New competition at Worlds : STP

[Laroche]

Adds are NOT difficulty, why don't people get that? For the record I agree completely with Dr. Skaags on this one.

Subjective scoring is how all trick based competitions are judged and footbag is no different.

[Zac Miley]

People don't get it simply because of what ADD stands for (additional degree of difficulty)

But yeah. Ben's post convinced me.

[ianek]

It's also strange that we learn about this [shred 30 cancellation] on a forum topic about a new untested event...

the official announcement was done by Announce dot ORG and the only feedback i had was on modified.

[ianek]

Subjective scoring is how all trick based competitions are judged and footbag is no different.

exactly

[ianek]

I say we don't use any sort of difficulty system. Think about any other "trick" based sport. Skating, skateboarding, blading, snowboarding, motocross, etc. Do they have difficulty ratings for each trick or element? Nope. They have names so everyone knows what they're talking about, but no specific difficulty ratings.

and have you seen any sport with "slow motion video replay" as the judging system? i haven't found any. i guess this is a reason.

What does Shred30 work most? Add-hunting ability?

i would say "fast add-hunting" ability.

[dyalander]

Personally I think this is ridiculous. Not the new event itself which may have merit but the way in which it is introduced.

I think this a symptom of a greater problem in the way freestyle footbag is run and organised. We don't seem to have an active rules committee. Correct me if I'm wrong. But the only discussion seems to happen in the lead up to worlds, driven by the worlds organisers. It should be no surprise then that worlds becomes the site for experiments.

If the IFPA took control over what went on in competitions via their sanctioning system - ie set rules and standards for sanctioned competitions, events wouldn't be dropped with such short notice and experiments could be carried out at other major events first before being put into worlds. It would be a terrible shame for an event to fall flat at what is supposed to be our premier event. We shouldn't be taking that risk. Moreover it is detrimental for the progression of the sport to shift rules on competitors at short notice giving them little time to prepare.

Official Worlds events should not be changed within 12 months of the event. Have exhibition events on the side to run such experiments, but the IFPA should maintain a core set of standardised official events. That way players can use the comps in the lead up to prepare knowing what they will need to do at worlds.

The IFPA wants to set up their regional system and eventually move towards ranking players so they can be seeded for worlds based on their lead up performances but there isn't even a standard set of events run under uniform rules. I'm running the Australian National Champs next year which will also be the Regional Champs and we won't have the same events as worlds. That is absolutely ridiculous.

Personally I would have liked to see people try a shred 30 without pdx or x-dex adds before trying this new event.

I think the new event has merit, but will need tweaking.

I'm just annoyed at how incoherently freestyle footbag seems to be run. I understand that there are individuals that put in huge amounts of effort to keep it going, but the way it seems to be run doesn't maximise the possible improvements those efforts could make. There doesn't seem to be any coherent long term direction towards which the IFPA is moving. It just seems that we're all feeling around blindly in the hope that eventually we'll stumble across the perfect solution for footbag competition and that we'll know it when we find it. As this and previous experiments show there will always be conjecture about what footbag comps and events should be, the IFPA needs to become the governing body of the sport, it shouldn't be left to whoever is organising the current individual event in question.

[Outsider]

Think about any other "trick" based sport. Skating, skateboarding, blading, snowboarding, motocross, etc. Do they have difficulty ratings for each trick or element? Nope. They have names so everyone knows what they're talking about, but no specific difficulty ratings.

Subjective scoring is how all trick based competitions are judged and footbag is no different.

Those are pretty definitive statements, guys. The problem is, they are incorrect.

Take Gymnastics as one counter-example. Trick based sport. Plenty of difficult moves. They even have different events that showcase either a single big trick (vault), a short run competition with no "performance" score (pommle horse, parallel bars, uneven bars), and an event that combines technical combos of tricks and articistic performance choreographed to music (floor routines).

Their difficulty scoring system actually sounds kind of cool to me. For instance, they give points for individual tricks, and also points for linking tricks.

Here's the wikipedia page for the scoring system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Po ... nastics%29

and here's some of details that I thought sounded relevant.

The Table of Elements is the section of the Code of Points which is used to identify, classify and assign value to gymnastics elements. Every acrobatic and dance skill is listed, illustrated and assigned a specific difficulty rating. Currently, difficulty ratings range from A (easiest) to G (most difficult).

Judging and score tabulation
Two panels of judges score every routine, evaluating different aspects of the performance. The final mark is the combined total of these two scores.

The D-score evaluates the content of the exercise on three criteria: the Difficulty Value (DV), Element Group Requirements (EGR) and Connection Value (CV).

