National Titles

[Marcus]

OK lets visit an old topic from a different slant.
We have approx 2000 archers in Australia
How many National Titles should be awarded each year?
Some know the actual number awarded this year, but I would like to know how many people think SHOULD be awarded.

[DrRalph]

One for each division recognised by Archery Australia. If you want less, get the rules changed :)

Must be quite a few!

I can see where you are leading here:

Lets see (U12, U14, U16 U18 Ad V50 V60 * 2 ) for Rec, BB, Longbow, Comp, BB Comp, X-bow, standard bow (?) for a maximum of
112 per event type. So we haev indoor, field, clout and target, for
448 potential national titles. Why don't I have one ? :o Better than 1/5 archers could be national champions if each were different and all categories were filled?

At least there are more potential archers than titles, although you may be hard pressed to find 2000 archers in australia that shoot competitively. If we play our cards right, all the 2-400 competing archers could be national champion!

How many are actually acheived?

[Flame]

OK lets visit an old topic from a different slant.
We have approx 2000 archers in Australia
How many National Titles should be awarded each year?
Some know the actual number awarded this year, but I would like to know how many people think SHOULD be awarded.

:D

[Eberbachl]

We should have far fewer, and make being a national champion actually meaningful.

Sure, in a few divisions, being National champion is a huge acheivement - and I have the utmost respect for those titles, but there are far too many obscure divisions where all you have to do is show up to get a medal.

If you win the veterans, left-handed, fat gut, bald spot, sighted longbow division what does that mean?

Jack **** :rofl:

Reduce the number of divisions in the sport, and make a win mean something :D

[CMB50]

I also think there are way too many divisions.

This would be my suggestion:
AGE GROUPS:
Open
1 x Vets division (maybe 50 or 55 +)
Junior (16-18 )
Cadets(12-15)


BOW TYPES:
Recurve sighted
Compound sighted
Barebow (covers BB recurve and longbow - NOT compound BB)

That makes 12 different divisions, multiplied by indoor, target, field and clout gives a total of 48 national titles available.

I think makes a national title a little more prestigious.

[Flame]

Mens open compound (all bow types)
Womens open compound (all bow types)
Mens open recurve (all bow types)
Womens open recurve (all bow types)
Junior girls u18 compound (all bow types)
Junior girls u18 recurve (all bow types)
Junior boys u18 compound (all bow types)
Junior boys u18 recurve (all bow types)
Junior girls U14 compound (all bow types)
Junior girls U14 recurve (all bow types)
Junior boys U14 compound (all bow types)
Junior boys U14 recurve (all bow types)

12 medals :D

[Rodger]

That makes 12 different divisions, multiplied by indoor, target, field and clout gives a total of 48 national titles available.

Ummmmm, that makes 24 different divisions and 96 titles. Don't forget Male/Female ;)

But I defiantly agree. Just two Junior divisions makes much more sense!

[Guy]

So everyone is in favour of retaining Clout as a National title?

[CMB50]

That makes 12 different divisions, multiplied by indoor, target, field and clout gives a total of 48 national titles available.

Ummmmm, that makes 24 different divisions and 96 titles. Don't forget Male/Female ;)

But I defiantly agree. Just two Junior divisions makes much more sense!

:oops: umm...yeah, that's what i meant!

[Rodger]

So everyone is in favour of retaining Clout as a National title?

YES! :D :D :o

[frommy]

:iamwithstupid:

A world without clout? Nah. :wink:

[Marcus]

So everyone is in favour of retaining Clout as a National title?That's fine, just don't make it part of the Teams events at the juniors.

However with approx 50 archers competing at the Nationals in clout with 5 bow types, 3 age groups and 2 sexes producing 30 Gold medals which is more than half the competitors it puts next to no value on it, which is a shame for those who worked hard to win it.

