All time top competition shred 30 scores

Uranos · Post by **Uranos** » 22 Jun 2006 14:46

Some noticable shred 30's missing:

221.3 - Honza Weber - Worlds 2004 Finals Shred 30

249 - Felix Zenger - NYJ Shred 30

Your gonna have to check the scores on this one for sure, im trying to find the video of it and when i do ill post it up

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 23 Jun 2006 00:06

Just to be clear with Dylan's shred 30 at Aus champs - the error made was a mathematical misculculation - I think I added the 3 adds tally twice or something like that. Anyway the priority with those was to get the results done as quickly as possible. Shred 30 scores are fairly meaningless and the position a person finishes is what counts. In the case of Dylan it was blatently obvious that he'd won so we didn't check over his score very carefully. I'd suggest that you check over the next 4 positions which were all fairly close and see if there were any errors in those. The significant problem with shred 30s is that it takes far too long to work out the results - you look at any other sport and the results of who won are up almost immediatly. My priority for Aus champs was always to get the results out as fast as possible instead of forcing people to hang around for 3 hours while waiting. I think we did a good job of this. I'm sorry for the error but it obviously didn't matter at all and the results that were close are correct.

I think it's also important to realise that different competitions use different rules - so although Ken found that all those results were incrorrect does he know what rules they were using? Even if the events were IFPA sanctioned I don't think you can assume that they were using the IFPA rules which are 9 years old and not very highly publicised. Worlds in Finland was the first time they were used in a few years at worlds.

Which leads me on to this question - what rules are you using to work out the top shred 30s? If I compete at an event that uses rules such as paradon and barfly are different moves and include x dex (at Aus champs we included x-dex) and get given a particular score - does the score I got using the official rules of the tournament count or do you use the out of date IFPA rules to give me a score?

This is why I get so frustrated with peoples unwillingness to support the IFPA - because without the IFPA there is no standard - people just use the rules they think are right. In terms of freestyle there are less then 10 IFPA members who actually do anything positive for the organisation.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 23 Jun 2006 12:56

Jeremy makes a good point that I addressed 7 years ago, and for which I proposed a solution

Without saving an ordered list of tricks and drops, scores can not be
recalculated with changes in the scoring equation, scores can not be
compared between competitions using different equations, and scores
can not be verified.

It's okay for an event to just get the order right, but it does nothing to
help seed players at other events, and offers the fan no way to keep
track of stats on their favorite players.

I think for historical purposes it would be good to have the IFPA to move towards implementing an archive of the open events, video or some other useful format. That way the history books can start to be a real
record book, and beating someones score can be done with the
equation of the day, or the equation of yesteryear.

dyalander · Post by **dyalander** » 25 Jun 2006 20:03

I brought this up when this thread first started but then when it looked like an argument would devolop over what should be counted as unique it seemed people just wanted to let it go.
I used the current IFPA shred 30 rules which don not include x-dex but do include the stricter of the unique rules.
I agree that more ppl should support the ifpa so as to maintain a standard, but i also think it works both ways - ie the ifpa needs to bring it up to date then enforce it.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 26 Jun 2006 22:33

dyalander wrote:I brought this up when this thread first started but then when it looked like an argument would devolop over what should be counted as unique it seemed people just wanted to let it go.
I used the current IFPA shred 30 rules which don not include x-dex but do include the stricter of the unique rules.
I agree that more ppl should support the ifpa so as to maintain a standard, but i also think it works both ways - ie the ifpa needs to bring it up to date then enforce it.

Just to be clear - the current IFC-Freestyle committee consists of myself, Steve Goldberg, Jan Zimmerman, Jan Struz, Vince Bradley and Scott Davidson. Of those people Vince Bradley and Scott Davidson are completely inactive within the committee (although Scott is fairly busy with other stuff - I have no idea if Vince is even alive). Jan Struz comments about twice a year and promised to write some stuff up for the committee but never has. Jan Zimmerman is fairly helpful in advice and comments but hasn't written anything up. Steve Goldberg is what keeps the IFPA alive but is very busy and hasn't written anything up (since I joined). So when you say "the IFPA needs to bring it [the shred 30 rules] up to date" - what that really means is that I have to. As I'm sure you know - I have never competed in an IFPA tournament, I have only ever judged one open event and I've only been playing footbag for 5 years. I think if you want the IFPA to have up to date rules you need to expect the players out there who are experienced with the running of serious tournaments and have a lot of experience to involve themselves with the sport beyond their own personal goals. Unfortuantly it seems that the majority of experienced freestyle footbaggers care much more about themselves then about what they can do for footbag as a sport. Maybe one day this will change but until it does I think you can't expect too much from the IFPA.

