Stickbow Target Archery Forums

Thanks for your Input guys.
Although some might be furstrated again, we have acchived a small step into a direction that you might call as " progressive ".
Please bear in mind that all sorts of cultural, national and personnal agendas have to be brought to a compromise in order to get this things on the way. Therefore I find it quite remarkable that it has been also acchieved to open a playing field for the pure traditionalists by introducing the experimental style "classic bows". It is now up to the archers to demonstrate whether or not this is a development in their favour.
Have a look at

I see no viable, meaningful changes to the existing IFAA longbow definition rules. IFAA bizness as usual.

Classic bow? WHAT "classic bow"? Who came up with these ridiculous rules??? ...n
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~n
IFAA "Classic Bow"n
a. The recognition of the classic bow (also called historical or primitive bow) shall be based on the accepted design and usage during the period preceding the year 1900.

But not really ... you've gotta wade through all the following caveats ...n
b. There shall be no distinction between the different configurations of bow designs or of materials used.

Exactly what does rule b. mean? It sounds like a self ELB can compete with a composite wood/horn Turkish thumbring horse bow. Interesting. OK, no real problem so far ...
c. Only the adult division shall be recognised and there shall be no class grades.

Wooo wooo - now rule c. is gonna be REAL interesting! n
d. The bow shall be either a self wood or composite bow.

Rule d.'s "composite" is not properly defined - the word "wood" needs to enter the picture, and modern fibers excluded. And talk about the use of glue.n
e. The inclusion of a form of arrow rest or shelf as well as a sight window cut-in shall be permitted, provided such meet the classic configuration of the bow which has established historical precedence.

WHAT the heck does rule e. mean? "Historical precedence"? You need to PROVE that yer bow is historically correct? That's nuts.n
f. The bow shall be constructed of wood or materials that were used during the period of the bow’s historical usage. Modern materials such as carbon, glass fibre and epoxy may not be used. The use of historic glues such as bone glue and hot tree resin is not permitted and only modern glues and adhesives shall be used for the riser and limbs!n
Ah, rule f. clarifies rule d. - at last. BUT, you can't use historically correct glues? For safetie's sake, I presume?
g. The standard bowstring material shall be Dacron B50 or similar. Historical (such as flax or sinew) and/or modern bowstring materials (such as Kevlar, etc) may not be used.

I don't get it - rule g. specifies the sole use of a modern bowstring fiber and disallows the use of period string fibers such as flax or sinew - again, for safetie's sake, or ... ???
h. Arrow shafts shall be made of wood and shall be fletched with natural feathers which are attached in the historical manner (no clear glue or superglue, etc). Modern arrow points or piles as well as modern nocks shall be permitted. Nocks that are cut into the shaft are not permitted.

This is downright stupid - rule h. doesn't allow period correct self nocks??? What's wrong with self nocks??? And not to allow Duco cement in place of hide or fish glue, yet you won't allow linen strings over Dacron? Makes no sense.
i. Accessories such as woven nocking point indicators and thumb rings shall be permitted, provided that such accessory was used during the historic use of the bow.

Man, rule i. alone can open a huge can of worms as just who is gonna verify "historical proof" during gear inspection, early in the morning on the day of the tourney? Sounds like bs to me, and like the IFAA longbow inspections, yer taking yer chances.n
j. The onus shall rest with the archer to ensure that all the equipment that is used for the tournament is historically correct. The shooter shall show documented proof of the correctness of the equipment if so asked by the technical controllers at the tournament.

Rule j. is the icing on the cake - judging by how the IFAA currently treats gear tourney longbow gear inspections you'd have NO idea if yer "period correct classic bow" will make the cut. What period correct non-subjective indicies will the "technical controller" use to judge yer bow legal? Who in their right mind would wanna enter a tourney on the whim of the IFAA rules subjectiveness?n
IFAA Classic Bow class? Forget it - IMO, you'd be better off playing Russian roulette with the IFAA Longbow class gear rules. Better yet IFAA, don't make up a new class until you have logical, encompassing rules that make sense. Who are these IFAA people that dream up this crap to be perpetrated on the good archers of the world? Another stupid IFAA move, IMO ...