* DV: The nine most difficult elements of the routine, plus the dismount, are added together. For a G skill a gymnast earns .7; for an A, he or she earns .1 points. In 2008, this rule applies to both men (MAG) and women (WAG) at both the senior and junior levels. However, from 2009 onwards, the total number of skills counted in the DV in the WAG Code for all competitors and the MAG Code for juniors will be dropped from ten to eight.[6]

* EGR: Gymnasts must demonstrate skills from five required Element Groups on each apparatus. A gymnast may use skills to fulfill the DV and the EGR simultaneously. For each EG presented, .5 points are awarded. A maximum score of 2.50 points may be earned here.

* CV: Additional points are given for connections of two or more elements.

Although the D judging panel does not take deductions, they may decide not to give gymnasts DV or EGR points for elements that are performed with falls. A gymnast may also lose CV credit if there are extra steps or pauses between skills that are meant to be connected.

The D-score is open-ended; in theory a gymnast could obtain unlimited points by performing connected skills.

The E-score evaluates the performance, ie, the "execution, composition and artistry" of the routine.

The base score is 10.0. Judges do not add to this, but rather, take away points for errors in form, artistry, execution, technique and routine composition. Deductions for falls are included in this mark, and have been raised from .5 to .8. Deductions for small, medium, and large errors have been raised from .1, .2, and .3 to .1, .3, and .5.
The D-score and E-score are added together for the gymnast's final mark.

I tried to find some info on the scoring systems of some other "trick based sports" such as Diving and Skiing, but couldn't seem to come up with anything solid. I really don't know anything about diving, but I've known some competitive skiers, and I believe that at least some events add up the numeric difficulty scores of individual tricks, for instance, in the freestyle mogul skiing event (whatever they actually call it), two skiers go down the slope at the same time, and the fastest to the bottom earns more points, and both competitors earn some score based on their form and style while getting from the top to the bottom, but they both also have to hit one or more specific jumps on the way down. What tricks they choose to do on the jumps is up to them, but the various tricks definitely have different numeric difficulty ratings. How those numbers are derived is unknown to me. The point is, the form/style is subjectively judged, but the tricks are definitely given an objective score without regard to a particular judge's opinion of its difficulty -- those tricks have a predetermined score, and the competitor earns exactly that many points for landing the trick irregardless of a judge's opinion.

I'm not trying to argue for or against ADDs or STP or Shred30 right here and now, I just wanted to point out that just because Ben and Nick say "no trick-based sports are scored objectively" doesn't necessarily make it so. In fact, these examples from highly popular olympic sports clearly demonstrates that they are mistaken.

[Outsider]

I don't really think this thread should be hijacked to a debate about ADDs. Also, I don't think I really want to debate the relative merits of Shred30. I think that comparing Shred and STP is missing the most important point of this thread, and that point is:

There is going to be a new event at Worlds this year, and all you freestylers out there that like to compete (and, presumably, do well in those competitions) had better start trying to understand the rules of this new event, otherwise you're not really going to know what kind of playing your going to have to do in order to score well in this new event.

So, Ianek, let me know if I am understanding the new event correctly:

I think I (and maybe lots of other people) had originally been thinking of this event as another kind of Shred contest, but really its not.

Now it is beginning to seem to me like its actually like a shorter and more highly focused routine. At first, when you said "No Artistic Criteria" I thought of Shred30, and I was confused as to why "theme combos" and a "beginning and ending" should be important at all. However, with the clarifications you gave me, Ianek, and some time to think about it, I think I understand better now.

I think what you're saying is that there is (what I would call) "artistic criteria", but its simply much more tightly defined than the artistic and performance components of the two-minute routines. That is to say, the "Structure" of the competitor's routine is important, and should be (at least somewhat) planned out to earn artistic/performance points for what moves you choose to link together, but you're doing away with other "performance/artistic" elements such as waving to the crowd, doing tricks to the beat or otherwise waiting on some musical cue, and, I don't know, anything else that might, in the 2-minute routine, be considered "performance" that doesn't necessarily have to do directly with the actual tricks you're trying to hit, like moving around the performance area.

I think that sound worthy. I'm very interested. There is still artistic criteria, but its not just anything thats "performy", its very specific criteria. I particularly like the idea of being scored on "Dynamics", now that I know what you mean by that. Like, the artistry of doing a combo of slow smooth styly stuff and build up to a big combo of very fast (and different) moves. Its a pretty cool concept, to try to earn points for deliberately (and artfully) trying to mix it up that way.

