stronges bow on the world

[Rod]

.
If we had had to face these people, we would have had to deal with it, not make excuses, so what does the response of the nay sayers tell us about the attitudes of todays war bow exponents?


Rod.

Care to expand on that Rod? I've noticed a strong feeling in your posts that anyone who does not immiedately take up your challenge is attacked! You implicated that I was some kind of a coward in a prior post on this thread! Setting forth a challenge and attacking anyone who may point reasons why that challenge has not been taken up on masse is no way to win people over to take up that challenge, in fact it will do the exact opposite. Attacking 'nay sayers' is no way going to get people to take up your challenge, to my mind it sounds like I'd be making a rod for my own back.

You state that two archers will take up your challenge. I know Mark will  we discussed this a few days ago and even though I've never met Jaro I know Mark holds in in very high regard so that holds a lot of water with myself but you could have so many more if you stopped the insults.

I'll take up your challenge on one condition you shoot with me and I'll choose the bow and arrows (and no I will not take the mickey with the kit) That way we will have a fair comparison, a warbow archer who is rubbish at target archery vs a target archer who is rubbish with a warbow. It would be fun and at least we could bury the hatchet

Nick,
I have no objection to shooting with anyone just so long as it is not boring.
 I do find it odd that you should now wish to compare your shooting with that of a "target shooter" after making such a fuss about not wishing to be compared.
But no matter.
Not that I would characterise myself as a target archer although I have dabbled in most styles of longbow shooting.
My preference is for instinctive unmarked distance field shooting.
You don't need to provide me with a bow, but you may wish to provide yourself with one.

[nick1346]

There's nothing odd in it, I'm only wishing to compare myself against you thats why I shall provide you with the bow, unless of course you can provide yourself with a warbow and the correct arrows. Like I said we'll both be at a disadvantage, you'll be unused to the bows and I'll be unused to style of shooting and at the end we'll have a pint. The question is when and where? The depends on the distance between us the when should be before the start of Summer otherwise it'll die a natural death, say during May?

[Rod]

Nick,
I take it as a given that you will hopefully be shooting a bow that you consider within your command that is of a higher draw weight than I might choose to use.
The fact that I shoot a lighter bow is neither here nor there since the object of the discussion with Mark and Jaroslav concerned the desirability of setting a benchmark in accuracy at the further end of intermediate distances for the heavy bow and 100 yards was chosen as the model based upon the not inconsiderable literature detailing practice in another but directly comparable war bow culture.

If you wish to make it, for whatever reason, a personal comparison, then you will have to accept that I will shoot a draw weight within my command.
But as I have said more than once, this would not be a meaningful comparison.

It seems that you still have some difficulty with the concept.
It is not about what draw weight I can handle. Though I did for a time shoot a 90lb bow, I have no intention of aggravating a damaged elbow by engaging in a contest of strength.
If you wish me to shoot with you, then I will shoot a bow that suits me, but as I have said, and will say again, this is not relevant to the proposition.

The proposition is about quantifying accuracy with any draw weight that you might consider to be within your command. Whoever you might be, your choice of draw weight is your own.

I fully understand that it is harder to hold a group as draw weight increases beyond a certain level, which differs for each individual, but the intention is not to draw a comparison between different applications.

It is however intended to help establish what level of accuracy is attainable with the war bow at the present time and to compare this with the yardstick of historical standards where possible, and to seek to raise the standard.
We might indeed classify draw weights by the level at which one loses command of the bow in practical terms of ongoing and consistent performance.
For example, a draw weight one might be able to make a few times, but would not choose to shoot habitually.
Mark freely admits that for him, this would include a 200 lb bow and considers 140 lb to 150 lb to be within his compass for shooting continually and with control, maintaining a steady rate of fire.
In this respect it is proposed that given a benchmark which is universally applicable, then others might have a standard to match or hopefullytry to better.

We take it as a given that the present standard is based upon draw weights, penetration and distances more than upon quantifiable accuracy.
Mark and Jaroslav understand this principle well enough.
 