I agree with Rob. These rules are the product of “rule – making - morning - sickness” Take for instance:- “The onus shall rest with the archer to ensure that all the equipment that is used for the tournament is historically correct. The shooter shall show documented proof of the correctness of the equipment if so asked by the technical controllers at the tournament.”
Perhaps the president of the IFAA should clarify the following:-n
1. Will there be present at each shoot in the world under the banner of the IFAA an expert in the history of pre 1900 archery who will be at the ready to “adjudicate” whether my written submissions “proves” that the equipment is historically correct?
2. What will such technical controller’s minimum qualifications be and will the IFAA provide training courses to qualify such controllers so that they can ‘control’ what will happen on archery ranges all over the world?
3. If an “unqualified” technical controller incorrectly rules against a competitor and the competitor has flown halfway around the world to compete in a tournament, he could very well succeed with urgent litigation against the IFAA (do not laugh, this type of thing has often happened in other sports all over the world). What is the IFAA’s contingency plan in this regard and why should the members (tax payers) pay for such an abortion?n
It seems to become more and more apparent that the IFAA clearly is no longer a fit and proper vehicle to drive competitive longbow archery? Is there perhaps another option?n
Piet Haasbroek

Wow! I am happy that the IFAA is creating a class for the selfbowyers. However it is impossible to prove certain characteristics and designs. The wood dictates that 90% of the time!
I am sorry but do selfbow archers need to send their bows to a historian before entering? That is exactly what I just read and it sounds extreme! I have built numerous selfbows and have no clue what period they represent! When I get a stave and start working it, the end result might look nothing like what was invisioned. Most of us are just happy it shoots an arrow!
What if I built an ELB out of Osage? The shape and style is representative of a period, but Osage is not grown in Europe. Would the bow be considered historically correct or a "bastard"? If it is considered a bastard then it is not deemed historically correct and therefore not legal.
How will a judge verify what type of glue was used in the construction of the bow? Cut the bow apart and send it out for analysis? That rule has no merit! Short of doing exactly what I mentioned it cannot not be disputed on the range, it is one man's word against another.
What kind of backings are allowed? How will you discern that a silk or snake/fish skin backing was glued down with a natural hide glue or a modern PVA or epoxy product? I have a hickory backed purpleheart stave that is laminated. How does the IFAA intend on separating that glue joint to discern what I used to put them together? I can get just as tight of a glue joint regardless what material I use. How are you going do it?
As for self nocks not being allowed that is ridiculous! Here in the states most of the primitive classes require that. Granted it is by far easier to glue a plastic nock on. Sounds very hypocritical if you want historical representation of an era.
If the IFAA wants a selfbow/primitive class they have over complicated the rules! It is called primitive for a simple reason.
I suggest the IFAA look at the rules already being used in primitive classes across the world. I am quite sure the board will find that they have over written the rules by a 100%. Better yet why not have primitive/selfbowyers write the rules for the class! If you want someone who is highly respected here stateside to guide you with the writing of these rules. I suggest you contact Dean Torges at

To prove my point, here are a couple Osage selfbows that I have built. Posted are pictures of each at full draw to prove that these are legitmate bows. Would I take them to a tournament? You betcha without hesitation!!!!!
Would anyone from the IFAA care to educate me as to what historical era they represent? I don't have the foggiest as like most self bowyers, I let the wood grain dictate the final result.
Also as can you see one is snake skin backed. It was glued down using a PVA based product. However, the other bow pictured has artificial sinew wrappings to reinforce problem areas. I don't think anyone, without performing a cross section and sending it to a lab, would be able to tell that there is epoxy underneath those wrappings.

