X > Pendulum, one trick?

[Prenz]

I believe that they end at the exact moment the following trick begins

Yeah me too. This or anything else you said hasn't supported your argument. Read it over carefully. All you do is make a claim, and then give examples of how things would be added or scored given your view.

Like I said, here's my argument. I believe it would be good for consitency's sake if all move's end and begin at a stall position. They already all DO, with the exception of pendulum which appears up for debate.

So make some valid points. Here's one: according to your discernable break theory, an eclipse after a trick should be added on to the previous trick's adds--it sure looks as smooth as hell to me. We all know it doesn't and my theory prevails as to why: the previous trick ended as soon as a stall position was reached: the inside catch. Same reason eclipse can't be a set: it ends when a stall position is reached: the clipper.

The appeal of my theory is one that in my view is important for the sport of footbag. It's a unified theory. End and Begin moves where a stall position is achieved. That's it... a one-liner. Please let me hear a unified theory for move 'transitions', from anyone who believes pendulum is either a seperate move or and ending. I'll find a way to shut it down, trust me

(See above shooting down of "discernable break" theory)

[FlexThis]

[Prenz]

The contact point of fliers is just a stall position, lifted off the ground by about a foot.

My mistake about eclipses, though, but my theory still holds for eclipses anyway. Even if you took very quick snapshots of the move, you'd never actually see a basic inside stall in any of those shots. By the time the bag is on the foot for the inside catch, the dex leg is directly above it. The first true stall position reached is indeed the ending clipper.

And if people wouldn't do moves anymore due to add-related reasons... they are playing footbag for a stupid ass reason.

What, are you getting paid by the add?!? HAHAHAHA. We ain't gettin paid shit and never will. Do what challenges you, end of story.

In fact that last statement has really turned me off the whole pendulum debate. Who gives a damn really?

[FlexThis]

[Anz]

Wrong-o my Finnish Friend. When you "touch" the bag with a rake, you don't end the move. It is reaching the "toe stall" position, upon completion of the rake, that defines the end of the move.

That's like WRONG. When you contact it's finnished and there's nothing you can do about it.

With x-body rake you end it in cross-body and then bring it from there.
Like Wrap, you do inside stall.

[qphox]

Craig, do you agree that whirl rake is 4 adds and that pixie eclipse is 4 adds? If so, I just can't get my mind around how you think that Pendulum differs from those tricks. They're all carry-style closing maneouvres.

I was trying some Pendulum stuff the other day, like Cameron. Ending a trick with Pendulum is really tough and it adds some serious difficulty to the trick as a whole. Smear Pendulum > Infinity is a HELL of a lot harder than Smear > (pause) > Pendulum > Infinity. A "Discernable Break" makes the string easier. (I don't need to write Pendulous Infinity for the same reason I wouldn't write Butterfly > Clipper set Mirage.)

I believe that they end at the exact moment the following trick begins

Yeah me too. This or anything else you said hasn't supported your argument. Read it over carefully. All you do is make a claim, and then give examples of how things would be added or scored given your view.

If you're looking for consistency, every trick in footbag begins immediately following the previous: When the bag is set back into play.

[Prenz]

That is a good bit of consistency, I understand what you're saying. The trick ends when the bag leaves your foot.

The problem with that is walk overs and wraps. The trick DOES end in those cases, before the bag leaves your foot. It ends when a stall position is reached: the inside catch. Not when you set the bag back into play.

I agree that when doing an eclipse, you dont actually ever find yourself in the inside catch position. By the time the bag touches the inside of your foot, the other leg is directly above it, and the first true stall position reached is the ending clipper.

But yes, I can definately see you're side of the story--grouping pendulums and eclipses and rakes.

Can you at least see my side? Imagine two players side by side, each in the toe stall position. One is holding his toe stall far out in front, so what.

Someone says "go", and player 1 does a pixie dex, the bag still going up, followed by a downtime mirage. Player 2 does a pendulum dex, the bag goes up, and he also does a downtime mirage. Thus in this view, one might think of both a pendulum and pixie as a 1-dex, 1-add set.

[Tsiangkun]

The problem with that is walk overs and wraps. The trick DOES end in those cases, before the bag leaves your foot. It ends when a stall position is reached: the inside catch. Not when you set the bag back into play.

Huh ? If the bag rolls off your foot during a wrap or walkover , you droppedc the trick and get exactly zero adds. The tricks not over until the bag is set.

Same thing with a freeze. If someone hits blurrywhirl freeze, and has a four second dramtic pause during a routine, but the bag rolls off three seconds into the pause, it's a missed trick and doesn't count.

