development of freestyle: technical progression
development of freestyle: technical progression
disclaimer: i've never been to a worlds / huge tourney & am largely uneducated with respect to judging principles.
i've been lurking about these forums for some time now & never really felt i was at an appropriate mental understanding of the game to constructively support people's arguments.
this is kind of an attempt at revitalizing the "Development of Shred" thread, but with a focus purely on tightening up the technical aspects of the sport. ( i would like to see a similar thread dedicated purely to promotion & publicity of freestyle, to keep these two important issues distinct from one another )
i know others are closer to the heart of what is changing within this sport, i hope to get better educated with respect to this.
i realize progress is being made already on much of what i am going to say. the advent of request contest, STP & circle comp are moving things in a seemingly positive direction.
it seems one of the primary concerns is regarding the ADD system, & attempting to determine just what the hell it is in the first place.
the pioneers attempted to create a system that encompassed both definition & difficulty. certain components were judged to be "worthy" of an ADD, while others were not ( symposium vs symple ). other ADDs were created to fill the gap between description & difficulty ( XDEX, XSPIN ).
these should have been the earliest warning signs that this system could not cater to both description & difficulty.
imo, the ADD system works flawlessly as a DESCRIPTIVE system. ADDs tell the story of the trick.
if we were to disregard difficulty entirely from the ADD system, would there be a problem with double leg over being a 4 component trick? ( barring shred 30...i feel this event should disappear, although i <3 the objectivity of it )
a good example ( if my understanding is correct ) of the dichotomy between description & difficulty is Ners' trick, "Critical Mass". symposium whirling nuclear set seems easier than whirling nuclear set, so a higher ADD value is actually of a lesser difficulty ( unless i'm offbase, & whirling nuke is easier ).
so...if ADDs are purely descriptive, how in the world are we meant to discern difficulty?
String Composition? an example already in effect is Circle Comp. each competitor gets 3-5 runs with the bag, & it is the overall composition of that player's game that determines whether they will advance. Sick 3 is composition. Routines are composition.
when we are shredding in a circle with others, it is the overall trick selection & execution over the course of a session that gives the impression of what level a player is at.
can variety & creativity form a foundation for judging difficulty?
"Genuine" is a solid attempt at representing difficulty, but my HUGE BEEF with Genuine is the boycotting of tricks. nothing in the game should restrict the creative potential for trick selection, imo.
"Unique" is another good attempt, but is restrictive with respect to repeats.
i feel like i'm searching for a term that falls somewhere between these two, something that emphasizes a) less bails & b) good string composition. but butterfly, osis & paradox mirage should not be prejudiced against because they are overused in our footbag culture. instead, players should be revitalizing these tricks by using them tastefully in string composition. eg. kozlov's osis links.
anyways, sorry for the rantish post, these are thoughts that run through my head a lot. i hope this wasn't too overbearing to stimulate conversation. please tear my thoughts a new hole if my understanding is incorrect.
i've been lurking about these forums for some time now & never really felt i was at an appropriate mental understanding of the game to constructively support people's arguments.
this is kind of an attempt at revitalizing the "Development of Shred" thread, but with a focus purely on tightening up the technical aspects of the sport. ( i would like to see a similar thread dedicated purely to promotion & publicity of freestyle, to keep these two important issues distinct from one another )
i know others are closer to the heart of what is changing within this sport, i hope to get better educated with respect to this.
i realize progress is being made already on much of what i am going to say. the advent of request contest, STP & circle comp are moving things in a seemingly positive direction.
it seems one of the primary concerns is regarding the ADD system, & attempting to determine just what the hell it is in the first place.
the pioneers attempted to create a system that encompassed both definition & difficulty. certain components were judged to be "worthy" of an ADD, while others were not ( symposium vs symple ). other ADDs were created to fill the gap between description & difficulty ( XDEX, XSPIN ).
these should have been the earliest warning signs that this system could not cater to both description & difficulty.
