Re: [SCA-Archery] Re: Archery Proposal
- That being said, I would like to point out that many heavy weapons
tourneys have prizes for "Best Death" and "Most Chivalrous". Ever
think why that is? Often people in competition get overly concerned
with winning and not how they play the game. I see little of this on
the archery field. But off the field is another matter. I have
heard many complaints off the field about how a certain type of
equipment or material or techniques gives an advantage and
competition should be split into classes. One thing I have noticed
is that in areas where archers are publicly recognized for their
overall progression instead of their tournament wins there is less of
this. I have also seen less of these complaints where the archers
commonly meet and know each other. When we have situations where
they only meet each other a couple of times a year such as Estrella
and GWW, there seems to be more divisiveness.
At 10:12 AM 4/2/2006, you wrote:
>Archers of the Knowne World,--
>Siefried fixed the problem I was having with people complaining
>about "Crossbows always score higher" in competitions without even
>I held a variety competition last year, where Siegfried (the consumate
>crossbowman) showed up with a recurve and whiped the field with all of
>the complainers. He even beat bowmen who were ranked higher then he is
>with the hand bow (though they tend to do fantastic at RRs and pretty
>poorly in novelty shoots).
>(I'm still waiting for one of them to complain that crossbowmen
>shouldn't be allowed to pick-up a recurve and shame the handbowmen).
>Now everytime someone broaches the subject of how unfair crossbows
>are, I just state the following line:
>"Didn't Siegfried The Crossbowman kick all your asses at Baronial
>Birthday last year using a recurve like the rest of you?"
>Then they tend to change the subject to how their bow seems to be
>suffering from a worn string or their arrows must be warped.
>Rankings are just hallmarks for yourself. They don't give you an
>title of merit, for that matter it doesn't even a non-merit order
>(atleast in Atlantia)! They don't give you a better seat at feast. And
>it certianly doesn't have any correlation to what level of helpfulness
>or support you have shown to the sport. Certain archers may not score
>as well as I do, but I feel they are better archers simply using bad
>equipment/unwilling or perhaps have much more enthusiasm and show much
>more support by helping out at events by showing up early to set-up
>and break down without thought of benefit. And I think they should get
>more kudos/court appearances then others get.
>If we were ranked on our display of graciousness to loss on the field,
>time we spend guiding other beginning archers and helping to make an
>event fun, we would all be wearing different badges then we do now.
>The only thing that you do when you cry foul is sew the seeds of
>Concern yourself less with what everyone else's is scoring relative to
>you the and propel yourself by being a shining model of the noble
>sport of archery, and others will follow and hopefully carry it on a
>"As yew bow, so shall yew reap."
>Brought to you YahooGroups Ad Free in 2003 by Medieval Mart
>Get Medieval at Mad Macsen's http://www.medievalmart.com/
>[Email to SCA-Archeryfirstname.lastname@example.org to leave this list]
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 3/31/2006
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 3/31/2006
- 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