It is for you to consider the draw weight that you consider within your compass and forget about what I choose to shoot.
If you mistakenly see this as a contest between us I would be happy to meet you on an NFAS field course shooting 3D's where you might feel less disadvantaged by shooting a draw weight that you do not regard as a handicap to shooting with accuracy.

On the other hand, I am quite happy to see you demonstrate that you can shoot a bow far  heavier than I would choose to shoot, if that is what it takes to see you contribute.

Rod.

[nick1346]

Rod,

I haven't missed the point of your challenge at all, my challenge to you was to put you on the spot in the same you have sought to put the entire warbow community on the spot. You issued a challenge to a group of archers based upon something that is not what they normally do, when some of those archers, most vocally myself pointed out a few reasons why they would not do it you disregarded those points and instead set out to ridulcule them. I issued a challenge back to you based upon a manner of shooting to which you are unnacustomed you have stated an elbow injury, I accept that and I will not attack you saying things like 'well Rod we know the real reason' or label your points as mere 'excuses'. I could say something along the lines of 'well you shouldn't be worried about embarrasing yourself' or I could say something about your 'attitude' all of those things you have said to me but I won't stoop that low so please do me the same courtesy.

In fact I believe there is merit in getting a seasoned archer to shoot a comparison using a warbow against someone used to a warbow, it could be very enlightening indeed, of course the bow couldn't be to heavy but any grown man should be able to learn how to use a 100lb bow in a few months, certainly well enough for a comparison. It would put any results gained from a warbow into a least some context, as I have said before you cannot get much aprreciation of the qualites of a rally car by racing it against a superbike at silverstone. Merely comparing scores of a warbow against those of a recurve or whatever on target archery round doesn't actually say a lot about the overall qualities of warbow copmared to to other weapons. If you extended your challenge to include other aspects and types of bows then you could be onto a winner. But at the end of the day all you'll have is a set of results which don't really say a lot about the weapons overall qualities.

I may well actually take it up not out of embarresment ro trying to prove someone wrong but because I often think along the lines of what the hell

[jamie]

just my two cents which are worth nothing in this style of shooting as i really only care about filling my belly. wouldn't it be necessary for a man shooting a warbow to be able to defend himself even at close distances. nice to kill a man far away but what about those who got through and are about to tear into you. shouldn't you be able to pick them off quickly at 20-50 yards. peace

[boze]

 Hello jamie, thats not a problem!

[nick1346]

just my two cents which are worth nothing in this style of shooting as i really only care about filling my belly. wouldn't it be necessary for a man shooting a warbow to be able to defend himself even at close distances. nice to kill a man far away but what about those who got through and are about to tear into you. shouldn't you be able to pick them off quickly at 20-50 yards. peace

Of course, at 100 yards your shooting at a body of men, if you miss the one your aiming at you'll hit the one next to him or behind. Getting closer in you'll more than likely hit the actual bloke your shooting at and at 20 yds you'd better well hit the bloke your shooting at becuase thats the one with a sword with your name on it...ouch!

[heavybow]

I would like to thank everyone in this forum been great. I decided to leave this forum. thank you marlon

[markinengland]

Nick, Rod,
Why not agree to meet and compare accuracy at Batsford in May. Plenty of opportunity to compare accuracy at a roving shoot and a field shoot and I am sure that there would be a space to set up a target roundel somewhere for a target test as well. What's more there would be plenty of witnesses and no doubt some other warbow or no-warbow archers who may take part in the challenge.
Sound possible?
Mark in England

[SimonUK]

Bye Marlon. Pop in and say hi now and then....

Simon

[stevesjem]

Nick, Rod,
Why not agree to meet and compare accuracy at Batsford in May. Plenty of opportunity to compare accuracy at a roving shoot and a field shoot and I am sure that there would be a space to set up a target roundel somewhere for a target test as well. What's more there would be plenty of witnesses and no doubt some other warbow or no-warbow archers who may take part in the challenge.
Sound possible?
Mark in England

That could be arranged. But Nick, why are you bothering with this, if someone wants to prove something then let him do it himself, if he wants to put his point across then let him do his own experiments/Challenges and not get others to prove or disprove his theories. Forget it mate, lets just get on with doing what were doing.....Having fun

[nick1346]