imo, the ADD system works flawlessly as a DESCRIPTIVE system. ADDs tell the story of the trick.
if we were to disregard difficulty entirely from the ADD system, would there be a problem with double leg over being a 4 component trick? ( barring shred 30...i feel this event should disappear, although i <3 the objectivity of it )
a good example ( if my understanding is correct ) of the dichotomy between description & difficulty is Ners' trick, "Critical Mass". symposium whirling nuclear set seems easier than whirling nuclear set, so a higher ADD value is actually of a lesser difficulty ( unless i'm offbase, & whirling nuke is easier ).
so...if ADDs are purely descriptive, how in the world are we meant to discern difficulty?
String Composition? an example already in effect is Circle Comp. each competitor gets 3-5 runs with the bag, & it is the overall composition of that player's game that determines whether they will advance. Sick 3 is composition. Routines are composition.
when we are shredding in a circle with others, it is the overall trick selection & execution over the course of a session that gives the impression of what level a player is at.
can variety & creativity form a foundation for judging difficulty?
"Genuine" is a solid attempt at representing difficulty, but my HUGE BEEF with Genuine is the boycotting of tricks. nothing in the game should restrict the creative potential for trick selection, imo.
"Unique" is another good attempt, but is restrictive with respect to repeats.
i feel like i'm searching for a term that falls somewhere between these two, something that emphasizes a) less bails & b) good string composition. but butterfly, osis & paradox mirage should not be prejudiced against because they are overused in our footbag culture. instead, players should be revitalizing these tricks by using them tastefully in string composition. eg. kozlov's osis links.
anyways, sorry for the rantish post, these are thoughts that run through my head a lot. i hope this wasn't too overbearing to stimulate conversation. please tear my thoughts a new hole if my understanding is incorrect.
greg raymond, kingston
FB: Rocker Holliday
"What is it that makes a complete stranger dive into an icy river to save a solid gold baby? Maybe we'll never know." - Jack Handey
FB: Rocker Holliday
"What is it that makes a complete stranger dive into an icy river to save a solid gold baby? Maybe we'll never know." - Jack Handey
lol @James.
Lately some good topics have been brought up, this is a good example. Here's some of my opinions and stuff that's been going through my head.
Technical developement is a reason why ADDs have become inaccurate.
About technical developement in general. One big step past the ten year has been developement of what I call "support foot moves".
I divide tricks to full body moves and support foot moves. I explain it shortly, and I'm sure everybody gets my point. Ask me if you don't get this.
-Full body moves are what you learn first when starting footbag. I call them like that because the whole body is along doing the move. Most of the trick selection of everyday freestyle circle runs consist of these tricks. Examples: Butterfly, Ripped Warrior, Symple Swirl, Scorpion's Tail.
-Support foot moves are more rare in normal circle runs. I call them like that because they often require precise use of support foot - which is often the flipside component of the trick and that's why makes it hard. These tricks require more balance, control and timing, and right use of the support foot. Examples: Swirl, Enterrage, Symposium Whirl, Rev Swirling Toe.
--I can think of moves that would fit both categories, but I think we can all agree that players that can link support foot moves well are rare - and if you think ten years back, almost nonexistant.
I like Shred30, but I don't like the add system. I think Shred30 needs it's own system that is accurate on the moves that are used in Shred30 performances. It would not need to give a comparable value to every footbag trick. I've actually been planning this already.
Also I think that footbag doesn't need a perfect system to compare difficulty of moves. Only Shred30 does. Like in routines or STP it's not required to rank tricks.
And I don't see a beef in boycotting tricks for Genuine Guiltless players already boycott Near Illusion.
But I do agree that the bars of moderns freestyle should be loosen. If you take a look at the video section, you see players play Guitless when they definetly should not.
Which actually brings me to the point that has been already brought to daylight in the "Russian big link" thread. So many players are hunting for tricks and sick3's for props on this forum. I mean, it's bloody easy to get props from any video on this forum, but everybody should be able to get their motivation to continue training from something else than addhunting in front of the camera for two hours for one sick3 that you could hit with ease in six months if you we patient enough to skool your fundamentals.
