Spin sets where the bag goes above your head are THE

Post by **Allan** » 05 Oct 2010 13:08

OK, maybe not 'the' per se (I know the term really only applies to dexterities), but certainly not as clean. I can't recall anyone pointing this out before, so I thought I'd just put it out there and see if anyone agrees with me. To be clear: if you're setting for a spin and the bag goes above your head, I would consider it a "dirty" spin and bad form.

Post by **Zac Miley** » 05 Oct 2010 13:18

Why?

I disagree.

Post by **Allan** » 05 Oct 2010 14:53

To my mind, it's just like the'ing a dex as you remove your body from the "context of the movement" and it becomes more about spinning in place (or moving your leg around really fast) than it is about the footbag.

Essentially, the higher you have to set the bag to complete the spin, the less control you're exhibiting over the movement.

Of course, this is a subjective evaluation; if you're intentionally setting really high, and say, spinning slowly, or ... something, then sure, I would qualify it as intentionally part of the move.

But I see a lot of spins where I think it just looks frantic and so-not-styling, where the person has to set really high just so that they have time to complete the spins. I think that's bad form

Post by **Zac Miley** » 05 Oct 2010 15:00

What if it's timed perfectly, but the bag is still high?

This seems like something to judge case by case to me.

I would argue that setting too low and spinning too fast looks worse than setting too high.

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 05 Oct 2010 16:20

I think Allan touched on the crux of "the" when he used the word "intentional." Tricks that are "the" are bad not inherently because dexes are thin or missed, so much as the fact that the player intended to do something and ended up doing something else. "The" shows a lack of control. Bails are also lame for a similar reason; you didn't intend to do what you ended up doing.

When I see a player go for ripstein and bail to crispy swirl, I think it looks bad. Same for a high spin that's not intentionally set high. Same for an intended pdx torque that becomes a big pdx mirage.

The one case that comes to mind where a high spin is fine, is when people intentionally set the bag slightly higher than head height so they can double spin. I don't consider this sloppy or bad, so long as it was intentional.

Muffinman · Post by **Muffinman** » 05 Oct 2010 16:44

I think this is why I have trouble with double spinning; I've always felt it's kind of sucky to set above head height for a spin. It'd probably be way easier if I did..

Post by **Zac Miley** » 05 Oct 2010 16:57

I concur with everyone. It's hard to apply a standard such as 'sets above head are the' though. Balance and speed are more important indicators of how well it was executed, to me.

FlexThis · Post by **FlexThis** » 06 Oct 2010 12:11

There is a video in the video section of a little girl killing spins with a baton. She sets it super high and spots every turn, sometimes up to 4xspins in one pass. It is intentional and very impressive.

Eric Wulff intentionally set his spins super high in competition so that A)It looked way cool, B) So he could get into a flyer position with plenty of time.

I think it is subjective to style as opposed to 'the'. Triple spins would be sick regardless of the bag height, and I would argue that spin height makes it more or less difficult when done intentionally of course.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 06 Oct 2010 13:33

Eric intentionally set the bag to allow him to make contact in a flying position at the end of the trick, therefore, the set was intentional, and not 'the'.

That would be different than a player throwing the bag high because they lack control, and or, discipline, to do the trick right.

FlexThis · Post by **FlexThis** » 06 Oct 2010 13:37

agreed.

Senor Grommet · Post by **Senor Grommet** » 08 Oct 2010 17:55

It is obviously just an opinion, as opposed to fact, that spin sets above the head are "the." It is as if you are picking some height completely arbitrarily and making it a rule. Why not choose shoulder height, or belly button height, or eye height?

And what if a freestyler is 5 feet tall? Wouldn't that make him/her have to work a lot harder to complete a dbl spin than you Allan? If I remember, you're 6 feet tall or more. You have an extra foot or more to work with as compared to a short freestyler.

I think it is bunk.

If someone has the ability to set high and straight, he/she has the opportunity to complete more components while the bag is in the air.

I could see your rule potentially limiting the completion of a triple spin, or making a completed triple spin 'the' because the bag passed too high. That limits progression.

Senor Grommet · Post by **Senor Grommet** » 08 Oct 2010 17:55

edited for dbl post.

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 08 Oct 2010 19:27

On a related note, I feel like double spins can only really be "the" when you run into a wall.

qphox · Post by **qphox** » 09 Oct 2010 10:01

I was actually JUST thinking about that last night. Crazy.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 10 Oct 2010 20:19

I agree with Allan. I don't even think intentionality comes into it though. Sorry to sound like a philosophy question, but if you hit a "the" barfly intentionally is it still "the?"

Of course sometimes doing something deliberately in a bad way can be fun, but if I were judging it in a competition, unless you made it really clear that you were hitting something with bad form for a deliberate reason, and I thought that was a good reason (such as choreography with music), then I'd mark you down on any technical scores.

I think the same applies with double/triple/inspinning moves, and that's why they're hard.

Of course I do note that Allan is probably a foot taller than me

cd · Post by cd » 10 Oct 2010 21:48

I agree with Mirken. Height is an arbitrary standard. Might not be aesthetically pleasing to some, but I don't think it disqualifies or discounts a trick. The move is still legitimate even if the set is higher than where your head happens to be.

And I don't think that a THE'd barfly is a good comparison. Spinning while the bag is in the air is clearly different from circling the bag with your leg.

An intentionally THE'd barfly isn't a barfly; it's a clipper with a fancy motion added which doesn't count as a dex. A spinning clipper set high is still technically a spinning clipper.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 10 Oct 2010 22:15

Yeah ok, I agree it's not as bad as a barfly, but it's still bad form. I'm short - 5'6" so calling it bad form is to my disadvantage.

I think it comes down to how you define spinning. Is spinning relative to the bag, or is it just turning around about 180 degrees or more? I personally consider it relative to the bag, and in that case if you set higher than your head you're not spinning "around" the bag, you're spinning below the bag.

I guess a better analogy would be planting on pdx moves. Planting on a pdx move doesn't negate the move, but it's still bad form. At the same time, some pdx moves are much easier with a plant than without - especially ducking pdx moves. In the case of those it's so rare to see the non-plant variety that planting is acceptable and non-planting is seen as extra stylish.

I'm really bad at double spinning (and indeed, normal spinning), and most of the harder spinning sets that you see have a set above head height, so perhaps that is acceptable in the same way.

On the other hand think of it like this - I'm sure most of us would agree that a ducking set where the bag is set higher than your standing height is poor form. The same must therefore apply for a spinning ducking set. Surely then your set for normal spinning should be of the same height or lower than your set for spinning ducking?

cd · Post by cd » 11 Oct 2010 07:15

Yeah I see what you mean, I think spinning relative to the bag is important. Like, I think the worst scenario of all is if it passes over your head unintentionally while you're trying to spin. I've definitely done that before.

Senor Grommet · Post by **Senor Grommet** » 11 Oct 2010 16:40

Jeremy, no one in footbag really spins around the bag anyway. We set and spin near or next to the bag (for clarity).

What would a juggler say about this topic when reading it?

Is a juggling spin move delegitimized by tossing clubs 10 feet in the air? 15 feet? 20 feet? Nope. But the higher they toss, the more revolutions they can complete.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 11 Oct 2010 17:30

But we're not jugglers.

The way soccer players hit atws is 'the' in our eyes, but legitimate in theirs too. Different sports have different conventions.