Juniors is worse
5 bow types
4 ages
2 sexes = 40 gold medals

I guess the biggest question is do we need to seperate divisions that have one person in them?
Why do we seperate mens and womens longbow?
Why do we have veterens longbow?
Same with the other barebow divisions?
Why do we even have barebow compound? (I know your reasons Robbo)
Do we need 4 jr age groups? There are moves to add 2 more as well!
Do we need 2 Veteren divisions?

I would suggest

Vet 50+ Mens and Womens Compound and Recurve (4 divisions)
Open Mens and Womens Compound and Recurve (4 divisions)
Open Barebow (1 division)
Junior (U18) Mens and Womens Compound and Recurve (4 divisions)
Cadet (U16) Mens and Womens Compound and Recurve (4 divisions)
(U13) Compound and Recurve (2 divisions)

19 divisions that caters to everyone

However we still have
National Target
National Indoor
National Field
National Clout
National Matchplay

95 gold medals, which is still better than the 500+ we give away now.

Comments?

[Flame]

You are generous :D

[Marcus]

I think we need 3 Jr divisions.
U18 and U16 keep us in line with FITA, however we have quite a few younger kids who should not be forgotten and shouldn't have to compete with some of the man mountains in U16's.

[Juggs]

and the argument is always the same
the open shooters who dont see the value in the other divisions.

and the minority divisions who say what about me.

ie long bow a man can draw more weight than a woman so has an adavantage why should a female have to compete against someone with a natural advantage.

what ever fita recognises should be done here

[Marcus]

It's got nothing to do with the Open divisions not recognising others Juggs, it's about archery having a serious problem and no one is fixing it. I find longbow discouraging to compete in because there are so few shooters.

FITA does not recognise longbow in any event except 3Di.

and the argument is always the same
the open shooters who dont see the value in the other divisions.

and the minority divisions who say what about me.

ie long bow a man can draw more weight than a woman so has an adavantage why should a female have to compete against someone with a natural advantage.

what ever fita recognises should be done here

[Juggs]

well your not a long bow shooter. im sure the women who do shoot this division would not apprieciate the change. if there are so few shooters why go to the sffort of changing it.

people seem happy with the way things are. if its the money issue for the awards that are needed to be bought. just hand out paper certificates.

[Marcus]

Arn't I? What do you know what I shoot down the club? Ask the fluro light I smashed shooting longbow.

How many women longbowers are there?
How many have LEFT longbow due to there being no competition?

People are NOT happy with the way things are Juggs, that's the point. At the Indoors this year we had to wait for an hour while division after division of Veterens with 1-2 people in there got up and got their medals. I would have been happy to wait had there been 5-10 people in each of their divisions, but there wasn't, in many cases the archers could have been allocated the medal at registration.
I've also run tournaments where Juniors have stopped shooting and made comments "It doesn't matter, I get my medal anyway" Where is the value there?

People like to compete Juggs, you take it for granted because you shoot Open. I've been to tournaments as a junior where I was the only one and I hated it.

The cost isn't the issue, it's about giving people something to be proud of.

[Juggs]

bull**** marcus 80% of aa members are non competitive social shooters. you argument holds no validity apart from the view of a competitive archer.

[Marcus]

bull**** marcus 80% of aa members are non competitive social shooters. you argument holds no validity apart from the view of a competitive archer.
80% of members non competitive social? Only in NSW.

Besides if they don't should tournaments why do they care if their peers are off somewhere else competing?
Based on a survey of my focus group of archers (my club) 65% of them shoot tournaments on a regular occasion.

[Flame]

CW and I shoot every State and National tournament plus all ranking rounds.

The same dedicated competition archers are there as well.

There are no need to have all of these divisions for the few who turn up to one State event at their club, compete in a division of one and say I won my divison.

[Eberbachl]

.......................bull**** marcus 80% ........... you argument holds no validity apart from the view of a competitive archer.................

:rofl: Juggs why don't you tell us what you really mean ...

If said archers aren't competitive, they'll be happy staying at their club and flinging arrows :wink:

All I would say is that it's a waste of time and effort when people can be allocated their medals as they register because of lack of interest in that division.

