Ignoring the archery focus, this is actually a phenomenal explanation of sports and their relationship to the Olympics. Extremely enlightening. Thank you.
I got into Recurve because of you. Its helped me more than I can explain as a disabled Veteran. Thanks mate, you and your videos have been greatly appreciated.
That's so good to hear. I discovered archery through disability also (caused by nothing as noble as your service). Archery has brought me back from the brink many times in my life - I can't put my finger on what it is exactly... but the extreme focus has a meditative quality that is at once challenging, soothing and restorative. Now I can't imagine life without it.
I'd rather see Horse archery or flight archery in the Olympics. Horse archery in particular is a lot more interesting to watch for advertising, and these sports have thousands of years of tradition, but compound archery has only around 50 years of sport history and would not address the common complaints of Olympic Archery as a spectator sport, such as being boring to watch for non archers. This is my personal opinion, nonetheless.
I couldnt agree more! Any traditionnal shooting or with a moving target or a moving archer would be much more appealing to watch and yould have the same kind of appeal than a martial art! 3D, horseback, kyudo... Why not even create a new kind of shooting specially for the olympics. Five rings for the symbol of the olympics? : make it five arrows, five distances, five heights, five positions of shooting and five kind of targets...
id agree but realistically how many people do you think own a bow and a horse and combine the two. i know there are people that do it but i think its a pretty small crowd, and a rather inaccessible side of archery when you think of the cost just to try it.
@@jake3040 owning a bow for a horse owner is negligible costs. There is already 2 worldwide established horse archery communities that hold regular competitions. This sport will also appeal to central Asia countries who normally have few sports to compete in and have easy access to horse archery facilities and equipment, they just need more cultural revival. Moreover there is a strong asiatic archery (aka horsebow) community that can transfer into horse archery once more facilities are established. More cities in the developed world have stables for horse riding nearby so the potential is also there for the sport to grow. There is already equestrian and archery in the Olympics. Horse archers ultimately a test of many skills, it allows you to test your rate of fire under stress and accuracy with moving targets. Throw in a minimum requirement of draw weight and now you have an ultimate sport
You speak a great deal of sense Nusensei, open-minded and even-handed, thank you. I find your videos to be the best on archery on RUclips, for me.😊👏🏻 🎉
Had the bow set up at a pro shop. It performed just fine ruclips.net/user/postUgkxQEKUoxLWwayEDZR0NKB-5limn4MBU-2L . And I would say this is a good starting now that I could pass down to my son when he is older.But the package was missing the release and a nock was missing from one arrow.Dealing with customer support was terrible. They suggested I buy a new release rather than correct their own quality control issue because it’s to expensive for the. to ship it out from China.Update: manufacturer got back to me and resolved the issue. I retract the above statement.
Just watched a few of the videos. I'm thinking of getting bows out again. Remembering how my dad and I would shoot his bow in the backyard. Love this information!
I really love this well thought out and precise explaination. The Olympic games may be the biggest possible stage in terms of media and world attention but that's about it. Most people tend to think that the Olympics are the most important because the entire world, from teenagers to old folks, men and women, sports enthusiast or couch potato, is getting it presented and it's the center of attention on almost any type of media. Thank you for this video!
It's nice how you explain todays most difficult obstacle in archery - the 993913234987923847 different rule sets. Really drives me out of anything but "some cooperative and friendly archery meeting.
This question is more for the fans: Nusensei has a horsebow (or asiatic style recurve) that makes the sexiest draw sound possible. It's a very notable creak to it, but I cannot find which one it was. If you know, you know.
That was the Mandarin Duck Qing Traditional Bow. it's no longer sold, but there are other identical versions made in China and probably sold under different names.
I think NYT did an article on this. Basically IOC is not convinced compound (or long bow or other types of archery) is that much different than recurve (to attract eyeballs and viewership) to justify extras costs to add compound to the program.
A small point of correction. At about 2 minutes in you refer to aluminium risers developing in the early 70s. Bow risers at that point were made of magnesium alloy (similar to car wheels) rather than aluminium which only came to prominence in the late 80s early 90s. Cannot be definite that all risers were made that way, but certainly the dominant brands (Hoyt, Yamaha etc) in the 70s were magnesium.
And many of them were still made of wood well into the 90's. I started shooting as kid in the early 90's. There were still brand new bows, many of them on the cheaper end of the price scale, that were laminated wooden risers.
I wouldn't be surprised if IOC do include compound in the future, whether near or far. But I guess it would depend of WA would campaign to have it included also. As a beginner who started last year with recurve, I've watched many compound, barebow, and trad bow competitions, and it's a shame that many talented archers who would represent their countries very well aren't able to have the world stage to showcase their talents. But I do understand the business and logistics side of it, more categories in a particular event would cost more. But as Nu said, there are plenty of archery competitions that host other categories styles and some would consider a greater honour to compete and win in.
We do! It's called recurve shooting cause that shit helps me sleep for hours! We start people with recurve bows cause it's not complicated for the simple people.
Pretty much as with any kind of sport when "new" equipment is introduced that offers benefits over the old. Two things can happen: Either more and more people move towards the new equipment over time Or people complain that the new equipment isn't fair and with enough complaints the regulating body puts a new regulation in place that bans the new equipment. We can see that a lot on Formula One car design. Some new stuff gets introduced and gets widespread acceptance and use, other things get banned. Some things are mandated. With archery, if there is no rule against using compound bows and they offer a benefit and advantage, somebody would use one. And if it shows to be beneficial, people would either switch from recurve to compound, or complain and compound bows would be banned in competition. Imagine if at some point the use of metal and fiber glass bows would be banned and only wooden bows would be allowed.... And I can totally imagine compound archery becoming it's own olympic discipline at some point. If it's distinct enough it can become a thing. A bit like how biathlon is an olympic discipline, despite there already being four skiing disciplines (alpine skiing, cross-country skiing, freestyle skiing, nordic combined skiing) and snowboarding. But they all are distinct enough from each other to warrant being their own discipline. So having another archery discipline like compound next to recurve might be possible. And maybe even a wooden longbow or barebow discipline as well.
Good episode. I'm enjoying backyard shooting with recurve and compound. I will be trying sights and a release add on one of my recurves. And I shoot older compounds with 3 fingers. Fun to move between each of them. If you included variations, you'd have about 30 different classes - too much for TV ... 🙃
3:58 i wouldn't say forever, top level compound bow require large amounts of strength as well but it's more focused on static precision instead of explosive power.
I imagine its due to the overshoot, if a compound misses the target (unlikely yes, but equipment failures happen) then its likely gonna go pretty far past the target. Recurves won't end up shooting as far past, and so they don't need as far of an overshoot
@@boygenius538_8 Olympics? yes, but its also about other non olympic shoots. Much easier if they can keep the same 'standard round' for both international and smaller competitions, and smaller ranges could have problems with an overshoot. That was one of the reasons I had heard anyway, makes some sort of sense to me
Keep in mind, the outdoor distance for Compound archery at the World Archery Events is 50m at a target size of 80cm. That is outside diameter. The 10 ring on that size of a target is 8cm(around 3"). The distance for Recurve archery is 70m at a 120cm target face. THAT 10 ring is 12.2cm, or around 4.5". It takes a very skilled archer, in both skills, to consistently shoot 10's. There are only a few archers who've shot 150's in competition.
@@mikeford963 Hmm, interesting so the accuracy is presumably higher if the other one is using a bigger target, but it is also a longer distance 20m seems pretty significant but i have never shot farther than maybe 30m so for all i know in that distance range the difference isnt as pronounced. curious how it would go if each archer did a set with each at each distance and how they would compare
@@KjoshWaddellBananasAreGood Surpisingly, the difference in target size means the targets appear the "same" size at each distance. For example, an 80cm at 50m appears to have the same dimension as a 40cm at 18m, and a 120cm at 70m, looks the same as an 80cm at 50m.
@@MartinHagi220 Awesome! I'm looking to get into archery. I'll probably get a compound since there's no point in going back in time with the other types.🥰
@@ilikewaffles3689 Well that comes off as narrow-minded, prejudice and uninformed af! But sure, go back in time! It's just very funny when it comes from one who didn't know how to shoot a bow!
@@ilikewaffles3689 I've been doing archery for a couple of years now. Honestly its mainly about what you enjoy shooting. I prefer compound, but I love seeing Olympic style re-curve or traditional bows, especially because its way more competitive and skillful in my opinion. Shoot what you enjoy, but don't bash other styles for whatever reason it may be :D
Maybe they should do 3 stages for each archer where they shoot longbow recurve and compound to show the evolution of archery, this would also mean they may win recurve but may not win longbow or compound but are still required to compete in them in order to win competition. You then don't need an extra set of staff as there would be no more archers. Just an idea.
Oh, that sounds interesting. A multi stage discipline. One good example of how similar sports can be at the olympic games simultaneously is skiing. There is alpine skiing, cross-country skiing, freestyle skiing, nordic combined skiing and snowboarding. That are four distinct ski disciplines plus one very adjacent discipline. And also biathlon, which combines skiing with shooting. But they all are different enough to be done at the same event.
Not in Olympic because watching compound bow competition is the equivalent of watching paint dry. And we’re talking about an organization that allow curling as a competitive sport. I also own a compound hunting bow.
Watching recurve shooting is painful. So fucken boring and that set system sucks cock. Recurve should be eliminated from Olympic games in favor of compound
@@jamesvpaquette I respect the compound bow for what it is l, a technological marvel and what it’s for more efficient and humane way for less skill hunter who refuses to practice more than few days out of the month, to harvest meat. But yea sure get rid of the game of skill by world class athletes in favor for watching out of shape old men with beer belly leisurely pull their pulleys machines with magnifying scope to shoot target at almost half of distance of recurve shooters.
@@LifeisGood-ye8rl watching that shit and mouthing off at compound athletes shows your a real that! The compound target it tougher than recurve currently. It should be 122 at 50 for recurve. The match may actually be interesting to watch.
@@jamesvpaquette you still allude to the fact that they all have beer guts and probably don’t even jog. We watch Olympic competition to admire and to be inspired because they put in hard work efforts overcoming adversity and challenges. Especially the para Olympian missing limbs and have more athleticism than top compound shooters. Please tell me what do beer guts inspire people to do?
