The problem with that is that people aren't reasonable 
especially if you put them in a position of authority 
. If you leave it up to judging you will have different rulings fron one meet to the next.
Don,
This is very true! This is why I like to make it as clear as possible in the rules. I find it important to avoid very open ended statements. The event officials who will be checking your equipment may also be a competitor. Clarity helps eliminate real or perceived bias when that official needs to make a judgement.
I know that added pieces bonded to the handle area for the self bow and simple composite has been allowed since the beginning. I think in every case, the added on material fades into the main limb, and this does technically make the bow into a limited multi-laminate. Specifying a maximum length for this does provide a clear limit. So I feel this could be a good approach. Is 12” too much?
An alternate solution is to disallow added in pieces at the handle for all future self bows and simple composites. Would this be better? It may mean bows used in prior years can no longer be shot in the same category in the future.
Overall, I feel our primitive rules are pretty good. The rules managed to avoid the pitfalls of trying to conform to a traditional standard. Instead, the rules attempt to focus on the materials and how they are used, and leave it up to the archer to figure out how to come up with the most effective design to get the job done.
Alan
