sake of it. I see the logic in this approach.

[GuyDawg9]

I also think some countries choose to spend their money on sports where they have the best and/or realistic chances of medaling, rather than just filling team spots for the sake of it. I see the logic in this approach.

Australia does the same thing but still give a little amount of money to other sports as well

[Ed]

I also think some countries choose to spend their money on sports where they have the best and/or realistic chances of medaling, rather than just filling team spots for the sake of it. I see the logic in this approach.

I know that government bodies always review funding to all Olympic sports after each Games and re-allocate on the basis of where the country is likely to get medals next time. A few years back some sports lost all funding (weightlifting was one I think) and athletics was drastically reduced.

[Flame]

from FITA

http://www.archeryworldcup.org/content.asp?me_id=817&cnt_id=2259

[Ed]

It's interesting that FITA sent me an email with this info and yet there is nothing on either the AA or Oceania websites!

from FITA

http://www.archeryworldcup.org/content.asp?me_id=817&cnt_id=2259

[Flame]

It's interesting that FITA sent me an email with this info and yet there is nothing on either the AA or Oceania websites!

We are on the mailing list Ed.
I think JL is in Tonga

[Sir Slick]

My wife has just returned from NZ and informed me that not one Kiwi shot for any Olympic spots.
How can this be?
I have been lucky enough to shoot for NZ at the olympic level and it was something i had always wanted to do and are proud of.
With NZ not sending any archers to the Olympic shoot in Wellington (to get places)i feel that this is the death of competitve recurve archery in NZ which in my view is shocking.
I would be interested in someone telling me how this can happen.
If it comes down to a count of not medalling at the olympics i hate to tell them nothing is certain, and even the best preparation, best training etc
means little on the day of the olympic games in getting a medal.
If Samoa can send any archer why can't NZ !!

NZOC has decided with Archery NZ (and most other sports within the NZ)that no athlete will be eligible to attend the Olympics unless they have the potential to place in the first 16.

The qualification standards have now been adjusted so that the score required is 1300 for a full fita. There is currently no recurve archer in NZ who can attain that score at this point in time. As is obvious by results from around the world 1300 score is a score that while being extremely good is still well away from what the very best archers can achieve.

Its not that nothing is certain, after all past Olympic champions have been knocked out in the first round, its that the archers must have the potential to at least compete with the top archers.

This is not causing the death of competitive recurve archery in NZ, from what I've noticed lately recurve archery is actually making somewhat of a resurgence in NZ with a couple of very promising young recurvers coming through and many more recurvers now on the line than in the past. I agree with this policy, it says to archers that if you want to compete at the very highest level you must excel and put in the effort.

The point that is being made that NZ'ers are not good enough to compete at the olympics at the moment in archery was actually highlighted when our top recurver was knocked out of the NZ Nationals matchplay by a Samoan.

I do however believe we should have had archers in the CQT tournament for the experience at least.

[grantwomack]

That is unusual, although I thought perhaps one of the NZ boys would try to earn themselves a place and pay for it personally...

Best of luck to Joseph Walter to get the MQS he needs in order to compete! It would be a real shame if he doesn't get the score in time.

[Clare Barnes]

NZOC has decided with Archery NZ (and most other sports within the NZ)that no athlete will be eligible to attend the Olympics unless they have the potential to place in the first 16.

That would seem to be an approach supported by the documents at:

http://www.archery.org.au/scripts/cgiip.exe/WService=ASP0009/ccms.r?pageid=10635

[Jim Reid]

So it has sod all to with competing and representing your country and everything to do with f***ing medals, plastic, metal, wharever, who cares!

When you cradles that dying person's head and whisper sweet nothings in their ear, they won't care how many medals you won in your life, what's more you won't care either.

Let's get our priorities right people.

Send your best team even if they come worse than last.

In fact be there, simply because YOU WANT TO BE THERE and tell them to keep the medal, give it to a bloke to flog at a shop and get a nice meal, that gives the medal a little value, worth about the same as a Big Mac.

[Batman]

Too right Jim.

If all countries adopted NZ's attitude, then we would have missed out on solid gold moments like Eddie the Eel's hot 100 meters!

AW. :archer:

[Batman]

Too right Jim.

If all countries adopted NZ's attitude, then we would have missed out on solid gold moments like Eddie the Eel's hot 100 meters!

AW. :archer:

Typo: Delete Eddie and substitute with ERIC. :D

AW. :archer:

[Jay.G]

There was something along the lines, if I remember correctly from last year's AGM, that if NZ weren't able to qualify for an olympic placing in this CQT, future alocations of olympic spots for archery would be jeopidised for NZ.