That would make the event far too exclusive. With 32 competitors per gender, that would mean far too athletes for the premiere event of the sport and would hardly make it worthwhile. In contrast, the men's long jump alone has more competitors.
If possible, it would be great if you could explain different styles of bow draws. I’ve seen some draw the string below the nock and don’t understand the purpose it…
If the organisation is anything like fencing then the issue is that the IOC allocates only so many medals to World Archery. They could put compound in the next Olympics but in order to do so they would have to drop a recurve event for every compound.
@@arnyt2002 Its always difficult to drop and add events. Synchronised swimming is as much of a sport as gymnastics. Horse dancing also have big tradition on the olympics. assets.morningconsult.com/wp-uploads/2021/03/30131727/210325_US-Olympics-Interest-By-Sports_fullwidthtall.png If anything we could drop rugby according the viewership data or water polo (even though its one of the most watched event in my country)
Hi NUSensei. Since we're just past the Olympic Games I think it's a great time to re-do a few videos from the past. Interest is still high and many people would love to know what do they need to get into archery. If you could please consider making a video (or divide it into multiple videos if you feel it is better) to show new archers what do they need to get into the sport, that would be great. One idea would be to focus on new archers (who may be thinking abou starting after watching the games) and go through what you need if they have a club nearby (mainly, join the club and use their equipment) and if they don't (maybe just have a safe place to shot but having to buy their own equipment. Example: If you have a club, they will provide you with equipment to start and, as you progress, they can help you choose the right equipment for you. If you don't have a club but have a safe place to practice (refer to your video about backyard shooting) then you can go for the budget option (entry level takedown bow, quiver, pre-assebled arrows, finger tab or glove, arm guard, arrow rest, string wax, nock point brass or made of string, and some optional gear like bow case, targets, foam targets, etc), a mid range setup (better takedown bow, maybe ILF, choice of limbs, fastflight string, clicker, pressure button, sight, complete arrow parts including shaft, insert, nock point, nock, tip, gluw, vane tape, vane, etc) and a top end Olympic kit (riser, limbs, string, sight, stabilizers, weights, full X10 arrows including wraps, jigs and maintenance equipment, chest guards, bow squares, etc). No need to get into details like which one to choose, but just give a full list of what may be needed. Do this using the cat on a website like Lancaster to give people an ideia of current prices for each level and I can guarantee you you'll get MANY views. Maybe break it down into 3 videos, one for each level, and triple the views since most people will want to open all three to see the difference. Just an idea. Hope it helps.
I used to watch archery at the olympics for many years...and I have just saw a couple days ago records of a recent world championship in Paris that featured both compound bow and recurved bow. Having seen my 1st compound bow event now, I have to say that i still like recurved bow more. It gave me the impresssion that the compound bow is too technological, and also much less "variable" in results...everybody was doing 10s all the time with the occasional 9 (with a target that was much smaller in size)...with recurved you see even 8s, 7s and occasionally very big mistakes like 2-3s. I had the impression that with recurved the skill of the archer is more important than the tech of the bow to have a perfect final result...also you have the occasional error that gives some "sparkle" to the competition and makes it less predictable... I am not an expert, so just my 2 cents here as a general spectator that likes the sport... That said I guess compound can be at the olympics along with recurved...they just need to extend the days of competitions, it's doable in the 2 weeks of the olympics.
if you bring the target for compound to 70m from 50m , you will see more wrong shoot. For 50 meters the compound is perfect with smaller target face, but 70 or 90 meters are very difficult for us.
Surely horse archery would come under equestrian? Personally I regard target recurve as the purest, most elegant form of the sport, and certainly the closest to the asiatic martial arts!
I talked to an international official who was close to the situation and the "cost arguments" you make are definitely in play but the primary reason Compound is not in the Olympics is that there were not enough countries with competitive compound teams. India, for example, has almost no compound archers, compared to Recurve. Even Korea is really just getting started with a compound program. Just because it is popular in the US and Europe does not mean it is a global sport. The "cost" considerations could be resolved simply by having the International Governing Bodies for the sports responsible for paying the operating costs. Asking one city to bear the burden of providing for all of the sports is untenable as every Olympic Games since Los Angeles (which used many pre-existing facilities) has lost money, often significant amounts of it). Instead, each sport, like archery, should be hosted by an archery-crazed country, like Korea, France, or the U.S. Make the Olympics a truly global event. This would reduce the costs needed to be the "host city" which would retain the opening and closing ceremonies and a couple of premier opening and closing events, e.g. track and field. This would also bring attending an Olympic event to a much broader population.
I find Barebow and Traditional to be the most fun to both shoot and watch. Compound is the best representation of modern archery even if it isn't my cup of tea. The question is, would anyone shoot Olympic Recurve if it wasn't in the olympics?
Olympic recurve is great for beginners who don't want to buy 10 bows while they climb the poundage ladder, just buy one and switch the limbs. That could be a good reason why one would be shooting recurve even if it weren't in the Olympics.
@@霊像子 compounds can also switch limbs, Barebow wooden ones too, though there can be some limitations. It is not something exclusive to Olympic recurve. But you’re right, someone who wants to start and progress in traditional will have to buy a lot of bows
Probably yes. Most people don't shoot Olympic recurve because of the Olympics, and the modern Olympic recurve developed while archery wasn't in the Olympics. While the Olympics exposes more people to archery every four years, the popularity of "Olympic" recurve was already in the sport from the ground up, not from the top down.
@@NUSensei thank you for your videos. Kudos from Brazil. May Allah (S.W.T) bless and reward you. I have been learning a lot. I took an interest in the sport because of your channel. That said. I’d like to ask a few things: 1. Would you do an episode about the progression on archery? What I mean by that is the average progression times for most people. Like how much time on average to go from 25 pounds to 35 pounds for hunting? How much time to go from 25 pounds to Olympic standard draw weight? You taught people not to rush and how to know if you’re rushing.Of course it’s gonna depend on how many hours you put, but it would be nice to have some kinda of estimate or average, so we can have an idea about it. 2. It would be nice to have an episode about the controversies between the branches of archery. You did this several times for historical archery, traditional archery, combat archery, Olympic archery etc etc. Which was very instructional. But you never done so for crossbows and compounds. It would be nice to have an episode where you tell us how the compound and crossbow are seen by most other branches, what are the points they critique etc. It’s not necessary for you to give your personal opinion if you don’t want. In other words, it would be nice if we could get a panorama of the situation. Quite frankly it seems that there’s a general opinion against compound and crossbow in the community and people avoid talking about it. Can you clarify what the people that think it’s not real archery present as their points please? Thanks again. I hope things improve for the club.
Add a 100lb+ Compound Division. Power, Accurate and Stamina. I know there are none at present but hey, that is what competitions are for, incentive! You could make sure the target is penetrated deeply enough as well, just to mix it up. A Triathlon style event using bows to role a few into one?
A lot of the financial burden of hosting cities comes from events that are not actually sport, but rather art. Ice dancing is a prime example, and any event where scoring is subjective rather than rigidly defined. Too much commercialism! Granted, in the case of ice prancing the arena might well be constructed for hockey and re-purposed for other 'events', but there is a lot of other commercial infrastructure that goes into production costs of subjective art events. If the Olympics were to return to PURE sport, I believe there would be plenty of funding for all events and generally a lower cost up front for the hosting city.
@@NUSensei well... I can't say that i'm not exaggerating a little bit here, but i feel like there is a spectrum from "stick and string" to "gun" and that "compound bow" is in the middle between "recurve" and "crossbow". It share the aiming and string holding contraints of the recurve, but also has a trigger, a mechanism to reduce the weight held by the operator and the magnifying lenses of a crossbow. So i would not put the crossbow much farther away from the compound than the compound from the recurve. also, definition of a bow : "a weapon for shooting arrows, typically made of a curved piece of wood joined at both ends by a taut string." so, a crossbow would kind of fit....
@@AuxenceF A crossbow is further defined by being a tool that positions its limbs horizontally and mounted onto a stock with a trigger. As bows do not have this characteristic, bows and crossbows not regarded as the same thing. Users of bows are not considered "archers", they are arbalists, and are categorised as a completely different sport with different rules run by a different organisation (in many countries), with further legal ramifications on their ownership. The simple fact is that a crossbow does not require the user to draw, hold and release the bow string. I agree with the spectrum in terms of ease of use and accuracy, but crossbows are not bows as much as rifles are not crossbows. It is a logical stretch to label a crossbow as a "bow" due to having a curved section held by a taut string, since the same logic means that a rifle is the same as a crossbow due to have a stock and trigger.
They should do a direct comparison between a good archer with an Olympic recurve with stabilizers, against a good archer with a Compound bow without stabilizers. I wonder if stabilizers are actually more beneficial for accuracy than the Compound system.
@@musikSkool having shot years ago...I can tell you my $0.02 antics. I remember shooting a hunting level recurve with a single long bar stabilizer. To me, the biggest difference between the two is the let off and roll-over. I started with a 35# recurve and ended at 74# compound. I never saw an Olympic recurve back then...but I'll be damned if you catch me trying to hold that at full draw while on an Olympic firing line or in the woods waiting for a buck to get sorted and provide a clear shot. I know shooting matches that the stabilizer helped keep steady during long holds but where it really shined was reducing bow shock and fatigue from riser harmonics. As a teen that was a real issue. Prepping for a hunting season without the long rod was a 20-50 arrow string MAX. My hand would be completely numb afterwards. Shooting several junior events over a long weekend wasn't too bad with the long bar.
@@musikSkool We could call it the Gymkhana event. Get some running involved, a 3D woods shoot, a field shoot, an Olympic match...battle royale. It would add a level of excitement to the sport.
all the time there is a bunch of new sports or variants of already existing ones trying to get in to the olympics, but the ultimate stopper is finances. if a rule was introduced that any sport would be dropped the next time if it didn't financially support itself via ticket sales and tv money. i don't think there would be much left. and maybe a surge is needed these days. everyone wants their sport in the olympics, but nobody want's the olympics to be in their city. the only way i can see it work out is to have the olympics in the same location every time, so that the things they must build will be used more then only once.