It happens all too often.

With so many divisions, as much as I love it - archery as a serious sport is largely a joke.

Especially considering that we can have National champions in:

AA

ABA

FITA

3DAAA

Multiply each organisation by the amount of possible national champions, and I'd guess you'd have a couple of thousand Australian National Champion Archers! :rofl:

No wonder many people I meet say - "hey I know so and so, he's a national champion - you must know him!"

:lol:

From a personal standpoint....

I'd like to see one governing body, catering for each archery discipline, with the number of divisions reduced, and a ruling that if there are too few divisions present at a tournament, then that division need not be catered for.

Maybe not realistic, I know - but hey, I reckon it'd be nice :D

[katzgrin]

I've also run tournaments where Juniors have stopped shooting and made comments "It doesn't matter, I get my medal anyway" Where is the value there?

If they don't finish the round they should not be eligible. If that isn't stated in the rules then it should be.

Flame said that he and CW shoot ranking rounds etc., so why not have a minimum qualification of some combination of interclub shoots that have been listed on the state calendar, state events and ranking rounds. If anyone else wants to go to a national event for a jolly time, they are welcome (as is their entry fee), but they are not eligible for a medal. A country earns its place at the Olympics by having archers compete successfully at a FITA sanctioned event so why not extend this idea to our national events?

[Flame]

CW shoots Womens FITA at all the ranking rounds because there is nobody to shoot against in U16, and is good pratice for the Nationals.

If the archers that want to have 1 archer division attended all of the State tournaments and Nationals then they would at least have a case.
But shooting one event a year is a bit rich to include that division.

[Peter King]

I have some sympathy for the problem but I see a few minority babies in all this bathwater, eg the obvious one:

Marcus wrote:

Open Barebow (1 division)

whilst sighted anything has so many divisions.

Recurve against compound, kids against men??? What round would they shoot?
It virtually says we don't care about barebow. That would get a reaction at our club

I think we recognise champions appropriately, and have even introduced extra "champion" categories (Matchplay). Winners of awards such as Vets, barebow etc are not really lauded as "champions": they just get recognition within their peer group.
That might not seem a big deal to X,Y and other gens but shooting recurve at 70+ years of age is some feat.

On to solutions:
Perhaps we should radically increase the trophy/prize/recognition for Open champions, recognise others with certificates or similar and only award such where 3 or more people compete.

And finally, on the semantics we don't bandy the "champion" tags around as much as other codes, even other archery codes....a good thing considering everyone is a "hero" today (and a "super-hero" if you even contemplate facing the extreme challenge of giving up smoking without pharmaceutical assistance!! :lol: )

[Juggs]

82 people shot the STATE TARGET CHAMPIONSHIPS 2004 at twin city.

how many members in archery victoria ??

[CMB50]

bull**** marcus 80% of aa members are non competitive social shooters. you argument holds no validity apart from the view of a competitive archer.

If that's true juggs then the 80% of shooters won't mind the division changes since there only there for the 'social' experience.

[CMB50]

82 people shot the STATE TARGET CHAMPIONSHIPS 2004 at twin city.

how many members in archery victoria ??

Twin city archers is 200+ kilometers from where the majority of AV members live - Melbourne. For me, it simply wasn't a possibility with work and other commitments.

[Juggs]

no not true, they still like their little trinkets for going along, most attend one or two events that they have been going to for years.
shoots like our south coast field, never see some of these people at any other shoots.

more participants are needed promoting the sport in the public should be the concern not playing with the few peas left in the pod.

[CMB50]

Oh ok.

Well forget about it Marcus. We'd hate to hinder these people that turn up to one or two shoots a year and expect their trophy in their division.

Archery is a sport. Sport's are supposed to be competitive otherwise they are a hobby. Having 500 divisions does not make archery a competitive sport.