One bow has a wiped on epoxy finish and the other a gloss urethane. I'll let you figure out which is which. Here again you cannot tell unless you test them.
<img>n <img>n <img>

Erik is a lump of wood with a string, NO ONE CARES!n least of all the Ifaa. They just want you to turn up and shoot the timber!n
Ok if I am at the shoot i will put $50 down because i know about the hidden glass lam that lays behind that snake skin!

Redbow,n
You would be better off asking for historical proof!

Erik
let´s take it from a less private point of view:
since the IFAA is dealing with a great variation of classic bows that comprises the whole range of bows shoot in the past, it is not easy to draw a border.
The same is with the definition what is classical and what is not? Is one of the first compound bows ever built a classic bow ? Or is a composite bow classic? What kind of components for a composite bow should be considered as acceptable?
We had to find a way how to do a definition in such way that it servers a number of purposes:
a) it should reflect the spirit of the whole classn b) it should be executablen c) it should be international adoptablen d) it should comply with safety and insurance issues
e) it should comply with already extablishedn common practisen f) etc.
So the strategy to start with is defenitly to have some provocations in place that forces people to think:
a) is this really what we wantn b) do we want something different
c. etc.

If than a proper way of communication is used we will reach a new eddition that would than lead to a set of rules that can be adopted and established once the class is not only a trial but becoming a integrated part of the IFAA shooting style portfolio.
Otherwise we are ending up nowhere.

I'd have to protest the one with the built-in peep sight.

Martin,n
I appreciate your response, however the IFAA rules proposed are insane.

This is how simple the rules are here in the states for the primitive class:
Any bow built of "natural materials" regardless of design is acceptable (stave, billet, or composite). The use of modern, man made, materials is forbidden without regard to glue.
All backings, overlays, and tips also must be of "natural material".
Any type of string material is acceptable.
Arrows are to be made of wood w/selfnocks.
n
That's basically all the rules we have with regards to the primitive class.
For the most part they are the norm, except some traditional clubs allow the use of plastic nocks.

I hope this helps! I'll keep my selfbows hanging in the rack until the IFAA comes up with something a little more realistic and reasonable. I have my fingers crossed.

Updates on IFAA Rules:
The Book of Rules 2007 / 2008 is now available as a download

Ho hum, bidness as usual - still absolutely no signs of intelligent life with regards to the IFAA ...n
International Field Archery Associationn Book of Rules : 2007/2008 edition 32n
7. Longbow - (L.B.)n
a. A one piece straight ended bow of any material, which when strung displays onen continued unidirectional curve, which is measured as follows:
When the strung bow is placed with the bowstring in a vertical position, the anglen as measured between the tangent of any point on the limb and an imaginaryn horizontal line must always decrease as this point is moved further away from then bow grip.

a. Please, stop this nonsense now - this isn't a rule, it's an interpretation of an opinion and we all know how easy it is to obfuscate. This longbow equipment rule would pit an ELB against a stealth hybrid longbow (i.e. - Edge), and does nothing to foster the involvement of the majority of the world's longbow archers who shoot longbows that are defined as "the string loops only touch the tip nocks".n
b. The tip reinforcing may not exceed 20mm in height, measured from the surface ofn the back of the bow limb and may not exceed 50mm in length, measured from then centre of the string groove towards the bow grip.

b. Who really cares? All that matters is whether or not there's tip reflex. You wanna add more mass tip weight to slow down the limbs, that's yer business and has nothing to do with a performance increase ... but the length restriction may affect an ELB's legality.n
c. The bow may contain a window and an arrow shelf. The side of the window shalln be slanted over the full length of the window and rounded off at the point wheren the window intersects with the top bow limb. The window cut may not exceed then centre of the bow.

c. I don't understand the reason for this rule ... ?n
d. The belly, bow grip, the window and the arrow shelf shall be free of any marks orn blemishes that may be used as sighting aids.