Compounds have more efficient power delivery than any other bow type. If you have two bows, one compound and one recurve, and they both have let's say a 55lb draw weight and 28in draw, the compound will always be more powerful than the recurve.
Yeah, but most archers do. Most of the modern compound, specially the hunting bows are short and have very high let off. If you shoot them with fingers, there's very high chance will derail them, because of finger pinch and hand torque.
@@TimeofRagnarok I just told about possibilities, derailing is very much possible. But you can shoot with fingers. Some compounds are specificly made for finger shooting.
I’d like for the world-organisations to suggest 1 ‘addition’ to the OG each time. So we, OG enthousiasts, can decide by views which one deserves a place in ‘the regular OG’.That being said, I’d rather see barebow or 3d-shooting in the OG!
Hi, shooting has various versions in the Olympics. My suggestion to have all forms archery and to keep cost down. Is to have a max number of team members five or ten per country. They would have to have a knowledge or experience with all forms or archery. Have individual gold and team gold for each style then one for an overall. A bit like gymnastics. Thanks for a great video and look forward to more of your insights.
It's hard to be good at multiple different types of archery simultaneously. Usually you pick one discipline and practice it exclusively for a period of time.
@@johnbarron4265 hi, that is true and thats why i think it would be a grater experience for both archer and audience. gymnast need to master the floor, bars, vault etc. heptathlon requires you to learn master seven different events. so way not strive for a higher gaol.
@7:30 you forgot instinctive division as a World Archery Class for 3D - but the picture you show is an Instinctive class shooter. I know it's kind of pedantic, and many people just look at it as a hybrid of the longbow and barebow class, but there are significant enough differences between the 3 single string classes as to why they exist.
You are missing the number ONE reason that compound archery hasn't been introduced into the Olympic games. Back in the 70's, when compounds came to market, there were availability issues regarding the international aspect of the sport. That is right from the IOC. Now that is not an issue. Also, if you say they have a hard time "adding events", why are they adding things like table tennis to the Olympics?
That was more or less the reason covered: international events largely had not adopted the compound bow by the 1970s. Now compound is paired alongside recurve as standard classifications. As for events, there's a difference between adding more sports and adding more events. Adding a sport means drawing in far more spectator interest, while adding an event to an existing sport may have less potential growth in interest for the Olympics. There's more to gain from adding cricket than from adding another archery round from the IOC perspective
@@NUSensei And there is the probelm. Turning a show case of atheltism into turning a profit. Oh, and archery was one of the ORIGINAL Oplymic sports of Greco-Roman times. And....no....when compounds were starting to come into production and populatrity in the 70's, they were not widely distributed throughout the world THAT was the IOC's original reasoning for not including compound archery in the Olympics. It had nothing to do with viewership, or spectators, or even the concerns behind "adding another event", which would have much easier then, than now. Now, they could reduce it to the same way World archery does it. 720 round for qualifiers, then 150 rounds for the top 8.
Table tennis? It has been in the Olympic games since 1988. It is also one of the most popular sports around the world. Not really a good example. Also, you seem to be arguing the exact same point as NUSensei.
That was a good video and an interesting topic. Can you please talk about arrow rests in general? Like not only the super are hunter rests, but also the magnetic one.
Compound bows are on the rise. I "downgraded" from target bow to traditional hunting bow. I saw a LOT of archers "upgrade" from target bow to compound bow. Nodody understood why I went shooting hunting bow, but they always ask to shoot some arrows with my bow, just for the feeling and experience of it
@@romainsavioz5466 by target bow, I believe he means a sort of Olympic or Barebow style, quite possibly aluminium riser with carbon limbs with either stabilizers or Barebow weights. he states he went from target to traditional, so maybe wooden riser/limbs, without stabilizers or sights.
I can't remember who it was for certain but I think I know as it was probably 8-10 years ago at one of the field courses I set I was talking to someone from ArcheryGB. At the time they were saying that they had been asked to work with Beiter on reactive targets (which became the Beiter hit miss system where the centres are pushed into the target) to make archery more interesting for spectators. The idea at the time was they were going to have a 50m indoor hit miss style competition for compound as a demonstration sport at the Winter Olympics. The thinking was, it would limit venues to try and hold a 70m round indoors but things like the curling ice once no longer required for the competition could be covered and provide the space required fo a 50m competition. Who knows if it will ever happen as several Winter Olympics have been and gone in that time.
This was talked about prior to the 2020/2021 Olympics. Essentially it comes down to a lack of compound archers across the world. Mostly female compound archers.
Where I live Compound, Barebow and even Traditional are more popular than Olympic Recurve. I get that it is different all over the world but I'm still surprised that they found Compound to have too few practitioners.
I would question the validity of your statements. Both the Pan Am Games and the Asian Games have compound archery and there is no shortage of competitors from the participating countries, both in the men's and women's sides. As for Europe, check out the Hyundai World Cup and see how many of the compound archers are Europeans from as many different countries as there are for the recurve.
@@spidey2721 You're going to have to be more precise than to say, "You can prolly [sic] even find it on their page." Well, I can't find it on any of their pages under any of the headings and sub-headings given. I stand by what I can find and see in all the video and information from the various competitions. Compound archery is practiced by men and women and in numbers.
Nu. Thanks ,so much , for another shirt out . A bit of Olympic trivia . Pole archery was an Olympic event . 1900 and 1920 . So there are gold medals, some where, for pole archery . I have no idea where . the games in question where Paris n Brussels . So pole archery would be considered a local sport . Another interesting point . One of our club members happens to be a fire fighter Organizing a international fire fighters games here in Winnipeg . And in the archery events which he has participated in previously. The plan is to include pole archery . With compound bows . ;) Cheers n thks again
@@NUSensei Yep . Though, the same two Olympics had pigeon shooting as a gold medal event . not Clay pigeons either ,😱. Not something I could see being tv advertising friendly. Lol . Those were local sports choices by the organizers .
I am mainly a recurve/flatbow archer and have never really used a compound much besides a first Generation 1999 Genesis when they had the 15-35 pound draw model I used without a release tool set to about 30 pounds. Nothing against Compound archers, My Brother had one for a bit as a kid due to few recurve archers in How Kota archery even at his age so to compete he used a compound. Lots of archers in compound did buy there win were good archers but beat out better great archers. They did this partially using a smaller adult bow that they set up to be 40 pounds or more with at the time in 2000's and having the top of the line sight and sights on compound vary way more then most recurve sights. My brother had good sights not top of the line latest model so he would lose due to that and having a slower 38 pound max young teen sized compound at age 9 before he out grew the bow. The others had 40-45 pound adult bows, the 2-3 year older model of the fathers, they gave down the older model as an excuse to buy a new bow themselves and 90% of parents were doing either no watching the kid just talking to parents about hunting of any kind or beyond coaching as if giving military orders without yelling.
Maybe in your country but not world wide. Recurve is what most use and what most care about. Just for the fact that this is more like what people think about when they think about a bow. Compounds just look way too futuristic for the average person to think "cool I want to see that bow tournament because bows are so cool in all these movies" Even the Recurves are probably already too futuristic for people who don't use bows themselves,
I would feel a lot better about recurve not being in the Olympics if synchronized banner spinning wasn't a "sport". EDIT: Sorry, I meant "compound", not "recurve".
What about World Archery itself? The IOC pays them $2 million+ to operate/officiate the event. Is compound more work to officiate? If it were at the same venue, events adjusted to add only two or four net medal ceremonies, and qualifying standards added to reduce the number of participants who actual attend the Olympics to a more reasonable ~40 or so per discipline, I suspect the IOC could be convinced as it would only add a marginal cost increase on their side. But how much more would World Archery need from the IOC for the extra qualification and officiating work? Marginal or double/triple?
If it's 40 per discipline, that means 20 men and 20 women. Is it really worth having an event for only 20 people? In contrast, the men's long jump alone had 32 competitors, and long jump is a side-event compared to the main event in archery. When an Olympic event has fewer people than a grassroots club shoot, that might have the opposite effect of promoting the sport.
@@NUSensei Or more if that's what they decide. Consider "Canoe Slalom" -- it's really two disciplines: kayak and canoe, without a ton of overlap. It works for them. I think a similar balance might work for archery. Maybe not. Some people don't care about the distinction, but others notice and find one much more compelling than the other. It would weaken the importance of the Olympics for the one discipline, but I think the right balance would interest more people. Many people are drawn to the high tech capability of compounds, and many people are drawn to more primitive bows than even the Olympic competition recurve. What do you enjoy the most?
In my opinion, emphasis on "my", compound is the form of archery where the goal/philosophy of the bow is to minimize as much as possible the role/influence of the human being doing the shooting. I do practice Olympic, Traditional and Compound.
@@manabellum not the case. If it was a crossbow then you’d be more correct. Still not entirely correct though. With all due respect it’s not a matter of opinion because there is such a thing as physics
part time archer not really that good but i do understand that Olympic archers might be crap hunters and war bow enthusiasts are a class all their own. nice vid and probably all very true on the reasons why. compound are nice to use and aim but again depends why and what you are doing archery for. im a medieval enthusiast so compounds are just to many parts to many things to maintain when a bit of wood and a string are far easier to make and maintain. what ever your reasons for doing it just enjoy them and know it takes a lot of skill to use any bow and perform well in any archery style, hunting Olympics whatever
I think that eventually that Compound will be the only one when less and less top manufactures are making target IOC stuff and are catering to the USA/Canadian Hunting Market and if NOT they will either go to more a barebow recurve that can use a flat limb/ILF/Hoyts newest ILF style but the hunting models of smaller risers then say a target model with only one screw in point so no damper thing on the bow per the current rules or a Compound hunting model. I say this due to even cheaper companies most are not willing to make bows that are target models for the majority of the line and claim they can't make a living off them. I mean PSE has a line of Target Compound and most others need to be specialty brands to have a bow like this, Bear has one model that works as a target bow. I think if Archery came out for the Olympics introduced in 1980, 8 years later, we would be now seeing a compound with a bow that is more a compound version of ILF style like a sleeve the limb fits into, using no more then ___ speed and ___ power to fit the risers with this changing a tad over the years as materials and designs have gotten better.
If its about money then IOC should kick out recurve from the olympics and get compound instead. Recurve is boring and looks just silly with that swinging of the bow after every shot.