[Juggs]

and you hit the nail on the head.

archery in australia is a hobby their is no serious competition calender. we dont even run to the same divisions as fita and you vics shoot something called a aus round.

the associations are fragmented and not treansparent to each other.

how hard would it be to run a aus wide handicapped fita round.

[Malko]

Could there be like a minimum score to achieve in each division to get a medal? like an "international" minimum level kind of thing

or perhaps only start giving medals when there is indeed a competition (4or more)?

ni all other cases just give a paper certificate.

[Clare Barnes]

Having 500 divisions does not make archery a competitive sport.

There may have been 500 divisions but only 229 archers received Gold National Championship medals in 2004.....

....so guys, check out the empty divisions and work out how to be a champion in 2005....there are medals waiting for you! :o :roll:

[Juggs]

our club amalgamated with another that ran saturday shoots every week.
they brought this idea to our club and it boosted participation.

before that the club was just a place to get sight settings and fling arrows.

y arnt the associations encouraging and promoting the sport, y is it left up to a few ie marcus to do it.

[Marcus]

Which way are you arguing Juggs?
The idea behind getting rid of divisions is to make it more competitive and remond our members they are in a serious competitive sport, not an expensive way of collecting medals.
We run 3 divisions at our 3D club shoots, Sighted, Unsighted and Juniors, and our participation levels are going up and up.

[Malko]

Clare, say I wan't to be a Longbow Veteran Champion in Clout? how do I do :D :-?

(i'm 29 :) )

[Clare Barnes]

Clare, say I wan't to be a Longbow Veteran Champion in Clout? how do I do :D :-?

(i'm 29 :) )

Wait 21 years....though by then Marcus will be running AA and will have abolished clout nation-wide...... :roll: :roll:

[Malko]

bugger !

[Juggs]

i am arguing the issue is not the divisions but the lack of numbers in the sport.

i know you could argue one is related to the other. but that is just being nearsighted and taking the easy way out.

the sport/hobby needs more participants, for every 100 participants in any sport 10-15 percent are goal seeking motivated sports people. the rest to varying degrees are there for recreational exercise purposes.

[Rodger]

i am arguing the issue is not the divisions but the lack of numbers in the sport.

Yes, that is a problem, but we're arguing about divisions...

[hill billy with a shotgun]

i think alot of people are forgeting about the long bows.

[Marcus]

No doubt about that Juggs.
I played competitive basketball for a number of years while I wasn't doing archery. In one league we had 2 divisions, A grade and B grade. In another we had 9 divisions. The difference was one league had the numbers to support it.
Archery is making the divisions without the numbers to support it. It's not smart sports administration, and I bet if we scrapped ALL divisions now and started again smart administration would do things alot differently.

Clare you malign me, Clout has a place in the archery world, at medievil festivals. ;)
Actually it's a good day off for the Nationals, it should remain, just don't make me shoot it.

Hill Billy: No not at all, that is the reason for the barebow division, right where Longbow would fit. IF we then got a point where 10+ longbowmen were shooting every shoot there would be a case for their own division, however they have their own at the moment and we get maybe 3.

[Flame]

Archers must make up their mind if they want to compete or be social shooters.

If at tournaments you set a minimum number of archers to run a division then you would force the ones that do shoot at comps to get their mates along so they can shoot.

I would leave the open longbow in as the 3 guys that do shoot this divison do so at most state comps and nationaly and are not the one off event shooters

Archers should justify a division by having the numbers at events :D

[Clare Barnes]

Clout has a place in the archery world ...

Actually it's a good day off for the Nationals, it should remain, just don't make me shoot it.

So programming something else on that day is not discouraging people from shooting it? :-?

If it is just considered a rest day for most people it may as well be removed from the event altogether.....and that is from someone who likes clout! :o

If the event took a day less it would be one day's less accommodation to pay for etc etc etc..... :D

[Flame]

but we wouldn't get to see you shoot Clare and take pics.

