*2011 Footbag Freestyle World MVP Rankings*-Elitefootbag.com

Rieferman · Post by **Rieferman** » 06 May 2010 04:31

In terms of decaying the points... Perhaps considering a rolling period of time rather than a strict calendar year. This accounts for the fact that a player may rise to prominence mid year, or another player may only be able to hit events during a certain part of the year etc.

Also, perhaps make the rolling period longer than 12 months, say, 18 months. This smooths out the points a bit and allows Worlds to figure in for a bit longer and accounts for "tourney dry spell" following the expense of going to the big show.

Ian Brill · Post by **Ian Brill** » 06 May 2010 06:58

It's an interesting idea and it certainly rewards effort. However, I would frown at anyone that tried to suggest that this was the official means of determining the world's best, as it is not official and there was clearly no fair warning.

If an idea like this were to go into play officially, I feel that it would be best to implement it officially, in advance of a new year.

One could argue that Milan is the MVP because he is, well, representing internationally and kicking an absurd amount of ass, but one could also argue that Jorden has represented the sport more so than anyone with his international, prestigious and groundbreaking demonstrations. Similarly, the phrasing of best in the world is very different than mvp. Aside from a a consistent point-system the idea comes across a bit half-baked.

To paraphrase: if you are going to implement anything with any merit, make sure it is certified and in advance of a season, Otherwise it just seems like a petty stab at some of the world's best talent that clearly can't afford the time or cost of running around representing, year after year for little to no return other than glory.

One thing that I dislike in particular is the fashion with which this is presented: a post on modified that does not clearly indicate if this is a full-blown thing that has gone into effect or if it's a proposal. The reason this aggravates me is because yeah-sayers will jump on a band-wagon for what they interpret as a matriculated, IFPA-sanctioned detail before realizing that it is a proposal. Then people are let down if it doesn't go through, rather than evaluating things objectively from the onset. I am curious, has SG given his blessing?

SlashC · Post by **SlashC** » 06 May 2010 08:51

It was pretty clear to me that this is a proposal/experiment/work in progress.
Nice work Zeb. Looks promising.

Ian Brill · Post by **Ian Brill** » 06 May 2010 09:38

SlashC wrote:It was pretty clear to me that this is a proposal/experiment/work in progress.
Nice work Zeb. Looks promising.

I don't mean to hog the thread so I will keep this definitive in regard to my exceptions.

The way things are presented in the opening paragraph make no allusions to this being a proposal/experiment/work or a work in progress. Nothing in the first two posts do. I was literally upset because I thought there was a slight chance this was legit, without prior public discussion and advanced warning. Only later in the thread does discussion make it apparent that it is only a proposal/experiment/work in progress.

Perhaps I am being too sensitive to this. It is merely that such misunderstandings sometimes lead to inflated worth. People read two posts. Gums flap. Ideas percolate. Then people get upset about not having something we never had in the first place. An idea takes on an inflated precedence. I would rather someone flat-out say: "here is my idea. Is there enough public interest for me to go through the proper channels?".

I may come across as argumentative, and I apologize if do.

I would like to make my first direct criticism of the proposal (as opposed to the manner with how it was proposed, which is of course subjective and probably didn't have an ill-intent,

.):

On one hand the argument can be made that Europeans as a whole have an upper advantage. The swift rebuttal seems that then perhaps the US should step it up. However, how does that logic translate to Japan? Why should the vested interest of one's geographic region in footbag help determine whether or not they are individually the 'best player in the world?". I think this is a valid concern, above and beyond the constraints your guidelines place on my own country.

Ners · Post by **Ners** » 06 May 2010 10:49

Why should the vested interest of one's geographic region in footbag help determine whether or not they are individually the 'best player in the world?

This ranking is not a tool made to show which player is the best in the world, since being the best is quite subjective. The ranking only shows who got the most points during the year using a certain system that awards competing in many/prestigious tournaments.

If this system encourages players to compete in many tournaments during the year I can only see it as a positive thing. If someone is good, he will be able to make finals despite having a low ranking anyway.