It does sound very challenging, however, to try to fit a specific opening combo, probably at least two different "themed" runs of different tricks at different tempos (because, really, if you only planned for one "theme" run, you're probably going to score low in the Variety and Dynamics category) and a specific closing combo all in just 30 seconds. Actually, I think it sounds like a really cool sort of challenge, to try to score points in all these various ways in just 30 seconds. Thinking about it, I'm pretty excited to try this, to plan a "routine". Too bad I won't be at Worlds this year.

So, Ianek, am I getting it? Is there something I've got wrong? What have I left out that you were envisioning as important to this event? (besides the fact that I didn't really hit on "difficulty" or "form and execution", which I think really don't require much disscusion -- I think I "get" that part of it already...)

[professor]

Think about any other "trick" based sport. Skating, skateboarding, blading, snowboarding, motocross, etc. Do they have difficulty ratings for each trick or element? Nope. They have names so everyone knows what they're talking about, but no specific difficulty ratings.

Subjective scoring is how all trick based competitions are judged and footbag is no different.

Those are pretty definitive statements, guys. The problem is, they are incorrect.

Ok, you got me. I should have said MOST trick based sports. At the very least, everything I listed.

But the sports you listed don't have nearly the amount and variation of tricks that footbag does, so it would be much easier to create an objective difficulty scoring system for those sports. Therefore I don't think it's quite fair to compare the sports you listed to footbag.

But, your observation was correct and I should have been more careful about using such broad language.

[Lise]

i don't get it..

so you (ianek) hate adds. and you decide to ask to ask vasek, honza, jorden, tina, etc. what they think, and it turns out they hate shred30 just like you. so you decide to create a new system based on objective judging. it turns out too hard, so you end up making a system that is subjective.

i don't understand how this is a solution to 'your problem'.

i also don't understand how it can just like that go and replace an already existing event before anybody evens knows of it (except for those top players that you've asked..)

i thought the IFPA would have some sort of rule set regarding important changes in the sport like this. but i guess maybe it doesnt...

if some random guy (i know you're not random Ianek, but you're not the IFPA or something) can just go and change the main disciplines of our world championships a couple of months before it takes place, how can we expect people outside of the sport to even take it serious..?! (i can't even take it serious..)

i'm no big shred30 fan. the stp would probably work well and all..
i'm just really confused about the way this whole thing is being presentet and implementet.

[professor]

if some random guy (i know you're not random Ianek, but you're not the IFPA or something) can just go and change the main disciplines of our world championships a couple of months before it takes place, how can we expect people outside of the sport to even take it serious..?! (i can't even take it serious..)

1. Ianek didn't change anything, the director did (Dexter).

During winter i've exchanged emails with mostly Jorden, Honza, Tina and Wiktor about how should STP be and by end of March we felt it was good enough to TRY it. So Honza explained to whole story to Worlds commitee (which Dexter is the main guy) and THEY decided to cancel shred30 and give a try to STP.

Ianek actually asked him to include Shred30 and he said no.

i've emailed Dexter about having at least 1 round of shred30 and make STP also just 1 round for a small test.

that's what he answered:

we are not including shred30.

2. You think that anyone outside of the sport knows or even cares that one event is not going to be included in the World Championships? I doubt it. Is it unfair for people inside the sport? Yes, but I don't think anyone will stop playing footbag because of it.

[sen]

I think that comparing Shred and STP is missing the most important point of this thread

I don't think that's missing the point. Less than three months before worlds we find out that an event many have been prepairing for, we find out it's been replaced. We find out, not in some official announcement, but on a forum that not everyone in the sport visits.

It's only logical to try to grasp why this change is needed, and why it has been implemented in such a brash way.

[Webslinger]

As one of the Worlds freestyle consultants, directors or whatever I feel like explaining our decision once again...

We think that shred has come into the point, when it is all wrong- the system does not reflect real skills due to players using easy moves worth many adds, judges not punishing unclean moves and so on... and we don't want to support this. First we were just going to ban some moves and not to count unclean moves at all, but than we just decided to cancell it at all.

STP is not a replacement for shred, it is unofficial experimental discipline. It is gonna be the same like circle was in Frankfurt 2006. If it will be succesfull, like circle was that year, it will maybe once become official and then you can see it as a replacement.

The decision and the whole issue is not new, we have been discussing this for more than a year and I am sure many of you have already heard about it and knew it. People who already prepared their shred can use it for Euros or US open or other local tournaments, so it was not a waste of time.

I also think there are much more important things to discuss and to be worried about, like for example you should be worried if there will be finals of some discipline in some kind of a dark club like it is common in Europe..., if there will be net players or freestyle beginners judging finals, like it happened many times and so on....

