Typically in the U.S. a longbow is defined as a bow which when strung the string only touches the limbs at the nocks, i.e. doesn't lie along the limbs. The reflex you noted in the Saxton Pope picture is actually the horn nocks on the tips of the limbs, as he was shooting an English Longbow. Your Martin Vision fits the criteria for a longbow under I.B.O. and NAA and NFAA rules. However it probably would not meet the criteria for the IFAA which mandates a continous curve in the limbs when braced. It also would not meet the criteria for the British Longbow Society which has stringent rules regarding depth vs width of the limbs and mandates a "D" shaped cross section. In England your bow would be classified as an American Flatbow. The rules that would govern your bow are those of the sanctioning body of the shoot you are attending. Unfortunately, as noted above, not all the sanctioning bodies utilize the same rules. As to why the differences in the rules, that's merely the way they have evolved over time. In the case of the BLBS, it's is because they are attempting to preserve the heritage of the English Longbow (ELB) which is so integral to their history. In the case of the IFAA, they are attempting to preserve a clear distinction between longbows and recurves. But take heart - most all of the shoots in North America are governed by either the IBO, NAA or NFAA, all of which accept your bow as a longbow. If you were to end up at a shoot that would not recognize your bow as a longbow, then you would be placed in the recurve class and be allowed to shoot carbon, aluminum or wood arrows as opposed to solely wood.

 

Thank you very much for that explaination. I am looking at my tournament listings for the next few months at my local club and almost all of them are IFAA so I might be in some trouble here. DARN!

I guess I'll have to check further with my club and see what they say. It just doesn't make senmse that if they are going to call it a long bow, then they should have checked with the rulings first...me too....lol

I wonder if I could raise the brace and make a continuos curve?

Bradd

 

Why mess with the brace, because I doubt you'll be able to achieve what you want. Just grab a set of aluminum/carbons and shoot in the bowhunter recurve class.

 

Yes..I could do that but at a disadvantage right off the bat because they can use rests, plungers and stabilizers...even in the barebow class...which we can't with the longbow. Besides, there are MANY more barebow and recurve shooters up here so the competition would be greater.

Oh..by the by...I saw a few of your posts on Stickbow sight over the pas couple of years discussing exactly the same thing and looking for ways to change the IFAA rules...lol Good work and I still think there should be some changes. They do have a traditional division that encompasses the original longbows so why not one with the newer styles?

So, for now, I'll practice with the Vision and see what happens around my club. Maybe, just mnaybe they will let me shoot with the ongbow guys!

Thanks again,
Bradd

 

What is it? They used to be called Hybrids, but since they have become more and more popular... that moniker has nearly disappeared.

 

Yes, I have been doing some research on the Native American bows...via museum sites... and most of the pictures that I have found wouldn't fit in with the 'must be one continuos curve' rule because many of them have some sort of deflex/reflex design. To me, no bow is a hybrid but rather a copy (maybe with a shelf) of earlier bow design.

I have written an email to the president of the IFAA and I think I am going to write him another to send him some of these pics as evidence that the English longbow wasn't the only/first design.

Even the Pope bow as per the picture won't be disqualified because of the deflex of the nocks. That's a shame.

Bradd

 

Well...I have written the IFAA president twice and the Ontario Archers Association to ask what the deal is on the 'modified' longbows IE Martin Vision longbow - (although it's not modified at all but rather an adaptation of an ealier design) . We shall see what happens from here.

I have done some primary research and found that the deflex design has been around for a very long time and there are many examples of it in the Native America museums. I also believe that the English longbow design has every right to be a separate entity, thereby keeping that design pure.

A simple rule change from 'one continuous curve' is all that it will take. Or perhaps a modified class is in order?

I would like to encourage all other longbow archers to send a simple email to the president of the IFAA and/or other governing bodies that use this silly ruling to eliminate them from competitions.

I do believe that the mandate for all archery associations is to encourage the sport through fair and equal rules. This rule clearly limits many archers from competing in a class that their bows were specifically built for. I don't think that is encouraging to anyone...do you?

Bradd

 

Your request for a rule change by IFAA about Longbow Class has been argued over and over again, with some people diametrically opposed to your proposal. I applaud you for your initiative but I suggest you brace yourself for disappointment. If you want to shoot IFAA Longbow class, you better resign yourself to buying equipment that meets their restrictions.

Dave

 

Yes...thanks...and I know it has been argued over again and again. But I HAD to do my part and sent off a couple of letters.

I did receive some word back but I don't expect too much. I also emailed 2 other governing bodies that use the IAFF rules and asked them to take a good look at it too. Fortunately, my local store owner and club president also has this on his mind and has agreed to take it up with whomever will listen. I am sure (once again) it will fall on deaf ears, but who knows?

I also understand all of the concerns by the people opposed. But my questions are; Isn't the English longbow simply a modification of other bows? Would ther even be aan English longbow if someone didn't see and take advantage of an improvement that benefits more? Is the sport to stay in the past with the rules or create new futures? Shouldn't there be a complete distinction between authentic and traditional? Or are the new, progressive longbow bows all headed for extinction?

It only takes one voice to change millions, if that voice makes more sense.

It's a shame that they are limiting themselves because I know quite a few archers at my club that won't shoot in any of their sanctioned events for the same reasoned ruling.

Many of the provincial bodies are taking note of these post too because the new archers come to these sites first and the newest archers will someday be the presidents of these associations.

Bradd

 

PS...the IFAA ruling on the longbow class would disqualify many bows (including DR Popes!) if the string nocks take any turn upwards whatsoever. This style or definition/interpretation could be argued in a competition situation resulting in major consquences.

I guess what I am trying my best to elude too, is that the rule isn't wrong in the 'standard curvature' sense, but should include any longbow with any upward turn at the nock locations...including MANY authentic bows with this simple feature.

It's not the bow itself, or the way it is shot, it's the description that needs adjusting.

I am not sure but I don't think I saw a minimum length listed for a longbow either. Does this mean that if I make a 48" bow that conforms to the curvature rule, it will be considered a longbow? I don't think so.

Rules are simply made to keep everyone on an equal, fair competition and meant to be modified with time. In my simple mind, they are not to be used to limit or discourage anyone. They are needed to encourage everyone!

Make sense?

 

Upon reflection, my post contributed nothing positive to the discussion so I deleted it.

Sorry,
Dave

 

No need to delete anything Arizona Dave! You voice is as powerfulk and necessary as everyone elses...sometime what we think is negative is much more positive than we can imagine! Thanks for you input!