It’s the monkey pulling the string!!!
Bisch
I don't mean to argue with you, but I do have questions. Why do they have separate categories for longbows and recurves in tournaments?
I don't have any evidence to support this other than my own personal experience, but I think that in general, a recurve is capable of greater accuracy than a longbow, because at the same poundage, a recurve is capable of a higher velocity because of the energy stored in the recurved limbs. This means that the trajectory of an arrow shot from a recurve will be flatter than the trajectory from a longbow. Note that this wouldn't make any difference in accuracy if the arrow were shot using a machine, because a machine could be set to fire the arrow the same way every shot, whereas a human is subject to more variables.
In my mind, this is a continuum, not an absolute. In other words, in a typical tournament there will be longbow shooters who will beat recurve shooters, and vice versa. A longbow shooter may have the highest score in the tournament, or a recurve shooter might. There are also some longbows that will outshoot some recurves, and vice versa. But one can't ignore the laws of physics. On “average” I think the recurve shooter and the recurve bows will win.
Up until now, I would have hedged and said that while recurves have more stored energy, it comes at the cost of potential problems like limb twist, etc. But with recent advances in limb technology, such as my new Cobra Curve limbs from Bob Lee, I think they are every bit as stable as longbow limbs, and store even more energy than was possible before they came on the scene.
I will admit that some shooters, such as Howard Hill, are so skilled that they could shoot the pants off any of us mere mortals with their longbows. And any individual, since we are all different, might shoot a longbow better than he can shoot a recurve, but on average….