@@weixingyang898 yes, that is what I mean. I know why recurve shooters do it and that some compound shooters do it too but with a compound bow this swing is not as big as with a recurve. Therefore it does not look as silly to me.
@@wojtekkowalski8983 I doubt you know why they do it and still see it as silly! How ironic that you want to replace an exciting style for a boring one! Compound archery looks very boring to me. How does that feel? I'm deeply in shock of just how narrow-minded people who practice archery can be toward other disciplines of it instead of being informedly respectful!
I think we will see Compound get into the Games sooner rather than later. Mostly because of popularity. Compound is the most in your face form of archery for people that aren't archers. If the average person sees a Turkish bow and see it being drawn with a thumb, that will appear too complex. Why is that person not shooting 3 finger like the movies, TV shows, and video games? How come it doesn't look like the bow Joe Rogan, Cam Hanes, etc. Cam might be the most famous archer to average ppl. Then you have ease of use. It's easier to shoot a 80lb Compound than a 45lb Recurve or Asiatic bow. So ppl will be drawn to the less complex, easier entry. So with more and more ppl getting into compound archery, the better chance the games will include it.
I've shooting trad, barebow and compouds and definitely shooting a #80 compound isn't easier than shooting a #40 recurve. I have two barebows (#45 and #55 respectively) and I competed with the #45, and with a #60 compound; if I compare the #55 barebow and the #60 compound the compound is easier to draw and to keep open, but whereas the barebow weigths less than 1,4 Kg my compound with scope and stabs weigths ~5 Kg and is harder to hold and carry around. And a #80 isn't a joke: Rogan and Hanes are hunters, which means fewer shoots than competing vs a target, and despite shooting less Hanes had shoulder injuries due being overbowed in draw weigth. In WA tournaments the pound limit is #60, and in Vegas I've only seen Levi Morgan using a #72 (and He's a very large and fit dude). If you try to do a 50m tournament with a #80 compound (which anyway you couldn't use under WA rules) you would be amazed of how much harder it will feel compared to shooting a sub #60 recurve.
Its not limited to archery. I.e. same reasons why in the olympic games under the firearms shooting disciplines two very popular events, Benchrest shooting and Practical shooting, are not present until today.
Interesting. So, sex up other forms of archery to sell them? Compound bow...Beyond Thunderdome? Long Bow...Last Man Standing? Slightly more seriously, it would be interesting to see a 3D target course or moving targets a la some gun shooting contests. Even horse archery or a biathlon-like event. Ironically, sexing it up might leave you with something better approximating archery's origins.
Sadly the historical trend in Olympic events it to move away from the sports' marshal, historical and practical roots. Partly in the name of clearer more consistent scoring, but also to elevate the Olympic event above the more pedestrian variants. Gamification is a primary goal since the standardization push in the 1970's. This can be seen in Olympic fencing and HEMA, while a book could be written about the drift of Olympic shooting and the practical shooting sports. The biathlon survives because a plurality of the countries involved in the winter games have a strong marshal tradition with firearms, though even this event has been consistently pushed away from the roots of military patrol with the use of small bore rifles and short single distance shooting.
@@archerry6457 Compound archers de-skilled? Pick up a compound bow and show us how many 10s you can shoot. Every type of archery requires skill and practice. Compound is not my cup of tea, I prefer trad recurve. But I know that I can just pick up a compound and shoot well. Everyone has their own preference and choice. You can't say other people's choice is wronh and yours is right.
No offense intended, I love your channel Nu, but IMO Olympic recurve is abominable. Olympic bows have grown so awkward and cumbersome you can barely walk through a house with one, much less the woods. In much the same way Europeans ruined cycling, they ruined archery - They fell in love with the tech and changed the rules to suit manufactures of $800 risers, etc..... Honestly, it is pretty ugly. I'll stay with a stick, string, and less mind... If I really want next level accuracy and power, I will drag out my 10 year old Bowtech....... The last bow I would ever own is an Olympic Recurve.
Archery was most definitely born from killing. It's the same logic that says sport rifles are better than military rifles for the same reasons. People forget that all rifles came from military first. The AR system is just the modern evolution of a rifle just as the compound is the modern evolution of the bow. That's all it is.
I'd really like to what kind of dirty stuff does the swimming organization have on the olympics committee, because the amount of events that are basically the same thing swimming gets is ridiculous. I realize swimming is exceptionally difficult sport, but if a single person can win 3 or more gold medals at the same olympic games for doing basically the same thing, yet some sports with two internationally recognized, very different divisions have only one of them present, something just doesn't feel right.
They will add this to Olympic games as a separate exercise if it'll become a more popular sport, which I doubt. One of the reasons why 10 meters running target was removed from Olympics after 2004 is because it wasn't as popular.
I've no problem with compound providing it's in its own section, I would say though you are a better all round disciplinarian using a recurve definately, for obvious reasons. I would like to see a comp that uses at least 2 types within a section, not insisting on which one you use as long as theyre both used. It would be fun and sort out the boys from the men (just a figure of speech but u get my drift). That would be awesome, maybe 3, compound, recurve and longbow making u use all the skills, anyway just my layman's opinion.
The team event in the 3D World Championships does this: each team has one compound, one barebow recurve and one longbow. The compound shoots at a further marker while barebow and longbow shoot closer. The contest really comes down the longbow shooter - the compound shooter will nearly always hit the smaller scoring ring, the barebow shooter will also nearly always nail their mark, whereas the longbow shooter - who isn't allowed to use sights or stringwalk - has the less predictable outcome.
@@mrhoppy_9724 Gap is the expected method. There's nothing that can prove that a shot is truly instinctive. The rules define that the fingers must be touching the nock of the arrow, which precludes stringwalking. You could still shoot instinctively, but gap shooters will out-shoot instinctive shooters in points.
I find that most arguments for Recurve over Compound would make Barebow the preferred form and most arguments for Recurve over Barebow would make Compound the better form.
That´s why there is a motion to change the scoring system for compound from "5-10" to "5-11" bringing a perfect round from 720 to 795. Less ties and a wider spread between archers.
Ignoring the archery focus, this is actually a phenomenal explanation of sports and their relationship to the Olympics. Extremely enlightening. Thank you.
Naaaah ☝️😄 no it IS not
(traditional IS The best)
I got into Recurve because of you. Its helped me more than I can explain as a disabled Veteran. Thanks mate, you and your videos have been greatly appreciated.
That's so good to hear. I discovered archery through disability also (caused by nothing as noble as your service). Archery has brought me back from the brink many times in my life - I can't put my finger on what it is exactly... but the extreme focus has a meditative quality that is at once challenging, soothing and restorative. Now I can't imagine life without it.
😇👍😁😁😁
I'd rather see Horse archery or flight archery in the Olympics. Horse archery in particular is a lot more interesting to watch for advertising, and these sports have thousands of years of tradition, but compound archery has only around 50 years of sport history and would not address the common complaints of Olympic Archery as a spectator sport, such as being boring to watch for non archers. This is my personal opinion, nonetheless.
I couldnt agree more!
Any traditionnal shooting or with a moving target or a moving archer would be much more appealing to watch and yould have the same kind of appeal than a martial art!
3D, horseback, kyudo...
Why not even create a new kind of shooting specially for the olympics.
Five rings for the symbol of the olympics? : make it five arrows, five distances, five heights, five positions of shooting and five kind of targets...
id agree but realistically how many people do you think own a bow and a horse and combine the two. i know there are people that do it but i think its a pretty small crowd, and a rather inaccessible side of archery when you think of the cost just to try it.
@@jake3040 owning a bow for a horse owner is negligible costs. There is already 2 worldwide established horse archery communities that hold regular competitions. This sport will also appeal to central Asia countries who normally have few sports to compete in and have easy access to horse archery facilities and equipment, they just need more cultural revival. Moreover there is a strong asiatic archery (aka horsebow) community that can transfer into horse archery once more facilities are established. More cities in the developed world have stables for horse riding nearby so the potential is also there for the sport to grow. There is already equestrian and archery in the Olympics. Horse archers ultimately a test of many skills, it allows you to test your rate of fire under stress and accuracy with moving targets. Throw in a minimum requirement of draw weight and now you have an ultimate sport
@@HistoricalWeapons Horse archery would not be affordable to poorer countries
A lot of older tournament styles would be cool. Like shooting at wands or clouts rather than upright targets.
You speak a great deal of sense Nusensei, open-minded and even-handed, thank you. I find your videos to be the best on archery on RUclips, for me.😊👏🏻 🎉
Had the bow set up at a pro shop. It performed just fine ruclips.net/user/postUgkxQEKUoxLWwayEDZR0NKB-5limn4MBU-2L . And I would say this is a good starting now that I could pass down to my son when he is older.But the package was missing the release and a nock was missing from one arrow.Dealing with customer support was terrible. They suggested I buy a new release rather than correct their own quality control issue because it’s to expensive for the. to ship it out from China.Update: manufacturer got back to me and resolved the issue. I retract the above statement.
Just watched a few of the videos. I'm thinking of getting bows out again. Remembering how my dad and I would shoot his bow in the backyard. Love this information!
I really love this well thought out and precise explaination. The Olympic games may be the biggest possible stage in terms of media and world attention but that's about it. Most people tend to think that the Olympics are the most important because the entire world, from teenagers to old folks, men and women, sports enthusiast or couch potato, is getting it presented and it's the center of attention on almost any type of media. Thank you for this video!
Extremely well thought out. Extremely well presented.
It's nice how you explain todays most difficult obstacle in archery - the 993913234987923847 different rule sets.
Really drives me out of anything but "some cooperative and friendly archery meeting.
This question is more for the fans:
Nusensei has a horsebow (or asiatic style recurve) that makes the sexiest draw sound possible. It's a very notable creak to it, but I cannot find which one it was.
If you know, you know.
That was the Mandarin Duck Qing Traditional Bow. it's no longer sold, but there are other identical versions made in China and probably sold under different names.
@@NUSensei Thank you Nu 🙏
@@NUSensei Alibow Mongolian MGZ
I think NYT did an article on this. Basically IOC is not convinced compound (or long bow or other types of archery) is that much different than recurve (to attract eyeballs and viewership) to justify extras costs to add compound to the program.
