development of freestyle: technical progression

[Lauri]

Yeah, not for you cause you fucking suck at footbag.

[LEGOMAN]

EDIT: ill take it to PMs

[habitat]

Yeah, not for you cause you fucking suck at footbag.

That wins every time, props.

However, I'm still right. Sorry. Maybe you should go play some more PROFOOTBAGHAXESAK instead of insulting people on the internet. Oh wait, that was basically my original point. Now I'm making too much sense. Please, continue to make yourselves look like GRRRRRRRRRRRREAT guys.

[Anz]

Is it possible to have a mature conversation about this sport on this forum?

Kyle and James, you guys disgust me. I hope I never meet you in person. You both are now on my ignore list.

Anyway. Does anyone think that shred30 rules can be changed and that another thread about it should be created?

I recommend more people to contribute to this thread. Everybodys opinions are valuable.

[habitat]

Is it possible to have a mature conversation about this sport on this forum?

In your sense of mature conversation, where everyone agrees with you, no. If think someone is disgusting because they disagree with you, you need to grow the fuck up.

[LEGOMAN]

Kyle and James, you guys disgust me. I hope I never meet you in person. You both are now on my ignore list.

What I'm really hearing is "BAWWWWWWW MY NAME IS ANZ AND I CRY WHEN PEOPLE SAY STUPID STUFF ON THE INTERNET BAWWWWW"

chill your balls.

All this talk about getting rid of bops "because they're too easy" is fucking stupid. Why don't we stop doing blurs, dimwalks, whirls, ducking clipper, and spinning clippers?

They're all really easy! People bail to them all time! Down with BDWDS!

[Zac Miley]

Saying "no" and nothing else is not mature conversation. Perhaps elaborate on why bops are valuable.

I'm not sure I like that system Anz, it looks like a lot of moves would be oversimplified and it is restricting.

[habitat]

Saying "no" and nothing else is not mature conversation. Perhaps elaborate on why bops are valuable.

Honestly? Something so obvious? Why bops are valuable? Wow. Maturity.

[LEGOMAN]

Saying "no" and nothing else is not mature conversation. Perhaps elaborate on why bops are valuable.

how good do you think you would be at footbag if you didn't learn bops? and what if you need a second to plan another trick?

bops are key in footbag.

didn't lon smith say bops were the key to mastering footbag? or something like that? i need to re read freestyle fantasy.

and why the fuck is no one calling out lauri and his shitty post about james?

me and james get called out for shit posting all the time.

[Zac Jackson]

Yeah, not for you cause you fucking suck at footbag.

and your disgusted at james and kyle for shit posts? I rarely post here bu this is clearly a shit post. if your going to call them out atleast call everyone out. and I agree with james and kyle on this one.

[Rieferman]

Alright alright, I'm going to attempt to post back on topic here (which probably won't work)

Anz wrote (I pulled out some sentences, just included the ones I'm responding to in the quote here):

Nowadays bops are just bails and tricks you do before you think. It seems like the bag controls you more than you control it.

Like I plan ahead much, programmed sessions for example.

Personally I like the feeling of hitting flawless Rubberman more than a forthy contact guiltless run with sloppy bop bails.

I understand where you're coming from, but I have to say that I feel totally the opposite mostly. Though I enjoy challenging myself to combos during a run, my favorite part of playing is when a song grabs my attention and I just start mindlessly playing. Not that I'm sitting there hitting fluff the entire time, but I'm certainly letting the freestyle or the bag or the song or muscle memory or something control me - not me controlling and thinking through the run. That's why I play, to find those moments.

For your shred 30 idea, I think you're skilled enough to mockup a couple of 30 second runs, and score them with your system, and post them on youtube for us to watch. I think that would be cool to see if you can figure out how to "game" your own system (by "game the system" I mean, hunt for points etc. let me know if you don't know what I mean.. like add hunting), and see which run scores the best.

[C-Fan]

I hate you Bob, you disgust me. That was clearly a 5h1t post.

[LEGOMAN]

I hate you Bob, you disgust me. That was clearly a 5h1t post.

hey ken your face is a shit post. bitch

[professor]

I like bops because they give an increasing/decreasing type of flow to people's games. Like you'll hit a 3 trick combo that's intense, then do a bop or two to slow it down. Hit a huge trick, then a medium trick, then a bop.

It's like good music. It has dynamics. I think Jorden is a great example of this. Sure there is something to say about constant intensity, but it's not all that interesting to watch. Is it more difficult? I guess it depends on your definition of difficult.

Here's an idea! How about none of us try to dictate the way people should play. Admire who fits your definition of "good" and leave it at that.

[Zac Miley]

Saying "no" and nothing else is not mature conversation. Perhaps elaborate on why bops are valuable.

Honestly? Something so obvious? Why bops are valuable? Wow. Maturity.

Thanks for elaborating.

If I think that BOPs are not important, and you think that BOPs are important, you're not going to change anyone's mind by just saying no and then making stupid posts afterwards when they ask you to elaborate.

By the way, I didn't call anyone out Kyle. Thanks for actually reasoning though.

