Asa allowing stringwalking

[JEFFRO]

since I don't go to asa shoots. ill just keep it to myself

[RJH1]

Dont want anyone thinking this will be replacing the trad class, they are adding barebow, but you can still shoot trad if you like. Don't know if that was clear

[RickBarbee]

I shoot a 3 piece take down recurve near 70# in draw weight, off the shelf, no stabilizer, no sights.

No gadgets of any kind. Heck, I don't even have any vibration dampeners on it.

The only things you could call accessories on it are, it has a 7 arrow bow quiver attached, and a KwickLoc arrow holder for hunting. It's my hunting bow plain & simple.

I shoot 640gr arrows having 3X4" fletching. Same arrows I hunt with, but with target points instead of broadheads.

It's definitely no barebow target rig by any stretch of the imagination. It's no different than say for example - a Blackwidow PMA, or a Martin Hatfield, except it isn't an all wood riser.

The way it is now, you could be shooting an Arvin Weaver Selfbow with a sinew string, bamboo self nock arrows, tied on fletching, and stone heads, but if you shoot it using the SWing method you would have to shoot in the barebow class. "Makes no sense."

Why can't I just pick the class that has the same configurations, and limits on equipment as I use, and shoot in it using my shooting style? I guess I should say "shooting styles", because I have several, and they vary from one shot to another depending on the shot at hand.

Anyway, back to my ^^above^^ question: Why can't I?

Rick

[RJH1]

Rick, you can't because that is the rules.

As far as equipment, no one forces people to use a selfbow or anything else that is at a perceived disadvantage. I see this line of thought all the time, "why can't I use my X in Y class? it is not fair?" You cant cause it is the rules.

!!! You can use any bow and or aiming method in any class that allows it, if you pick a bow/aiming method that puts you at a disadvantage, that is on you!!!!

A lot of people seem to want organizations to have a class set up for exactly what they want, if that happened there would be about 10,000 classes. Heck ASA has 41 classes now, 42 when barebow is added, if you can't find a class that suits you, maybe you are being too hard to please. In the pistol sport I shoot there are 8 classes and a couple of years ago there were only 6, but guess what, people want to gripe and moan about "why can't I do this or that"? Truth is they usually can but that puts them in a tougher class and they don't want that either, so we end up with a thread like this one on a different forum

[RickBarbee]

Jerome, I understand the rules as they are written, and I participate within the confines of them. Always.

I say KUDOS to the ASA for putting forth the effort. It's just a shame they based that effort on an old, non sense, "arbitrary" decision.

I'll rephrase the question.

Why not set the classes according to style of equipment, instead of by some "arbitrary" rules on aiming styles/methods, that make no sense?

I actually know the "real answer" to that. I was around to see it all unfold (it was ugly). But, I wouldn't say it here, nor anywhere else in public, because it would start a !@#$ storm the likes of which we seldom see. 8^)

Rick

[RJH1]

Didn't they just do that with Barebow? So see there is a class doing exactly what you are asking for, but you don't seem happy :-)


The issue that always arises is that people want classes set around THEIR equipment, and there are just too many variations for that to be feasible

I am not trying to be a smart alec, I know tone is hard to tell on the interweb

[RickBarbee]

No, no they did not.

Determining classes according to non accessorized aiming methods makes about as much sense as determining classes according to shooters height, or whether they are left, or right handed.

LOL wait - classes determined by height, or left or right hand (especially in 3D competition), actually makes more sense if you think about it, and how/who set the 3D courses.

Rick

[RJH1]

You have never addressed why you seem so opposed to shooting in barebow class when it seemingly gives you exactly what you are looking for. So, why you no like it, when it does what you want?

[DRT]

Not sure arbitrary is the word I would use.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[RickBarbee]

If you think the barebow class will be even "remotely similar" in equipment "by most" to the equipment I use to hunt with, then you really need to look it all over again real good.

I compete exclusively with the same rig I happen to be hunting with, and with exception to it being a metal riser, it is exactly like most any other recurve you would see at just about any "traditional only" shoot there is.

Well, it's generally heavier draw weight than most also, but I won't count that.

I'm not debating the rule. I'm debating, and "asking for" the "reasoning" for the rule.

Rick

[RickBarbee]

Not sure arbitrary is the word I would use.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Maybe you wouldn't, but I used the word intentionally.

ar·bi·trar·y
ˈärbəˌtrerē/
adjective
adjective: arbitrary

based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.

Rick

[DRT]

I don't have a big stake in archery competition.

In rifle and pistol shooters always tweaked stocks, sight hoods, mounts, etc ro get any perceived advantage. Then wanted to be placed in hunter class.
The rules are what they are because someone is trying to protect what they perceive is the integrity of the spirit of the sport regardless of what sport it is.
I think it's curious that people think the way they do on much of this. Then again people seem to not like being excluded even though they wouldn't participate even if things were changed.


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[RickBarbee]

What "Way to many" folks seem to have forgotten is - 3D competition was intended to make us better shots for hunting.

I took/take that intent to heart, and compete with exactly what I hunt with, with exception to the type points/heads I use. It makes ZERO sense for me to try to improve my hunting accuracy with a bow I'm not going to be hunting with.

Folks gasp at having to compete against metal risers, thinking they are different. They are not at all different functionality wise than all wood.

Folks swallow their tongues over competing against ILF rigs, thinking they are different. They are not at all different functionality wise than all wood.

I was making the same adjustments with my all wood risers/bows (oh be it a bit more difficult) as I do now with my metal riser ILF, and ILF is just a limb attachment system.

Thinking I am upset, and/or unhappy is a mistake. Thinking I am being combative is a mistake. I am none of those.

I enjoy serious discussion, with serious, pertinent, descriptive, and honest input.
I'm simply asking questions, and looking for descriptive answers.
The descriptive answers haven't happened yet.

Saying - "That's the rule" don't cut it.

Tell me WHY that's the rule.

Rick

[RJH1]

Rick, it looks like to me that you are not really after a class that is equipment based like you are advocating, more, that you are looking for a class that is based around the equipment in your bow rack, which is why these "debates" always come up in shooting sports. The "I think trad/production (pistol reference)/barebow class should be like X, because it is what I have, and believe it should be that way" mentality.


Once again the only way to get that is to start your own organization, or get on the board of an existing one. As for the reasoning of the rules, you said you were there, so I reckon you know

[RJH1]

PS, i also shoot my hunting rig