YES! So glad you mentioned the IHAA
Very well explained, many thanks.
A small point of correction. At about 2 minutes in you refer to aluminium risers developing in the early 70s. Bow risers at that point were made of magnesium alloy (similar to car wheels) rather than aluminium which only came to prominence in the late 80s early 90s. Cannot be definite that all risers were made that way, but certainly the dominant brands (Hoyt, Yamaha etc) in the 70s were magnesium.
And many of them were still made of wood well into the 90's. I started shooting as kid in the early 90's. There were still brand new bows, many of them on the cheaper end of the price scale, that were laminated wooden risers.
The magnesium alloy used was predominantly aluminium.
@Alan Brando kevlar, really, a synthetic fibre in a cast metallic alloy, how does that work?
@@mikeford963...Browning was a famous producer of the wooden compound.
@@MyLifEcademy-sr4hy Yep. My first bow back in the early 90's was a Browning Fox 2.
I wouldn't be surprised if IOC do include compound in the future, whether near or far. But I guess it would depend of WA would campaign to have it included also. As a beginner who started last year with recurve, I've watched many compound, barebow, and trad bow competitions, and it's a shame that many talented archers who would represent their countries very well aren't able to have the world stage to showcase their talents.
But I do understand the business and logistics side of it, more categories in a particular event would cost more. But as Nu said, there are plenty of archery competitions that host other categories styles and some would consider a greater honour to compete and win in.
I think we should add competitive sleeping and compound bow shooting to the Olympics!
I’d win both
We do! It's called recurve shooting cause that shit helps me sleep for hours! We start people with recurve bows cause it's not complicated for the simple people.
Snoring included?
Pretty much as with any kind of sport when "new" equipment is introduced that offers benefits over the old.
Two things can happen:
Either more and more people move towards the new equipment over time
Or people complain that the new equipment isn't fair and with enough complaints the regulating body puts a new regulation in place that bans the new equipment.
We can see that a lot on Formula One car design. Some new stuff gets introduced and gets widespread acceptance and use, other things get banned. Some things are mandated.
With archery, if there is no rule against using compound bows and they offer a benefit and advantage, somebody would use one. And if it shows to be beneficial, people would either switch from recurve to compound, or complain and compound bows would be banned in competition.
Imagine if at some point the use of metal and fiber glass bows would be banned and only wooden bows would be allowed....
And I can totally imagine compound archery becoming it's own olympic discipline at some point. If it's distinct enough it can become a thing.
A bit like how biathlon is an olympic discipline, despite there already being four skiing disciplines (alpine skiing, cross-country skiing, freestyle skiing, nordic combined skiing) and snowboarding. But they all are distinct enough from each other to warrant being their own discipline.
So having another archery discipline like compound next to recurve might be possible. And maybe even a wooden longbow or barebow discipline as well.
Good episode. I'm enjoying backyard shooting with recurve and compound. I will be trying sights and a release add on one of my recurves. And I shoot older compounds with 3 fingers. Fun to move between each of them. If you included variations, you'd have about 30 different classes - too much for TV ... 🙃
3:58 i wouldn't say forever, top level compound bow require large amounts of strength as well but it's more focused on static precision instead of explosive power.
Ok another good question to add.. why is it recurve shoots 70m targets vs compound who shoots 50m? Shouldn’t it be the other way around?
Because they don't want to walk the extra 20m to get their arrows lol
I imagine its due to the overshoot, if a compound misses the target (unlikely yes, but equipment failures happen) then its likely gonna go pretty far past the target. Recurves won't end up shooting as far past, and so they don't need as far of an overshoot
@@mymychannel324 nonsense
@@mymychannel324 just get a backstop? Pretty sure Olympics can afford that lol.
@@boygenius538_8 Olympics? yes, but its also about other non olympic shoots. Much easier if they can keep the same 'standard round' for both international and smaller competitions, and smaller ranges could have problems with an overshoot. That was one of the reasons I had heard anyway, makes some sort of sense to me
If compound archers are getting 10s consistantly doesn't that mean that the target is too close?
Logically that is the case. However, they _don't_ constantly get 10s. That's the upper echelon of compound shooters.
@@NUSensei how much further would the Compound competition need to be shooting to end up with the same grouping with an archer of equal skill?
Keep in mind, the outdoor distance for Compound archery at the World Archery Events is 50m at a target size of 80cm. That is outside diameter. The 10 ring on that size of a target is 8cm(around 3"). The distance for Recurve archery is 70m at a 120cm target face. THAT 10 ring is 12.2cm, or around 4.5". It takes a very skilled archer, in both skills, to consistently shoot 10's. There are only a few archers who've shot 150's in competition.
@@mikeford963 Hmm, interesting so the accuracy is presumably higher if the other one is using a bigger target, but it is also a longer distance 20m seems pretty significant but i have never shot farther than maybe 30m so for all i know in that distance range the difference isnt as pronounced. curious how it would go if each archer did a set with each at each distance and how they would compare
@@KjoshWaddellBananasAreGood Surpisingly, the difference in target size means the targets appear the "same" size at each distance. For example, an 80cm at 50m appears to have the same dimension as a 40cm at 18m, and a 120cm at 70m, looks the same as an 80cm at 50m.
Love it! Thank you
Is compound better than recurve in terms of arrow speed, accuracy, precision, ease of use, etc?
Ease of use is debatable(in my opinion yes), but answer to other questions is definitely YES
@@MartinHagi220 Awesome! I'm looking to get into archery. I'll probably get a compound since there's no point in going back in time with the other types.🥰
@@ilikewaffles3689 Well that comes off as narrow-minded, prejudice and uninformed af! But sure, go back in time! It's just very funny when it comes from one who didn't know how to shoot a bow!
@@ilikewaffles3689 I've been doing archery for a couple of years now. Honestly its mainly about what you enjoy shooting. I prefer compound, but I love seeing Olympic style re-curve or traditional bows, especially because its way more competitive and skillful in my opinion. Shoot what you enjoy, but don't bash other styles for whatever reason it may be :D
Maybe they should do 3 stages for each archer where they shoot longbow recurve and compound to show the evolution of archery, this would also mean they may win recurve but may not win longbow or compound but are still required to compete in them in order to win competition. You then don't need an extra set of staff as there would be no more archers. Just an idea.
Oh, that sounds interesting. A multi stage discipline.
One good example of how similar sports can be at the olympic games simultaneously is skiing. There is alpine skiing, cross-country skiing, freestyle skiing, nordic combined skiing and snowboarding. That are four distinct ski disciplines plus one very adjacent discipline. And also biathlon, which combines skiing with shooting. But they all are different enough to be done at the same event.
Not in Olympic because watching compound bow competition is the equivalent of watching paint dry. And we’re talking about an organization that allow curling as a competitive sport. I also own a compound hunting bow.
Watching recurve shooting is painful. So fucken boring and that set system sucks cock. Recurve should be eliminated from Olympic games in favor of compound
@@jamesvpaquette I respect the compound bow for what it is l, a technological marvel and what it’s for more efficient and humane way for less skill hunter who refuses to practice more than few days out of the month, to harvest meat. But yea sure get rid of the game of skill by world class athletes in favor for watching out of shape old men with beer belly leisurely pull their pulleys machines with magnifying scope to shoot target at almost half of distance of recurve shooters.
@@LifeisGood-ye8rl watching that shit and mouthing off at compound athletes shows your a real that! The compound target it tougher than recurve currently. It should be 122 at 50 for recurve. The match may actually be interesting to watch.
@@jamesvpaquette you still allude to the fact that they all have beer guts and probably don’t even jog. We watch Olympic competition to admire and to be inspired because they put in hard work efforts overcoming adversity and challenges. Especially the para Olympian missing limbs and have more athleticism than top compound shooters. Please tell me what do beer guts inspire people to do?
@@LifeisGood-ye8rl You keep thing that Ass Kan.
So I do archery with a compound bow right now so could I use a recurve in a tournament with other compound users?
If the cost is a big part of the why, what would you think about cutting the format in half, 64 athletes instead of 128, but having two events?
That would make the event far too exclusive. With 32 competitors per gender, that would mean far too athletes for the premiere event of the sport and would hardly make it worthwhile. In contrast, the men's long jump alone has more competitors.
If possible, it would be great if you could explain different styles of bow draws. I’ve seen some draw the string below the nock and don’t understand the purpose it…
I was totally absorbed by the Olympic and Paralympic archery. But I confess I use a recurve bow.
I'm curious about your thoughts on lever bows like onieda bows?
Still a compound bow. The wheels are just in the middle or limb hinge provides mechanical advantages
If the organisation is anything like fencing then the issue is that the IOC allocates only so many medals to World Archery. They could put compound in the next Olympics but in order to do so they would have to drop a recurve event for every compound.
Correct
Or drop rubbish non-sports like horse dancing and synchronised drowning. Opening up more medals to go to archery.
@@arnyt2002 Its always difficult to drop and add events. Synchronised swimming is as much of a sport as gymnastics. Horse dancing also have big tradition on the olympics.
assets.morningconsult.com/wp-uploads/2021/03/30131727/210325_US-Olympics-Interest-By-Sports_fullwidthtall.png
If anything we could drop rugby according the viewership data or water polo (even though its one of the most watched event in my country)
@@arnyt2002 Took a second for the shock of how narrow-minded people can be to warp over me there!
@@tritrinh568 He's on point. These are not sport but more like theater with subjective scoring. Show them the door!
I first learned on recurve bows a little over 20 years ago but I really enjoy my compound bow. I enjoy the technical aspects of cams, tuning, etc.
Hi NUSensei.
Since we're just past the Olympic Games I think it's a great time to re-do a few videos from the past. Interest is still high and many people would love to know what do they need to get into archery. If you could please consider making a video (or divide it into multiple videos if you feel it is better) to show new archers what do they need to get into the sport, that would be great. One idea would be to focus on new archers (who may be thinking abou starting after watching the games) and go through what you need if they have a club nearby (mainly, join the club and use their equipment) and if they don't (maybe just have a safe place to shot but having to buy their own equipment.