I would like to give massive props to Zeb for stepping up and doing this, I think it has a lot of potential and I would love to see it running. I can see that there will be a lot of work to keep it up to date.

Ian Brill · Post by **Ian Brill** » 06 May 2010 12:01

Ners wrote:The ranking only shows who got the most points during the year using a certain system that awards competing in many/prestigious tournaments.

Agreed. Definitely shows commitment and awards enthusiasm.

Ners wrote:I would like to give massive props to Zeb for stepping up and doing this, I think it has a lot of potential and I would love to see it running. I can see that there will be a lot of work to keep it up to date.

I appreciate the commitment and enthusiasm. Quite an undertaking.

Senor Grommet · Post by **Senor Grommet** » 06 May 2010 16:32

Re: Ian's "well thought out arguments"

Why would anyone care what Steve Goldberg thinks about this system? Are you pussies afraid to do anything without getting his approval first? Or does knowing Daddy Goldberg's opinion just make you feel better? Whether or not he said it was a bad idea should have NO bearing on what the freestyle community thinks of this venture.

As you have determined over your last few posts, this is not yet an official ANYTHING. As I have told Zeb in private communications, these ranking points likely need to be for IFPA sanctioned-only events, which would guarantee some sort of standard in competition and judging, and would aid to increase player attendance.

Wat you don't seem to understand is that if the Afganistani swim team or it's own athletes don't have the money to sponsor their attendance of the Olympics, they simply don't go. They can't be the best, they can't win a medal. It is, and shall be the same for footbag. Because Jorned Moir cant attend a Worlds in Europe, does that mean we take anything away from Vasek if he wins t? No; he's the fuckn' champ. Jorden gets to suck it, end of story. If Japanese players want to prove their footbag competency, well . . . you know what I'm gonna say.

"If an idea like this were to go into play officially, I feel that it would be best to implement it officially, in advance of a new year."

-I actally agree with that, but this can be considered a trial period to see if the system actually works.

One thing that I dislike in particular is the fashion with which . . . ."

Blah blah, then why didn't you ASK befor running your purty mouth??

YOU are a bit half baked. You probably didn't even read my original thread about the subject in the general footbag section (or maybe you juct can't remember it, Mr. "Baked"). Until you've got the facts, don't go dissing somebody's initiative.

To paraphrase:
-Screw Goldberg's opinion
-Screw players who don't go to comps or who are too pussy to compete
-Screw players who aren't ommitted to improving the world of footbag
-The system SHOULD be IFPA-ratified and connected.

No hard feelings Ian Brill

Zeb Jackson · Post by **Zeb Jackson** » 06 May 2010 18:33

^^^^^

Ian Brill · Post by **Ian Brill** » 06 May 2010 18:41

Senor Grommet wrote:Why would anyone care what Steve Goldberg thinks about this system?

Think about it as a scale of how much any one individual has contributed to the sport and go on from there. A knock on him is a nock on your precious.

Senor Grommet wrote:Are you pussies afraid to do anything without getting his approval first? Or does knowing Daddy Goldberg's opinion just make you feel better?

Are you a child or a man-child? I ask a question and you launch into a misguided tirade. That was a case of trying to form a frame of reference. And in the case of your response, epic troll bait. Nice fail buddy.

Senor Grommet wrote:Whether or not he said it was a bad idea should have NO bearing on what the freestyle community thinks of this venture.

I don't believe you. I think you must care greatly. Otherwise how would you have come up with this idea on your own? I certainly didn't say it. Nice read-in.

Senor Grommet wrote:Wat you don't seem to understand is that if the Afganistani swim team or it's own athletes don't have the money to sponsor their attendance of the Olympics, they simply don't go. They can't be the best, they can't win a medal.

What don't I understand? The olympics reference reinforces my idea. It is an event that is held sparsely and it determines the world's best. It is the opposite of what you are trying to say. I love the idea of someone competing in one event and that is all she wrote.

