Comparisons of Different Countries' Classification of Archers

I have noticed that FITA does not recognise longbows as an individual bow style for Outdoor Target Archery. Rule 9.3.1.4, relating to "Longbow divisions", is in Book 4, Chapter 9, "Field Archery", but, in the FITA Rule Book 2, "Outdoor Target Archery", there is no mention of longbows in their own right, as a class or division of bow. There is Recurve (7.3.1), Standard Bow (7.3.2), Compound (7.3.3), and that is it. NO LONGBOWS for Outdoor Target Archery.

So, apparently, it is left up to individual countries, to define longbows for Outdoor Target Archery, and, to design and implement their own rules and classifications, relating to longbow archery in Outdoor Target Archery. This results in a lack of international standardisation of rules and classifications, applying to longbow archery in Outdoor Target Archery. An example of the differences in classification between two countries, in shown in the table at the end of this document.

In further investigating classification of archers by the archery organisations of different countries, I have found the following.

The following is from information obtained from the particular organisations' sets of rules, as viewed on the Internet as at 31 January 2006, and from some other sources.

1. Archery Australia
   The Australian archery society previously had the following age based classifications, which were relatively clear. Each class was apparently applicable to both the male and female genders.
   Under 12
   Under 14
   Under 16
   Under 18
   Adult
   Over 50
   Over 60
   
   Then, for some reason, Archery Australia changed the classifications to be a bit more obscure, coming up with the following classifications. Each class is apparently applicable to both the male and female genders.
   Cub
   Intermediate
   Cadet
   Junior
   Men/Women
   Master
   Veteran
   
   I was not able to determine, from the Archery Australia Rules, as to what age groups, the age-based class names apply, but I assume that they apply to the above, previous, respective age groups.
   
   Now, apart from the age-based class names not indicating the applicable age groups, as was done in the previous age-based class names, the class names are a bit confusing.
   
   The merit-based sub-classifications (I use the term sub-classifications, as these classifications exist within each age-based class), include the following.
   Grand Master Bowman
   Master Bowman
   First Class Archer
   Second Class Archer
   Third Class Archer
   
   So, there is the commonality of the term Master, which is generally used to indicate a person who has “mastered” a particular skill or set of knowledge. However, here, it is used both to indicate that, and, an age group. Apart from the differences in the usage of the term “Master”, in the classifications, there is also the unfortunate allusion to the novel Catch-22, which had, I believe, a person with the name Major, who also held the rank of Major, being addressed as “Major Major”, and, here, we have the prospect of a person being a “Master Master Bowman”, when a person of the “Master age classification, attains the merit-based classification of “Master Bowman”.
   
   Apart from that, there is also the aspect that the word “veteran”, also has a clear meaning in common usage, apart from the usage here which relates to an age group. In the Concise Oxford Dictionary, two meanings are attributed to the word “veteran”; 1. “a person who had grown old in or had long experience of esp. military service or an occupation (a war veteran; a veteran of the theatre; a veteran marksman”, and 2. “US an ex-serviceman or servicewoman”. Thus, a veteran is generally regarded as a person who has been doing something for quite a while, and therefore a likely authority, or at least, a person with many years experience of an art or skill. Thus, a person could reasonably expect a veteran archer, to have been practising archery for at least a decade, rather than a person over a certain age, who has picked up a bow for the first time.
   
   
   

2. Archery New Zealand
   The New Zealand Archery Society has the following specified age-based classifications. Each class is apparently applicable to both the male and female genders.
   JAMA (U14 and U12)
   Cadet
   Junior
   Men/Women
   Veteran (50:64: 64+)
   
   I was unable to determine any clear merit-based classifications, from the New Zealand archery society rules.
   
   The problem with the use of the class name of “Veteran” also applies here.

3. Grand National Archery Society (GNAS) (UK)
   The GNAS apparently has different age-based classes for the male and female genders. The GNAS apparently has the following age and gender based classifications.
   
   Junior Ladies Under 13
   Junior Ladies Under 16
   Junior Ladies Under 18
   Ladies
   
   Junior Gentlemen Under 12
   Junior Gentlemen Under 14
   Junior Gentlemen Under 16
   Junior Gentlemen Under 18
   Gentlemen
   
   Further, the GNAS apparently uses these age and gender based classifications for outdoor target archery for recurve and compound bows, and has only the two gender classes for outdoor target archery for longbows, and, for crossbows, and for indoor target archery for recurve and compound bows.
   
   The GNAS has the following merit-based classifications for Outdoor Target Archery.
   Grand Master Bowman
   Master Bowman
   Bowman
   First Class Archer
   Second Class Archer
   Third Class Archer
   
   (Note: The British archery Society, the Grand National Archery Society, in 1995, added the sixth class, between First Class Archer and Master Bowman; the class of Bowman – source - http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~ajcd/archery/awards/class.html )
   
   The GNAS merit-based classifications are apparently different, between the types of archery, with Outdoor Target Archery and Field Archery having different classes to Indoor Target Archery, Flight Shooting, and, Crossbow shooting has again, its own, different set of merit-based classes.
   
   
   

4. National Archery Association (NAA) (USA)
   The NAA apparently has, for Outdoor Target Archery, the following mix of classifications apart from merit -based classifications.
   Bowman (12 years or younger)
   Cub (14 years or younger)
   Cadet (16 years or younger)
   Junior (18 years or younger)
   AR Cpd Open (disabled)
   AR1 (quadriplegic – special rule relating to equipment)
   AR2 (paraplegic)
   AR3 (“standing disability”)
   Collegiate (NCAA eligibility)
   Senior (any archer)
   Master (50 years or older)
   Master 60+ (60 years or older)
   Master 70+ (70 years or older)
   
   I was unable to determine any clear merit-based classifications, from the NAA rules.

So, as can be seen, considerable variation exists, both in the naming of the age classifications, and, in the age groups that separate the classifications, and, there is also the problem of the discrepancies between the names of the classes, with, as an example, the NAA having the class of Bowman as an archer under the age of 12, and the GNAS having the class of Bowman, as an archer of merit between a First Class Archer and a Master Bowman. And, as mentioned above, apart from the problems with the use of the word Veteran to denote a person of a particular age, who may be a novice archer, rather than the common accepted meaning of the word “Veteran” in such a context, to mean a person with several years' experience, the problem also exists, of the above uses of the word “Master”, to denote a person of a particular age group, rather than a person who has “mastered” the practise of archery, which would be indicated by the use of the word “master”. in the merit-based classifications.

And, the problem also exists, of the discrepancies between different national archery organisations' similar merit-based classifications of the same archery scenarios. For example, for a longbow archer, the differences in classifications, and the scores required to qualify for the classifications, between the GNAS and Archery Australia (AA), are below.

As can be seen from the above table, considerable discrepancies exist, for the same classification requirements, between the UK (GNAS) and Australian (AA) archery societies.

So, I believe that this all shows a significant need for FITA to define the classifications of archers for Outdoor Target Archery, which I understand to be the primary concern of FITA (as the International Federation of Target Archers).

I can be contacted by email by clicking on the link at Bret

For issues relating to this web site, send an email to the webmaster by clicking on the link at webmaster

This web page was last updated on 08 February, 2006