Example: If you have a club, they will provide you with equipment to start and, as you progress, they can help you choose the right equipment for you. If you don't have a club but have a safe place to practice (refer to your video about backyard shooting) then you can go for the budget option (entry level takedown bow, quiver, pre-assebled arrows, finger tab or glove, arm guard, arrow rest, string wax, nock point brass or made of string, and some optional gear like bow case, targets, foam targets, etc), a mid range setup (better takedown bow, maybe ILF, choice of limbs, fastflight string, clicker, pressure button, sight, complete arrow parts including shaft, insert, nock point, nock, tip, gluw, vane tape, vane, etc) and a top end Olympic kit (riser, limbs, string, sight, stabilizers, weights, full X10 arrows including wraps, jigs and maintenance equipment, chest guards, bow squares, etc). No need to get into details like which one to choose, but just give a full list of what may be needed. Do this using the cat on a website like Lancaster to give people an ideia of current prices for each level and I can guarantee you you'll get MANY views. Maybe break it down into 3 videos, one for each level, and triple the views since most people will want to open all three to see the difference.
Just an idea. Hope it helps.
Will take some time. They have to add the sports that have the greatest odds of drawing an audience you know like break dancing and flag football.
I used to watch archery at the olympics for many years...and I have just saw a couple days ago records of a recent world championship in Paris that featured both compound bow and recurved bow.
Having seen my 1st compound bow event now, I have to say that i still like recurved bow more.
It gave me the impresssion that the compound bow is too technological, and also much less "variable" in results...everybody was doing 10s all the time with the occasional 9 (with a target that was much smaller in size)...with recurved you see even 8s, 7s and occasionally very big mistakes like 2-3s.
I had the impression that with recurved the skill of the archer is more important than the tech of the bow to have a perfect final result...also you have the occasional error that gives some "sparkle" to the competition and makes it less predictable...
I am not an expert, so just my 2 cents here as a general spectator that likes the sport...
That said I guess compound can be at the olympics along with recurved...they just need to extend the days of competitions, it's doable in the 2 weeks of the olympics.
if you bring the target for compound to 70m from 50m , you will see more wrong shoot. For 50 meters the compound is perfect with smaller target face, but 70 or 90 meters are very difficult for us.
Compound, 90% tools. More expensive, more accurate. Very funny Olympic choose compound more than barebow.
Surely horse archery would come under equestrian?
Personally I regard target recurve as the purest, most elegant form of the sport, and certainly the closest to the asiatic martial arts!
I talked to an international official who was close to the situation and the "cost arguments" you make are definitely in play but the primary reason Compound is not in the Olympics is that there were not enough countries with competitive compound teams. India, for example, has almost no compound archers, compared to Recurve. Even Korea is really just getting started with a compound program. Just because it is popular in the US and Europe does not mean it is a global sport.
The "cost" considerations could be resolved simply by having the International Governing Bodies for the sports responsible for paying the operating costs. Asking one city to bear the burden of providing for all of the sports is untenable as every Olympic Games since Los Angeles (which used many pre-existing facilities) has lost money, often significant amounts of it). Instead, each sport, like archery, should be hosted by an archery-crazed country, like Korea, France, or the U.S. Make the Olympics a truly global event. This would reduce the costs needed to be the "host city" which would retain the opening and closing ceremonies and a couple of premier opening and closing events, e.g. track and field. This would also bring attending an Olympic event to a much broader population.
I find Barebow and Traditional to be the most fun to both shoot and watch. Compound is the best representation of modern archery even if it isn't my cup of tea. The question is, would anyone shoot Olympic Recurve if it wasn't in the olympics?
Olympic recurve is great for beginners who don't want to buy 10 bows while they climb the poundage ladder, just buy one and switch the limbs. That could be a good reason why one would be shooting recurve even if it weren't in the Olympics.
@@霊像子 compounds can also switch limbs, Barebow wooden ones too, though there can be some limitations. It is not something exclusive to Olympic recurve. But you’re right, someone who wants to start and progress in traditional will have to buy a lot of bows
Probably yes. Most people don't shoot Olympic recurve because of the Olympics, and the modern Olympic recurve developed while archery wasn't in the Olympics. While the Olympics exposes more people to archery every four years, the popularity of "Olympic" recurve was already in the sport from the ground up, not from the top down.
@@NUSensei thank you for your videos. Kudos from Brazil. May Allah (S.W.T) bless and reward you. I have been learning a lot. I took an interest in the sport because of your channel.
That said. I’d like to ask a few things:
1. Would you do an episode about the progression on archery? What I mean by that is the average progression times for most people.
Like how much time on average to go from 25 pounds to 35 pounds for hunting? How much time to go from 25 pounds to Olympic standard draw weight?
You taught people not to rush and how to know if you’re rushing.Of course it’s gonna depend on how many hours you put, but it would be nice to have some kinda of estimate or average, so we can have an idea about it.
2. It would be nice to have an episode about the controversies between the branches of archery. You did this several times for historical archery, traditional archery, combat archery, Olympic archery etc etc. Which was very instructional.
But you never done so for crossbows and compounds.
It would be nice to have an episode where you tell us how the compound and crossbow are seen by most other branches, what are the points they critique etc.
It’s not necessary for you to give your personal opinion if you don’t want. In other words, it would be nice if we could get a panorama of the situation.
Quite frankly it seems that there’s a general opinion against compound and crossbow in the community and people avoid talking about it. Can you clarify what the people that think it’s not real archery present as their points please?
Thanks again. I hope things improve for the club.
@@AdalbertoMaggioJunior I did a crossbow video already: ruclips.net/video/Fa03yBJ7tCI/видео.html
Nice work
Never watched an event but if I wanted another style adding it would be longbow as surely far more accessible than those cyberbows!
Maybe easier to buy, but much harder to shoot
Add a 100lb+ Compound Division. Power, Accurate and Stamina. I know there are none at present but hey, that is what competitions are for, incentive! You could make sure the target is penetrated deeply enough as well, just to mix it up. A Triathlon style event using bows to role a few into one?
I don’t even watch archery and I’m here
A lot of the financial burden of hosting cities comes from events that are not actually sport, but rather art. Ice dancing is a prime example, and any event where scoring is subjective rather than rigidly defined. Too much commercialism! Granted, in the case of ice prancing the arena might well be constructed for hockey and re-purposed for other 'events', but there is a lot of other commercial infrastructure that goes into production costs of subjective art events. If the Olympics were to return to PURE sport, I believe there would be plenty of funding for all events and generally a lower cost up front for the hosting city.
Going by the argument of accuracy, olympic archers should use crossbows because they are more precise ^^
Crossbows aren't bows, and you would no longer be considered doing archery. Same with the "gun" argument.
@@NUSensei well... I can't say that i'm not exaggerating a little bit here,
but i feel like there is a spectrum from "stick and string" to "gun" and that "compound bow" is in the middle between "recurve" and "crossbow".
It share the aiming and string holding contraints of the recurve, but also has a trigger, a mechanism to reduce the weight held by the operator and the magnifying lenses of a crossbow.
So i would not put the crossbow much farther away from the compound than the compound from the recurve.
also, definition of a bow : "a weapon for shooting arrows, typically made of a curved piece of wood joined at both ends by a taut string."
so, a crossbow would kind of fit....
@@AuxenceF A crossbow is further defined by being a tool that positions its limbs horizontally and mounted onto a stock with a trigger. As bows do not have this characteristic, bows and crossbows not regarded as the same thing. Users of bows are not considered "archers", they are arbalists, and are categorised as a completely different sport with different rules run by a different organisation (in many countries), with further legal ramifications on their ownership.
The simple fact is that a crossbow does not require the user to draw, hold and release the bow string.
I agree with the spectrum in terms of ease of use and accuracy, but crossbows are not bows as much as rifles are not crossbows. It is a logical stretch to label a crossbow as a "bow" due to having a curved section held by a taut string, since the same logic means that a rifle is the same as a crossbow due to have a stock and trigger.
i always figured that they don't add Compound because it would be boring to watch.
Compound gets more views. Hence recurve is boring to watch
Watched the full video.. never used a bow in my life 🤣
As a beginner i regret buying compound bow so many things to do now i wish i shoudlve just bought the recurve bow
Compound is boring AF to watch.
They should do a direct comparison between a good archer with an Olympic recurve with stabilizers, against a good archer with a Compound bow without stabilizers. I wonder if stabilizers are actually more beneficial for accuracy than the Compound system.
Or...have Olympic recurve shooters run a match with compund bows and Compound shooters run with an Olympic recurve.
@@MyLifEcademy-sr4hy Sounds like fun. I love it. I'm sure you could find a ton of the pros willing to do it for fun, or just plain curiosity.
@@musikSkool having shot years ago...I can tell you my $0.02 antics. I remember shooting a hunting level recurve with a single long bar stabilizer. To me, the biggest difference between the two is the let off and roll-over. I started with a 35# recurve and ended at 74# compound. I never saw an Olympic recurve back then...but I'll be damned if you catch me trying to hold that at full draw while on an Olympic firing line or in the woods waiting for a buck to get sorted and provide a clear shot.
I know shooting matches that the stabilizer helped keep steady during long holds but where it really shined was reducing bow shock and fatigue from riser harmonics. As a teen that was a real issue. Prepping for a hunting season without the long rod was a 20-50 arrow string MAX. My hand would be completely numb afterwards. Shooting several junior events over a long weekend wasn't too bad with the long bar.
@@musikSkool We could call it the Gymkhana event. Get some running involved, a 3D woods shoot, a field shoot, an Olympic match...battle royale. It would add a level of excitement to the sport.
@@MyLifEcademy-sr4hy I agree with everything. Too bad I'm not in an Archery club. No time. :sigh:
I miss the intro "archery with nu"
all the time there is a bunch of new sports or variants of already existing ones trying to get in to the olympics, but the ultimate stopper is finances. if a rule was introduced that any sport would be dropped the next time if it didn't financially support itself via ticket sales and tv money. i don't think there would be much left. and maybe a surge is needed these days. everyone wants their sport in the olympics, but nobody want's the olympics to be in their city. the only way i can see it work out is to have the olympics in the same location every time, so that the things they must build will be used more then only once.
I'll take the guy who can hit an aspirin in the air with an arrow fired from a traditional long over other standard archery type.
are there military bows?