[The One]

The NZOC has decided that they will only send athletes to the Games who have been shown to be regularly competing within the top 16 within the world. If NZ had won a spot at the CQT, it would have been rejected by the NZOC. FITA had apparently mentioned to Oceania that if places from the CQT kept getting rejected the 2 places available at the CQT *may* drop to 1 for the region. Thus, ANZ decided that it was in the interests of Oceania that we did not contest a spot as we did not have any archers in the top 16 in the world.

Trust me - it wasn't because we didn't want to compete.

[Archangel]

That is unusual, although I thought perhaps one of the NZ boys would try to earn themselves a place and pay for it personally...
They can't - the only places to win Olympic places are limited-entry tournaments like Worlds and CQTs, so since ANZ had decided not to send a team to the CQT the archers can't compete on their own.

If it comes down to a count of not medalling at the olympics i hate to tell them nothing is certain, and even the best preparation, best training etc means little on the day of the olympic games in getting a medal.
I wish SPARC and the NZOC took a reasonable attitude like that. Unfortunately the government sports bodies in NZ have been taken over by MBAs and other such lifeforms, and don't think like normal people any more. Maybe one day things will return to how they used to be, although I'm not holding my breath unfortunately.

[Sir.Nightingale]

its just typical New Zealand really, they wont give anything until we do really well but without being given anything we loose the opportunity to even show we could do well, if it was rowing or cycling or something tho then we would have been out in full force for the CQT to get a spot because its likely we would be a main competitor in the Olympics, all we need now is a kiwi archer to win something major to gain the sport a little recognition within New Zealand, seems to me that we brag about the few sports we are overly good at and shun the ones that could do with some help, man they really know how to promote growth and the status of the minor sports in NZ, bloody excellent to know nz wants to do well across the board.

[2Dogs]

You guys seem to be in the situation Oz was, Pre AIS days.

I remember the old sports commision website stating that there is no correlation between providing extra funding and gaining medals with Archery. It also went on to mention that Archery should only have token representation as Australia does not have the Membership/competitor numbers, or depth of talent to warrant further funding.

And so it was for many years, most of us had to provide our own funding and we only got 1 Male & Female spot at the Olympics.

You are correct in that you will need someone to shine on the international scene. It wasn't till Simon started shooting well, then headed overseas and winning that things started getting a little better for Archery in Oz.


But the biggest change was Aus winning the 2000 Olympic bid. It was then that a whole stack of us "minor" sports recieved a massive funding boost so that the host National might just pickup some extra medals.

Of course Simon went on to win Gold, and it's been bliss ever since.

[Sir Slick]

its just typical New Zealand really, they wont give anything until we do really well but without being given anything we loose the opportunity to even show we could do well, if it was rowing or cycling or something tho then we would have been out in full force for the CQT to get a spot because its likely we would be a main competitor in the Olympics, all we need now is a kiwi archer to win something major to gain the sport a little recognition within New Zealand, seems to me that we brag about the few sports we are overly good at and shun the ones that could do with some help, man they really know how to promote growth and the status of the minor sports in NZ, bloody excellent to know nz wants to do well across the board.


Rowing and cycling were in a similar (not identical) situation a few years ago to what archery is now. Through excellent administration, coaching, development programmes and talent identification - and the shear bloodimindedness that they would not send athletes overseas unless they had a good chance of success - they are now well in the public eye and achieving excellent results overseas and thus receive improved funding and commitment from sports governing bodies. Those two sports have dragged themselves right up the foodchain by doing pretty much what Archery NZ is, or is attempting to do now.

[Archangel]

You guys seem to be in the situation Oz was, Pre AIS days.
So we're about 25-30 years behind you lot? Sounds about right to me :-D

[Sir.Nightingale]

So we're about 25-30 years behind you lot? Sounds about right to me :-D

Sh*t were catching up to Australia, the rest of the world must not be far off now - yeah right :D

[themadarcher]

I have to admit that it is a bit dishearting that we are not the same page with the rest of the world. I think all we need is somebody to take the leap of faith and offer NZ archers the chance to step up and show that they do have what it takes to get back up to that level again. Rather than setting huge qualifing standards (in terms of travel ) and sitting back and seeing if there is an archer with the time and money to have a crack. All we need is a way to get the funds to get a team off full time work, even if it is only for a weeks before a major event, so that we can show that we do have the dedication to make it on the bigger stage. I am of the opinion that it is not resonable to expect a return without an investment. I have not been in Archery NZ for long so I apologise if all this is has been done and there are people trying to make this happen. After being at the nationals and listening in on a meeting on such matters I am still unsure that archery NZ is giving us a fair go. Lets put the offer out there and put this in the archer's hands.

