March 8, 1913 
FOREST AND STREAM 
307 
Forest and Stream is the official organ of the National Archery Association. 
Scoring by Points in Archery. 
Chicago, Ill., Feb. d.- —Editor Forest and 
Stream: 1 recently sent you a symposium on 
the point system of scoring. Since then I have 
received the following letter from Will H. 
Thompson, of Seattle. Nearly every archer 
knows that Mr. Thompson was the leader in 
organizing the National Archery Association in 
1879. He has since been devoted to its interests 
and five times he has won the national champion¬ 
ship. Edward B. Weston. 
“I am sorry to know that you are thinking 
of reviving the old controversy over the ‘point 
system,’ as it can do no possible good, and can 
do much harm. 
“In England they wrangled over it for thirty 
years and finally abandoned it for two years in 
favor of gross score, and then came back to it 
gladly, and have ever since clung to it. We 
abandoned it for one year—1880—at Buffalo, 
when Peddinghaus won a gross score, though 1 
should have won on points, having hits and score 
at 100 yards, hits and score at 60 yards and gross 
hits, 6 points in all, to his 4 points. We changed 
back to points by a unanimous vote, after the 
most elaborate discussion. 
“We came near wrecking archery at one time 
over the attempt to change the value of the colors 
on the target to i, 2, 3, 4 and 5. The Eastern 
Archery Association adopted the silly change for 
no real scientific reason whatever, as the real 
value of the colors are nearer i, 3, 5, 7, 9, than 
I. 2, 3, 4, 5. In fact, I and 9 are right, 3 nearly 
right, and 5 and 7 quite wrong, especially 7. But 
what matters it? It gives all the same chance. 
Archery is an old game, doctor. The halo of 
age age is about it. Its history is half its glory. 
Its old usages plead for life. The British have 
kept it alive thjough years and years of cannon 
and musket. Why not stay with them in all 
these little details that do no one wrong? A 
few years ago B. P. Gregson won the British 
medal with tenth score. A big furor ensued. 
Everybody irate. But finally a fine, calm, scien¬ 
tific article demonstrated his actual superiority 
in the contest. The ten scores were close, only 
a few points between lowest and highest. Greg¬ 
son had gross hits by a pronounced margin. He 
had hits at 100 yards (the most difficult range) 
by a strong lead. Pie was only beaten one hit 
at 80 yards by one of the ten. He was second 
in score at both too yards and 80 yards, and so 
he deserved the medal over the fellow who by 
a few lucky golds and reds got gross score. Of 
course, any system will show wrong in individual 
cases, but on the whole one is about as good as 
another. But stability is best of all. We are 
at one with the English in this old, old pastime 
in all things save one, and in that they are right 
and we wrong, and that is in shooting both ways 
at targets. Everything is in favor of their sys¬ 
tem and naught against it. The red ring should 
count 3 if the gold counts 9, yet why change? 
Your red and mine counts as much as Phil 
Bryant's, doesn’t it? I lost one medal in 1880 
because 'points’ were abandoned, and I won the 
medal on points in 1888 though Maxson scored 
739 to my 733. So I'm even. Don’t let us 
muddy again the clear stream of archery that 
now flows deeper, cleaner and stronger than for 
many years. 
“There is nothing to be gained. Such little, 
annoying things as the loss by rebounding arrows 
are far more important. They unnerve and ex¬ 
asperate.’’ Will H. Thompson. 
Present Means of Scoring. 
BY JAMES DUFF. 
I AM rather surprised to see that old bone 
of contention, method of scoring, come up again 
and to see such wholesale condemnation of the 
system as has appeared of late on the subject. 