Which reminds me who wants to see pics of Clouters bending over to pick up arrows :D

[rooster]

Flame You and AX are VETS next year??? :wink:

[robbo]

:-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :o

[Flame]

Flame You and AX are VETS next year??? :wink:

Yep :D

We are going to start our own division :D

[bigfella]

OK lets visit an old topic from a different slant.
We have approx 2000 archers in Australia
How many National Titles should be awarded each year?
Some know the actual number awarded this year, but I would like to know how many people think SHOULD be awarded.

It is still an old topic, still the same old arguments and still the same old efforts to disenfranchise those minority elements of the fraternity. The old, the young and the not so good archer.

Instead why don't we make archery totally elitist and allow only those shooting in the top 10 of the maintsream divisions compete, get rid of everything else and see where archery is then. Dead!

Archery is unique in that you don't have to be a world beater to compete and that has to be one of the things that keeps everyone coming back.

[Xs24-7]

Does the present class system keep them coming back....or does it simply give less qualified archers the opportunity to reach their goals of becoming a National Champion sooner, and then they quit anyway.
We are in a similar situation here in Canada, and we have finally put in place a system so remove classes with little participation from National events. You can have 500 classes at local shoots if you wish...but the Nationals should not be about making mediocre archers happy by giving them a token medal for a substandard performance in an obscure catagory. There is no other sport in the World that has fealt it neccesary to cater ot the every whim of every participant to the detriment of the integrity of the sport. So long as we keep up the present policy, mainstream recongnition will not excist. Take the Sydney Olympics for example...would SImon have gotten the press he received if, rather than being Olympic Archery Champion he was "Senior Men Recurve CHampion, along side 14 other gold medallists in 15 divisoins? No. It was the prestigous field that made allowed him to be crowned a true champion. We should endevour to make our rules for all events reflect this, so that those who truly shine can bring our sport the recongnision it deserves.

[Flame]

It is still an old topic, still the same old arguments and still the same old efforts to disenfranchise those minority elements of the fraternity. The old, the young and the not so good archer.



Hey I qualify for two of those :D

Ax and I are going to ask for the 50's Not so good archer division :D

Sorry bigfella you will need to ask for the 60+ better than average division

[CMB50]

It is still an old topic, still the same old arguments and still the same old efforts to disenfranchise those minority elements of the fraternity. The old, the young and the not so good archer.

Instead why don't we make archery totally elitist and allow only those shooting in the top 10 of the maintsream divisions compete, get rid of everything else and see where archery is then. Dead!

Archery is unique in that you don't have to be a world beater to compete and that has to be one of the things that keeps everyone coming back.

bigfella,

this has been discussed before, as have a lot of other topics on here. However if we keep dismissing everything that is bought up on here then there would be very little to talk about. I think it is also good to give people a chance to throw their two cents in who are new to the forum or for other members to posts new ideas they've had since the discussion last time.
In all seriousness, do you think Veteran require 2 different age groups (50 - 60 and 60+ ) ? Would there be any merit in merging the veterans and having just one age group but say make it 55 +. I ask this because here in Vic most of our best shooter could qualify for veteran 50+ however choose to shoot open because they are still well and truly able to.
Would be interested in your opinion and the opinion of others in the Vet's division.

[Oldtimer]

The true Australian Champions are the winners of the open divisions, and they should be so recognised. The rest of us are shooting restricted divisions, and the rewards are obviously less - the medals are engraved with the restriction. Perhaps these medals should be smaller, also ???? But there would be an extra cost involved in this.

I know it can be somewhat embarassing to receive a medal for turning up, especially if you were not happy with your shooting, but is it the fault of those who turned up, or those who didn't ? There can also be some quite strong competition in these divisions, even if not a lot of competitors.

I don't see a problem, as long as we recognise the true champions - the open division winners. This is why their medals are usually awarded last - so that those who bothered to stay for the presentation will go away with that memory.