[gizzy]

Its out of Archery NZs hands it was the NZOC that set the criteria

[themadarcher]

Yea, sorry I forgot that it was not just ANZ that set the bar, Its just that the impression I get that they (OC) are just saying "tough, deal with it". I know that history shows that it takes a break through to start the ball rolling, it's just that it's going to need to be one amazing break through! Where does SPARK sit in all this? are they only trying to develop the sport on a participation basis?

[Jay.G]

Well in someways I guess that's the only way FOR THE MOMENT to deal with archery as there's only a very little minority that is capable of getting up there and so the only one is to build the foundation of the sport to ensure future continuity and sustainability of the sport in order to slowly build the sport up. Because as depressingly as it sounds archery is very very minor in New Zealand and so to increase popularity the first is to increase participation.

[burt666]

Yea, sorry I forgot that it was not just ANZ that set the bar, Its just that the impression I get that they (OC) are just saying "tough, deal with it". I know that history shows that it takes a break through to start the ball rolling, it's just that it's going to need to be one amazing break through! Where does SPARK sit in all this? are they only trying to develop the sport on a participation basis?


As far as i know we are still classified under "development sport by SPARC... and we wont get much more funding until we won something.... catch 22....

[themadarcher]

Aha, the vicious cycle continues! I think we need archery cheerleaders, that would boost numbers, we may draw a crowd as well!

[themadarcher]

I guess when talking about the growth of the sport we get back to Andrew's proposal during the AGM about ANZ membership. Do you think that this sport could ever drum up the numbers in this country to force SPARK to pay attention to us? Lets face it, we could never compete on the same scale as soccer, rugby and such. Its just not as big a spectator sport. I wonder how far away from a strong enough membership to force more attention from SPARK?

[burt666]

I guess when talking about the growth of the sport we get back to Andrew's proposal during the AGM about ANZ membership. Do you think that this sport could ever drum up the numbers in this country to force SPARK to pay attention to us? Lets face it, we could never compete on the same scale as soccer, rugby and such. Its just not as big a spectator sport. I wonder how far away from a strong enough membership to force more attention from SPARK?

well at least we are not 1 million$ deficit like NZ soccer...

re spectator, well yes, that's what we need... remember what steve said at one meeting, the format of comp might change....

[2Dogs]

Look...just face facts.

You all Suck! :rofl:

HTFU :thumb:

[flyboy_su27]

Isn't FITA introducing a 4 year plan to build up the promotion of Archery Worldwide? By 2012 they hope to have Archery recognized as a "main" Olympic sport. It would be great if ANZ try and follow suit and introduce a similar scheme (though not on such a grand scale obviously :). With a bit of promotion and encouragement we can have great potential coming through in the next few years and it would also encourage our current archers (everyone wants to be on TV!) to do well.

[themadarcher]

well at least we are not 1 million$ deficit like NZ soccer...

re spectator, well yes, that's what we need... remember what steve said at one meeting, the format of comp might change....
I heard archery world cup is thinking of changing the compound side of things a bit...I was watching a video on Youtube about the atlanta games when the new matchplay program was introduced, it did wonders for archery at the olympics. I guess change can always be good, so long is it is still with the archers in mind.

[burt666]

Look...just face facts.

You all Suck! :rofl:

HTFU :thumb:


coming from you, i'll take that as a compliment, Mr 4th place fetishist...:p

[burt666]

I heard archery world cup is thinking of changing the compound side of things a bit...I was watching a video on Youtube about the atlanta games when the new matchplay program was introduced, it did wonders for archery at the olympics. I guess change can always be good, so long is it is still with the archers in mind.

agree... i heard also about the 4 year dev plan and stuff... but that's NZ olympic comm. who is putting the bar so high.. hell , samoa is sending more people then we are, gutted.... even Ron doesn;'t understand why they put them so high...

[2Dogs]

coming from you, i'll take that as a compliment, Mr 4th place fetishist...

You rang?.... did someone say Fetish?


..... Ooops wrong Forum and Window ;)

[The One]

It would be great if ANZ try and follow suit and introduce a similar scheme

Yes, it would. We need to come up with some pretty ambitious initiatives, else we will simply womble along and get nowhere very fast.

