Spin sets where the bag goes above your head are THE

Post by **Allan** » 11 Oct 2010 20:08

Thanks for the thoughtful replies everyone

Perhaps what bothers me about high sets in spinning moves is that it becomes much more difficult to set the bag straight up and down; if the bag isn't set straight up and down, the higher you set, the more the bag will travel; thus the more the player has to travel to catch it; thus making for a "sloppy" spin (spinning-running-[...]-osis).

If you set high, you need to set vertically, and maintain the spin-in-place. But the higher you set, the harder this is to accomplish.

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 11 Oct 2010 20:36

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr4G07crPVo[/youtube]

FlexThis · Post by **FlexThis** » 12 Oct 2010 09:52

According to discussed cleanliness, only 3 of those were head height or lower.

Despite this...SICK!!!

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 12 Oct 2010 12:18

some of those were very sloppy, with lots of unintentional travel.

It detracts from the ones hit well, and gives the impression that the player is sloppy.

Jazzkid · Post by **Jazzkid** » 12 Oct 2010 13:49

I think the only one not hit well in that video was the last one where he missed.

Corey · Post by **Corey** » 12 Oct 2010 13:59

Wow!

Tsiangkun wrote:
some of those were very sloppy, with lots of unintentional travel.

It detracts from the ones hit well, and gives the impression that the player is sloppy.

How many players in the world have come close to that?

Wouldnt the duck be the and not the spin?

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Oct 2010 21:51

It seems to me to be completely illogical to suggest that because nobody else, or very few people, could do something, that it is therefore perfect. It's obviously very hard, and impressive, but I would say it's definitely conceivable for somebody, or Rekordy to hit the same thing in an even better manner. I think a good approach to footbag is to strive for perfection and to accept that perfection is impossible. I remember watching Buda's Best with Ales Zelinka when he was one of the best players in the world and he criticised his form on nearly every move, even though in my opinion he has (or maybe had) one of the best forms of anybody in the game. His attitude was that hitting a trick is just the first step - you should aim to hit it perfectly.

I think my analogy with plants on pdx and ducking was pretty good. Double spinning is so difficult that I think setting above your head might be fine, just like planting on tomahawk is fine, but if you did it with a lower set that would be even cooler, just like not planting on tomahawk is even cooler.

In the video each double spinning clipper is hit slightly differently. I think the second one is the best one. The first's set is too high, as are the others, and the sets after the second are not as straight. Criticising the form doesn't take away from the skill and difficulty of what's being hit - it's still impressive, and I struggle to hit one double spinning clipper. How can we achieve perfection if we don't even discuss what that would be?

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 13 Oct 2010 05:17

Jeremy wrote:I would say it's definitely conceivable for somebody, or Rekordy to hit the same thing in an even better manner.

The player in the video is Damian Gielnicki, the 2008 world champion. "Rekordy Polski" means "Polish record," ie the video shows the Polish record for the trick. "Rekordy" isn't the name of the player in the clip.

FlexThis · Post by **FlexThis** » 13 Oct 2010 12:44

Honestly I knew it was Damian. I have met him in person and he has stayed at my house, but I was also thrown off by the Polish text and thought this was just another super Polish player.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 13 Oct 2010 15:36

Yeah they all look the same to me

Ners · Post by **Ners** » 14 Oct 2010 02:47

* ka-ching! *

Jokes aside, I'll see if I can get Rekordy to film some better Double Spinning Clippers.

Pozdrawiam
Szymon KaÅ‚wak (Ners)

Laroche · Post by **Laroche** » 15 Oct 2010 01:14

And a new nickname is born

grek · Post by **grek** » 21 Oct 2010 09:19

Strange that nobody said it (or i just didnt read the posts careful enough), but according to Allan's theory, nobody hit a clean Spinning trick until it was set from clipper (or any delay), since in the early years - until the late 80's early 90's - i think spinning was done from outside kicks mostly, from which the bag inevitably goes above the head...

sen · Post by **sen** » 23 Oct 2010 12:57

Not that my opinion on footbag should really matter to anyone, seeing as I haven't kicked in 3 years, but...

I like what Allan is saying here. And I think everyone agree's that it looks way better if the bag is set lower. Should the add not count? I'm not sure on that, but style points should be lost for sure imho.

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 23 Oct 2010 15:25

On a similar note to what Allan is saying, I also submit that peeking tricks where you don't spot the bag (make "eye" contact with the bag) are also "the."

FlexThis · Post by **FlexThis** » 25 Oct 2010 13:27

I'd say peeking moves where only your head turns are 'the'

Sporatical_Distractions · Post by **Sporatical_Distractions** » 25 Oct 2010 14:59

edit: the argument i just posted sounds kind of ridiculous. took it down.

Sporatical_Distractions · Post by **Sporatical_Distractions** » 27 Oct 2010 10:52

Ken prompted me to post one of the points anyways.

I also believe that if Allan's setting clipper (the foot itself, not the bag) was set 6 inches off the ground, and my setting foot went 6 inches off of the ground, he would have more time to spin seeing as how he is much taller than I am. Therefore, he'd have a better chance of hitting double spinning clipper without going above his head then I would. Height seems to play a role in this 'the' idea.

Post by **Allan** » 29 Oct 2010 13:35

Can't shorter players can spin faster than taller players? Wouldn't this--at least partially--negate the height issue?

I'm not suggesting making this some sort of hard and fast rule where I would expect people to call "the" on someone mid-string after setting a little high on a spin. All I'm really trying to accomplish is to explore the idea a little bit in the interest of better defining what is the most efficient and technically valid method of hitting spinning moves.

Anecdotally, spins feel the most controlled and easy for me when I keep the set at about eye level. When I set significantly above this area, I find that the bag starts to travel faster on the down-stroke; this speed gain might actually negate the extra time that you get by setting high on the up-stroke. This also makes it potentially more (unnecessarily) difficult to stall as an added side-effect of the speed; I find this particularly true of the smaller, heavier bags that have become standard.

Perhaps maybe why my statement rings true to at least a few others is that it actually is true for spin sets, and maybe not for complete spinning moves. In other words, to do a spinning > inspinning osis ("double spinning osis"), if the first spin goes above your head before you spot the bag, then the move becomes a "true" double spinning osis, where there is a set, and then two spins, then the osis. If you're spotting the bag on the way up, then it becomes a spin-set, and is technically a different move than it's "full double spin" cousin. This is maybe why the "if you don't spot on a peak" statement is true too.

Now I feel like I'm starting to over-analyze

I accept that my whole statement could be bunk. It just seems to make some sense to me that is hard to define.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 29 Oct 2010 20:32

I think there are all kinds of advantages and disadvantages for having different body types. Being short and small makes me able to shuffle faster, giving me an advantage in events like shred 30. Being tall means you have bigger windows and more time to hit tricks like triple around the world. It's just the nature of sport in general that people are different and those differences can result making somethings easier or harder. Aaron Orton would smash me in a wrestling match because he's big. I'd probably smash him in a 400m sprint. Both events advantage people with particular body types, but nobody has ever suggested trying to change the events so that people of all body types have an equal opportunity.