[Robert de Bondt]

In all seriousness, do you think Veteran require 2 different age groups (50 - 60 and 60+ ) ? Would there be any merit in merging the veterans and having just one age group but say make it 55 +. I ask this because here in Vic most of our best shooter could qualify for veteran 50+ however choose to shoot open because they are still well and truly able to.
Would be interested in your opinion and the opinion of others in the Vet's division.

If we analyse the results from the Nationals 2004 we find:
9 Archers - 50-59 MC
4 Archers - 60+ MC

6 Archers - 50-59 MR
3 Archers - 60+ MR

3 Archers - 50-59 FC
3 Archers - 60+ FC

4 Archers - 50-59 FR
1 Archer - 60+ FR

Resulting in 8 Classes for 33 people and 22 medals :roll:

Leaving alone the
Plus 1 archer - 60+ FBBC
Plus 1 Archer - 60+ MBBC.

Personally, and in view of the above, I feel we should stick with FITA Rules and only have the Masters being 50+(sounds better than Vets or Old Farts :wink: )

Just watch out BigFella I'm gonna whip your ass next Nationals, irrespecive of what class :wink: :lol:

[Flame]

I personally like Old Farts - tell it like it is :D

[bigfella]

Cam, Two points. Firstly this topic has been thrashed to death and whilst I agree that it is important to revisit issues so that all can be resolved to the satisfaction of those who are affected by the issue, it is important that we do not allow others' agendas to dictate the debate. Why is the number of medals an issue? I believe that it is because there are some divisions within our Nationals or other major events that presently have fewer than 3 competitors and in some only 1. I know all the argument regarding this and they don't have to regurgitated. My comment is that it is not an easy issue to resolve. However why is it an issue at all and would it be an issue if there were 10 or 15 competing in every division? I guess not. So is the answer in reducing the number of divisions. I would expect more that it is in the relatively small number of competitors nationally when compared to say swimming and athletics (track and field) where there are more than enough to fill every event, category and division). So shouldn't our focus be on growing our sport to the point where it can support the divisions instead of disenfranchising those archers who are either too old and unsteady to compete in open class or who like shooting without a sight (God forgive them) or who in some cases like shooting a wooden bow.

Regarding your question as to my thoughts on reducing veterans to a single division. If I were 10 years younger (50) and with my present skill level I would be happy to shoot open class and I do on occasions at present. Add another 10 years (70) and to be frank, I can't imagine that my body would hold up to being competitive with those of 54. Still I would hope that I am still shooting and being able to compete nationally within a restricted class. I am sure that I would enjoy the competition as much as I do now even though it may not be at as high a level as it is at the moment. My perception now is that a great majority of those veterans who are doing the circuit at present do so because of the friendships that they have made over the years and because it gives them the opportunity to re-establish contact and enjoy their sport. Perhaps the challenge of winning a medal presents an additional opportunity for some, but so what? Have they not earned the right to compete?
This debate is somewhat like the debate concerning the removal of the clout from the National Championships. I ask why? Just because some who don't like it and who are vocal in their attitude towards it does not mean that we should disenfranchise those who enjoy it. If you don't like it don't shoot it. It is as simple as that but don't come the heavies with those for whom it is a great day of shooting. How many would like to see the field removed from the Nationals and yet in Australia that is not a majority discipline. I say live and let live.
Grow the sport and there wont be a need for this debate. Show your new archers an unbiased view on clout and there will always be those who want to do it.

Robert, Melbourne 2005 :fist:

[bigfella]

Flame You and AX are VETS next year??? :wink:

Yep :D



Flame, I might even move up a division to give you some curry 0X :wink:

[Juggs]

well said.