[flyboy_su27]

We need to come up with some pretty ambitious initiatives

We had an article down here in Palmy about a couple of our Archers that did well (actually..very well) in the Nationals. It appears we are getting a few people interested with people ringing up the paper trying to find info on our club. If we can publicize on a bigger scale, we may be able to open the eyes to the public and say show them that we have some d*mn good archers in this country.

[The One]

We had an article down here in Palmy about a couple of our Archers that did well (actually..very well) in the Nationals. It appears we are getting a few people interested with people ringing up the paper trying to find info on our club. If we can publicize on a bigger scale, we may be able to open the eyes to the public and say show them that we have some d*mn good archers in this country.

Yes, advertising would go a long way. We would have to consider what form of advertising would be most appropriate, and whether the costs are acceptable, but yes, definately an option. We'd need to check whether clubs could actually cope with whatever inflow would come in, of course - for the past 5 years, our club's novice coaching courses have been either at or above 75% capacity.

[themadarcher]

Its amazing how much interest is around when the offer is put out there, Ive been doing some early morning and late evening training at Mountain Green recently are have had 5 seperate people asking me how things work in around three days. Lol, I think they just don't want to wear whites!

[burt666]

Its amazing how much interest is around when the offer is put out there, Ive been doing some early morning and late evening training at Mountain Green recently are have had 5 seperate people asking me how things work in around three days. Lol, I think they just don't want to wear whites!

ans mt green is pretty "hidden".. think about the interest we generate in Cornwall park.... :p

[flyboy_su27]

I think they just don't want to wear whites!

People still wear whites? lol.

We'd need to check whether clubs could actually cope with whatever inflow would come in, of course - for the past 5 years, our club's novice coaching courses have been either at or above 75% capacity.


Haha yeah. Any more archers on our line and things are going to be good fun! But I think the important thing is just to open the eyes of the public, and if we get some new archers in the process then great! Being a new archer myself I found it pretty hard to find anything out about clubs in my area...that needs to change before anything else happens.

[The One]

Yep, and a lot of getting into the public spotlight involves how we publish results. For instance, none of the results from the National Champs made it into the national newspapers. We need a lot more emphasis on getting articles and results into the papers, radio, television, on the web. It does take time to organise this, but it is well worthwhile. The more exposure, the better.

[Jim Reid]

Don't get angry with this...Please.

You all kinda mean well , but you all suck at PR and Development, I've seen it in Scotland and it still exists there, that inferiority complex thing holding you back because you have a small population, and although PROUD, you don't believe in yourselves, (overwhelmed by Australia, aka Scotland/England).

Don't get angry with me for pointing this out as I am on your side, but you NZ lot need to get real about where you want to be, and that comes down to yourselves and those governing archery in NZ. If you guys (and girls) don't stand tall and wave your flag no one else is going to do it for you.

Look at bowhunting in USA. I am not a bowhunter, but a country like NZ is crying out for bowhunters, and from that and a better combined federation archery could be huge in NZ, and a great drawcard for tourism and the greater good of NZ wildlife and NZ archery. Touches of the old deer capturing from helicopters stuff. Now fly in the bowhunters at US$1000 a day, put them up in a little hut overnight with good NZ company, some brown ale or sauvignon blanc, and get Archery New Zealand on the map, like Jet Boating, Fly Fishing, Skiing, Tramping, etc. Might have to come down and show you how to do it.

Trouble is, the people steering the ship don't have a compass.

I've got a compass.

[Jay.G]

That's about the best expression I've heard for archery. We need to become more strategic about the development of the sport and we genuinely needs to be ambitious in its development and not just words on papers and no action.

I believe the best way to approach this problem is one exposure of archery as a SPORT and not a Fun School Camp Activity i.e. media coverage of nationals and creating opportunities for the best of archers to earn archery some fame i.e. sending archers to Olympics and Worlds and Promoting them!

Two: Building the sport from grounds up, I think personally the best way to do so is using Schools. We can never be a major sport if the schools doesn't get involved and then you'll increase much more opportunities for gaining memberships/competitors/potentials.

So in someways, one is to build the sport at the top and the other is to build the foundation.

[bruce johnson]

No kiwis contested the qualifying spots.. Man thats a real shame.. I know several NZ recurvers that have Olympic experience and would put up a good show in that environment.. Its going to be a difficult battle for recurve archery to attain the heights of 1300 + without regular exposure to this level of competition... NZ recurvers that have achieved this level in the past have been self motivated and self funded with a mind set to achieve their goal.. If any kiwis are going to get to the Olymidcs in the future then they need to start preparing for the 2012 Olympics now.. ask Peter Ebden how long and what it takes to get there... better still ask his mum..