[FlexThis]

[JoshMan01]

Can you at least see my side? Imagine two players side by side, each in the toe stall position. One is holding his toe stall far out in front, so what.

Actually, doesn't the bag make contact with the foot when starting the pendulum out in front of the body in such a way that it couldn't be held there?

You know, like a trick ending.

[Tsiangkun]

Does the bag make contact where it could be held :: NO
Doesn't the bag make contact where it could be held :: YES
Doesn't the bag make contact where it could not be held :: NO

I agree with your statement that the contact point for a pendulum is not a position in which a toe stall can be caught and held, but rather is the opportune point at which the vector acceleration of the bag due to gravity can have it's cardinal direction changed to continuously place a force upon the foot to hold it steady. If the leg stops moving, the bag rolls off.

[Prenz]

That's all well and good, but:

a) You can still start a "proper" pendulum from a stationary toe stall. With the bag on your foot, bring the leg far out in front, slowly pointing your foot down so as to make possible the continuation of the stall. Whenever you feel like it, you can simply rotate your foot upwards to allow the bag to "drop" with your foot into the pendulum. That's why I'll continue to think of it as a set from toe.

b) Forget talk of the stationary if you don't like it. What if you do are doing a trick, but the bag is kinda further out in front than it should be. You mimick the pendulum motion exactly, but stop the motion and bag in the classic toe stall position (i.e. a "half-pendulum swing to toe).

I would say, as would anyone else, you've just done a toe stall. Maybe slightly more fancy but still, just a just a 1 add toe stall.

Since the dex of the trick occurs AFTER a basic toe stall position COULD BE held and caught with ease, I think the "dex" add of crossing your support leg should go towards the next trick. You've already sealed the trick at the "possible" toe stall ending.

[Tsiangkun]

Nobody does a rake motion on any normal trick that is anywhere close to the motion necessary to do a pendulum. Raking forward occurs a lot, but catching out in front and having it ready for a pendulum is not somthing that ever accidentally happens. It's a very intentional motion, and is only useful for a pendulum, it's not at all like a toe stall that is way out in front with regards to the positioning of the leg and the angle fo the foot at contact.

on your other "point",
If you "swing forward", and the drop into the pendulum, congratulations. You hit a pendulum. It's a two add trick. It's most certainly not a set in this case, because you broke the string moment to move foward and backwards to hit a two add trick.

[JoshMan01]

The problem here is clearly how each of us define what a pendulum is.

I define it as snagging the bag out the air then swinging it back then releasing it which is why I believe it to be a trick ending. But let us put all our personal definitions aside and refer to how .org defines it. It goes as follows:

Delay the footbag on the toes on its way down to the ground and continue the downward motion keeping the leg perfectly straight. Keeping a smooth motion swing your leg back and bend at the knee flicking the footbag over your head to the ground in front of you. The key to the pendulum is smooth acceleration while keeping your leg straight as long as physically possible.

[del] [dex]

For one it clearly states that the delay at the beginning is part of the trick and not just where it starts from. And you can clearly see that by the order the adds are given delay then dex.

It's adds come in the same order as a rake's would. Delay then dex. Anything that begins with a delay like these moves is going to be a trick ending.

And yes, I realize just about every trick starts with a delay(they really start from a delay). But in the pendulum and rake are the only places the delay is considered part of the trick.

Is pendulum a trick ending? Yes.

[Outsider]

First things first:

Y'all are throwing around the term "Pendulous" incorrectly, I believe. I think "Pendulous" only applies to cross-body pendulum, a-la Evan Lovely (pretty much a rewound cross-body rake).

And speaking ofEvan, he links those cross-body pendulums to leg-overs consecutively. The question I'd ask him is "Are you doing a Cross-body Penduluming Leg-Over, or are you doing a Leg-Overing Cross-Body Pendulum?" A Pendulousing Leg-Over or Leg-Overing Pendulus... I think its the latter, but I'd like to hear his position.

I have a position that I favor, though I will say that its certainly not the case that one side of this argument doesn't have a leg to stand on;' pardon the pun. Maybe just maybe though you're both a little off.

I've said it a few times recently, though its not often on my mind. It took a few days of this argument before it even came to mind: A new trick category, a "Carry" or something. I believe Dexterity poorly describes what is done in a pendulum or rake, and Body isn't exactly perfect for osis and perhaps some other things too. I mean, really, saying an osis involves a Spinning component is a bit of a stretch, and Body is perhaps too broad of a category anyway, containing so many different kinds of movements (flyers, ducks, spins, paradox and symposium) that it could probably stand to lose some of the kinds of movements that we describe as body moves.

Shit, this could go on and on, but its late.

[FlexThis]