HAA shoot rounds for 2026 summer season?

David Bruce<countyshoots@herefordshire-archery.info>

​HAA committee;​HAA club secretaries;​HAA club chairmen​

​Bromyard Bowmen Tournaments​

Folks:

As well as the *dates* for this summer’s county shoots, which are now
confirmed (see separate message), I also asked last month for thoughts /
suggestions w.r.t. potential changes to the *rounds* we have shot in
recent years.

SUPPORT FOR CHANGE?

The two responses I did get both supported the idea of change:

    On 2026-02-23 06:13, Mark Beaumont wrote:
>     On the basis that ‘variety is the spice of life’, I am personally
>     in favour of switching the county shoots up a bit and introducing
>     some new more obscure, or rarely shot, rounds that members may
>     never have shot before (or not shot in a long while)

    On 2026-03-09 21:40, R Cecil wrote:
>     I note the suggestions for variations on our “usual” rounds. I’d
>     support that as a general plan

That said, just two responses may not be statistically significant!

WITH CAVEATS:

    On 2026-03-09 21:40, R Cecil wrote:
>     use of different sized faces might pose problems if done at short
>     notice.

🙂

    On 2026-02-23 06:13, Mark Beaumont wrote:
>     The only caveat being that we don’t want to make them too
>     complicated for either the archers to score or yourself to tally
>     up afterwards. Introducing a handicap may also cause a few
>     disagreements as to whether an individual has been fairly or
>     unfairly categorised, and would be additional work.

With any form of head-to-head / knockout format there are obviously
numerous matches, each having their own totals, but that’s neither
intrinsically complicated nor particularly onerous.

FWIW:  The system we used in 2015 and 2016 so that archers of different
bowtypes/categories could compete against each other in a ‘mixed’
Olympics-style head-to-head format reasonably fairly wasn’t really
handicapping as such [one could do that as well, I suppose, but we
didn’t], but rather based on the classification system.
Essentially, after shooting a three-arrow ‘set’ (end), rather than the
competing archers saying I scored X, you scored Y, who _scored more_ (or
did we tie), there was an additional step involving a simple
lookup-table: I scored X (which for my age/gender/bowtype/… is at
classification level CX), you scored Y (which for you is classification
CY), who _got the better classification_ (or did we tie).  [Actually,
the program I wrote to prepare the lookup-table sub-divided each
classification level into I think five steps, but the idea’s the same. 
Another conceptually similar table is used when seeding archers after
the ranking round.]
It’s not perfect, but it’s as fair/unfair as the underlying
classifications themselves, which I don’t think are too bad/contentious.

WHAT NOW?

Both because time is pressing, and for the reasons Rachel gives:

    On 2026-03-09 21:40, R Cecil wrote:
>     For the first shoot I think we should stay with offering metrics
>     as they offer a good introduction to those new to outdoor
>     competition. It is also a round where many can earn credit for
>     classifications.

I see no reason to change April’s shoot from the Long Metric rounds of
recent years.

Similarly, I see no reason to change August’s County Championship rounds.

The other three offer scope for change if desired:

May’s American / St Nicholas / v.short.Nationals can be a bit awkward
with the different round-patterns, but we usually get through it without
too many problems 🙂
Might changing to Western rounds make things simpler?

June’s WA 70m etc / WA 50m etc seems OK, albeit just 6 dozen.
We could up to a double, add head-to-head matches in some form (eg qv),
or switch to the WA 1440 / AGB Metric rounds we haven’t shot since lockdown?

July’s St George / Albion / Windsors seems OK.

Of these options, I’m most minded towards either switching to 1440s or
adding H2Hs in June, but what do others think?
Let me know your yeas / nays / or other thoughts / suggestions. Or
should we ask the archers at large (eg at April’s shoot) for their views?

Best wishes — David

County Shoots organizer, Herefordshire Archery Association
01684 892139

————————————————————————

On 2026-02-22 20:02, David Bruce wrote:
> ALTERNATIVES?
>
> The rounds we’ve shot have evolved over the years, with the current
> selection pretty stable since 2017.  (The original idea was to offer a
> progression through the season, both in number of arrows and in
> distances, but this is now less evident (especially with many choosing
> the LM I or II at the first shoot).  It’s not clear whether that still
> matters.)  But we are free to offer whatever rounds we fancy
> (including inventing our own ‘local’ rounds if the recognized ones
> don’t suit).
>
> One round we haven’t shot recently is the 1440, since we stopped
> holding a practice round for the WMAS RICM (itself now 900 rounds). If
> desired, we could put one on (with the option for those who want it of
> just the Long Metric in the morning or Short Metric in the afternoon),
> perhaps instead of the WA 70m/50m rounds?
> [Or, if anyone wants some fun / a stiffer challenge, a (non-standard)
> variant some Australian suggested back in the late 1990s, with the
> four distances shot respectively on 122cm, 80cm, 60cm, 40cm faces!]
> Any thoughts?
>
> Another thing we tried a couple of times in the 2010s was a ‘mixed
> head-to-head’, where I ‘handicapped’ archers of different
> bowtypes/categories so everybody could compete against each other in a
> Olympics-style head-to-head format reasonably fairly.  (The current
> handicap/classification system might be slightly better suited to this
> than the one in place back then.)
> [There is also an obscure Club Match round hidden near the back of the
> WA C&R which affords ‘virtual’ matches (where archers shoot for the
> duration rather then being knocked out early).]
> Any takers for either of these?
>
> Any other ideas / suggestions?