Do you think Compound Archery should be an Olympic sport?

Aside from the para Olympics, the only bow type shot as an Olympic sport is recurve. Compound archers, and even long bow archers, are left out, unable to shoot in the Olympics.

As an archer your self, or even as a non archer, do you think that other bow types should be considered?

I'm not saying that it is as easy as clicking your fingers to get other bow types competing at the Olympics, but I hope to write a little from both sides of this story. Including why other bow types should be considered as an Olympic sport and on the other hand, why only recurve is perhaps best.   

Each bow style requires a different skill 

Compound archers are extremely accurate, it would be nice to show the world how accurate a bow and arrow can be! However, I would suggest a different target to the recuve archers to compensate for their increased accuracy. Although the compound bow does take away some of the physical fitness required by an archer, I feel it requires a different kind of focus. I may be wrong, but personally it feels that with a compound you can't loose focus for a second and any slight deviation from the gold can result in a drop from first place to well below mid place. Compound archery becomes very much a show of mental fitness, aiming and precision (once and assuming you have all the equipment optimized).     

Longbow archers deserve all the respect! It almost feels that to be a good longbow archer you need to have that natural innate ability. It is also beautiful to see archers hit a target at 70 m with such a simplistic bit of equipment. Although there are some extremely good long bow archers, I would imagine that scores would be far less predictable than that of compound and recurve archers and perhaps more exciting than the typical string of 10's. 

Even horse back archery would be a cool addition to the Olympics.... but I do accept that maybe my thinking here is a bit far fetched!

However, the recurve bow is a nice mid way between compound and long bow. Visually, compound archery could be considered boring to watch, and from a spectators point of view appear to lack skill. Sorry long bow archers, but generally (not everyone though!) longbow is far less accurate and may look unimpressive and old fashioned. Recurve archers have the accuracy, but allow the use of some "technology" such as sights and long rods etc. So out of all the bow styles currently in the Olympics the recurve is perhaps the best choice. 

Compound archery is already a Para-Olympic category

For obvious reasons compound archers have a category in the Para-Olympics this should make it somewhat easier to transfer the category to the Olympics. 

Compound archers gain to much from mechanics and technology 

Compound archery does differ to other bow styles when it comes to gadgets and technology. There are many rules and regulations that any new Olympic sport must abide by/comply with before it can be considered. I don't wish to mention all those regulations, but just to mention that compound archery would pass all but one...

"Physical, not mechanical, athlete performance is required. Disciplines and events which performance depends essentially on mechanical propulsion are not acceptable."

I don't think that this rule applies any differently between recurve and compound archers (or many of the other Olympic sports). However, it should be considered at which point equipment will be of too higher of an aid to an athletes performance.  

  

Compound archers should stick to hunting

The compound bow was first made by H Allen in 1966 to increase accuracy and has continuously increased in popularity, especially in America. Although you can hunt with a recurve bow it is much easier to do so with a compound. Many archers would perceive the compound as a hunting bow rather than a target bow. However, compound archers compete in many target competitions at every level, local, national and international. In fact, the Olympics is perhaps the "odd one out" when it comes to having only one bow type. Compound archery is growing in popularity, but maybe it is just not yet popular enough to consider as an Olympic sport?

There are limited Olympic categories 

There is no room for more than one archery category, recurve is the best of the bunch so stick with it. The London 2012 summer Olympics had 26 sports and two more are due to be introduced in 2016 (golf & rugby sevens). Since 2000 the number of Olympic sports has been capped at 28, which could make it very difficult to push for more than one archery category. However, other international federations, such as the international swimming federation has several categories, including, swimming, diving, water polo and synchronized swimming. Just to emphasis the point a little further, other categories such as equestrian have 3 sports, cycling 4 sports and even wrestling has 2 sports included in the summer Olympics.     

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am more interested in getting people thinking about how they feel on this issue, rather than just saying that I think that other bow types should be included as an Olympic sport (As a compound archer my self!). I think there is certainly a good chance that compound archery will make it as an Olympic sport, quite how soon that will be will require some changes to the way the people in "power" and those heavily involved in archery perceive other bow styles.

Each sport has to have an international governing body and its inclusion is also governed by its popularity - so lets keep spreading the word of archery and increase the popularity of other bow styles!