Nick, Rod,
Why not agree to meet and compare accuracy at Batsford in May. Plenty of opportunity to compare accuracy at a roving shoot and a field shoot and I am sure that there would be a space to set up a target roundel somewhere for a target test as well. What's more there would be plenty of witnesses and no doubt some other warbow or no-warbow archers who may take part in the challenge.
Sound possible?
Mark in England

That could be arranged. But Nick, why are you bothering with this, if someone wants to prove something then let him do it himself, if he wants to put his point across then let him do his own experiments/Challenges and not get others to prove or disprove his theories. Forget it mate, lets just get on with doing what were doing.....Having fun

I've no intention of letting something like this spoil my weekend at Batsford   If Rod wants to go head to head as I suggested then it'll be between ourselves and as I challenged I'll supply the bow and arrows, that would take place somewhere quite Batsford isn't the place. But as Rod isn't capable of it though injury, which I can understand, then the only challenge left is the one he put out to everyone else. If I do that then it'll be down at our club with the club GNAS coaches as witnesses.

[Rod]

I am not the one who seems to be obsessed with comparing target bows with war bows.
The proposal only has to do a curiosity about standards of accuracy with a heavy bow.
To suggest that this would not have been relevant to the realistic employment of a projectile weapon  is patently absurd.
If I appear to be critical, it is not of the ability of todays heavy bow afficionados, but of the weakness of some of the responses.

Fact: In the Tang dynasty the main body of infantry archers will have passed a test in mid range accuracy by shooting six arrows at a man sized mark from a bow in the median draw weight range of 120 lb to150 lb.
The passing grade required one or more hits out of six arrows.
No hits was a failing grade.
Six out of six hits was the elite first class grade.

If you think that an honest and rational response is to say that you are not Chinese, not a target archer and that it is irrelevant, and that besides the comopound bow has some magic quality which makes it possible for the ancient Chinese to perform the impossible, do you expect to accorded the same respect as someone who says "I don't think I can do that" or "I wonder If I could do that?" or  even " I don't find that interesting".

Rod.




I

[nick1346]

If I appear to be critical, it is not of the ability of todays heavy bow afficionados, but of the weakness of some of the responses.

I

LIke your poorly elbow?

Fact: In the Tang dynasty the main body of infantry archers will have passed a test in mid range accuracy by shooting six arrows at a man sized mark from a bow in the median draw weight range of 120 lb to150 lb.
The passing grade required one or more hits out of six arrows.
No hits was a failing grade.
Six out of six hits was the elite first class grade.

I

So what? Thats very nice for them but why to you keep bringing up Tang dynasty archers on a English Warbow forum? If you want to quote standards of military archery quote English ones which I think you'll find were higher.

If you think that an honest and rational response is to say that you are not Chinese, not a target archer and that it is irrelevant, and that besides the comopound bow has some magic quality which makes it possible for the ancient Chinese to perform the impossible, do you expect to accorded the same respect as someone who says "I don't think I can do that" or "I wonder If I could do that?" or  even " I don't find that interesting".

Rod.

I

Agian there you go about chinese archers, since I'm someone who studies English archery then it is an entirely rational response to point out the fact that we are not chinese. That doesn't detract form chinese archery in the slightest but why use that example when you could use English ones? That is not very logical.  All of my points so far in this thread have not to provide excuses for not doing your little test but to point out to you why you haven't been swamped with offers. Steve gave the best respnse so far ' why are you bothering with this, if someone wants to prove something then let him do it himself, if he wants to put his point across then let him do his own experiments/Challenges and not get others to prove or disprove his theories. Forget it mate, lets just get on with doing what were doing.....Having fun ' and that seems to be the main reason. Why should people want to engage in your test when you plainly attack anyone who disagrees with it and are unwilling to take it yourself! That is no way to win people over.

Anyway enough of this I shall not post any longer on this as I'm sure many people are tiring of this somewhat. If I do this round I'll contact you and let you know the results and yes they will be fairly witnessed.

[Badger]

   Flight shooters will often get what I consider odd responses such as " whats the point? will a 200 grain arrow kill a deer"  or "try killing a deer at 300 yards". Just different games we are playing no more or no less valid. Steve