Both Sidedness- A Must for Today's Footbag Game?

Senor Grommet · Post by **Senor Grommet** » 21 Nov 2004 10:31

I was reading one of Mosher's posts about how "gross" single-sidedness is and I got a bit frustrated. Over the last year or two, Ive given this issue a lot of thought, as have many others. I feel that, to be the best footbagger, you do need to be able to hit most tricks on both sides. But this is not always the case nor should we accept it as the standard.

Bothsidesness is only for those who want to: 1) have "complete" mastery of a hard trick or tricks, or 2) be robotic-looking.

Who is not bothsided in today's game? Hmm . . . lets see:
Ahren German-Ive never seen a flipside Id (maybe he can hit it tho)
Ryan Mulroney- all symp. double downs were on one side
Vasek Klouda- always favors his left clipper side and his rt. toe (IMO)
Chad D- has never hit a flip flurricane

I think what Im trying to say is that there is a fine line between being 'bothsided" and just being able to hit most tricks on both sides. There is NOTHING wrong with either style, nor is there anything wrong with a person who uses only 1 side for mst of his/her tricks, except for the fact that it is limiting.

Also, i think it is absurd for a player who has been playing only 10 months (who is very good for 10 months BTW) to 1) feel justified in being able to put down a player or 2) have less respect for a player who has been playing for several years, simply because that player does not hit all tricks both sides. When a newbie disrespects an older generation player for not being bothsided, the world is coming to an end.

Bothsidesness is a recent young upstart faction that needs to be quarantined or at least neutered. To think it is the "rule" rather than the exception or just an option is bad for the development of the game.

mosher · Post by **mosher** » 21 Nov 2004 10:49

When I say bothsided I meant component wise, not just individual tricks.

As in, when I see a new player coming up I encourage them to do all the basics on both side because that avails to you nearly every trick out there.

By not having all the *components* both sided you are closing the door to the so many tricks!

Here is my reasoning for why both sidedness is so important in footbag.

There are sports like skateboarding where (essentially) everyone has a clear and defined "switchstance" (flipside) because skateboarding naturally lends itself to not REQUIRING that you be both sided! You only need to travel in one direction naturally. You can learn all your tricks moving in the opposite direction but it really is not as obvious when you do not.

But footbag is one of those amazing sports where you CAN play it on both sides of your body because no one side needs to dominate.

The reason people have weak sides stems from the fact that people are fucking lazy. (ease off the trigger on your flame-throwers) By that I mean that our whole lives we have grown up doing one-sided things and it really doesn't matter because you can get away being one sided at things like kicking a soccer ball or writing your name. You can be one side dominant at that shit and have it never make a difference.

Here is the stupid part - people have applied this logic improperly to footbag, a sport that does not naturally require that you have a dominant side!

If you just assume from the beginning that since every trick is new to both sides of your body then logically you can learn them both together.

It frustrates me when people blame their having a weak whatever as their reason for not being able to hit a certain trick. If you drill the shitty one harder than the good one the shitty one will start to feel like the good one, guaranteed!

Of course another easy way to become one sided is to see the bright lights of big tricks that are suddenly within your grasp with your newfound talents on one side and run with it. Tsk tsk.

and yeah TSK FUCKING TSK!!!!!!!!!

ASSUMING THAT YOU NEED TO HAVE A WEAK SIDE IS FLAWED LOGIC !!!!!!!!

Also, I never meant to attack anyone's game in particular Jeremy. I don't know what veteran shredder I insulted but I surely didn't mean it. I like to make vague, broad insults to let the masses get mad at me instead.

Fu Xi · Post by **Fu Xi** » 21 Nov 2004 11:21

No one is running this sport. We make our own style, strings, and tricks. One sided is great if you love the sport and are having fun.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 21 Nov 2004 11:29

Plain and simple, you're denying half of footbag by not working on your "weak side".

goad · Post by **goad** » 21 Nov 2004 11:30

Everyone should be both sided

don't be lazy all it takes is time

Colin · Post by **Colin** » 21 Nov 2004 11:42

Jim Penske almost never uses his left toe when he's busting big. Do I care?

Variety is more important than both sidedness, but both sidedness is a path to variety.

shreddaily · Post by **shreddaily** » 21 Nov 2004 12:14

Jeremy brought this up a while ago, and I'm starting to agree with him (except for claiming vasek is one sided, thats just ignorance. Favors doesn't equal ignores).

