If I made a bow like this, could I call it a reflex deflex?...

[toomanyknots]

I recently made some recurve forms that would produce the equivalent of the reflexed limbs found in common reflex deflex bows. I was wondering, if I started with a straight normal grade white wood self bow stave (of some wood that typically takes a little set, nothing too compression strong like osage/elm/iron wood, etc, maybe like red oak or ash or something) and reflexed the limbs like a reflex deflex, but left the rest of the bow straight? And tillered the bow so that most of the bend would be in the inner limbs, in hopes that the inner limbs would develop the inevitable set, so as to create the delfex in a reflex deflex bow?... would that be cheating...,  . Would I be forced to call it a "reflex / set-flex bow"? lol

[Pat B]

The final profile shape of the bow will determing the shape style...no matter how you get there. 

[PatM]

The deflex in bows of that design is all in the handle. None of them have actual bending in the inner limb to achieve that profile.
 There is a misconception with this style of bow.
 The idea is to change the plane of the limbs so that less strain is needed to achieve brace height and less energy remains in the bow after release.
 Actual damage or manipulating wood shape isn't really part of this design although plenty of selfbowyers think inner limb set/string follow achieves the same goal. Only partially.