[bigfella]

I personally like Old Farts - tell it like it is :D

An Old Fart and proud of it :wink:

[Marcus]

I argue that too many divisions hampers the growth of our sport. I have done studies into the costs of tournaments etc and found that the Open Mens Compound pay for the rest of the archers to compete, only Open Womens Compound breaks even, the rest are NOT finacially viable divisions.
When kids go to shoot after shoot and win because it's just them they drift away from the sport, they don't feel they are accomplishing anything. We already have quite a few juniors, but in Victoria they are spread too thin, over 5 divisions. We had one U12 shoot Open Womens Compound recently because she's sick of winning by default.
People simply are not shooting tournaments in many of these divisions. You ask them why and they ask why bother. Why pay $25-$35 if you win by default?

I hear so many people say "but it doesn't hurt you, let us do it"
It does hurt us. It lessens the competition, it increases costs, it makes tournaments more difficult to run (so many rounds to cater for), and it discourages many more from competing (mainly in juniors here).

Why Bigfella are you opposed to shooting 50+ instead of 60+? You shoot good scores, you'ld be competitive. You'ld be shooting with your mates, and you still will not have to shoot 90m? Why are you shooting a Fremantle, same round as a 14 year old recurve girl? Is 70m that much harder? These questions are not a put down, I simply do not understand the opposition by strong full grown compound shooting adults to shooting longer than 60m.

I think the problem is that too many are comfortable in their little pond. How many Barebow, Veterens or Juniors have finished 25th at a competition? Would it really put you off the sport if you finished outside the medals? I believe barebow would be more popular if there was 10-15 in teh group instead of 1-2 in each.

No one is saying they can not shoot, quite the opposite, just streamlining things into a more intelligent system. If you said to me I could no longer shoot Mens Compound but had to shoot against all the others in one division I would be fine with that, even if I shot recurve.

BTW Leigh Cornish goes into 60+ next year, He shot a PB Mens FITA at the Nats (1359) and PB field round. The age thing simply doesn't hold up in this debate.

[Flame]

Flame You and AX are VETS next year??? :wink:

Yep :D



Flame, I might even move up a division to give you some curry 0X :wink:

You are over qualified for our division :D

[Axilla]

Old
Learners
Division
Flame
Axilla
Rooster
Tens
Sometimes

[Flame]

quick get the trade mark :D

[Clare Barnes]

Old
Learners
Division
Flame
Axilla
Rooster
Tens
Sometimes

I thought the T was for "they're" and the S was for "****" :-?

[Flame]

I have just found some more Clout pics - hmmmmmmmmmmmm! :D

[Clare Barnes]

I have just found some more Clout pics - hmmmmmmmmmmmm! :D

Sorry - missed off the "hot" in error! :D

[Flame]

Just lost the files again :D

[katzgrin]

Old
Learners
Division
Flame
Axilla
Rooster
Tens
Sometimes

I thought the T was for "they're" and the S was for "sh*t" :-?

Oh Clare! I cannot fault your spelling or grammar however.........................

Mind you I am doing very well with your rambling rose joke.

[Clare Barnes]

[Mind you I am doing very well with your rambling rose joke.

I must admit I really liked that one too ..... :D

[Flame]

You would :D

[Clare Barnes]

The true Australian Champions are the winners of the open divisions, and they should be so recognised. The rest of us are shooting restricted divisions, and the rewards are obviously less - the medals are engraved with the restriction. Perhaps these medals should be smaller, also ???? But there would be an extra cost involved in this.

Not a bad idea. :D Considering the number of Nationals medals I hold I think perhaps new medals for the Open Champs is the way to go or else we will never get through them ..... :o :roll: There would only be 48 Open Champs a year max then:

Recurve
Compound
BBRecurve
BBCompound
Longbow
Crossbow

Male/Female for Target, Indoor, Field and Clout.

Now let's await the onslaught of complaints from the "restricted" divisions... :D:D:D :bad-words:

[rooster]

Old
Learners
Division
Flame
Axilla
Rooster
Tens
Sometimes

I thought the T was for "they're" and the S was for "sh*t" :-?.
Sh-t Hot thank you :wink: . I kinda like the *Master* instead of Vets :D

[Flame]

Master Rooster :D

[Rodger]

50-60 = Master
60+ = Grand Master!