I think there is a conection between J's stance on bothsides and his stance on big moves vs long runs. I, and many up and coming players, are ALL about strings and both sides. And I think thats a great thing for the sport. But it isn't everything and we should acknowledge the coolness of the big move oriented players, and the huge part they play in the developement of this game.

freestyle

Laroche · Post by **Laroche** » 21 Nov 2004 13:35

Bothsidedness is fine and dandy, but I hate the way alot of players always do drills in their runs, ie: If its Blur > Legbeater > Pdx Dlo > Pixie Whirl one side, they have to throw it in on the other side DIRECTLY after, and in the SAME order, it drives me crazy. I hate being able to predict strings, its boring.

Drills are not meant for circles, they are called "Drills" for a reason.

B_Man · Post by **B_Man** » 21 Nov 2004 13:42

I really don't like people who push their views on bothsidedness on others.

It's not called freestyle for nothing.

You have a choice. Being bothsided is your decision. Let other people have theirs, whatever it may be.

mosher · Post by **mosher** » 21 Nov 2004 14:01

I just wanted to touch on one other thing that Jeremy mentioned. You used the fact that some people have only hit certain things on one side to insinuate that i was calling them one-sided.

Ive only hit fume on one side, I wouldn't say I am one sided because my fairies are equal, as are my drifters.

Also, it is worth echoing that all this sidedness jazz is, and will always be just like so many other aspects of life, a choice!

I was just stating why I think it is so important to use both sides, not declaring why anyone else has to.

JFootbagger · Post by **JFootbagger** » 21 Nov 2004 14:13

I think being or striving for bothsideness just opens up more doors of creativity to how many tricks you can do or use them in a string.

B_Man · Post by **B_Man** » 21 Nov 2004 14:42

JFootbagger wrote:I think being or striving for bothsideness just opens up more doors of creativity to how many tricks you can do or use them in a string.

Word

ShredPirate · Post by **ShredPirate** » 21 Nov 2004 16:32

more importantly, alot of people slur their stepping sets, 'the' their dex's, and drag their osis. footbag won't become popular because some kid notices so-and-so hitting a trick on both sides.

i agree with laroche about predicting where a run is heading. i get no surprise factor from seeing someone hit a combo flipside. it's most definitely impressive, but it's boring.

the reason you practice drills is so the components are easier to throw into your runs, not so you can do the drills midrun (which is still impressive).

Mulroney is a good example. he CAN hit tricks on both sides, but when he is shredding, he throws in moves that make every run look unique and damn cool.

it depends on your style of play:
would you prefer
"ripwalk > ripwalk > barfly > barfly"
or
"ripwalk > sidewalk > barfly > down double down"

Outsider · Post by **Outsider** » 21 Nov 2004 17:04

ShredPirate wrote

it depends on your style of play:
would you prefer
"ripwalk > ripwalk > barfly > barfly"
or
"ripwalk > sidewalk > barfly > down double down"

Chris, I'm not sure I understand. Is this a rhetorical question? Is it supposed to be obvious to all what the correct answer is, or are you suggesting "different strokes for different folks?" 'cause I've always liked barfly back to back...

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 21 Nov 2004 17:08

There is clearly a difference between being able to hit something on both sides and actually doing it in runs.

From all accounts Ryan is fairly both sided in terms of skill - but hits runs he feels comfortable with.

I think it's vital to be able to hit all your tricks of 5 adds or less (of that approx difficulty - obviously there are harder 4 adds and easier 6 adds etc.) with both sides.

If you can't do that you are potentially losing a lot more than half the potential moves you can do.

Let me give you an example:

There was a time when I could only hit pixie sets on one side and torques on one side. This meant I could hit one move combining those two components - pixie ss torque.

Now I can pixe and torque on both sides - so I can hit 4 different moves with the two components - pixie ss torque both sides and pixie torque both sides.

One sided player has 1 move - both sided player has 4.

Apart from when I'm drilling I don't think I've ever hit pixie torque bsos. I'm sure I could but I don't feel any desire to.

Here's another great example. There was a time when I could only hit dlo on one side and whirl on one side. It didn't matter how much I tried - I couldn't hit flurry. Then I spent a few months drilling flipside dlos and whirls and I can now hit flurry both sides. - One sided player had 2 moves - both sided player has 6 moves.

Moves are connected - if you want to be able to hit flurry - you need to be able to hit whirl, symp whirl, barrage and dlo first (or at least it will make things much easier) - all on the side you want to hit flurry. To deny yourself some of those moves on one side means you are denying entire strings of moves that lead from those moves.

I also think that your both sidedness or lack of is one of the things people judge you on very quickly. I was talking to a well known footbagger the other day and asked him about another big name player who has won a few world championships (not Vasek but someone else) - and the first comment was "He's very good but he is too onesided".

Obviously you don't have to be both sided if you don't want to. I guess it depends on what you want to do in footbag. I want to be the best player I can possibly be. I believe that trying to be bothsided makes me a better player (I'm still a bit one sided but getting a lot better!). If you just want to have fun then do whatever makes you have fun.