(No, hopefully everything will be fine, for the players and for the sport as well because we want to improve and push the sport and that is also why we cancelled shred, to help the sport...)

[Tsiangkun]

I'd like to suggest that the IFPA remove players from their name and replace it with planners. I see little evidence that the IFPA takes the players into consideration when sanctioning events.

[Jeremy]

Just for the record, as far as I can see, the organisers of this years worlds have made no effort to officially communicate this decision with the World Oversight Committee or the International Footbag Committee. The World Oversight Committee would have found out about the decision at the same time as everybody else did. The IFPA can't really make decisions on things that it isn't told about.

If you think this is a stupid decision then blame the organisers of worlds and not the IFPA. From what I can see, the Worlds Oversight Committee is far more concerned with other issues about this years Worlds, such as the venue being changed from what was proposed in the proposal that received the support of the IFPA to the same venue as 2003, along with a proposal to hold freestyle events outside unless it rains etc. These kinds of issues are obviously far more important than whether an official event is replaced with an unofficial untested experimental event or not.

It's important to note that the organisers of "STP," like with Circle, have not made any effort to contact the International Footbag Committee, so both events remain unofficial, so there can be no IFPA World Champion in either event. The events have as much status with the IFPA as me deciding to hold the Mr Footbag Universe Championships today, and then declaring myself the best footbagger in the universe would hold with the IFPA.


Due to the size and support that the IFPA gets from the footbag community, it really doesn't have a great deal of power in controlling how events, even World Championships are run. Most of the time the event organisers and the IFPA are on the same page anyway. Unfortunately that wasn't the case last time Worlds was in Prague, and possibly it's not the case this time. The IFPA is trying very hard to ensure a more professional Worlds, but as I said earlier, it's really in the hands of the Worlds organisers, not the IFPA. I am sure that everybody in the relevant IFPA committees would prefer Worlds to go ahead at a less professional standard than have to withdraw support unless there were really serious problems.

I agree that this is a terrible decision to have made.

STP is not a replacement for shred

So what, it's just a coincidence that for the first time since 2000 (or 1999?) that shred 30 has not been held at a World Championships? It's also interesting to note that in the announcement to this event on May 23rd Ianek wrote;

It will replace "shred:30"

It sounds like you guys should get together and get your stories straight so you can at least put forward a united front on what's going on.

[Tsiangkun]

there are much more important things to discuss and to be worried about, like for example you should be worried if there will be finals of some discipline in some kind of a dark club

Players competing in a world championship finals should be very concerned that the performance environment will be totally unsuitable ?

Seriously ? I don't think the players should ever need to worry that the organizers will screw over the competitors in a world championship final.

Are we measuring who has the best night vision now ?

[Jeremy]

From the sound of things, that's not a problem this time around. Freestyle finals will be held outside, unless it rains, in which case they'll move into the gymnasium... Professional.

[LEGOMAN]

i think this whole event is stupid. its just routines with more shred and less time. its fuckings stupid you guys are getting rid of shred 30. not only getting rid of it, you didnt even talk to the IFPA. amazing.

[ianek]

It will replace "shred:30"

It sounds like you guys should get together and get your stories straight so you can at least put forward a united front on what's going on.

This is my mistake, what i meant was STP will take the time usually allowed for shred30. So it will "replace" shred30 in the schedule, not as an event.

[ianek]

i don't understand how this is a solution to 'your problem'.

My "problem" as you said, is not really a problem. Shred30 is in fact a "short technical program" and my pernonal opinion is that an event mainly based on adds is wrong. STP is also a "short technical program" + structure and it's not based on adds. How can you not understand that STP is "my" solution for a "short technical program" not based on adds?

i also don't understand how it can just like that go and replace an already existing event before anybody evens knows of it (except for those top players that you've asked..)

as i said in previous post, Worlds director cancelled shred30, not me.

and STP will be a very unofficial (mainly a test) event that will take the time usually allowed for shred30 in the schedule.

I do appologize for this big confusion, it was clear for me when i wrote initial post, but it was in fact not clear at all.

i thought the IFPA would have some sort of rule set regarding important changes in the sport like this.

I remember asking Steve Goldberg last year at Worlds about how official shred30 is and he answered something like:
"There is always been just 1 mandatory footbag freestyle event at Worlds and it's routine. The rest is just sideline events that can be or not be at Worlds, and that's up to the organizers to decide."

how can we expect people outside of the sport to even take it serious..?! (i can't even take it serious..)

I (personal though) think footbag freestyle can't be taken serious with event like shred30. So that's why i'm working on solution to have events pushing the sport in a better direction. People don't need to agree with my ideas, but at least i try.