e. Any additions to the bow for the purpose of stabilisation, levelling, draw-weightn reduction, sighting and/or draw checking are not permittedn
f. Only one nocking point shall be allowed on the string, which may be marked byn either one or two nocking point locators. If resting nocks are used -such as balln nocks -only one locator may be used
String silencers no closer than 30 cm above or below the nocking point aren allowed.

f. What's a "resting nock"?n
g. Arrows shall be of wood, fletched with natural feather, and must be of the samen length, fletch and pile, without regard for colour. The arrow must be free of anyn marks or blemishes that can be used as sighting aids. Nocks may be of anyn material and any weight of pile may be used. Ring markings will be no furthern than 30mm from the front of the fletch towards the arrow point.

g. IMHO, it's a huge mistake to allow only woodies - this adds a huge amount of luck factor and will not reflect the archers' true abilities.n
h. The bow must be shot with the "Mediterranean" loose. In cases of physicaln deformity or handicap special dispensation shall be made.

h. Oiy vey. Oh, one over and two under only? What about one over and one under? And why not a few fingers under? ... without walking the string and arrow, there's no real advantage to a few fingers under as long as one finger touches the arrow.n
i. Entries that do not comply with the above rules shall be classified in the recurven bowhunter style.

8. Historical Bow - (HB)n
a. The recognition of the classic bow (also called historical or primitive bow) shall ben based on the accepted design and usage during the period preceding the year 1900.

a. This "rule" means absolutely NOTHING. It's as dumb as a door nail because it's totally fraught with obfuscating ambiguities. Nonsense!n
b. There shall be no distinction between the different configurations of bow designsn or of materials used.

b. Huh????n
c. Only the adult division shall be recognised and there shall be no class grades.

d. The bow shall be either a self wood or composite bow.

d. "Composite" means .... ? Oh wait, I see the IFAA tells us in yet another of their rules.n
e. The inclusion of a form of arrow rest or shelf as well as a sight window cut-in shalln be permitted, provided such meet the classic configuration of the bow which hasn established historical precedence.

e. Here we go again with that "historical" silliness - who can prove what, and WHY does one need to prove anything? It's a selfbow, it's a dang stick and string in it's most basic form. Yeesh.n
f. The bow shall be constructed of wood or materials that were used during then period of the bow’s historical usage. Modern materials such as carbon, glass fibren and epoxy may not be used. The use of historic glues such as bone glue and hotn tree resin is not permitted and only modern glues and adhesives shall be used forn the riser and limbs!n
f. Now this makes more sense, but that "historical" is scary, knowing the IFAA's track record with their whacko definition of "longbow".n
g. The standard bowstring material shall be polyester. Historical (such as flax orn sinew) and/or modern bowstring materials (such as Kevlar, etc) may not be used.

g. Don't beat around the bush, just say Dacron and/or HMPE fibers.n
h. Arrow shafts shall be made of wood and shall be fletched with natural feathersn which are attached in the historical manner (no clear glue or superglue, etc)
Modern arrow points or piles as well as modern nocks shall be permitted. Nocksn that are cut into the shaft are only permitted when these are strengthened withn appropriate materials.

h. This rule is just plain ABSURD and should allow simple modern non-CYA glues such as Duco. After all, PLASTIC non-period nocks are allowed. I see that self nocks are now allowed - that must have taken months for the IFAA brains to ratify.n
i. Accessories such as woven nocking point indicators and thumb rings shall ben permitted, provided that such accessory was used during the historic use of then bow.

i. Cool, so we can use release aids! Well hey, the thumb ring is what the 6 Gold release aid of the 70's was based on. But oh my, there's that "hysterical" caveat word again ...n
j. The onus shall rest with the archer to ensure that all the equipment that is used forn the tournament is historically correct. The shooter shall show documented proof ofn the correctness of the equipment if so asked by the technical controllers at then tournament.

j. Totally INSANE!!!! Hey, IFAA - ya haven't learned a thing in all this time and ya just shot yerself in the foot yet again. Very very sad.