[Archangel]

Wow, I go away for a weekend to watch another sport, and look at all these posts that appear in the meantime!
Unfortunately all it is is talk on a web forum. It's all very well saying "get more strategic" and "develop initiatives", but what does that mean?

What I think it needs is a lot more "phwoaaar" factor. We're not very good at promoting ourselves as being a modern and exciting sport, and we certainly don't play up any of our athletes at all. People want to see a story and have something to get excited about - and no, "will the lights system fail this round" does NOT count.

Jim: I honestly think that is one of the most insightful and intelligent posts I've seen from you on this forum. Only problem is that Archery NZ is a target archery organisation, not a bowhunting one. What you're proposing sounds like a great idea, but I think maybe your compass is pointing at a different pole than ours.

[burt666]

[QUOTE=bruce johnson]No kiwis contested the qualifying spots.. [QUOTE]

yeah... but no_one_was_allowed_to_do_so...:(

[bruce johnson]

yeah... but no_one_was_allowed_to_do_so...:(

Was that a decision from ANZ administration or NZOC

[burt666]

Unfortunately all it is is talk on a web forum. It's all very well saying "get more strategic" and "develop initiatives"...

yeah it's all about acting vs. blabla-ing really.... soudns like there is lots of athletes around at the moment, and not enough managers / coaches / people wanting to put some time in aside of their own shooting.... tho the one we have are doing a great job, dont get me wrong here!!!

all of his takes manpower and dedicated people... and people got full time jobs filling 9h a day to start with...

as far as i remember, the "communication / PR " position on the ANZ board hasn;t been filled in for a couple of years now...

[Archangel]

as far as i remember, the "communication / PR " position on the ANZ board hasn;t been filled in for a couple of years now...
Correct. We asked many a time and had precisely zero responses. Position remains open though so if someone put their hand up...

[Archangel]

Was that a decision from ANZ administration or NZOC
ANZ administration - or at least some parts of it.

[Sir Slick]

I have to admit that it is a bit dishearting that we are not the same page with the rest of the world. I think all we need is somebody to take the leap of faith and offer NZ archers the chance to step up and show that they do have what it takes to get back up to that level again. Rather than setting huge qualifing standards (in terms of travel ) and sitting back and seeing if there is an archer with the time and money to have a crack.

I think I must look at this slightly differently from everyone else. Archers have known for over a year now that there would be no one attending this event (Olympics) and that the qualifying score would be dramatically increased to attain selection. My personal point of view is that archers within NZ were given the chance to step up - they had a year to prepare and get their scores and ability right up there, turn up at the Nationals shoot very high scores and thumb their nose at ANZ by showing what they could do. No one took that chance. There are other events after the Olympics (thinking Comm Games and World Champs) - and the next Olympics is only 4 years away!!

As far as not being on the same page as the rest of the world - I think in terms of qualification standards at least - Archery NZ is now catching up. Many countries around the world would likely have archers who can shoot 1300 actually miss Olympic selection so the archers are not being hard done by in terms of standards required.

Development programmes - people have tried to institute these in the past and due to various reasons (one of which includes a lack of athlete commitment and lack of willingness to adapt) all have fallen over. I have received that statement straight from the horses mouth and so feel justified posting it here. There are of course other factors contributing to their decline.

In regards to "even the Samoans sending someone" - those Samoans beat most of our archers at our Nationals. They earned their spot at the CQT and knocked a few of our top archers out of our own Matchplay. They have improved markedly in just two years through dedication and hard work.

Finally - I don't believe the Olympics should be diminished by sending substandard athletes - the Olympics have ALWAYS been about the very best in the world. People might say its all about medals - damn right, and so it should be. There are other events around the world that you can send your best teams too who are below Olympic standard. I would be embarrased if NZ sent an Eric the Eel or whatever his name is. There is actually a rule issued by the IOC that states something along the lines of no country should send an athlete who is not worthy of being there. If you attend the Olympics, before you even turn up you should be good enough to win - first round KO or not. IMO.

[Archangel]

Development programmes - people have tried to institute these in the past and due to various reasons (one of which includes a lack of athlete commitment and lack of willingness to adapt) all have fallen over. I have received that statement straight from the horses mouth and so feel justified posting it here. There are of course other factors contributing to their decline.
That's partly my impression of it. I've been through a couple of development programmes in the past, and while I got a lot out of one of them, in the end it folded for two reasons:
1) lack of any semblance of dedication from most of the archers
2) no strong enforcement of requirements from the coaches
I haven't seen any compelling evidence so far that things would be different if it all played out again.

