There has been a lot of great advice offered so far. First and foremost I want to congratulate you for setting an accuracy minimum and sticking to it. I think if more people did that—no matter the weapon—we’d all be better off. There is simply no substitute for accuracy.
You asked if others had similar self-imposed standards, and the answer for me is yes. I use a basic 2/3 rule, meaning the longest shot I’ll take at a medium or big game animal is 2/3 the distance I can keep all my arrows—sans the rare occasional flyer—in a target the size of its kill zone. For example, if I can’t keep all my broadheads within the 8 ring of a 3D deer target at 30 yards, I won’t attempt to shoot a real one at 20.
Probably the best piece of advice I could give you right off the cuff is to remember that archery fundamentals don’t change just because your new bow doesn’t have cams at the ends of its limbs. If you are a good shooter with a compound there’s no reason you can’t easily transition that ability into a recurve—form is form, and archery is archery. The only things that truly have to change for most people switching from compounds to recurves is how they release the string (mechanical release versus fingers) and how they aim (sights versus barebow). Don’t overcomplicate things by thinking the knowledge you’ve gained with a compound doesn’t transition into a recurve.
