Munsterman
Active member
Looks Like AGB is losing one of their better coaches:
Songi Woo Joins USA Archery as National Women's Head Coach
Songi Woo Joins USA Archery as National Women's Head Coach
Archery GB has a lot to answer for not UK Sport - many of the important topics you raise in this post are not UKS but Sport England issues. Yes UKS is imposing a new governance structure but to be honest this is required to shift some of the old "blazers" out of entrenched committee positions and for all sports to modernise, to put in place the right structures and remove the nepotism that has underpinned many failing sports over years. The only people to blame are previous AGB performance directors and coaches. With the governance code UKS is looking for accountability, yes it is going to take a quantum shift but it does mean cleared lines - no more hiding. If the sport does not want the new code then it can of course choose not to take UKS or SE funding there are plenty of other sports who are working hard to apply the new code, not it is not easy but it has been needed for decades.I think Sport UK have a lot to answer for, they have dictated as they do with many sports how they should be run with the threat of the removal of funding if they don't comply. They have imposed loads of constitutional changes requiring ridiculous amounts of time to be wasted as well as insisting on additional top heavy staff to oversea everything. Totally out of proportion for a sport with a membership of 30-40K. This time could have been better spent as you say looking at the competition structure in the UK, considering how the sport can grow and how clubs can prosper and facilities in clubs improved, IMO the agenda of Sport UK and AGB could not be further apart. We now have found ourselves in a position where from an athletes point of view anyone in the UK (GBR & N Ireland) can if they put the work in get the new qualifying scores represent GBR. There is now no place for embarrassment of those in the inner circle picking archers outside of the funding system and having to explain to Sport UK why the ones in the funding system were left out. I have seen how this has enthused previously disillusioned archers to up their game and strive to achieve the new qualifying scores. Already we have at least two archers doing this and the rest are really not that far behind - a real step forward. Archery is a personal sport it is up to the individual how far they want to go - no more (although I am not sure we ever did) shoot the way we tell you etc... Archers are free to follow their own training schedule the important bit is getting the qualification scores not just once but regularly these scores put our archers in the Top 32 easily so at least we then have a chance of medals. The playing field has been leveled and the cream is rising to the top. No waiting, no jam, tomorrow no sentiment, just do it.
I would never advise anyone to take up archery as a professional athlete. As a young person, by the time you make it then get dropped, you could be 10 to 15 years behind anyone of your age with any type of professional career. Archery in this country is little more than a hobby.The conversion rate needs to be increased to help the UK succeed. At the moment I get the feeling that a lot of people try the sport, but comparatively few take the step to compete, especially at a high level.
I know some people on this forum are not fans of the National Series, but they are doing something right. It would be nice to actually get into one from time to time without having to go on a waiting list thoughTo achieve that I think the UK needs to focus on getting more attractive competitions. Domestically perhaps a shift to prize pools (not necessarily a large pool, but something to give a bit more incentive to win) and a step away from casual competitions would help. Internationally the UK lacks a Nimes/Vegas/Arizona Cup level shoot. The National Series is a good start, but a focus on bringing along a big group of top level archers, whilst still allowing open entry, would encourage competition in my opinion.
So; let me get this right. This morning your practice involved thinking all the above with your "conscious brain" so that your "subconscious" could shoot your arrows for you. Dear Oh dear! I am glad that I was not anywhere near your vicinity. It's the Chinese Whispers all over again. All those years ago Al Henderson wrote with such great insight about subconscious competence and this is how it has become distorted is it? The interpretation now seems to be one of subverting the subconscious by thinking of something else. Is this why modern GBR target archers are smiling and "high-fiving" when they shoot a blue...because they were planning there next tropical holiday at the time their subconscious made the shot? LOL. I would also suggest, from your general question that in future it might be an idea not to try and multi task and, either think about making a shot or think about something else but in either event try and engage the whole brain!So whilst practicing this morning, trying to give my conscious brain something to do so that the subconscious can get on with the act of putting the arrows where they are supposed to go.
I got to thinking what would a National Competition Structure look like and to be honest I do not know.
The hear and now is that to get into the Gents GBR team the minimum requirement is to shoot 665-670 on a WRS shoot and secure one of 3 places. To meet the criteria to get a National Ranking, from now until the end of the season I am not short of WRS to choose from and not having to travel all over the country. If I want to be involved in a season long competition I can enrol in the National Series. All of which will now get you noticed and if you are already in the top 20 your are offered an early place so we can see our best archers compete - what is wrong with this approach?
At this point I hear the cry's that it is not "National" but a National Competition would have to be that and archers interested would have to travel all over the country.