Calma, calma, take a breath. Well......you are right that there is bafflegab, obfuscation and distinctions without a difference in there. But perhaps we can make a positive suggestion, or argument, or two.

One might be to further develop the historical or primitive notion, so English longbows can compete with Hungarian horsebows and Turkish, Mongol, Chinese and Japanese bows, and the popular American selfbow. It does seem unfair that those ancient designs and the styles of their use should be expected to compete with modern fibreglas bows, whatever their shape when strung.

I agree that the Mediterranean loose, one finger over and two under, should not supercede all the other ancient and modern ways to hold and draw the bowstring. Face and stringwalking are modern variants that deserve segregation from traditional methods in my opinion, not because of the drawing method, but as specialized aiming methods.

I do favor the wooden arrow rule, though I accept and would not give up the fibreglas laminations on some of my longbows. Many, many of us enjoy the craftsmanship required to make really accurate wooden arrows,like to be rewarded for the advantage our good craftsmanship can give us, and enjoy the connection with the ancient tradition. It would be a shame in my opinion if any fool could gain a considerable advantage over all of that by writing a small check to Easton Archery. I use Easton aluminum shafts in my recurves, and for hunting in my longbows. But for competition and general sport archery I love my wooden arrows better.

I do think it would clear the air if a few top hands would use an ELB or a horsebow to apply a whupping to the reflex/deflex boys. It has happened to me on a day when I shot my Edge very well, and I admire the man who did it......... wearing kilts!n
Finally, I believe that a good archer with good traditional tackle of any of the main archery cultures could perhaps hold his own with the most high tech 'longbows' out to 50 yards or so, if everyone used wooden or bamboo arrows.

I think sensible and fair rules for all of this are attainable. It does seem some more practical and less stodgy minds are needed to devise and write a more sensible, and shorter, set of rules. And it seems to me that about a half a dozen simple rules might be sufficient if good enough minds were to set that as their goal.

Rob you are correct about ELBs and stealth Edge type bows
But the ELB argument is a non starter as there were no ELB archers in IFAA
In Europe there are IFAA clubs and when one joins such a club one has to play by those rules
Such rules for ELB were at that time not in place.

We have to keep in mind that IFAA longbow rules aim to separate recurves from longbows.

Some 12 years ago there was an issue with semi recurve bows shooting in the longbow division
So to that end the new rules came into play
So this is where we get the D shaped rule fromn
c. The bow may contain a window and an arrow shelf. The side of the window shalln be slanted over the full length of the window and rounded off at the point wheren the window intersects with the top bow limb. The window cut may not exceed then center of the bow.

This rule is to stop archers building risers that have edges and curves in the sight window which can be used as a sighting aid.

Part of the thrill of longbow in the IFAA is just how well one can make arrows it is all part of the sport. There is no luck in making good arrows.

There has been in past years a total debacle in IFAA Longbow rules. But over the last 3 years the IFAA has worked very hard to right those mistakes. And we have Martin k to thank for that.

IFAA longbow is the biggest division in the IFAA and it does carry some weight and power but it was not always the case. Now it is understood that as long as the bow does not show any reflex in the tip and the riser is clear of any marks. you are good to go.

As for the primitive class
It is great that the IFAA are open to it
I understand that the plastic nock is a safety issuen
When I shot in Switzerland at the IFAA world bowhunter champs this year, the Primitive class was a great success
Not at all a shot in the foot.

Longbow guy i reply to your postn
"I do think it would clear the air if a few top hands would use an ELB or a horsebow to apply a whupping to the reflex/deflex boys. It has happened to me on a day when I shot my Edge very well, and I admire the man who did it......... wearing kilts!"n
The top 10 IFAA longbow archers shooting UNMARKED distance are very very very good
Primitive bow against an Edge is a bit like taking a knife to a gunfight, you may get a cut in. but you will end up very dead. lol.