Yes
Specjal forces do use bows
compound bows are stronger than olympic bows?
Compounds have more efficient power delivery than any other bow type. If you have two bows, one compound and one recurve, and they both have let's say a 55lb draw weight and 28in draw, the compound will always be more powerful than the recurve.
A release aide can be used with any bow. And compound bows don't require release aides. I have a compound bow and never use release aides.
Yeah, but most archers do. Most of the modern compound, specially the hunting bows are short and have very high let off. If you shoot them with fingers, there's very high chance will derail them, because of finger pinch and hand torque.
@@greenhoodedvigilante458 never had such a problem. Maybe just do better.
@@TimeofRagnarok I just told about possibilities, derailing is very much possible. But you can shoot with fingers. Some compounds are specificly made for finger shooting.
@@greenhoodedvigilante458 I understand
Compound will be there in time.
Olympics should do biathlon archery. That would be cool.
so the short answer is "inertia"
I’d like for the world-organisations to suggest 1 ‘addition’ to the OG each time. So we, OG enthousiasts, can decide by views which one deserves a place in ‘the regular OG’.That being said, I’d rather see barebow or 3d-shooting in the OG!
Hi, shooting has various versions in the Olympics. My suggestion to have all forms archery and to keep cost down. Is to have a max number of
team members five or ten per country. They would have to have a knowledge or experience with all forms or archery. Have individual gold and team gold for each style then one for an overall. A bit like gymnastics.
Thanks for a great video and look forward to more of your insights.
It's hard to be good at multiple different types of archery simultaneously. Usually you pick one discipline and practice it exclusively for a period of time.
@@johnbarron4265 hi, that is true and thats why i think it would be a grater experience for both archer and audience. gymnast need to master the floor, bars, vault etc. heptathlon requires you to learn master seven different events. so way not strive for a higher gaol.
I like your way of thinking after all an olympian is supposed to be the best of the best, not a one trick pony.
Yeah, Olympics won't include barebow or compound, but they are very happy to include 'Beach volleyball." 😒
Maybe archers should wear thongs and bikini? :D
@@Debilinside oh please not with the people i shoot with.... you could never un-see that
@7:30 you forgot instinctive division as a World Archery Class for 3D - but the picture you show is an Instinctive class shooter. I know it's kind of pedantic, and many people just look at it as a hybrid of the longbow and barebow class, but there are significant enough differences between the 3 single string classes as to why they exist.
You are correct - there is Barebow, Instinctive and Longbow. I used the Instinctive event to highlight the diversity in bows in other events.
You are missing the number ONE reason that compound archery hasn't been introduced into the Olympic games. Back in the 70's, when compounds came to market, there were availability issues regarding the international aspect of the sport. That is right from the IOC. Now that is not an issue. Also, if you say they have a hard time "adding events", why are they adding things like table tennis to the Olympics?
That was more or less the reason covered: international events largely had not adopted the compound bow by the 1970s. Now compound is paired alongside recurve as standard classifications. As for events, there's a difference between adding more sports and adding more events. Adding a sport means drawing in far more spectator interest, while adding an event to an existing sport may have less potential growth in interest for the Olympics. There's more to gain from adding cricket than from adding another archery round from the IOC perspective
@@NUSensei And there is the probelm. Turning a show case of atheltism into turning a profit. Oh, and archery was one of the ORIGINAL Oplymic sports of Greco-Roman times.
And....no....when compounds were starting to come into production and populatrity in the 70's, they were not widely distributed throughout the world THAT was the IOC's original reasoning for not including compound archery in the Olympics. It had nothing to do with viewership, or spectators, or even the concerns behind "adding another event", which would have much easier then, than now. Now, they could reduce it to the same way World archery does it. 720 round for qualifiers, then 150 rounds for the top 8.
Table tennis? It has been in the Olympic games since 1988. It is also one of the most popular sports around the world. Not really a good example.
Also, you seem to be arguing the exact same point as NUSensei.
That was a good video and an interesting topic.
Can you please talk about arrow rests in general? Like not only the super are hunter rests, but also the magnetic one.
Not even relevant u can just google it dumb
Compound bows are on the rise.
I "downgraded" from target bow to traditional hunting bow.
I saw a LOT of archers "upgrade" from target bow to compound bow.
Nodody understood why I went shooting hunting bow, but they always ask to shoot some arrows with my bow, just for the feeling and experience of it
Target bow ?
@@romainsavioz5466 That's right, target bow
@@Australian_Made compound recurve, longbow etc are all target bow
@@romainsavioz5466 by target bow, I believe he means a sort of Olympic or Barebow style, quite possibly aluminium riser with carbon limbs with either stabilizers or Barebow weights.
he states he went from target to traditional, so maybe wooden riser/limbs, without stabilizers or sights.
I can't remember who it was for certain but I think I know as it was probably 8-10 years ago at one of the field courses I set I was talking to someone from ArcheryGB. At the time they were saying that they had been asked to work with Beiter on reactive targets (which became the Beiter hit miss system where the centres are pushed into the target) to make archery more interesting for spectators.
The idea at the time was they were going to have a 50m indoor hit miss style competition for compound as a demonstration sport at the Winter Olympics. The thinking was, it would limit venues to try and hold a 70m round indoors but things like the curling ice once no longer required for the competition could be covered and provide the space required fo a 50m competition. Who knows if it will ever happen as several Winter Olympics have been and gone in that time.
This was talked about prior to the 2020/2021 Olympics. Essentially it comes down to a lack of compound archers across the world. Mostly female compound archers.
Where I live Compound, Barebow and even Traditional are more popular than Olympic Recurve. I get that it is different all over the world but I'm still surprised that they found Compound to have too few practitioners.
I would question the validity of your statements. Both the Pan Am Games and the Asian Games have compound archery and there is no shortage of competitors from the participating countries, both in the men's and women's sides. As for Europe, check out the Hyundai World Cup and see how many of the compound archers are Europeans from as many different countries as there are for the recurve.
@@notapplicable531 that's coming from the US archery. You can prolly even find it on their page.
@@spidey2721 You're going to have to be more precise than to say, "You can prolly [sic] even find it on their page." Well, I can't find it on any of their pages under any of the headings and sub-headings given. I stand by what I can find and see in all the video and information from the various competitions. Compound archery is practiced by men and women and in numbers.
@@notapplicable531 ruclips.net/video/KSuLTifKrLg/видео.html
Nu.
Thanks ,so much , for another shirt out .
A bit of Olympic trivia .
Pole archery was an Olympic event .
1900 and 1920 .
So there are gold medals, some where, for pole archery .
I have no idea where .
the games in question where Paris n Brussels .
So pole archery would be considered a local sport .
Another interesting point .
One of our club members happens to be a fire fighter
Organizing a international fire fighters games here in Winnipeg .
And in the archery events which he has participated in previously.
The plan is to include pole archery .
With compound bows . ;)
Cheers n thks again
Yes! What a strange twist to be mentioning the early Olympics when they did have pole archery!
@@NUSensei
Yep .
Though, the same two Olympics had pigeon shooting as a gold medal event .
not Clay pigeons either ,😱.
Not something I could see being tv advertising friendly.
Lol .
Those were local sports choices by the organizers .
I am mainly a recurve/flatbow archer and have never really used a compound much besides a first Generation 1999 Genesis when they had the 15-35 pound draw model I used without a release tool set to about 30 pounds.
Nothing against Compound archers, My Brother had one for a bit as a kid due to few recurve archers in How Kota archery even at his age so to compete he used a compound. Lots of archers in compound did buy there win were good archers but beat out better great archers. They did this partially using a smaller adult bow that they set up to be 40 pounds or more with at the time in 2000's and having the top of the line sight and sights on compound vary way more then most recurve sights. My brother had good sights not top of the line latest model so he would lose due to that and having a slower 38 pound max young teen sized compound at age 9 before he out grew the bow. The others had 40-45 pound adult bows, the 2-3 year older model of the fathers, they gave down the older model as an excuse to buy a new bow themselves and 90% of parents were doing either no watching the kid just talking to parents about hunting of any kind or beyond coaching as if giving military orders without yelling.
Compound and bear bow are the most entertaining archery disciplines with the broadest audience. They both should be included.
Maybe in your country but not world wide. Recurve is what most use and what most care about. Just for the fact that this is more like what people think about when they think about a bow. Compounds just look way too futuristic for the average person to think "cool I want to see that bow tournament because bows are so cool in all these movies"
Even the Recurves are probably already too futuristic for people who don't use bows themselves,
I'd love to see bears shooting bows in the Olympics.
I would feel a lot better about recurve not being in the Olympics if synchronized banner spinning wasn't a "sport".
EDIT: Sorry, I meant "compound", not "recurve".
What about World Archery itself? The IOC pays them $2 million+ to operate/officiate the event. Is compound more work to officiate?
If it were at the same venue, events adjusted to add only two or four net medal ceremonies, and qualifying standards added to reduce the number of participants who actual attend the Olympics to a more reasonable ~40 or so per discipline, I suspect the IOC could be convinced as it would only add a marginal cost increase on their side.
But how much more would World Archery need from the IOC for the extra qualification and officiating work? Marginal or double/triple?
If it's 40 per discipline, that means 20 men and 20 women. Is it really worth having an event for only 20 people? In contrast, the men's long jump alone had 32 competitors, and long jump is a side-event compared to the main event in archery. When an Olympic event has fewer people than a grassroots club shoot, that might have the opposite effect of promoting the sport.
@@NUSensei Or more if that's what they decide. Consider "Canoe Slalom" -- it's really two disciplines: kayak and canoe, without a ton of overlap. It works for them. I think a similar balance might work for archery. Maybe not. Some people don't care about the distinction, but others notice and find one much more compelling than the other.
It would weaken the importance of the Olympics for the one discipline, but I think the right balance would interest more people. Many people are drawn to the high tech capability of compounds, and many people are drawn to more primitive bows than even the Olympic competition recurve. What do you enjoy the most?
In my opinion, emphasis on "my", compound is the form of archery where the goal/philosophy of the bow is to minimize as much as possible the role/influence of the human being doing the shooting. I do practice Olympic, Traditional and Compound.
@@manabellum not the case. If it was a crossbow then you’d be more correct. Still not entirely correct though.