There is actually a rule issued by the IOC that states something along the lines of no country should send an athlete who is not worthy of being there. If you attend the Olympics, before you even turn up you should be good enough to win - first round KO or not. IMO.
FITA have a "standard" that all archers are supposed to have reached; was 1200 I think.
It's total bull**** though; they have ignored it several times in the past. If they're not going to stand by that, they shouldn't expect anyone else to do so.

[Jay.G]

Wow, I go away for a weekend to watch another sport, and look at all these posts that appear in the meantime!
Unfortunately all it is is talk on a web forum. It's all very well saying "get more strategic" and "develop initiatives", but what does that mean?


Such as making the step of inviting/involving school into national level and also appeal to school using whatever means achievable. I have already instigated the process of connecting my school through the help of AAC with ANZ from this year. I am eagerly awaiting to see what results, however small can be seen through this change and though I will depart in Auckland in the year to come, I would also keep an eye out to see this program's future advancement and hopefully for my school archery will be rectified from its present derailment and hopefully this will result to some benefit for archery in New Zealand in General and maybe other school will follow.

[themadarcher]

[QUOTE=Archangel]
People want to see a story and have something to get excited about - and no, "will the lights system fail this round" does NOT count.
QUOTE]
Lol, that was getting pretty old by the end of that matchplay, no wonder the cameras didn't stay! :D I may have a slightly distorted view on this selection thing, as I have only shot target for 6 months. Hence if ANZ really did stand up and tell everybody the required standard after the last nationals then I guess we should be dissapointed to have missed out since we were forwarned. Sir Slick, I certainly agree that the Samoans are doing very well and showing us how it is done, but we do have archers at this level - why should we sit back and watch? They are letting their archers shoot and they are gaining valuble experience. We don't even give the Islands the respect of recognising shoots there as international experience. We are at that level, we should be sending archers to have a go. I recon a single archer that returns from an international shoot, hungery :drool: to improve and get back to that world stage- regardless of position, is worth ten archers sitting at home wishing they could be there. I agree that we need to go with the desire to win, but we have to start somewhere.

[The One]

Development programmes - people have tried to institute these in the past and due to various reasons (one of which includes a lack of athlete commitment and lack of willingness to adapt) all have fallen over. I have received that statement straight from the horses mouth and so feel justified posting it here. There are of course other factors contributing to their decline.

Granted, but we should not fail to pursue this just because some people in the past didn't care enough to make it work. Give the archers of today the opportunity to make it work. If we want to get a team of 1300 recurve shooters then they don't grow on trees - we need a framework which will support and foster their improvement. We need to get a squad running NOW or else I don't forsee anything substantially different from performances over the past few years.

If we want to improve our scores, we need to do something proactive about it. Archers do not score 60 points more in a FITA just because the qualifying scores go up by that amount. Granted a lot of personal motivation and dedication is required, but we need more than that if we're going to succeed at the CGs.

[Jay.G]

Well Samoa is somewhat lucky politicially since the PM is an archer himself and thus Archery has some what more allowance for certain aspects. Also Olympics as previously mentioned even if we did attend the Qualifier, the NZOC wouldn't have accepted the candidate because of their high standards. Of Course you're right about the international experience but its still up to the archer financially and physically. I personally think the qualification needed is a bit hard for the moment and hence we don't have that many candidates but on the other hand if its lowered we'd send somewhat of a mediocre team in terms of the world level and archers themselves may be disheartened by the gap in their level and the worlds. However I would suggest a lowering of qualification for the reason of international exposure and also if we have seen that gap of skill, like you said, we would be pushed to excel and those who disheartens and gives up IMO shouldn't be there anyway.

[themadarcher]

I have to admit have the prime minister shooting would probably help their sport develop!

[Jay.G]

In regards to "even the Samoans sending someone" - those Samoans beat most of our archers at our Nationals. They earned their spot at the CQT and knocked a few of our top archers out of our own Matchplay. They have improved markedly in just two years through dedication and hard work.

For the seniors, I was actually disappointed at how much they improved, I was expecting some really good stuff from the Samoan senior archers but I was somewhat disappointed. I shot with them last nationals and this nationals, both during practice so prehaps I cannot acurately comment. I say this only because of them having full-time access to one of the elite coaches of China for over a year since october of 2006 for building up to the pacific games. Only the Junior, Andrew Ah Liki really stepped up and talking to him, he really earned that too.