Senor Grommet wrote:"If an idea like this were to go into play officially, I feel that it would be best to implement it officially, in advance of a new year."

-I actally agree with that, but this can be considered a trial period to see if the system actually works.

I can hang with that too. I just don't think it should be official until key players agree upon it, and that includes neither my opinion nor your own.

Senor Grommet wrote:One thing that I dislike in particular is the fashion with which . . . ."

Blah blah, then why didn't you ASK befor running your purty mouth??

YOU are a bit half baked. You probably didn't even read my original thread about the subject in the general footbag section (or maybe you juct can't remember it, Mr. "Baked"). Until you've got the facts, don't go dissing somebody's initiative.

You are gonna have to be a bit more articulate with your pretty mouth. I have no idea where you are going with this but here in PA those are strictly not "safe-words". I did not respond to thread. I did not read your thread. I responded to a post that gave an artificial air of authority but only elbow grease and a few partially developed ideas to back it up. I will likely not read your thread. No offense but my alloted post time is being exhausted as I respond to this.

Senor Grommet wrote:To paraphrase:
-Screw Goldberg's opinion
-Screw players who don't go to comps or who are too pussy to compete
-Screw players who aren't ommitted to improving the world of footbag
-The system SHOULD be IFPA-ratified and connected.

To paraphrase, in response:
-Steve Goldberg is not my type
-Screw haters who are too busy seeing things their way to understand a more beautiful and complex world around them
-Screw players who think any developed idea (especially one they seeded themselves) must be imposed upon a structure that has existed longer than they have played the sport. Especially if they are ill-prepared to handle criticism without resorting to accusations, vile asumptions/generalizations and name-calling
-the system will potentially be a great measure of determining a player's commitment and enthusiasm and that's important since some of us are pussies

Senor Grommet wrote:No hard feelings Ian Brill

First beer is on me at worlds if we can agree to disagree

Zeb Jackson · Post by **Zeb Jackson** » 06 May 2010 19:41

weather anyone agrees or disagrees on anything I'm going to keep working on this. Regardless of what anyone thinks. Take it as you will im not imposing anything on anyone. Im not saying "EVERYONE FOLLOW THIS OR DIE"

Senor Grommet · Post by **Senor Grommet** » 06 May 2010 22:11

I accept your beer, sir. I'm really not all that upset as I came off in that post. Hope you tok it lightly.

Just so you know, Goldberg has not been consulted.

And as for imposing my idea on a "structure that has existed longer than (I) have played the sport" . . . well I can tell you that they used to have "all around" titles, golf used to be contested, so were timed consecutives, and distance one-pass, there was no shred 30 (shred 45 was around for a short while though), there was no circle comp., no sick 3.So all of this "structure" you speak of has really not been stable at all. Rather it has been fluidly changing over the past 10 years. I know this because I've been around a while and I actually attend Worlds.

We're not imposing our idea onto a dissenting group, we're proposing a brilliant NEW idea for the community to either accept or reject.

In MY opinion, for one guy to say "I'm the world champ (in shred 30)" and a different guy to say, "I'm the world champ (in routines)" and yet another guys says he's the world champ in circle . . . well, its just silly. There should be one world champ.

And BTW, it is OK if this proposed ranking system rates a player OTHER than the winner of worlds as being the best overall tournament player. That doesn't make the ranking system flawed in any way.

CIC flurry · Post by **CIC flurry** » 07 May 2010 01:10

<3 Grommet

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 07 May 2010 05:04

Will this be used for seeding at Worlds? My understanding is that most tournaments have no real system for seeding, so this could be useful for that.

And co-sign everything Szymon wrote:

Ners wrote:
Why should the vested interest of one's geographic region in footbag help determine whether or not they are individually the 'best player in the world?
This ranking is not a tool made to show which player is the best in the world, since being the best is quite subjective. The ranking only shows who got the most points during the year using a certain system that awards competing in many/prestigious tournaments.

If this system encourages players to compete in many tournaments during the year I can only see it as a positive thing. If someone is good, he will be able to make finals despite having a low ranking anyway.

