Proposal on pendulums, pendulous sets & pendulous string

[Iron Clad Ben]

Doing a search today I found a very heated and unresolved argument on the ADD value of pendulums from last year:

http://www.modified.ca/footbag/viewtopi ... =pendulous

Even though I've only gotten into "real" freestyle recently I've been able to hit the pendulum since 1995. So I do feel I have enough experience to comment on this. Here is my proposal.

Pendulum is not a trick (hear me out here).

Under the established methods of defining tricks, a trick starts with a set, has interim components and ends with a contact (usually a delay). Using this metric, a pendulum can be expressed in Job's notation as:

TOE [DEL], Pendulous [???]... >... ,

So basically the TOE delay is a contact that is the end of a trick. The behind the back motion is then the beginning of a new trick.

The question then becomes is this "pendulous" motion worth an ADD? I think it's fairly plausible to believe that it IS, probably [BOD] but arguably [DEX] or [XBD].

Think of it as functioniong as a set. If you just set straight up from a toe delay, that's worth zero adds, but here you are whipping it around behind you, using centrifugal motion to overcome gravity, that's harder right? One ADD, call it what you will BOD, XBD or DEX.

Ergo, what we call a "pendulum" is in fact a string of two seperate moves, 1 ADD each: TOE [DEL], Pendulus [BOD]...

The pendulous set therefore is a 1-ADD move (a set, not unlike stepping) that can be incorporated into subsequent maneuvers before the next contact, for example:

Pendulus [BOD] > OSIS [DEL][XBD][BOD]

This would be a Pendulous Osis, 4-ADDs.

This makes a lot of sense to me and I think could very well end the debate on this. What do you folks think?

[Tsiangkun]

i disagree for all the same reasons I disagreed about it being a set before.

Starting from a toe stall is not a pendulum.
Ask yourself this.

Would you consider somebody stalling the footag on their inside surface, and then doing a hop-over set an eclipse.

I wouldn't. To me, Eclipse is a very specific set of motions, much the same as a pendulum is a very specific set of motions.

Both require snatching the bag out of the air in my opinion.

[Outsider]

Under the established methods of defining tricks, a trick starts with a set, has interim components and ends with a contact (usually a delay)

I disagree because I don't believe that ALL tricks need to fall into this very limited definition. Pendulum does not, OSIS does not, rake and cross-body rake do not "end" as soon as contact is made, etc. You're whole idea is based on a false premise that a trick "ends" as soon as a contact is made. Most tricks end upon contact. Well, most tricks that most people do most of the time. There are lots and lots of tricks out there that won't necessarily follow the same pattern of defining characteristics as the oh-so-common dex-dex-toe delay > dex-dex-clipper delay moves that you've become used to seeing.

I can think of other reasons why Pendulum is not a 1-ADD set, but I'm tired and hungry and I don't want to get into it right now.