[Archangel]

We need to get a squad running NOW or else I don't forsee anything substantially different from performances over the past few years.
As much as I think we should have a squad running, I don't foresee any substantially improved performances as a result of one being set up. A bunch of archers sitting around waiting for a squad to be set up for them to solve all their problems isn't a recipe for success.

[themadarcher]

You are exactly right, what I was thinking is using the squad as an incentive to get archers training on their own first. As in setting archers targets that if achieved will give them a spot. The squad is then used to keep those archers pushing themselves and each other. If somebody puts the offer out there, but only if certain standard is reached, then there may be the interest to get archers shooting for a place. As the standards rise, so does the squad requirement. This way we build our internal standards up first. At the moment everyone is waiting for a squad to get things moving, what we need is to start a movement that will create such a need for a squad, the squad will then give those archers something to shot for, without worrying about the skill gap and such.

[Jay.G]

As much as I think we should have a squad running, I don't foresee any substantially improved performances as a result of one being set up. A bunch of archers sitting around waiting for a squad to be set up for them to solve all their problems isn't a recipe for success.

Nor does archers that are just flying around like flies without heads. I agree with Stephens' idea and I guess once the squad starts to run, it shouldn't be fun and games, it must be disciplined. Screw that **** about having fun, what did that ever do for getting medals at world level, if you want results, you must sacrifice in order to achieve it. Those who ain't prepared to put in the work and dedication then they have no right to be in there. Of course problem is there might be no one left in the end but then that would say something about archery is going ain't it.

[themadarcher]

I would hope that the promise of such an deal may give a little bit of an incentive - without initaily putting things in place. There would be no need to ask for managers and funds untill the archers had shown that they supported the idea- by shooting, not by simply saying that it is needed. Simple, we shoot well, then maybe someone will consider putting the time into being squad manager, they can then do this with the confidence that the archers are already training and competeing for spaces. If a squad is formed there will then be the incentive to shoot to stay in the squad, or to lift the game to get in.

[burt666]

i agree, let's shot together, let's compete, let's exchange ideas and have common training session once in a while, and let's have our ideas / froms checked by our respective mentors / coaches regularly (and probably let's make sure they talk to each other behind our back isn't a silly idea either)......a squad manager would be nice off course, but i don't see any body right now willing to take the responsibility, and with the appropriate skills... i belonged this winter to a "common interest group" sort of thing, but it's been recently dissolved... :( (coach wanna do more shooting while he can...)

We already talked about this with madarcher a week or so ago, and i'm think we're going to have sessions once in a while together :D

Maybe it's the maybe to go.. or at least for us in the Auckland area... with ANZ, we must learn to be independent and take care of our asses ourselves...

[Ray Watchman]

Correct. We asked many a time and had precisely zero responses. Position remains open though so if someone put their hand up...
I have recently retired after a career in print and radio journalism. I have also recently returned to archery after some 10 years and have a 16-year-old son who took up our sport just a couple of months back and is quickly shaping up to be a commited competitive recurve shooter.
Apart from 16 hours a week sub-editing, I have plently of time on my hands and would be delighted to help Archery NZ in the publicity/promotion area. In fact, I am soon to prepare an article to submit to The Archer offering suggestions to clubs (and ANZ for that matter) on how to deal with the media.
The excellent semi-feature article, with display photo, on Amanda Hume and Patrick Biggs which appeared in the Manawatu Standard last week was, simply, the result of a member of Manawatu Archery Club liaising with that paper's sports editor, Peter Lampp. Once Peter grasped the significance of Amanda's achievement at the 08 Nationals, he was only too happy to give it substantial space on the paper's main sports page, with a skybox on the front page.
The point is, someone needed to make the personal approach to the sports editor, explain the significance of the potential story to him and suggest, in this case, the photo opportunity it presented as well. Also secured, was an undertaking for the Manawatu Standard to continue carrying archery stories and the results of significant events involving local archers.
Our club has had at least two serious membership inquiries out of that one story.

[The One]

As much as I think we should have a squad running, I don't foresee any substantially improved performances as a result of one being set up. A bunch of archers sitting around waiting for a squad to be set up for them to solve all their problems isn't a recipe for success.

I see some improvements (not the sitting around bit, but after it has been implemented). But sitting on our asses and doing exactly the same thing will certainly not work. It's not working currently, we need to try something else, and I think that this is one of the thigns we are missing. Certainly not all, but still a part.