If somebody hijacks this thread, I'm gonna beat the shit out of him in Berlin next summer.
Lately some good topics have been brought up, this is a good example. Here's some of my opinions and stuff that's been going through my head.
Technical developement is a reason why ADDs have become inaccurate.
About technical developement in general. One big step past the ten year has been developement of what I call "support foot moves".
I divide tricks to full body moves and support foot moves. I explain it shortly, and I'm sure everybody gets my point. Ask me if you don't get this.
-Full body moves are what you learn first when starting footbag. I call them like that because the whole body is along doing the move. Most of the trick selection of everyday freestyle circle runs consist of these tricks. Examples: Butterfly, Ripped Warrior, Symple Swirl, Scorpion's Tail.
-Support foot moves are more rare in normal circle runs. I call them like that because they often require precise use of support foot - which is often the flipside component of the trick and that's why makes it hard. These tricks require more balance, control and timing, and right use of the support foot. Examples: Swirl, Enterrage, Symposium Whirl, Rev Swirling Toe.
--I can think of moves that would fit both categories, but I think we can all agree that players that can link support foot moves well are rare - and if you think ten years back, almost nonexistant.
I like Shred30, but I don't like the add system. I think Shred30 needs it's own system that is accurate on the moves that are used in Shred30 performances. It would not need to give a comparable value to every footbag trick. I've actually been planning this already.
Also I think that footbag doesn't need a perfect system to compare difficulty of moves. Only Shred30 does. Like in routines or STP it's not required to rank tricks.
And I don't see a beef in boycotting tricks for Genuine Guiltless players already boycott Near Illusion.
But I do agree that the bars of moderns freestyle should be loosen. If you take a look at the video section, you see players play Guitless when they definetly should not.
Which actually brings me to the point that has been already brought to daylight in the "Russian big link" thread. So many players are hunting for tricks and sick3's for props on this forum. I mean, it's bloody easy to get props from any video on this forum, but everybody should be able to get their motivation to continue training from something else than addhunting in front of the camera for two hours for one sick3 that you could hit with ease in six months if you we patient enough to skool your fundamentals.
About time for bringing up this. I was thinking about it myself actually. I hope the community is ready. I do hope we can have a constructive discussion about all this.anyways, sorry for the rantish post, these are thoughts that run through my head a lot. i hope this wasn't too overbearing to stimulate conversation
If somebody hijacks this thread, I'm gonna beat the shit out of him in Berlin next summer.
Hey habitat, if your too busy "playing" than why would you have time to read the whole post and then leave a USELESS remark? You go "play", and everyone will continue with their "talking".
Errrg..... My first month of footbag ever was with Tom Mosher. The ADD system slowly fell into it's uncomfortable place. With my learning came something very important: Usually when a person who was interested in the sport (and not too shy to ask) came up and inquired they where told about the point system in some way or another. Now if you look at this scenario as someone studying the sport you will notice that this is bad for the progression of the game. First of all the ADD system doesn't work and thus neither did shred 30. It was fun and a very good try but not meant for the future. So why do we feel the need to PUSH the fact that we have a point system still? IMO it is because it gives the sport some structure. It makes it more understandable. And what are we doing here by playing footbag folks? Were trying to express ourselves. How can we do this if no one is interested in learning about our crazy world of FREESTYLE? ADD's give us grounding. Although it's false support.
Post Script This is based off MY first month playing with Mosher, Peng, and Derrik.
I completely agree that the ADD system can be used very well for description based purposes.
Errrg..... My first month of footbag ever was with Tom Mosher. The ADD system slowly fell into it's uncomfortable place. With my learning came something very important: Usually when a person who was interested in the sport (and not too shy to ask) came up and inquired they where told about the point system in some way or another. Now if you look at this scenario as someone studying the sport you will notice that this is bad for the progression of the game. First of all the ADD system doesn't work and thus neither did shred 30. It was fun and a very good try but not meant for the future. So why do we feel the need to PUSH the fact that we have a point system still? IMO it is because it gives the sport some structure. It makes it more understandable. And what are we doing here by playing footbag folks? Were trying to express ourselves. How can we do this if no one is interested in learning about our crazy world of FREESTYLE? ADD's give us grounding. Although it's false support.
