Archery GB Rule Changes

PLEASE HELP TO FUND ARCHERY INTERCHANGE

AJBrady

Member
Apologies if this has been covered previously, but I see from the latest Archery UK magazine (I haven’t seen any previous mention and that is probably my fault) that various rounds have been renamed as “naming of the rounds has caused some archers embarrassment”. I can see the logic in “all xxx V rounds” starting at 30 yards, but “embarrassment”? And why keep York, Hereford and Bristol as separate names?

Am I missing something here?
 

bimble

Well-known member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
AIUK Saviour
I imagine it's someone trying to tidy up the rounds, in the way the Bristols are. I mean, I know a National is 60/50yds, but if you were to press me on the names of the 100/80/50/40 yd Nationals, I'd take a guess at New/Long/Short/Junior (are there 30/20 variants?), but I might have those in the wrong order. Same with the Western rounds.

I mean, you can tell which are the Traditional rounds (which have their own name; York, Hereford, St George, Albion, Windsor, Western (actually, I feel this is a much newer round), National) and those which are newer variants (with the prefix) for archers who either find the current rounds too easy or too hard.

And by removing the word "junior" you're presumably removing the sigma you might get from an adult novice archer feeling they should shoot a round longer (distance) than they can manage so they don't do a "junior" round, which does have connotations of being "for kids".
 

AJBrady

Member
Westerns, National and Warwicks etc go:-
New 100yds
Long 80 yds
Normal 60 yds
Short 50 yds
Junior 40 yds
Short Junior 30 yds

But seriously, people were getting embarrassed by this ‽
 

LAC Mark

Active member
I can understand a new archer being embarrassed shooting a junior round, but isn't that just an incentive to progress to the Big boy's/girl's distance 🤣😂🤣😂
 

Kerf

Supporter
Supporter
AIUK Saviour
Westerns, National and Warwicks etc go:-
New 100yds
Long 80 yds
Normal 60 yds
Short 50 yds
Junior 40 yds
Short Junior 30 yds

But seriously, people were getting embarrassed by this ‽
Typical AGB corporate political correctness. It smacks of a “rule change committee” with nothing to do fishing around for work to justify their existence.
 
Last edited:

wully

Supporter
Supporter
AIUK Saviour
Sport national governing bodies seem to have a nasty addiction to change for the sake of change...
 

ATH

New member
Apologies if this has been covered previously, but I see from the latest Archery UK magazine (I haven’t seen any previous mention and that is probably my fault) that various rounds have been renamed as “naming of the rounds has caused some archers embarrassment”. I can see the logic in “all xxx V rounds” starting at 30 yards, but “embarrassment”? And why keep York, Hereford and Bristol as separate names?

Am I missing something here?
It frankly makes sense. Adult beginner wanting to shoot a target day/club comp/local competition being told they need to enter the short round, fine. But the junior, or short junior. Its a small thing, but its the kind of small thing that isn't needed, and it will prevent people from doing rounds until they think they can do the "big boy/girls" distance, or trying to shoot up when they clearly aren't ready and holding everyones shooting up loosing arrows. The old names wern't clear anyway.
 

Rabid Hamster

Well-known member
Ironman
funny how they find the time to fiddle around the edges with make work but have done nothing about the horrible mess the classification tables are in.
 

ArcheryFox

Active member
funny how they find the time to fiddle around the edges with make work but have done nothing about the horrible mess the classification tables are in.
The classification tables are currently being dealt with, but it is not an easy task.
There is the question of collecting data representing UK archers (not easily available), understanding the data and the handicap/classification system (no-one inside AGB particularly well-placed to do this so it falls to volunteers), deciding on the classification scores, and then checking everything is all OK to go for the many rounds, classes, bow-styles, and ages available.
All I can say is work is in progress and watch this space.

The other side to this work is a review of the system that goes beyond the scores and into the fundamentals. In particular asking how the highest classifications (MB and GMB) are available, the main question being should they remain on a York/Hereford and 1440, or should they be available from shorter (number of arrows and distance) rounds. This is a very controversial question I have found when talking to others, so would encourage anyone who feels strongly to submit their thoughts to AGB to take into account.

Happy to discuss more about what is going on with anyone interested.
 

bimble

Well-known member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
AIUK Saviour
The other side to this work is a review of the system that goes beyond the scores and into the fundamentals. In particular asking how the highest classifications (MB and GMB) are available, the main question being should they remain on a York/Hereford and 1440, or should they be available from shorter (number of arrows and distance) rounds. This is a very controversial question I have found when talking to others, so would encourage anyone who feels strongly to submit their thoughts to AGB to take into account.
They should totally only remain available to the long "proper" rounds that are the York/Hereford/1440s. Partly because it should be a challenge to get them, and shooting for a full day at multiple distances is part of that challenge of "mastering" archery; partly because the rounds will probably die off only had to shoot for half a day at a 720 to get the classification. TOs will be well aware that 720s are a lot easier to put on (no need to move bosses for starters) and if people don't need to shoot three of the 12 doz rounds, why would they? Would you be able to earn your MB/GMB in a single weekend if there was a double 720 x2?

