Re: [SCA-Archery] Re: Archery Proposal
- Barak, thank you for contributing your thoughts ... a few followups:
> Given many of the posts IThank you for bringing this up, as it is a valid point. Very few
> have seen on this list, the mass of SCA archers seem
> to start off the same way I did, buying a recurve bow
> at a
> secondhand store or yard sale. A crossbow, like an
> is usually a tradeup, so you have a pool of more
> experienced archers using a more stable firing
people just 'interested' in shooting, buy a $300 crossbow (or even a
$150 one) and start shooting. They start off with a $20 bow (or a $20
loaner bow). After shooting a while they make the commitment to buy a
more expensive crossbow.
Also, something you didn't point out, is that the people who will pay
$300 for a crossbow, are therefore committed to it, and will practice,
alot. This is no different if you look at the high-level
recurve/longbow archers. All of which I know, end up with $300 (or
more) bows. (Though many may have more cheaply obtained ones, which
are still of that calibur).
If someone is going to commit that much money into a game, then
typically they are going to be serious about it.
Not to say that people with a $20 yardsale recurve aren't serious.
But in general you will find alot of 'sunday archers' with the $20
recurves. And very few 'sunday crossbowmen'.
Though, I've actually known a few of those 'sunday crossbowmen'. And
actually, their scores don't end up all that high. Again, lack of
> First, if I am theAnother astute point. Or worse can happen. I was at an event a year
> longbowman who shoots, I win my category by default;
(or 2?) ago that normally was not ever divided by class. A big
archery event in Atlantia. (On Target for those in the know). It's a
great fun event, lots of shooting. I decided to bring my crossbow
that year, usually there are a large number of crossbow and handbow
folks. Well, two things happened that year. First of all the field
was divided into two prizes, one for crossbow and one for handbow.
Secondly ... 3 crossbowmen showed up, including me.
The other two? Well, one had been shooting for a year, the other had
just started. They both turned to me and said: "Well, guess we know
who is winning this category".
It sucked for them, because they couldn't feel any edge of
competition, being compared against others of their skill level. (At
least having the scores on the same sheet/etc, let alone if skill
level categories had been set up instead).
Myself, I felt horrible. Just because I showed up, I would win my
category. Where was the challenge for me? Where was the competition?
I felt bad for the two 'new' crossbowmen who were officially
competing against me. Had I brought my longbow, I would have pulled
it out, but I didn't. And I still wanted to shoot of course. But
much of the fun of the day was lost to me because this event was one
of the ones I usually came with the intent of good hard competition.
> second, Ludicrous the Bowman shows up, enters theAlso another problem. Especially when you note that many of the
> crossbow and recurve divisions and cleans up both.
highest ranked shooters, in most Kingdoms, end up shooting both (all
3? all 4?) ... They tend to have one they prefer, and are better in
because of more practice. But still, they will be more than passingly
good with the other one.
> The problem with SCA archery competitions is that theyWell said. This is often accomplished (though definately in an
> pit Sunday duffers like me against club pros and PGA
> tour players on equal footing. I believe that paying
> more attention to skill level and less to equipment
> will give a far truer picture of individual archer's
> ability and a more equitable distribution of prizes at
incomplete and controversial in another way, manner) ... via grouping
people by their RoyalRound rankings, and/or giving handicaps based
upon the rankings.
THL Siegfried Sebastian Faust - http://crossbows.biz/
Barony of Highland Foorde - Baronial Archery Marshal
Kingdom of Atlantia - Deputy Kingdom Earl Marshal for Target Archery
http://eliw.com/ - http://archery.atlantia.sca.org/
- 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