998Re: Archery Scoring( Long reply)
- Oct 31, 1999There will be a lot of snippage here...
On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 09:31:04 -0800 Chris Nogy <cnogy@...>
>From: Chris Nogy <cnogy@...>promote activities that 80% of the time are almost totally non-period?
>Would you say that it is OK for any group within the SCA to consistently
> And would you say that the best time for teaching those non-periodthings is at a
>practice (a place where learning the skills of the SCA is the mostimportant
>thing, not competition?).Speaking for our local Barony, we use our practices more for teaching the
basic techniques of good archery, which haven't changed over the
centurys. The RR is a good indicator of increased ability to group your
shots, which comes in handy when trying more 'period' shooting, and falls
within the space and safety constraints we have.
> I believe that SCA archery practice should be used to fully ingrain theideals of period archery techniques, as this is the place where most
folks see and retain the most information.
What ideal techniques are you speaking of that are different from today?
>Also, if there was no ranking system associated with the RR, if all yougot was
>a score at the end of a round (for your use only, not ever to be used inany
>official ranking system) and it was never recorded or used for rankinginside
>or between groups, do you think the shooters would be as interested inRR? I
>for one find the repetition of routine IKAC or a RR to be almost tediousto the
>point of not shooting if that is all that is offered.Over the years, I have found humans to be a competitive group. They will
find some way of ranking themselves, I guess this is as good a way as
>On the other hand, if we had a ranking system associated with somepurely
>period shoots (several types of shoots, and a way of combining scores toget a
>better 'overall' picture of an archers ability) do you not think thatthe shooters would be asking for these shoots instead?
That depends on the shoot and the constraints of the area. A clueless
new archer probably wouldn't enjoy a York round much, since they'd
probably be all over the field and may only hit the target a time or two
out of 144 arrows. The RR and IKAC are good training tools.
>I agree with Macsen. Giving a Grant for RR performance (no matter howhigh) is
>quite revolting, and if true has done more to set back the attempts ofgetting
>more period archery into the context of the SCA than any ten otheractions to
>date.As a good friend of Andras the Truemark, I can tell you he received
applause and accolades (and a lot of teasing)from his fellow archers -
but no grant award
>I also agree with Macsen's thoughts that more archers on the line is notshould
>necessarily the final goal we aim for - more period archers on the line
>be more important. And it is almost as easy to do, all you as a marshalhave
>to provide is a regularly scheduled set of period style shoots and a wayof
>scoring them that allows them to see personal improvement. After all,if you
>don't have RR's, you don't teach their importance to new archers, theyonly
>learn what they are taught (in the beginning, the formative stage) andyou have
>successfully led a new person to the practical art of medieval (notmodern or
>pseudo-modern) archery.I don't believe you are giving enough credit for the intelligence of our
new archers, or their teachers.
>We do not hold anything against the leatherworkers and calligraphers
>for not using fulminated mercury in gilding, because it is a very likely
>harmful or fatal technique.
>In my opinion, archers can use different equipment in their quest for
>but when it counts it should be the good stuff.So, everybody else should be relegated to the 'back forty'?
Period archery is just as safe as modern archery, there are no inherant
extra risks, so why do you ask that archers be held to a lower standard
than we hold everyone else? I still say that if we don't promote
individuals to be rewarded for reaching a plateau that
>rests almost exclusively outside of period, and we promote individualsbeing
>rewarded for going deeper into period, then we end up reaching the sameconsistent with
>personal goal (we recognize achievement) but we do it in a way
>the by-laws and charter of the SCA.I do agree that 'periodness' should be rewarded, but basic skill in
archery must not be ignored. We all must make our own decisions on what
level we wish to attain, and how we will get there. Without a fiberglass
recurve, I would not be shooting the yew longbow I now have. Without
K-Mart special arrows, I would not be making my own self-nock, matched
arrows. There are those to whom archery is a passion and those who find
it a pleasant diversion...there is room for both on my line.
HL Aleksei Zateev
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>