Post Script This is based off MY first month playing with Mosher, Peng, and Derrik.
I completely agree that the ADD system can be used very well for description based purposes.
First think about how to practice or don't bother practicing.
John Bagi
John Bagi
You do realize you just said playing footbag is pointless and talking about it on an internet forum is more productive?footbagi wrote:Hey habitat, if your too busy "playing" than why would you have time to read the whole post and then leave a USELESS remark? You go "play", and everyone will continue with their "talking".
ITT: Self-described noobs (-anz, so far) talking about the "future of footbag" and how they know everything.
Last edited by habitat on 19 Nov 2008 11:09, edited 1 time in total.
James Randall
Re: development of freestyle: technical progression
Less whine, more serious talk.
Thanks for mentioning my stupid thread.
I really liked how that discussion evolved and I definitely learned alot about footbag from it.
Hope I learn some from this thread aswell.
What I have heard from Anz for shred30 it sounds like a perfect solution for that discipline.
In Phasing the swirl is almost always symposium and not counted as so because it's so much easier to hit it that way.
Phasing Swirl = Frankenstein = The swirl is symple
Phasing Pickup = The swirl is symposium
Phasing Osis = The swirl is symposium
Phasing Revup = As done by Renato in the heroes video = The swirl and the rev swirl is not symposium
Renato is fucking sick in that video btw.
Thanks for mentioning my stupid thread.
I really liked how that discussion evolved and I definitely learned alot about footbag from it.
Hope I learn some from this thread aswell.
What I have heard from Anz for shred30 it sounds like a perfect solution for that discipline.
There is another example of this:abstract wrote:a good example ( if my understanding is correct ) of the dichotomy between description & difficulty is Ners' trick, "Critical Mass". symposium whirling nuclear set seems easier than whirling nuclear set, so a higher ADD value is actually of a lesser difficulty ( unless i'm offbase, & whirling nuke is easier ).
In Phasing the swirl is almost always symposium and not counted as so because it's so much easier to hit it that way.
Phasing Swirl = Frankenstein = The swirl is symple
Phasing Pickup = The swirl is symposium
Phasing Osis = The swirl is symposium
Phasing Revup = As done by Renato in the heroes video = The swirl and the rev swirl is not symposium
Renato is fucking sick in that video btw.
I see this as just the next evolutionary step in footbag:
Before the ADD system, shred was not common, it was more Net > next was the circles that played and flyers were the 'in' thing > then with the invention of the ADD system, big moves and levels of play were next (guiltless, tripless etc) > then just recently style is now the thing with hard moves that arent necessarily high on the ADD system
It seems to me that people that have been playing a while get tired of the same old same old and want more. Sure the ADD system isnt accurate in difficulty, but it is still descriptive and relatively easy to learn and use.
Heres the thing, to incorporate the level of technical moves within footbag - a program is the thing to use, that takes into account all these things that people complain about (string links, foot switching, contortion of body, fluidity, and repetition of moves) that a person would not be able to do.
Also to introduce a new system for discerning difficulty will just be hard to implement. Currently I do not care for ADDs but if people have been playing a while its easy to recognize whats hard and whats not. Also the notations in the ADD system shape people's creative mind - things like miraging refraction and zooming (now its accepted) are not 'correct'. Its outside the box that people are looking for.
It will just take a while to develop a difficulty system, but will require contribution, however a lot of the moves are still not hit, like in the realm of dragons, flappers, or xbody toe. We have our descriptive system, we need a difficulty system like you have said earlier.