Ask not what the IFPA can do for you - ask what you can do for the IFPA.

ville · Post by **ville** » 27 Jun 2006 04:57

Uranos wrote:249 - Felix Zenger - NYJ Shred 30
Your gonna have to check the scores on this one for sure, im trying to find the video of it and when i do ill post it up

http://www.kapsi.fi/~jfk/video/FelixNYJ06shred30.wmv

Code: Select all

Starting from Right Toe > Legbeater > Stepping op Osis > Ripwalk > Blurry Whirl > Stepping Butterfly > Stepping Whirl > Blur > Parkwalk > Blurrier > Blizzard > Pixie Butterfly > Stepping Butterfly > Ripwalk > Stepping Clipper > Blurry Whirl > PS Whirl > Spinning Whirl > Symposium Whirl > PS Whirl > Blender > Spinning Clipper > Spinning Butterfly > Spinning Osis > PDX Whirl > PDX Whirl > Barfly > Blurrier > Barfly > Same Osis > Spinning Osis > PDX Blender

31 contacs, 29 unique, 128 adds, 247,74 score.

Thanks Max, the change to pdx blender also adds an extra unique though

krawallier · Post by **krawallier** » 27 Jun 2006 05:24

last trick is pdx blender, so 128 adds: score 243.613

Outsider · Post by **Outsider** » 27 Jun 2006 07:46

Of those people Vince Bradley and Scott Davidson are completely inactive within the committee (although Scott is fairly busy with other stuff - I have no idea if Vince is even alive)

Vince is alive and well, and he just ran the East Coast Footbag Championships for the 10th year in a row. The East Coast Championships just ran for its 24th year in a row, and it's a big responsibility to see that it happens. It would be very very easy for somebody like Vince to simply say "I'm too busy to do all that work this year" and to let a 24 year record die, but once again that did not happen.

Vince also competed at the East Coasts. Likewise, two weeks prior to that Vince competed at AND helped run my event, the Jersey Spike & Shred. He won open singles and doubles net.

Unfortuantly it seems that the majority of experienced freestyle footbaggers care much more about themselves then about what they can do for footbag as a sport.

Jeremy, I know that you weren't attacking Vince. I know that. (Particularly since Vince is more of a Net player than a freestyler these days {though he can still bust} And so this may sound unnecessarily defensive, so take it with a grain of salt (ya know, I have no idea what that old saying is supposed to mean, at least, in a litteral sense): Vince made sure that the East Coast Championships happened at great personal expense (renting the facilities and buying insurance, printing up shirts, etc, etc.) That money could easily have covered a trip to Worlds in Germany for him. I'm sure Vince would have enjoyed that trip. Obviously he didn't make the selfish choice, instead putting his money into making a large regional event happen for dozens of people rather than taking a trip himself.

I guess my point here is simply to let everybody know that Vince does alot for footbag, much more than most. I'll make a second point by saying that making shred contests happen at all is probably more important than seeing that the rules of shred or properly codified.

max · Post by **max** » 27 Jun 2006 08:02

I added Felix with 31 contacs, 29 unique, 128 adds, 247,74 score.

Is this correct? Or is Max K's score the correct one?

sen · Post by **sen** » 27 Jun 2006 16:12

CSS 7 - 208
GRASS -202
Spike and Shred 06 203
Steel City Open 06 (231)

Edit: These are from David Cleavers.

david · Post by **david** » 27 Jun 2006 16:38

Hi. Don't put those 200 ones on there. They are lame.

And I don't even know if you should put the 231 on there. I probably scored it wrong. Ken can rescore it in his free time.

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 27 Jun 2006 16:56

I don't have much free time these days thanks to grad school preparations, and even if I did, I feel burnt out from counting all the Shred30s.

Just so people know how I've been counting, I've been using these rules:

-score begins on the first guiltless contact.
-clock begins on the first add.
-ddd, dod, paradon, and barfly are not counted as uniques. Similarly, symp pixie, symp mirage etc are not unique. I have been counting diving and ducking butterflies as uniques, though it could be argued that they shouldn't be, using the same rule as ddd etc.
-any clipper/toe stall/legover that happens after the first guiltless contact is counted towards adds and contacts, but not towards uniques.
-a drop is a 0 add contact. This means it counts as a contact, and hurts the ratio.
-The biggest flaw in my calculations so far, has been in not re-timing each shred. Because of this, I have sometimes counted the final trick when it shouldn't have.

