Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [SCA-Archery] Re: The Fourth Peerage?

Expand Messages
  • James Koch
    Richard, ... I agree 100%. This is why when Merlin and I held our RR competition last year we offered identical prizes for the winners. One for crossbow and
    Message 1 of 224 , Mar 2, 2012
      I agree 100%.  This is why when Merlin and I held our RR competition last year we offered identical prizes for the winners.  One for crossbow and another for hand bow.  Shooting together is good for comaradery and is logistically simpler, but scoring separately is a must.  In the case of champions shoots, as at Pennsic, we ought to have equal numbers of crossbows on each team. 
      Jim Koch "Gladius The Alchemist"
      >  At 01:47 AM 3/2/2012, you wrote:

      I think the score comparisons that Gladius and Darrian have done, especially the top 10 and top 25%, just drive home the point that the scores for crossbows and hand bows produced by equally skilled shooters are still significantly different. This is obvious to most and it's why they are tracked separately. But even with this recognition, in some kingdoms the crossbow shooters are ranked using the same score levels as hand bows. And, in team competitions, they are often considered interchangeable even though everyone knows the crossbow shooters give their team a distinct advantage when the opposing teams have fewer crossbow shooters. Looking the other way and allowing crossbows to go up against hand bows can really spoil the results of a head to head competition whether it is an individual or team shoot. This can lead to a feeling of "why compete" by skilled hand bow shooters and cheapens the victory crossbowmen. Even if an event is small, you really shouldn't have crossbows compete head to head with hand bows for the same prizes and recognition.


      On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Wolfgang Starck <ericbelser@...> wrote:

      As someone who shot a recurve years ago when I was first active in the SCA and switched to using a crossbow this time back...I have to wonder if the scores tell the whole story.

      When you first show up at an SCA archery range, in a clueless new-shooter sort of way, you are invariably handed a loaner recurve or simple bow. My first 'competition' recurve was a hand-me-down from a more accomplished archer who had moved on to shooting a traditional crossbow.

      My current crossbow scores are vastly better than my old recurve scores...but I also have put in a whole lot of range hours with my crossbow that I never did with the recurve. So clearly looking at the top scores/top percentages is the comparison to make...

      I'll accept as a given that crossbows seem to have an edge (without going into a long discussion on why) but what does that mean for competition? The score lists are already tracked independently; outside of the biggest of events how often are there enough shooters to seriously consider splitting any given tournament into multiple categories?

      > >>>I tasked one of my merry men with the job of totalling and comparing
      > >>>the Royal Round scores for the Middle Kingdom.
      > >>> >
      > >>>Crossbow
      > >>>Average95.59
      > >>>Median98.5
      > >>>StDev20.27
      > >>> >
      > >>>All Hand Bows
      > >>>Average54.61
      > >>>Median49.5
      > >>>StDev23.58
      > >>> >
      > >>>Long Bow
      > >>>Average62.87
      > >>>Median59.7
      > >>>StDev22.10
      > >>> >
      > >>>Recurve
      > >>>Average53.96
      > >>>Median48.7
      > >>>StDev23.33
      > >>> >
      > >>>Mongol
      > >>>Average25.93
      > >>>Median23
      > >>>StDev16.00
      > >>> >
      > >>>I was rather shocked by the results. I knew when shooting a Royal
      > >>>Round that the crossbow had an advantage, but I wasn't quite prepared
      > >>>for the gap in average scores. The difference between the average
      > >>>crossbow and the average aggregate hand bow score is a whopping 40.98
      > >>>points! What this means is that if a crossbow shooter is getting a
      > >>>RR average of 120 "Ludicrous" points, then a hand bow shooter of
      > >>>equal skill is posting scores around 79.02! Of course the hand bow
      > >>>average is likely skewed downward by a larger number of
      > >>>novices. Another surprise is that long bow shooters post scores
      > >>>which on average are higher than people shooting recurves. The
      > >>>common wisdom is that recurves are easier to shoot and are more
      > >>>accurate. The difference here is 8.91 points in favor of the
      > >>>longbows. Assuming the longbows are an advanced weapon used by
      > >>>archers who have been around for a while, the gap between longbows
      > >>>and crossbows is still 32.72 points. This means a Ludicrous
      > >>>crossbowman is comparable to a handbow shooter with a score of 87.28
      > >>>points. Tomorrow I'll have Mark tabulate the East Kingdom scores for
      > >>>comparison.
      > >>> >
      > >>>Jim Koch "Gladius The Alchemist"

    • Mark Cipra
      Well, let us agree to disagree on this issue. Llywelyn Glyndyverdwy (Mark Cipra) __ When in doubt, end with a jig - Robin McCauley From:
      Message 224 of 224 , Mar 9, 2012

        Well, let us agree to disagree on this issue.


        Llywelyn Glyndyverdwy (Mark Cipra)


        "When in doubt, end with a jig" - Robin McCauley



        From: SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Oblio of Abertwidr
        Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 10:37 PM
        To: SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [SCA-Archery] Re: The Fourth Peerage Apples Versus Oranges?



        On 09/03/2012, Mark Cipra <cipram@...> wrote:

        > My dear Oblio:
        > I realize you are a heretic, but does that heresy extend to the belief that
        > *every* representative form of government is inherently anti-democratic? Of
        > course this is true, but only by the very narrowest definition of democracy.
        > Even *within* the small elected council of my small city there are
        > committees to hash out the details of legislation. There may be some pure
        > democracies out there, but the reason we don't know anything about them is
        > that they are completely ineffective.
        > Whether or not a committee for a cross-border archery GOA agreement is
        > *inherently* democratic will depend on its charter. I hope that charter
        > includes provisions for frequent reporting back to (and soliciting opinion
        > from) the archery community at large.

        The word "heretic" means a person who chooses for himself/herself,.

        As (only one of many) an example, at
        http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/heretic , is

        1300–50; Middle English heretik < Middle French heretique < Late Latin
        haereticus < Greek hairetikós able to choose (Late Greek: heretical),
        equivalent to hairet(ós) that may be taken (verbal adjective of
        haireîn to choose) + -ikos -ic

        I think it unfortunate to have a closed mind;

        There may be some pure
        > democracies out there, but the reason we don't know anything about them is
        > that they are completely ineffective.

        So, what do you know of participatory budgeting, such as implemented
        at the town/city of Scarborough, where the people determine on which
        projects, council funds are budgeted to be spent? Just because you may
        not be aware of it, does not mean it does not work. I was not aware of
        it, until I saw a television documentary about it.

        Many people in the world, are not aware of electricity. Does that mean
        that it does not work?

        Many people in the world, are probably unaware of photovoltaic
        electricity generation, that could probably be of great assistance to
        them, Does that mean that photovoltaic electricity generation is of no
        benefit, simply because some people are unaware of it?

        Many people in the world, are probably unaware of archery, or, of
        archery as an activity that exists; does that mean that archery is not
        an activity worth doing?

        Many (possibly most) of the archers "in the knowned worlde" are
        probably not aware of this mailing list (I only found out about it,
        through my own efforts, and, I think, thence, by accident) - does that
        mean that this list is of no benefit?

        Just because a person may be unaware of something, does not mean that
        that thing of which the person is unaware, is of no benefit.

        Hence, a difference between bigotry and heresy; the first, being the
        refusal to accept opinions different to the opinions of the bigot,
        and, the second, whee the person chooses for himself/herself, and,
        employs the freedom to choose.

        Oblio the Unregistered,
        Heretic of Abertwidr
        of the Western Shores
        In the Kingdom of Lochac

        Per fructu, non folii

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.