If I think back to the 90's when we won some Olympic medals we used to have a 6 stage Double FITA Grand Prix circuit where archers had to attend enough events to get a ranking to then be considered for selection, lots of costs, lots of weekends and lots of travelling and annual holiday used up on the Fridays and Mondays.
However much we want to ignore it archery is a minority sport and 99% of archers only have a passing interested in events at the top level and not seriously interested in putting the work in to have a chance of achieving it, so how do we work with what we have.
I don't do spilt milk or I told you so - I don't care how we got to this point, all that interests me is how we move forward - from what I understand the system we have now has correctly identified the best 6 men recurve archers in the UK capable of representing us on the World stage and a list of those bubbling under both seniors and juniors. None of these archers since the loss of funding have thrown the towel in, if anything the removal of a protective barrier has inspired them to move their games on.
Yes long term international success is a numbers game, but where are all these people coming from and where are all the unpaid volunteers to help make it happen.?
So what will a National Competition structure look like, that will inspire 1000's of people to take up archery with the goal of GBR representation and International medals and what do we do in the meantime just sit on our hands?
This is part of the problem - what attraction is there for someone if they're told "you can put in the hours, sacrifice all sorts, but you'll still need to work 9-5 to live"? If you compare that to the US model, where winners can be walking away with 5 figures after contingncy payments are made, there's a lot more to be competitive about.I would never advise anyone to take up archery as a professional athlete. As a young person, by the time you make it then get dropped, you could be 10 to 15 years behind anyone of your age with any type of professional career. Archery in this country is little more than a hobby.
I know some people on this forum are not fans of the National Series, but they are doing something right. It would be nice to actually get into one from time to time without having to go on a waiting list though
Prize money, I have often regretted taking up a sport with so little on offer, and even having to pay to get trophies engraved is like a punishment for coming 1st. But for sponsored shoots that have the backing of the big manufacturers, the UK might struggle I think.
Ha, Ha, Ha but so sad, I was quite pleased with 638 and no dogs or dog walkers were harmed - Your reply was nothing more that I expected all hot air and a deflection from the question. Yet again no I ideas just going over the same old.It is apparent and you admit that you have conjured this question using half a brain so you will easily understand why I will not dignify it with an answer.
By that logic, how many "Swansea Harriers" does the London Marathon ignore by virtue of the ballot system? I've tried a number of times to get a spot in the London Marathon but haven't managed - that wouldn't preclude me from a qualifying time, just a qualifying time from that event. Archers have many opportunities to achieve qualifying and ranking scores (supporting entry into AGBNS if ranked highly) without necessarily travelling all over as Whitehart has already pointed out.But is the so called "National Series" really facilitating a competitive ethos back into UK target archery tournaments? Is it encouraging a development of coaching skills and knowledge? I think not. It is merely an extension of the walled mentality of the PU, which is hardly surprising given that this was the clique that initiated and promoted it. How does being placed onto waiting lists for a once a year experience promote a personal investment and commitment to the sport. How many "Swansea Harriers" are being ignored and trampled over by this process. The whole of the available gene pool needs to be able to access the tournament structure and participate or the subjective, prescriptive and nepotistic practices of the past will continue to write the script for the fate of the sport.
Oh... I agree, but I think 5 years to a Masters degree is time better spent than 5 years to a silver medal at the Olympics. That said, to take archery forward the destination needs to be known. Archery needs a full design brief not a 2 year plan or 5 year plan. Without one Uk archery will be like ducks on a duck pond with everyone trying to do their own thing and getting nowhere.This is part of the problem - what attraction is there for someone if they're told "you can put in the hours, sacrifice all sorts, but you'll still need to work 9-5 to live"? If you compare that to the US model, where winners can be walking away with 5 figures after contingncy payments are made, there's a lot more to be competitive about.
If I keep saying the "same old" it would be because my understanding of things remains consistent and accurate. I also have to keep repeating the "same old" because there really does seem to be a comprehension problem amongst a great portion of the Apologists and their up to date contemporaries; "Apologists who cannot any longer escape the fact that the AGB blue chip programme has been a disaster. I also have to keep repeating the "same old" because the "same old BS continues to be pushed by wannabe authorities of the sport in posts on this forum. If you actually gave the attention to my posts of the past, that your comment suggests, you would be very aware that I have, on many occasions, pointed out that the infrastructure already exists for a proper and inclusive national tournament. Now if the outcomes of those County and Regional tournaments fed into a National Series type of competition structure then you would have something that is;-Ha, Ha, Ha but so sad, I was quite pleased with 638 and no dogs or dog walkers were harmed - Your reply was nothing more that I expected all hot air and a deflection from the question. Yet again no I ideas just going over the same old.