Obviously this is going totally off topic, but I do think you should have to adjust your sight more than a couple of clicks to earn an MB!
 

ArcheryFox

Active member
Obviously this is going totally off topic, but I do think you should have to adjust your sight more than a couple of clicks to earn an MB!
Yes, perhaps we might want to move to a new thread if there is significant interest from people in this topic going forwards.

In general I agree with you. Personally I find the double 720 or 720/H2H boring and not much fun to shoot. I very much enjoy a field course, 1440 or Y/H. In fact, the changes in the target competition scene of late has pushed me further towards field and into doing more and more EFAA competitions over the last 2 years. I also agree with you that there is more to MB/GMB than just shooting accurately - for example adaptability and stamina (recall the previous discussion here on AI on this topic when AGB first started talking about this).

You also open up a can of worms with questions like 'can you also therefore claim MB on a Western, or a National etc.?' and risk the separation into people who feel they achieved a 'real' MB vs. the 'easy' MB. Not to even get started on how you set the scores on each round (theoretically handicaps, but there are known issues with this system I am working to correct, and this doesn't account for the longer shoot, changing distance etc. aspects).

However this is just my opinion.
The opinion of others, including the higher-ups at AGB, is that the long distance competitions are in decline (a result of their changes to rankings and the higher changes of WA to move international competition in this direction, thereby dictating what national governing bodies are preparing for) and there is the fear that, as a result, the MB/GMB could disappear with them. Add to this that the UK's international squad struggle to qualify for MB/GMB due to focussing on the 720/H2H and that they/AGB feel like they deserve the award for being 'the best' (for the given definition of best by AGB and WA).

This is the discussion I am having with AGB and others in support of changing MB availability to the 720.
There are valid points to both sides. Indeed, as you allude to, one of the questions that has come up is 'if you can get a score on a 720, how many, as getting it in one weekend at a double-double competition doesn't seem right?'.
Whatever your opinion I encourage you to email AGB (Katy Cumming) to ensure that your opinion as a grassroots member is heard from beyond the Lilleshall echo chamber. This is an award for, and they are here to represent, all archers in the UK.
 

wully

Supporter
Supporter
AIUK Saviour
Agree, + have you seen any changes in rules on AGB website? If yes, when it done? Did they inform anyone?
agb - they destroy archery
I heard they have decided to change what constitutes a traditional bow- but aren’t letting us in on the secret until January 2022... So not only will people hold off on buying one until they know what will be allowed, how many will suddenly find their bows are overnight now illegal?
If true it’s a pretty good way to kill off a whole class - or drive Trad shooter away.
Maybe they only want bows with sights and scaffolding hanging off them?
 

bimble

Well-known member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
AIUK Saviour
I heard they have decided to change what constitutes a traditional bow- but aren’t letting us in on the secret until January 2022... So not only will people hold off on buying one until they know what will be allowed, how many will suddenly find their bows are overnight now illegal?
If true it’s a pretty good way to kill off a whole class - or drive Trad shooter away.
Maybe they only want bows with sights and scaffolding hanging off them?
Maybe three...?? ;)
 

ArcheryFox

Active member
I heard they have decided to change what constitutes a traditional bow - but aren’t letting us in on the secret until January 2022...
Perhaps you are referring to the changes at the recent WA congress to the instinctive/traditional division?
AGB had a recent push to make sure that all of their bow-style definitions matched WA where applicable, and these are already in the most up-to-date rules of shooting IIRC.
These changes to instinctive/trad will now need to be implemented by AGB, however, and the next review may not be until Jan 2022.

The changes from WA congress can be found in the proposal for change here: https://extranet.worldarchery.sport...roposals/Motion_15_-_Traditional_Division.pdf
In this case the changes were meant to make it easier for most people to shoot the class as buying a bow with only one adjustable limb is near impossible. The other changes were mostly around how the bow is shot (release, anchoring, aiming methods etc.) which could cause issues for some.
 

Rabid Hamster

Well-known member
Ironman
one of our longbow shooters joined one of the longbow societies and was showing the rules around the club. some of the shooting stuff was eye opening even before we got to the rules on smoking at the targets ...... and having to get a blazer and cravat! :ROFLMAO:
 
Top