C-Fan wrote:OK, here's my first draft score of Felix's shred:

legbeater-crispy dlo- paradon-blur -parkwalk- blizzard- dimwalk- blur-toe ripwalk- pdx whirl- spinning whirl-spin butterfly-drifter-drifter- sidewalk- ripwalk-sidewalk-ripwalk -blurry whirl-ps whirl- spinning pdx whirl*- spinning blender- infinity-infinity-osis- osis-barfly (worlds score, this is a repeat)-spinning blender*-butterfly*-step clipper-step whirl- osis*- infinity*- double spinning osis (according to Jon S, this last trick shouldn't count. I haven't had time to re-time the shred, but assuming he's right, the new score would be:

Contacts: 33
Six adds: 2 (1 unique)
Five adds: 4 (3 unique)
Four adds: 16 (15 unique, since barfly and paradon are same leg)
Three adds: 11 (8 unique)

Adds: 129
Uniques: 27

Score: 234.55
?

In my defense, I asked people to retime it to check that the last trick counts or not.

I think the 210 cutoff point is good. I'm also starting to lean towards having only videoed shred30s appear on the list.

sen · Post by **sen** » 27 Jun 2006 17:08

I don't think it's fair to only have video'd events count. I know it makes it so the score can be legit and counted the same as others, but I don't think a player should be penalized just because noone chose to put the footage on the net. Getting ready for a competition, you don't think to make sure you're taping it yourself and therefore can put it online.

It would defianatly make it easier to score though.

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 27 Jun 2006 17:13

Without video confirmation, Dylan Fry's Aussie Nats Shred30 would be on the list right now with a score of 228 (actual score was in the 170s or 80s..check my post where I counted it). Without video confirmation, I would be on the list with a 213.8, whereas my actual score was 204.8 or something like that. Similarly, Jorden's Danish champs score would be around 9 points higher as well.

I'm just saying that in my experience re-scoring Shred30s, many of them are way off, and posting inflated scores is unfair to those who legitimately scored well, and makes the list (and footbag) look real unprofessional.

sen · Post by **sen** » 27 Jun 2006 19:16

Point taken.

All Shred 30's taped for scoreing purposes right? There should be a place on .org or somewhere else online for every single Shred 30 to be uploaded archived. Until that happens there will continue to be uncertainty.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 28 Jun 2006 22:33

C-Fan wrote:Without video confirmation, Dylan Fry's Aussie Nats Shred30 would be on the list right now with a score of 228 (actual score was in the 170s or 80s..check my post where I counted it).

You're wrong - we realised the error well before this topic came up and publicised it. You probably just didn't read the topic where that was mentioned.

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 29 Jun 2006 09:47

james_dean wrote:220 - Dylan Fry - Australian Championships 2006

This was posted on page 2. My point was (and is) that without video confirmation, we have to take people's word (and memory) for what a score was. In this case, somebody posted here that Dylan Fry had scored 220. Whether or not the error was "publicised" somwhere else does not matter: it shouldn't be my responsibility to hunt down scores (even though I have in several cases), much less have to re-count them. Posting a video link guarantees that an accurate score can be obtained, even if changes in the scoring system are implemented in the future.

I was not "wrong" at all that somebody submitted an incorrect score in this thread, nor am I "wrong" in saying that without video confirmation, there's no way to make sure the list is accurate. Considering that Max and I are the only people keeping this list up to date, my statement "without video confirmation, Dylan Fry would be on the list" is absolutely correct.

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 29 Jun 2006 18:20

And I got that score off the ausfootbag website too...

dyalander · Post by **dyalander** » 29 Jun 2006 18:37

Jeremy wrote:

what that really means is that I have to. As I'm sure you know - I have never competed in an IFPA tournament, I have only ever judged one open event and I've only been playing footbag for 5 years. I think if you want the IFPA to have up to date rules you need to expect the players out there who are experienced with the running of serious tournaments and have a lot of experience to involve themselves with the sport beyond their own personal goals.

Don't let your lack of competition experience stop you (and I suspect its not the problem at all, the real problem is that, as you say, you and Steve are the only ones putting time into the ifpa) use the ausfootbag rules you wrote up - they are an improvement on the current ones, and as long as the rules are an improvement no one will care that you are not the most expereiced competitor. I don't think it needs to be left to experienced players at all, its basically left to anyone who has adequate know-how whether that knowledge is the result of 5 years or 50 years doesn't really matter as long as it can produce the right results. You have it, the rules you wrote up are a good progression from the current rules, and can slot into the ifpa rules quite easily, then you remove the article saying organisers can devieate from these rules, forcing organisers to effect rule changes through the ifpa. I know, I know, If only it were that easy.

max · Post by **max** » 25 Jul 2006 00:12

Updated with Worlds 2006 shred Finals resulsts. Anyone know the scores / have vids for the semi-finals?