I would like to give massive props to Zeb for stepping up and doing this, I think it has a lot of potential and I would love to see it running. I can see that there will be a lot of work to keep it up to date.

Rieferman · Post by **Rieferman** » 07 May 2010 06:39

+1 on Ken's post immediately above, as well as a +1 on Ners post.

Ian Brill · Post by **Ian Brill** » 07 May 2010 09:56

I am disappointed that posts were edited with content which I was referring to. In effect it makes my earlier points seem more trivial and makes my efforts to defend myself come across as defensive. I have officially lost interest in sharing my opinion and I will not bother to offer criticism here in the future.

Senor Grommet · Post by **Senor Grommet** » 08 May 2010 23:45

I didn't edit anything, yo. Maybe someone else did, but I don't bother reading what other people write . . . I only read your posts Ian Brill.

Ian Brill · Post by **Ian Brill** » 09 May 2010 06:18

Senor Grommet wrote:I didn't edit anything, yo. Maybe someone else did, but I don't bother reading what other people write . . . I only read your posts Ian Brill.

I didn't say you did. Ultimately my major points were that "best player in the world" seemed weird. It has been removed. Also, I didn't like that this would be implemented without consensus and warning prior to a season and even though you found a myriad of exceptions with my post you seem to agree with this so I would rather remove myself from this thread as there is little else to gain.

The fact that there are negative references to my "half-baked comment" (which was certainly not the most gentle way I could have phrased things) but the part that I found fault in has bee removed paints me as larger dick than I am. I hate when people do things like this without mentioning it in their edits and it is a game a don't have time to play. At least the post was edited. And on that note, I am bored.

Zeb Jackson · Post by **Zeb Jackson** » 09 May 2010 07:37

if your referring to me i never said that either. You can clearly read that in the first post i put "top freestylers in the world"

the thing i don't get is your the only one that doesn't like this. Honestly the only reason I started it so abruptly and without warning was because if i were to have waited until the end of this years worlds to start it i likely would have forgotten about the concept completely and not done it at all. At the time I had the motivation to do it....so I just did it.

on a positive note....Jay Boychuk has left (and that is actually kind of sad) and I'll be able to continue working in this as soon as today

Cod · Post by **Cod** » 09 May 2010 07:39

I just wanted to add my few cents. Please, don't be offended, Zeb

.

It's pretty cool you started such a ranking but, in my opinion, it won't work fine. And I have a mathematical and statistical point of view on my mind. It may work for the very top players but all the other shredders will just have kinda randomish ranks. The main problem is you're not using all the data you should use, just the data from finals (the other thing is that there are no full results from almost every footbag competition!). It can't work fine if the 9th player at Worlds doesn't get any points and a player who won a small tournamnet gets a lot of points. I hope you see my point.

The other bad thing about your ranking is that you posted it here too early. In my opinion, you should at first add all the results from at least one year and then post it. Just because right know the results are simply weird (like eg. Jindra Smola is 7th in the world, lol).

IFC is working on official IFPA ranking for freestylers but it's really not that easy thing to do. And at first we need to change the fact that tournament directors don't give us the full results. It's often just a first 8 players. Sometimes even worse - only a podium!

At the end of my post a small curiosity: a very first version of mine test ranking. The data were took from all the IFPA sancioned events from September 2008 to September 2009 (or something like that), plus Worlds 2007 and 2008. It's nothing official and for sure the future IFPA ranking will have totally different formulas and so on. I think it's just cool to post it

.

http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key= ... nbGc&hl=en

Zac Jackson · Post by **Zac Jackson** » 09 May 2010 07:55

nice work Michal! although I also found a flaw in your system as well, jim penske is 22nd.....lol. and we all know jim isnt 22nd >.<

Zebs system isnt in anyway official and will be tweaked back and forth over the next year, its been said many times now. Im sure your system will have many corrections as well.

you have to look at it like this essentially: there will never be such a system where everyone agree's with it. its the same for any sport really.

its good that everyone puts in there 2 cents and helps develop the system constructively