Adam
Before the ADD system, shred was not common, it was more Net > next was the circles that played and flyers were the 'in' thing > then with the invention of the ADD system, big moves and levels of play were next (guiltless, tripless etc) > then just recently style is now the thing with hard moves that arent necessarily high on the ADD system
It seems to me that people that have been playing a while get tired of the same old same old and want more. Sure the ADD system isnt accurate in difficulty, but it is still descriptive and relatively easy to learn and use.
Heres the thing, to incorporate the level of technical moves within footbag - a program is the thing to use, that takes into account all these things that people complain about (string links, foot switching, contortion of body, fluidity, and repetition of moves) that a person would not be able to do.
Also to introduce a new system for discerning difficulty will just be hard to implement. Currently I do not care for ADDs but if people have been playing a while its easy to recognize whats hard and whats not. Also the notations in the ADD system shape people's creative mind - things like miraging refraction and zooming (now its accepted) are not 'correct'. Its outside the box that people are looking for.
It will just take a while to develop a difficulty system, but will require contribution, however a lot of the moves are still not hit, like in the realm of dragons, flappers, or xbody toe. We have our descriptive system, we need a difficulty system like you have said earlier.
Adam
that makes a lot of sense, i never thought of it that way before.Anz wrote:I divide tricks to full body moves and support foot moves.
i thought about the full body / foot support while playing tonight & it got me to thinking about "themes" in strings, such as would be used in STP, Circle & Routines. there are all kinds of terms commonly used that represent different types of themes.
tiltless
guiltless
tripless
fearless
genuine
bsos
mirror
repeat
unique
shuffle
drills ( rubber, blubber, etc )
full body & support foot could be themes as well as individual trick classification.
other loose themes without terms exist, like "toe combos", "clipper combos", "same side combos".
guiltless is a circle standard.
but if you look at themes objectively, guiltless is just 1 theme out of many. if someone combines a unique theme with tiltless that involves a long mirror combo, can that not be seen as an equivalent demonstration of skill to doing guiltless with no other themes? not to say that a player should not move up to guiltless when they are ready.
good point. so i guess instead of beefing on it, i should look at it as a distinct expression of freestyle. i still feel we can make better creative use of bops when we use them though, to equalize them against other 3s.And I don't see a beef in boycotting tricks for Genuine Guiltless players already boycott Near Illusion.
I think Shred30 needs it's own system that is accurate on the moves that are used in Shred30 performances. It would not need to give a comparable value to every footbag trick. I've actually been planning this already.
very cool. this seems like a necessary step in order to maintain an objectively judged event. i agree about difficulty not needing a judging component outside of shred 30.
if the image of "difficulty" can be broken away from the component system & add diversity were to receive more recognition than add quantity, new players may be happier about schooling their fundamentals.but everybody should be able to get their motivation to continue training...for one sick3 that you could hit with ease in six months if you we patient enough to skool your fundamentals.
agreed, structure is awesome. adds define it well, i think.footbagi wrote:So why do we feel the need to PUSH the fact that we have a point system still? IMO it is because it gives the sport some structure.
i guess presentation of the ADD system to a new player should be done with care, to emphasize control of separate components before combining them. if they learn from the beginning that it is much more difficult to do long, consistent strings than huge tricks, it'll give them the right goal to shoot for.Usually when a person who was interested in the sport (and not too shy to ask) came up and inquired they where told about the point system in some way or another. Now if you look at this scenario as someone studying the sport you will notice that this is bad for the progression of the game.
greg raymond, kingston
FB: Rocker Holliday
"What is it that makes a complete stranger dive into an icy river to save a solid gold baby? Maybe we'll never know." - Jack Handey
FB: Rocker Holliday
"What is it that makes a complete stranger dive into an icy river to save a solid gold baby? Maybe we'll never know." - Jack Handey
Not having people attempt to hijak this thread would be a miracle.
The problem with the technical progression of freestyle is that it is not parallel to the direction which would make footbag more popular. Other developing sports have the advantage height, speed, acrobatics, and danger. Footbag just has extreme technical difficulty, which is un-interesting to the untrained eye. We have come to this conclusion many times before.....