It would seem to me that the time is ripe for 
taking the matter up seriously and trying, at 
least to amend, if not to totally alter, the point 
idea to something that would give some kind 
of satisfaction. Unlike our British friends in 
the sport of archery, we are scattered over so 
vast a territory that it is a difficult matter to 
see how a meeting could be convened to give 
the full discussion this and other matters should 
really have. But in the matter of publication, 
America by far excels anything that Britain can 
show as pertaining to archery; that after all it 
is delightful to be able to subscribe to such a 
work as Eorest and Stream where one can and 
does have all that is latest and best, and to 
know that if a lead is on one’s mind, he has only 
to tell his troubles to the editor of Forest and 
Stream in letter form, knowing that full publi¬ 
cation will be given with every possibility of 
receiving some comfort and probably fresh loads 
of sound advice and ideas from the many arch¬ 
ery readers. 
Many of us know that the present means 
of scoring are entirely wrong, but inasmuch as 
we don’t belong to the class that is affected by 
it, we give little attention to the subject. 
Coming from Boston last August I was 
asked by an archer in the novice stage how I 
worked it out that l\Ir. Wills won second place 
in the York rounds, when Mr. Richardson 
seemed to be as good a shooter by scoring 196 
hits to Wills’ 19s hits, which looked as though 
the difference in score should be about balanced. 
Working it out on a per cent, basis, I was sur¬ 
prised to find the following result: 
Plits. Possible. 
Wills. 
Per Cent. 
Richardson, 
Per Cent. 
Wills . 
.... 195 
288 
67 17-24 
Richardson 
.... 196 
288 
68 1-18 
Wills . 
Score. 
.... 
2592 
34 31-216 
Richardson .. 
.... 860 
2592 
33 29-162 
Totals .... 
101 69-81 
101 19-81 
Showing a win for Mr, Wills by a narrow 
margin, but still an undisputed win on merit. 
Taking the same method of scoring and apply¬ 
ing it to two questions asked by Drs. Elmer 
and Hertig, respectively, which shows that— 
Elmer’s query. 
, 
Hits. Possible. Per Cent. Per Cent. 
A . 90 90 100 
H . 10 90 11 1-9 
Score. 
A . 90 810 11 1-9 
B . 90 810 11 1-9 
Totals . . 111 1-9 22 2-9 
hertig’s query. 
Jiles, Hertig. 
Hits. Possible. Per Cent. Per Cent. 
.Tiles’ end . 0 6 100 
Hertig’s end . 2 6 33 1-3 
Score. 
Jiles . 12 54 22 2-9 
Hertig . 14 54 25 25-27 
Totals . 122 6-27 59 7-27 
While this method may not be acceptable 
to us, it seems to me to show that there is a 
great lack of certainty in our present means of 
scoring, as there are very few archers scored 
on their actual merits, unless it be done by the 
P. Bryant method, namely clean up the slate and 
“mak siccar.” 
The Mystery of Sleep. 
It is impossible to give any precise ex¬ 
planation of the phenomenon of sleep. Yet, 
says Harper's Weekly, many theories have been 
advanced. Legendre has shown by fairly con¬ 
clusive arguments that it is due neither to 
“brain pallor.’’ nor to intoxication by carbonic 
acid, nor to the presence of narcotic substances 
in the blood, theories that have been in turn 
advanced. Legendre intimates his preference 
for the view that sleep is not the result of 
fatigue, but is an inherited instinct designed to 
protect the organism against the ill effects of 
fatigue. 
Equality. 
by JAMES E. RICHARDSON. 
When fifty bowmen, straining all arow, 
I'ary no finger’s breadth in arrow-flight; 
When down the stadium ten runners go. 
And first to choose defieth all men’s sight; 
W hen yew and olive tree give bow for bow, 
And star and lesser star yield equal light; 
W’hen maids of one birth-morn are all so fair. 
That none in visible degree surpass 
In gifts of grace—bright eyes and shining hair; 
When weights of lead and gold give mass for mass; 
When the high gods shall answer every prayer. 
And each man’s auspices come forth to pass; 
In that—and in no earlier—hour shall ye 
W’ail fitly through the market-place, “Equality!” 
FOR ARCHERY SUPPLIES 
—M——MW— 
■Write for Archery Catalogue. 
E. I. HORSMAN CO. 365 Broadway, N. Y. 
