The Instigator
bradenldavis
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
FaustianJustice
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Should Compound archery be included in the Olympics?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
FaustianJustice
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/19/2015 Category: Sports
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 700 times Debate No: 75522
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

bradenldavis

Pro

I think they should include compound archery in the Olympics because shooting a compound bow is nearly as challenging as shooting a recurve bow, and most people that shoot a bow now shoot a compound bow instead of shooting a recurve bow, so limiting the olympics to only a recurve bow is limiting the amount of competitors in the event.
FaustianJustice

Con

I accept the challenge, and in the course of the debate will demonstrate exactly why the traditional recurve bow should serve as both the best and the only means of measuring a competitors' talent in Olypmic Archery.


I just hope the instigator doesn't string me along.
I feel my arguments will be on target.
Knock on wood, my opponent will be prompt with replies.
I sincerely hope the instigator doesn't draw this out.
I think my puns are becoming overdrawn...


Debate Round No. 1
bradenldavis

Pro

bradenldavis forfeited this round.
FaustianJustice

Con

In light of my opponent not having an opening argument, I with hold further puns until something occurs. At such time, I will then explain why there should be a standarization of bows for competition.

In the mean time, please allow me to get one qualifying argument:

Various bows means various levels of competition, and the bows themselves enable the archer to circumvent draw time, aim time and other assorted traditional archery caveats through mechanical (IE not skill related) means.

Debate Round No. 2
bradenldavis

Pro

bradenldavis forfeited this round.
FaustianJustice

Con

Very well, in light of arguing against a premise, I will list out some basic reasons as to why a standardization of one bow should be the sole Olypmic archery benchmark.

The compound bow is a fantastic tool for hunting, and in earlier years, defense, but currently, as a means of sport against fellow archers, it is really just a simple cheat of paying more to circumvent skill that is needed. A compound bow by its nature is designed to give the shooter a "break" during the draw, thus enabling them to hold their aim, or find their target without need of exerting the amount of energy originally required. The more elaborate the bow, the more this advantage could be exploited, enabling a vast an unfair divergence in comeptitors. It would be quite possible that sponsors willing to donate their goods to mediocre archers with the intention of demonstrating their wares could over run the talent pool.

In addition, the various sights and peeps that are placed on compound bows immediately remove the challenge of aiming, all that work has been pre-sighted and calculated for the shooter. This is great for field shooting against animals, but takes skill out of the hands of the competitor and places it on the range with a bow press and auto trigger releases.


Without kicking a dead horse, the above reasons are why Con should win the round, since as usual, last man standing is the de facto way of determing a winner. -sigh-
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by philochristos 1 year ago
philochristos
I wish there was traditional archery in the olympics. No sights, no stabilizers, no mechanical releases, and no elevated rests. Just recurves and longbows, instinctive or gap.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by daem0n 1 year ago
daem0n
bradenldavisFaustianJusticeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Pro started a debate and forfeited it. Arguments: Con is the only one who gives me a reason why his impacts matter. (Segregating competition is bad because it diverts sponsorship from a form of competition that is more deserving of it.)