Screw the ADD system, screw shred 30, and fuck sick three's....we should all practice bloughchi and backflip legovers (off picinic tables of course).
I guess that wasn't really on topic, but beer makes me want to contribute sometimes.....
The problem with the technical progression of freestyle is that it is not parallel to the direction which would make footbag more popular. Other developing sports have the advantage height, speed, acrobatics, and danger. Footbag just has extreme technical difficulty, which is un-interesting to the untrained eye. We have come to this conclusion many times before.....
Screw the ADD system, screw shred 30, and fuck sick three's....we should all practice bloughchi and backflip legovers (off picinic tables of course).
I guess that wasn't really on topic, but beer makes me want to contribute sometimes.....
- james_dean
- space cowboy
- Posts: 2268
- Joined: 26 Oct 2004 23:11
- Location: Bendigo, Vic, Australia
Yeah I guess I struggle to relate to this justification of certain strings or 'themes' because I just hit what I want to hit... I'm 'guiltless' but I don't shun near illusion at all, because it's cool, and difficulty enough, IMO. I think ultimately it comes down to the shredders integrity to themselves and it's no one elses job to tell them what to hit. This also I guess is linked to the fact that I don't care too much for the 'progression' of footbag. I like that it's small. I'd like to have more validity but don't care that much... even the Australian scene, which is tiny, is enough for me. I can go to Sydney, Melbourne, Hobart, and shred with peeps and just have fun, and it's better for being small.
But you said you wanted to discuss the technical aspect not promotion. I don't know that it's really possible to judge footbag in any kind of objective manner. It's just too complex. And opinions are varied so much... it all depends on your focus and what is easier for each person. I guess I don't really care much for competition anyway... for me it's all about the shred and never mind what you're 'ranked', shred at some comps or post your shit up and people can see what you can do and make their own judgments, and that's just about all it can be with footbag, it's just too complex.
Anyway screw what others think, play for yourself.
I think ultimately the general players' style follows the comp format and the best players' style. You can't change how the best players play, and the comp format is improving for sure, so I think things will be OK.
But you said you wanted to discuss the technical aspect not promotion. I don't know that it's really possible to judge footbag in any kind of objective manner. It's just too complex. And opinions are varied so much... it all depends on your focus and what is easier for each person. I guess I don't really care much for competition anyway... for me it's all about the shred and never mind what you're 'ranked', shred at some comps or post your shit up and people can see what you can do and make their own judgments, and that's just about all it can be with footbag, it's just too complex.
Anyway screw what others think, play for yourself.
I think ultimately the general players' style follows the comp format and the best players' style. You can't change how the best players play, and the comp format is improving for sure, so I think things will be OK.
yeah bro. it thats going to mess with broduction and cause people not to get bromotions D:habitat wrote:Pretty good, did you hear how flawed that ODD system is? It's cray-c brah.LEGOMAN wrote:Anz wrote:If somebody hijacks this thread, I'm gonna beat the shit out of him in Berlin next summer.
hey james how are you today?
People that like LEGOMAN - 10
People that hate LEGOMAN - 1000
LEGOMAN´s posts - Priceless
People that hate LEGOMAN - 1000
LEGOMAN´s posts - Priceless
I heard Genuine used to mean unique guiltless. I think I'd personally consider a run with only unique bops still genuine, because the player needs to really keep track on the bops. Nowadays bops are just bails and tricks you do before you think. That's why I dislike bops so much. It seems like the bag controls you more than you control it.
The style that I've played footbag for a while now has been much more technical than artistic. Like I plan ahead much, programmed sessions for example. I like doing things where you really show that you have absolute control and you don't bail at all. Genuine is a good example.
Personally I like the feeling of hitting flawless Rubberman more than a forthy contact guiltless run with sloppy bop bails.