BOPs (not just bops really, but moves like smear, plo, etc. for me) are obviously a key part of footbag development, but once you achieve a certain level, what is the real point of them? Surely you can't argue that they require as much thought as other moves. They really bog down the difficulty of the string.

I don't think that anyone is ultimately trying to get rid of BOPs, but instead arguing that harder bails need to be developed (for genuine).

Also, saying that BOPs are something you do to gather some time to think about your next trick supports Anz's point that they are mindless.

[C-Fan]

I heard Genuine used to mean unique guiltless.

Thought I'd add some historical perspective. I remember when Eli first developed the term genuine. The original meaning was a string with no bails, and no repeats. So by this definition, BOP was excluded, and so was a run where you hit the same blurry whirl more than once.

For me, the truest definition of "genuine" is "bail-less." So if Felix did a run with a gyro clipper in it, I wouldnt consider if genuine for him, but it would be genuine for me. By the same logic, a run with flip smear would be genuine for me, but not a run with strongside smear.

With these terms I think the most important thing to remember is the goal, and not the path. The goal is to challenge yourself and improve your game. The path can be trying to avoid easy tricks/links. But just because you do the occasional BOP doesn't mean you aren't improving or challenging yourself, and on the flip of that, just because you are playing BOP-free also does not always mean that you are improving.

[Jeremy]

I guess I usually use the definition Lynton told me, which is just guiltless without bops (which is kind of funny since none of the bops were really bails for Lynton - his were dlo and symp mirage (and ps mirage), which are probably why I bail to those moves a lot as well.

I kind of agree with Anz in that I much prefer to watch genuine shred and at tournaments I tend to try and play genuine. However most of the time I play, it's with very sub tiltless players down at the local markets, and in that situation I mainly just hit long runs without any concern of adds or difficulty, and I have a lot of fun doing this as well.

So I think it really depends on context - sometimes genuine should be the standard and sometimes it shouldn't. Of course you don't really have any choice about how you play unless you're capable of playing genuine, so it's still a good goal to set, even if you still like hitting bops.

I kind of like the idea of Anz's shred 30, although I don't understand the "double downs count as one dex" rule. I think that's a case of Anz allowing his ability to bias his rules. I think double dex moves are genuine and it sounds like barfly and butterfly would get the same score and that system, which seems fairly silly given the nature of it.

I also really like the idea of a shred30 system that didn't have an arbitrary points cut off (like how currently only 3 add moves and up count as uniques).

I think with these kinds of proposed changes though, it's hard to judge them very well until you've actually had a few competitions with them, because until you've tried to construct something that gets the most out of the system and seen other people do the same thing, it's hard to really see the actual outcome of the system.

[Anz]

For your shred 30 idea, I think you're skilled enough to mockup a couple of 30 second runs, and score them with your system, and post them on youtube for us to watch --- and see which run scores the best.

I actually thought about this too. But I thought that a few players would create a couple shred30s with this sytem, not just one. And we'd see how they turn out. That's a really good idea, but the rules should be more clear and precice before that.

I kind of agree with Anz in that I much prefer to watch genuine shred and at tournaments I tend to try and play genuine. However most of the time I play, it's with very sub tiltless players down at the local markets, and in that situation I mainly just hit long runs without any concern of adds or difficulty, and I have a lot of fun doing this as well.

Yes. I'm sure we'll never see genuine routines or even circle competition. I still play tiltless on my sessions. But it's good to have genuine as an ace up your sleeve in "serious" circle when you want to play hard.

I think that's a case of Anz allowing his ability to bias his rules. I think double dex moves are genuine and it sounds like barfly and butterfly would get the same score and that system, which seems fairly silly given the nature of it.

Maybe. But still the difference between Double Down and Butterfly would be the link point. I thought that Double Downs are too easy to be worth more points than Whirl or Drifter, but hard enough to get the link point.

I also really like the idea of a shred30 system that didn't have an arbitrary points cut off (like how currently only 3 add moves and up count as uniques).

Yeah me too. But then again I'm not sure if you could score high with just unique toe tiltless. Which wouldn't be good.

I think with these kinds of proposed changes though, it's hard to judge them very well until you've actually had a few competitions with them, because until you've tried to construct something that gets the most out of the system and seen other people do the same thing, it's hard to really see the actual outcome of the system.

A few players filming their own Shred30's with these rules would lighten it up a bit.
Any volunteers?

And Jeremy, are you still involved with the IFPA board? I remember you doing hard work with the routine rules system. Can you explain what must be done if the competition rules want to be changed?

[Rieferman]

Hey Anz, one other thing you could do while waiting for volunteers would be to score the top 3 places using this system from a couple high profile events that we already have captured on youtube. Like worlds and a 2 other events that had good shred 30 competition... see if the results would have been any different with this scoring.

But I agree, you also need to run the test of having people specifically prepare a shred 30 for these scoring rules.

[Anz]

I don't know if that's a good idea, since the add-system does not value linking, so players mostly avoid those links that are rewarded in this system.
But it can't hurt if I do. As just an example.
I'll just go have a short footbag session first. (Without a camera, sorry.)