With all due respect it’s not a matter of opinion because there is such a thing as physics
What are my alarms fishtail❤😊
World Archery answers this question here : ruclips.net/video/KSuLTifKrLg/видео.html
Smart smart smart. Brilliant man. Hope he doesn't get drafted by Microsoft. Love learning from a RUclips star that potentially won't get me screwed.
part time archer not really that good but i do understand that Olympic archers might be crap hunters and war bow enthusiasts are a class all their own. nice vid and probably all very true on the reasons why. compound are nice to use and aim but again depends why and what you are doing archery for. im a medieval enthusiast so compounds are just to many parts to many things to maintain when a bit of wood and a string are far easier to make and maintain. what ever your reasons for doing it just enjoy them and know it takes a lot of skill to use any bow and perform well in any archery style, hunting Olympics whatever
"I have nothing against compound archers, some of my best friends are compounders!"
I have nothing against compound archers, but I don't want them to be able to get married and adopt children.
@@narcissisticnarcissus4956 Jokes on you, I don't want children and marriage is a scam.
@@narcissisticnarcissus4956 😆😆😆
@Papa Palpatine 😆😆😆
I think that eventually that Compound will be the only one when less and less top manufactures are making target IOC stuff and are catering to the USA/Canadian Hunting Market and if NOT they will either go to more a barebow recurve that can use a flat limb/ILF/Hoyts newest ILF style but the hunting models of smaller risers then say a target model with only one screw in point so no damper thing on the bow per the current rules or a Compound hunting model. I say this due to even cheaper companies most are not willing to make bows that are target models for the majority of the line and claim they can't make a living off them. I mean PSE has a line of Target Compound and most others need to be specialty brands to have a bow like this, Bear has one model that works as a target bow.
I think if Archery came out for the Olympics introduced in 1980, 8 years later, we would be now seeing a compound with a bow that is more a compound version of ILF style like a sleeve the limb fits into, using no more then ___ speed and ___ power to fit the risers with this changing a tad over the years as materials and designs have gotten better.
Compound bows will demolish the recurve though when it comes to fps.... 300++ vs 160++ .... no contest.
It's a shame they don't give out medals for arrow speed then.
If its about money then IOC should kick out recurve from the olympics and get compound instead. Recurve is boring and looks just silly with that swinging of the bow after every shot.
"swinging of the bow after every shot"... you mean the bow fall over after every shot? Many compound bow shooter will also do that.
@@weixingyang898 yes, that is what I mean. I know why recurve shooters do it and that some compound shooters do it too but with a compound bow this swing is not as big as with a recurve. Therefore it does not look as silly to me.
@@wojtekkowalski8983 I doubt you know why they do it and still see it as silly! How ironic that you want to replace an exciting style for a boring one! Compound archery looks very boring to me. How does that feel? I'm deeply in shock of just how narrow-minded people who practice archery can be toward other disciplines of it instead of being informedly respectful!
I think we will see Compound get into the Games sooner rather than later. Mostly because of popularity. Compound is the most in your face form of archery for people that aren't archers. If the average person sees a Turkish bow and see it being drawn with a thumb, that will appear too complex. Why is that person not shooting 3 finger like the movies, TV shows, and video games?
How come it doesn't look like the bow Joe Rogan, Cam Hanes, etc. Cam might be the most famous archer to average ppl.
Then you have ease of use. It's easier to shoot a 80lb Compound than a 45lb Recurve or Asiatic bow. So ppl will be drawn to the less complex, easier entry. So with more and more ppl getting into compound archery, the better chance the games will include it.
I've shooting trad, barebow and compouds and definitely shooting a #80 compound isn't easier than shooting a #40 recurve. I have two barebows (#45 and #55 respectively) and I competed with the #45, and with a #60 compound; if I compare the #55 barebow and the #60 compound the compound is easier to draw and to keep open, but whereas the barebow weigths less than 1,4 Kg my compound with scope and stabs weigths ~5 Kg and is harder to hold and carry around. And a #80 isn't a joke: Rogan and Hanes are hunters, which means fewer shoots than competing vs a target, and despite shooting less Hanes had shoulder injuries due being overbowed in draw weigth. In WA tournaments the pound limit is #60, and in Vegas I've only seen Levi Morgan using a #72 (and He's a very large and fit dude). If you try to do a 50m tournament with a #80 compound (which anyway you couldn't use under WA rules) you would be amazed of how much harder it will feel compared to shooting a sub #60 recurve.
Its not limited to archery. I.e. same reasons why in the olympic games under the firearms shooting disciplines two very popular events, Benchrest shooting and Practical shooting, are not present until today.
Ahh so that's probably also why Chessboxing isn't in the Olympics yet either...
Interesting. So, sex up other forms of archery to sell them? Compound bow...Beyond Thunderdome? Long Bow...Last Man Standing? Slightly more seriously, it would be interesting to see a 3D target course or moving targets a la some gun shooting contests. Even horse archery or a biathlon-like event. Ironically, sexing it up might leave you with something better approximating archery's origins.
Sadly the historical trend in Olympic events it to move away from the sports' marshal, historical and practical roots. Partly in the name of clearer more consistent scoring, but also to elevate the Olympic event above the more pedestrian variants. Gamification is a primary goal since the standardization push in the 1970's. This can be seen in Olympic fencing and HEMA, while a book could be written about the drift of Olympic shooting and the practical shooting sports. The biathlon survives because a plurality of the countries involved in the winter games have a strong marshal tradition with firearms, though even this event has been consistently pushed away from the roots of military patrol with the use of small bore rifles and short single distance shooting.
Why are crossbows not in olympics?
Because Olympics committee don't allow hunting pigs in the Olympic events.
Crossbows are practically a different sport entirely and aren't run by World Archery.
Compound bows have de-skilled archers enough.
@@archerry6457 Compound archers de-skilled? Pick up a compound bow and show us how many 10s you can shoot. Every type of archery requires skill and practice. Compound is not my cup of tea, I prefer trad recurve. But I know that I can just pick up a compound and shoot well. Everyone has their own preference and choice. You can't say other people's choice is wronh and yours is right.
Q：Why are Compond did not replace recurve in Olymipcs?
A：Because south Korea wants to win 5 extra gold medals (doge)
No offense intended, I love your channel Nu, but IMO Olympic recurve is abominable. Olympic bows have grown so awkward and cumbersome you can barely walk through a house with one, much less the woods.
In much the same way Europeans ruined cycling, they ruined archery - They fell in love with the tech and changed the rules to suit manufactures of $800 risers, etc..... Honestly, it is pretty ugly. I'll stay with a stick, string, and less mind... If I really want next level accuracy and power, I will drag out my 10 year old Bowtech.......
The last bow I would ever own is an Olympic Recurve.
Because it’s like rifle shooting, back site front site, and training wheels.😊
Because they are for killing not targets.
Any of them besides olympic recurves fit well that task.
Archery was most definitely born from killing. It's the same logic that says sport rifles are better than military rifles for the same reasons. People forget that all rifles came from military first. The AR system is just the modern evolution of a rifle just as the compound is the modern evolution of the bow. That's all it is.
I guess you missed the fact that trap and skeet shooting are part of the Olympics.
We have target compound bow....
Breakdancing? Honestly? If the Olympic Commitee is going to include sports that people actually play, the compound bows should be included.
Hey Nu, are you interested in working with Mandarin Duck again?
I'm currently (mostly) inactive due to pandemic and lockdowns, so I'm not in a great position to pitch future projects.
@@NUSensei I understand my friend, but that door is open for you. The affiliate program might help out in these times 🙂
Thanks for answering the question in such detail.
we are lucky to have chosen a sport with so many different disciplines.
I'd really like to what kind of dirty stuff does the swimming organization have on the olympics committee, because the amount of events that are basically the same thing swimming gets is ridiculous. I realize swimming is exceptionally difficult sport, but if a single person can win 3 or more gold medals at the same olympic games for doing basically the same thing, yet some sports with two internationally recognized, very different divisions have only one of them present, something just doesn't feel right.
I want to see compound bows in the Olympics!
They will add this to Olympic games as a separate exercise if it'll become a more popular sport, which I doubt.
One of the reasons why 10 meters running target was removed from Olympics after 2004 is because it wasn't as popular.
I've no problem with compound providing it's in its own section, I would say though you are a better all round disciplinarian using a recurve definately, for obvious reasons. I would like to see a comp that uses at least 2 types within a section, not insisting on which one you use as long as theyre both used. It would be fun and sort out the boys from the men (just a figure of speech but u get my drift). That would be awesome, maybe 3, compound, recurve and longbow making u use all the skills, anyway just my layman's opinion.
The team event in the 3D World Championships does this: each team has one compound, one barebow recurve and one longbow. The compound shoots at a further marker while barebow and longbow shoot closer. The contest really comes down the longbow shooter - the compound shooter will nearly always hit the smaller scoring ring, the barebow shooter will also nearly always nail their mark, whereas the longbow shooter - who isn't allowed to use sights or stringwalk - has the less predictable outcome.
@@NUSensei wow, who knew, that sounds awesome. 👍👍
@@NUSensei Can longbow shooters use gap shooting if they can't stringwalk or is it entirely instinctive?
@@mrhoppy_9724 Gap is the expected method. There's nothing that can prove that a shot is truly instinctive. The rules define that the fingers must be touching the nock of the arrow, which precludes stringwalking. You could still shoot instinctively, but gap shooters will out-shoot instinctive shooters in points.
I say horse archery.
Because constant 10s is boring
Too much tech its aimbot
@@SirPraiseSun ikr, still it’s at least not crossbow
I find that most arguments for Recurve over Compound would make Barebow the preferred form and most arguments for Recurve over Barebow would make Compound the better form.
@@mplovecraft true. But then recurve is balanced in the middle. I think barebow should be an event in the olympics too
That´s why there is a motion to change the scoring system for compound from "5-10" to "5-11" bringing a perfect round from 720 to 795. Less ties and a wider spread between archers.
I think it has a place there with the olympic recurve. Both have sights and neither should be in the olympics. Sights on a bow bum me out.
Olympic archery is the most boring thing to watch
No! It is so interesting and intense.
It is when you can only see from your eyes to your nose!