---------
About shred30 and the new system I though for it. In Shred30 competition you're supposed to shred, right? When I think about shredding what comes to my mind is shuffle, fast tricks, many uniques, semihard links - but nothing mind blowing or technically complex. Trick selection in Shred30 competition performances is usually constructed from a lot of unique shuffle moves and easy dowtime 4add tricks. So that's shredding.
Technically complex moves should not be worried about in Shred30 point system, because nobody even does them. And I don't think it should be encouraged to do them, since it's Shred30 competition, not Short Technical Program.
In my new system basically the unique trick thing would stay the same, just the point count from tricks would be different and it would encourage for harder links and more toe combos.
-you don't get points from stalls.
-there is no paradox or cross-body points
-Double Down counts as one dex
-you get dex points and body points
-you get points for prefix links
-contacts are not count, only tricks. So if you do a dexless trick worth no points, it's not count in at all.
So if you want to win you do more hard links than others. These links are uptime sets from:
-Whirl, Double Down, Drifter, DLO (and maybe some others too? Suggestions)
So here are some examples.
Single tricks and their worth in points:
Butterfly - 1
Mirage - 1
Ducking Whirl - 2
Nemesis - 3
Symposium Whirl - 2
Links and their worth in points:
Ripwalk > Far Whirl = 2+1 (3)
Far Whirl > Ripwalk = 1[+1]+2 (4) - you get an extra link point for stepping out of Whirl
Janiwalker > Barfly = 3+1 (4)
Barfly > Janiwalker =1[+1]+3 (5) - link point
Vortex > Matador = 2[+1]+2 (5) - link point
I'm sure everyone gets the point.
So the main idea is that the winner is the one who really shreds it up and doesn't just go for easy links and a lot of adds
There's still a lot to figure out, like should you get extra point for linking same foot symposiums?
Any thoughts, suggestions, pointing flaws, questions?
Brainstorming!
The style that I've played footbag for a while now has been much more technical than artistic. Like I plan ahead much, programmed sessions for example. I like doing things where you really show that you have absolute control and you don't bail at all. Genuine is a good example.
Personally I like the feeling of hitting flawless Rubberman more than a forthy contact guiltless run with sloppy bop bails.
---------
About shred30 and the new system I though for it. In Shred30 competition you're supposed to shred, right? When I think about shredding what comes to my mind is shuffle, fast tricks, many uniques, semihard links - but nothing mind blowing or technically complex. Trick selection in Shred30 competition performances is usually constructed from a lot of unique shuffle moves and easy dowtime 4add tricks. So that's shredding.
Technically complex moves should not be worried about in Shred30 point system, because nobody even does them. And I don't think it should be encouraged to do them, since it's Shred30 competition, not Short Technical Program.
In my new system basically the unique trick thing would stay the same, just the point count from tricks would be different and it would encourage for harder links and more toe combos.
-you don't get points from stalls.
-there is no paradox or cross-body points
-Double Down counts as one dex
-you get dex points and body points
-you get points for prefix links
-contacts are not count, only tricks. So if you do a dexless trick worth no points, it's not count in at all.
So if you want to win you do more hard links than others. These links are uptime sets from:
-Whirl, Double Down, Drifter, DLO (and maybe some others too? Suggestions)
So here are some examples.
Single tricks and their worth in points:
Butterfly - 1
Mirage - 1
Ducking Whirl - 2
Nemesis - 3
Symposium Whirl - 2
Links and their worth in points:
Ripwalk > Far Whirl = 2+1 (3)
Far Whirl > Ripwalk = 1[+1]+2 (4) - you get an extra link point for stepping out of Whirl
Janiwalker > Barfly = 3+1 (4)
Barfly > Janiwalker =1[+1]+3 (5) - link point
Vortex > Matador = 2[+1]+2 (5) - link point
I'm sure everyone gets the point.
So the main idea is that the winner is the one who really shreds it up and doesn't just go for easy links and a lot of adds
There's still a lot to figure out, like should you get extra point for linking same foot symposiums?
Any thoughts, suggestions, pointing flaws, questions?
Brainstorming!