[Jay.G]

I have recently retired after a career in print and radio journalism. I have also recently returned to archery after some 10 years and have a 16-year-old son who took up our sport just a couple of months back and is quickly shaping up to be a commited competitive recurve shooter.
Apart from 16 hours a week sub-editing, I have plently of time on my hands and would be delighted to help Archery NZ in the publicity/promotion area. In fact, I am soon to prepare an article to submit to The Archer offering suggestions to clubs (and ANZ for that matter) on how to deal with the media.
The excellent semi-feature article, with display photo, on Amanda Hume and Patrick Biggs which appeared in the Manawatu Standard last week was, simply, the result of a member of Manawatu Archery Club liaising with that paper's sports editor, Peter Lampp. Once Peter grasped the significance of Amanda's achievement at the 08 Nationals, he was only too happy to give it substantial space on the paper's main sports page, with a skybox on the front page.
The point is, someone needed to make the personal approach to the sports editor, explain the significance of the potential story to him and suggest, in this case, the photo opportunity it presented as well. Also secured, was an undertaking for the Manawatu Standard to continue carrying archery stories and the results of significant events involving local archers.
Our club has had at least two serious membership inquiries out of that one story.

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: Well its up to the board nw.

[Ray Watchman]

Yep, and a lot of getting into the public spotlight involves how we publish results. For instance, none of the results from the National Champs made it into the national newspapers. We need a lot more emphasis on getting articles and results into the papers, radio, television, on the web. It does take time to organise this, but it is well worthwhile. The more exposure, the better.
Can I suggest in all seriousness that the board of ANZ consider re-naming the National Archery Championships The Sir Edmund Hillary Memorial New Zealand Archery Championships?
We should seize the initiative and be the first national sporting body to honour Sir Ed in this manner. Bear in mind the Oceanic/Australasian nature of our national event, so it is appropriate to Sir Ed's universal popularity. So re-named, it would make the lifting of the championship's public profile that much easier and help establish the kudos it should enjoy through the media as a major, internationally inclusive, sports event in New Zealand.
Mountaineering and archery are similar sports in terms of individual excellence being supported by team effort.
And obviously, the annual event will always fall on, or very near, the anniversary of Sir Ed's death - reason in itself to consider this proposal. I'd be interested in what wiser heads than mine think about this idea. If there seem to be a consensus of support, I'll follow through with a submission to the board.
No sport can remain healthy, let alone flourish, in a social vacuum. That is why a sustainable and practical publicity strategy is important. Hence the above proposal as a means to honouring a great Kiwi and in doing so gaining a valuable publicity foothold (an image Sir Ed would have appreciated!)

[burt666]

Can I suggest in all seriousness that the board of ANZ consider re-naming the National Archery Championships The Sir Edmund Hillary Memorial New Zealand Archery Championships?

that could really be sees as free loading, no?!? :S

[The One]

A worthwhile cause, but not appropriate IMO. Sir Ed had no visible links with our sport.

[bruce johnson]

Burt666

Who is running the administration now in ANZ. President, Sectretary, National Coach etc..

I see you're associated with Shore Archery club. That was my first club in NZ way back in the day.. I've spent many hours there coaching Peter Ebden and others.. is it still as windy as ever.. give my regards to anyone who remembers me..

Cheers Bruce

[burt666]

Burt666

Who is running the administration now in ANZ. President, Sectretary, National Coach etc..

I see you're associated with Shore Archery club. That was my first club in NZ way back in the day.. I've spent many hours there coaching Peter Ebden and others.. is it still as windy as ever.. give my regards to anyone who remembers me..

Cheers Bruce


Hey Bruce,

Peter as indeed mentioned you, as he is a very gd friend of mine and has posted many things in this thread in case you haven't recognize his style yet ;)

Find all the info you needabout actual ANZ board members on archerynz.co.nz (http://www.archerynz.co.nz), not sure we have a "national coach" as such at the moment...

Shore still windy indeed!! good place to train tho, it make it really "do or die" sort of thing! :D will send regards around indeed!:thumb:

[The One]

Apart from 16 hours a week sub-editing, I have plently of time on my hands and would be delighted to help Archery NZ in the publicity/promotion area.

I'm sure the board would be very interested to talk to you about that! This is an area where we could make a lot of gains, and i'm sure your input would be appreciated. if you want, PM me your contact details, and I'll pass them on to the Board to contact you about the position. :)