:D

But I think we should go the FITA way, and just use under 16 (or maybe 15), under 18, Open, and Masters. Maybe clubs could use under 13s and 60+ ect if they want, but use FITA divisions for nationals? :-?

[Axilla]

AMENDMENT

Old
Learners
Division
Flame
Axilla
Rooster
Team
Supreme

[Clare Barnes]

But I think we should go the FITA way, and just use under 16 (or maybe 15), under 18, Open, and Masters. Maybe clubs could use under 13s and 60+ ect if they want, but use FITA divisions for nationals? :-?

Strangely enough it is only for AA National Championship Records that Vet 50+ and 60+ records are recognised ... the AA Tournament Records are for Veterans as one group. :-?

[Clare Barnes]

AMENDMENT

Old
Learners
Division
Flame
Axilla
Rooster
Team
Supreme

Can Victoria consider that as an official online entry for the Matchplay Teams event for 2005? :D

BTW Victorian Nationals 2005 Organisers.... on the assumption that should any changes be made to division numbers they will not occur in a hurry, would it be possible to offer a few options on the entry form to encourage competitors to think about the divisions/medals issues:

1. If I am the only entrant in my division could you please move me up to 50+ or Open [options to tick/circle one or both] should there be other competitors there I may then compete directly against

2. Or leave a blank spot so say a longbower can write in that they would like to compete as a BBR or something if no other longbowers

3. Or perhaps also offer an option to do as I did on my entry form this year, saying that should I be the only competitor in my division I did not wish to receive a championship medal (and I thank SQAS for complying with this request!)

:-? :D

[Flame]

I had a team called the The Flames at the Nats.

Maybe The Flaming Old Farts for 2005 :D

[Axilla]

Think that the Flaming Old Farts Team will transcend state rivalries.

First intra-state team in the Nats! Definitely medal-worthy :wink:

[Flame]

Anything can happen in matchplay Ax

Have to fine tune the 70m shooting :D

[Axilla]

May the Drift be with us. :lol:

[Flame]

:rofl:

[rooster]

Flame we just gotta Ax into a Hoyt :wink: . Do'nt know about the FLAME though,quite common if you ask me :wink:

[rooster]

AMENDMENT

Old
Learners
Division
Flame
Axilla
Rooster
Team
Supreme
Can we get a sponsorship with Urban?? :wink:

[Flame]

Flame we just gotta Ax into a Hoyt :wink: . Do'nt know about the FLAME though,quite common if you ask me :wink:

Yes Ax has to get rid of that Farton :D

Nothing common about Flame :wink:

As for bow colours Blue and red are common. :D

[unclepete]

I had a team called the The Flames at the Nats.

Maybe The Flaming Old Farts for 2005 :D

Appropriate. I for one am not as air-tight as I used to be :)

[Flame]

Yes Pete

I have to be careful when I light a fag :D

[unclepete]

:D

[Axilla]

Yes Ax has to get rid of that Farton

That could well be on the cards, cept it won't be replaced by Hoyty-Toyty :D

[Flame]

Yes Ax has to get rid of that Farton

That could well be on the cards, cept it won't be replaced by Hoyty-Toyty :D

Maybe a Bo Bo Bowreck :D

[rooster]

Maybe OD will HO him a mathews :wink:

[Flame]

Maybe OD will HO him a mathews :wink:

If he gets one of those he can find another team 8)

[OldDog]

We would have to do a character background on him first. Cant have anyone of fine upstanding ideals shootin our bows. :wink:

[Flame]

We would have to do a character background on him first. Cant have anyone of fine upstanding ideals shootin our bows. :wink:

Your right, Ax is too nice to shoot a M :D

[OldDog]

brown tonguer. :P

[Flame]

get back to your chooks they are crowing :D

[mike]

Juggs
the rest to varying degrees are there for recreational exercise purposes


If you are in archery for exercise purposes then you need to see a different therapist. Recreation yes, and perhaps if you