I think all four of the people that Jeremy M mentioned are fairly bothsided. From the footage I've seen - Chad is very bothsided. Vasek is definitly both sided. As mentioned - Ryan is capable of hitting most things both sides - and often does - but in different runs - not the same run. I haven't seen enough of Ahren to know how both sided he is - but I know he's hit stuff like mobius>blurry torque or something similar and 21 consec atomsmashers so that seems fairly both sided to me.

If you are happy to be as bothsided as Chad then that is good - Chad hits things like blurriest>blurriest>blurry whirl>stepping whirl>blurry whirl>stepping whirl and blurry whirl>whirr>blurry whirl>whirr. I don't think it's necessary to get much more bothsided than that - you don't need to be perfectly equal - just as equal as you can be with all the basic kind of stuff (ie sets, and downtime 3s and easy 4s)

Outsider · Post by **Outsider** » 21 Nov 2004 17:14

Oh, by the way, I voted that both-sidedness is a matter of choice. Of course I prefer it, but the way I see it, one could either spend lots of energy learning a trick and then learning the same trick on the other side, or they can spend a like amount of energy learning a trick and then learning another trick on the same side. To say that you must be both-sided is to say that you must spend half your time/energy on relearning the same thing on the other foot. I think it is just as worthy to put your energy towards a different thing on the same foot rather than the same thing on a different foot.

Both sidedness has certain payoffs, of course. Some tricks or combos just beg to be hit back-to-back. Scorpions tail can be done back to back without being both-sided, but Blurry Whirl cannot. I happen to like combos that go from one side to the other and then back again. Thats just me.

I also have no problems seeing drills in circle shred. I don't feel that shred has to be all-spontaneous all the time. But then, I'm just not a very spontaneous guy, so again its just me. Patterns of tricks are cool. Patterns that are hard to predict are even cooler. Whatever.

ShredPirate · Post by **ShredPirate** » 21 Nov 2004 17:34

Outsider wrote:ShredPirate wrote
it depends on your style of play:
would you prefer
"ripwalk > ripwalk > barfly > barfly"
or
"ripwalk > sidewalk > barfly > down double down"
Chris, I'm not sure I understand. Is this a rhetorical question? Is it supposed to be obvious to all what the correct answer is, or are you suggesting "different strokes for different folks?" 'cause I've always liked barfly back to back...

i actually meant it to be an obvious answer towards the second combo... which only further proves that everyone plays for different reasons

Muffinman · Post by **Muffinman** » 21 Nov 2004 18:27

I voted for the first one. Bothsidedness is suuuuper important to me and I don't like watching players who are exceptionally one-sided, but it's definately not something that you should strive for if it's not fun for you.

On a really vital note, though, bothsidedness does not have to look robotic. I was talking to Andrew about this yesterday about how instead of hitting mobius beesauce to hit mobius one side and vortex one side. It's like Tom said -- you are spinning both ways but it's not so predictable and painfully bland. Andrew's actual example was that he was trying to hit toe barrage > atom smasher [repeat] but hit legbeater instead of the last atom smasher and I was, like, "That's so much cooler", BECAUSE it's not as blandly symetrically structured. In my last video I hit gyro dlo with one dlo and fog with the other as my bothsidedness for that combo. Bothsidedness CAN be cool and just (if not more) interesting. I mean, is it cooler to see Vasek bust whirlwind > montage > montage rake or spinning blender > food processor [repeat]??

ted · Post by **ted** » 21 Nov 2004 18:34

I think the development of bothsidedness as an ethos is a very good step for the game. I remember when Ellis made a post on the old .org list saying something like:

If you have a weakside, you are weak. If you have a flipside, you are cool.

and this had a large impact on the community. Since then, the term weakside virtually disappeared and the idea of 'flipsiding' concepts and moves has taken over. I believe this is good. Still, I voted that it is the option of the player but I like to see total bothsidedness and I like robotic style and I like repeating combos BSOS (and I love Lon in Just Shred 2). I have changed to a more bothsided approach to the game to save my body (and it's hard!) so I respect bothsidedness much more than big moves with repeating components.

The most boring combo I have ever seen? something like: spinning whirl>montage>whirlwind. Blech.

crazydwarf · Post by **crazydwarf** » 21 Nov 2004 22:18

I voted for the first one. Bothsidedness is suuuuper important to me and I don't like watching players who are exceptionally one-sided, but it's definately not something that you should strive for if it's not fun for you.

agreed, if you don't want to be a very good player, and you are just trying to have fun, do whatever you want. Being bothsided would probably be more fun for me though...

Both Sidedness- A Must for Today's Footbag Game?

Which of the following describes your thoughts on bothsidedness?

Both Sidedness- A Must for Today's Footbag Game?