Re: [SCA-Archery] Re: Archery Proposal
I'm not claiming that the Winter Challenge is a scientifically valid laboratory for comparison studies - I'm simply making the lesser point that under identical rules, and presumably near-identical targets, crossbows are consistently outshot at the very highest skill levels by very fast handbowmen, nothing more. And, as an incidental quibble, the WC does not use averages; the high scores posted are just that, the best that a particular archer has achieved with a given piece of equipment. Technically, a participant IS supposed to "declare" a scoring round to the observing marshal, and then just shoot it. Naturally, given the constraints of a postal competition, identical ranges cannot be obtained - but such an experiment would be relatively easy to set up at a venue like Pennsic, after hours.
> There is another problem with using SCA shoots to compare the merits of
> various types of equipment which should be discussed. SCA shoots like the
> royal round and Winter challenge are not in any way scientific experiments
> in terms of comparing crossbows, longbows and recurves. The scores are
> only the averages of the top scores submitted. What this means is, we tend
> to give an advantage to people who shoot often. This is fine for the sake
> of ranking shooters, but is doesn't really tell us who is the best shot or
> which piece of equipment is superior and by how much. To obtain that
> information we would have to require each shooter to declare that he or she
> was about to shoot a competition for points, and then have the scoring
> marshal submit that score regardless how good or bad it might be. The
> results would be factored into a seasonal running average. Of course even
> this would not take into account environmental factors like wind. A true
> test would require shooters to compete on the same range at the same time.
Three things never heard from the mouth of a Celt:
"Do these colors match?"
"Is this too much jewelry?"
"Is that my drink?"
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- Actually a more accurate term would be timed ends rather than speed
ends. In the RR or IKAC the intent is to get as high a score as
possible in the time given, rather than just getting off as many arrows
as possible. It is better to shoot four and get twenty points, than to
shoot nine and get ten points.
Yes, when shooting into a mass of tightly packed warriors, where most
any arrow will hit someone, plain speed is important. But, in the
instance of less tightly packed targets it is a case of accuracy and
rapid rate of release. When you are trying not to hit a shield or one
of your own men while attempting to get an arrow or bolt into a visor
slot, accuracy is important. And then getting off an other shot as
fast as possible to take out an other opponent, before they kill you or
one of your friends is reason to shoot rapidly and accurately. Aside
from sieges, there were countless small scale engagements, aside from
major battles where a rapid and accurate rate of shooting was
paramount. In the hunt, when beaters are driving herds of deer toward
you, killing as many deer as possible for the larder is also important.
As to period speed ends. Since there is little documentation of just
how period competitions or training were done, it is difficult to
positivity state that they were either used or not used. However, I
do have a copy of a period illustration of a german crossbow
competition showing an hour glass in the foreground. If it was using
for timing the shooting or to indicate when to break for lunch, it is
impossible to say.
On Monday, April 3, 2006, at 06:39 AM, J. Hughes wrote:
> John edgerton <sirjon1@...> wrote: I would like to comment
> regarding the RR and IKAC. The speed ends were
> not tacked on later. They were there from the beginning. I wanted the
> competitions to also test the ability to shoot rapidly and accurately
> as would have been needed in combat or in the hunt. And on the RR,
> when I made up the rules for it, I gave little thought to crossbows.
> Is there any evidence of the use of speed rounds in a period archery
> competition or a schutzenfest? While rate of fire is useful when the
> archer is in a defensive position receiving a mounted charge or in an
> archery counter archery role, it is not at all appropriate for the
> sort of warfare in most found in period: siege warfare, when only in a
> storming do you have the target rich environment that rewards speed of
> Charles O'Connor