I just want to point out that the rules can be changed and I don't think that referring to current IFPA rules is necessary. They should be updated.
IMO it would be ridiculous if Phoenix and Ripped Warrior would be one unique. Just Like I think that Paradon and Barfly are uniques.
Paradon vs Barfly
-
Outsider
- Ayatollah of Rock n' Rollah
- Posts: 1373
- Joined: 21 May 2003 21:30
- Location: Bridgewater, New Jersey
Tuukka
I'll put it another way: There are lots and lots and lots of other things to do with a footbag besides circling your leg around the bag. There are spins, jumping kicks (flyers)(and even jumping stalls) ducks, rakes and pendulums, unusual surfaces (and not just unusual surfaces, but just about any other surface besides toe and cross-body inside are hardly ever used), rolls, didits, etc. There are surely many freestyle concepts that have not yet been invented, or at least hardly ever done by anybody. But in my opinion the sport is hung-up on dexterities.
In principle this game rewards variety. Its fundamental to this game. We are all proud of the many different things that we can do with our feet. But so much of our variety involves circling our leg around the bag in various ways that it seems to me that we're neglecting all these other possibilities. We talk about other ADD categories like body, but alot of what we call Body ADDs is really just a MODIFIER OF HOW WE DO A DEXTERITY (paradox and symposium are cool, but I think we could see them not so much as a body ADD but as a Dex Modifier, like X-Dex). I see people circling there legs around the bags in many different and interesting ways, and its real cool, but now I have to ask, "what else can you show me?"
I see all the possible things to do in freestyle represented on pie-chart. Dexterities are one piece of the whole pie, and we've been slicing up that one piece into smaller and smaller bits and telling ourselves we're adding to our overall variety, but its still just that same one piece of the pie, and when you cut it into more sections it isn't really becoming MORE PIE.
Since the mid-1990's new DEX concepts HAVE UNDOUBTEDLY added alot to our game. But in that same period of time, Ducks and Dives have, on the whole, added more real variety to freestyle and have made our game cooler overall. I like the new DEX varieties that I see (Allan's Far Symposium Swirling stuff, Jorden's Slicing and Sidewinding are particularly cool) but I'm much more anxious to see the next new kind of BODY move than I am to see the next new kind of DEX.
In competition where we reward for variety, how much reward do we want to give when all of the variety was DEXing variety? I'm not saying that we limit how many dexterity moves in total are allowed, but simply that the dexterity moves demonstrated be of a more varied nature. To do a bunch of stepping dexing tricks, and then to essentially repeat those motions but from the toe, is only a very meager display of variety.
So thats my rant against dexterities. One more issue I have with the rules is the double standard. I am not really totally against the idea that a different set makes a trick unique. I understand that point of view and I sometime feel that I like that point of view. My problem is that we apply it inconsistently. In some cases, we say, a different setting surface makes the same dexing (or ducking, or spinning, I guess) elements unique from one another. In other cases it does not ("Paradon is unique from Barfly, but Butterfly is not unique from Infinity." "Why?" "Because Butterfly is too easy.") This application of the rules is arbitrary and based on the opinions of what some people find easier or harder. I don't find that to be a fair system of judging. I feel that we must make everything unique if it differs only because of the setting surface, or nothing. Anything in-between is just a bunch of loopholes in the rules, and a precedent for the rules to be changed based on how a few motivated people feel about things that year. We know that the ADD System is inadequate to judge difficulty, but are we now to say that it is equally bad at describing variety? I think it happens to do a pretty good job of describing variety, and so when the ADDs are the same...
My position in summary: More slices of the pie rather than subdividing one piece further, and a consistent rule without a double standard.
I am not going to insist that Worlds or any other competition be run the way I would like it. How could I expect to get away with that anyway? Freestylers are free to play the game as they like, to decide for themselves what they like about the game, and the people that organize the sport, who do all that work on our behalf, have every right to say how things are going to be run. I don't expect anybody to adopt my point of view, I just want everybody to understand it. When I see Dex > Dex > Clipper > Dex > Dex > Toe > Dex > Dex > Clipper, I see potential for lots of variety, but not infinite variety. That dex was faster, that dex was slower; that dex was uptime, that dex was downtime. Still, a dex is a dex is a dex, at least in relation to all our other options.
Yes, that is essentially what I am saying.You are then probably saying also that atw and legover are the same trick and so is reaper and d-atw? also pixie and mirage are same trick? btw. dso and reaper has same problem as paradon/ddd/... they are both double switch overs. clip set double switch over and toe set double switch over.
Because a dex is a dex is a dex.Why should pixie op butterfly and quantum op buttefly be same trick?
I'll put it another way: There are lots and lots and lots of other things to do with a footbag besides circling your leg around the bag. There are spins, jumping kicks (flyers)(and even jumping stalls) ducks, rakes and pendulums, unusual surfaces (and not just unusual surfaces, but just about any other surface besides toe and cross-body inside are hardly ever used), rolls, didits, etc. There are surely many freestyle concepts that have not yet been invented, or at least hardly ever done by anybody. But in my opinion the sport is hung-up on dexterities.
In principle this game rewards variety. Its fundamental to this game. We are all proud of the many different things that we can do with our feet. But so much of our variety involves circling our leg around the bag in various ways that it seems to me that we're neglecting all these other possibilities. We talk about other ADD categories like body, but alot of what we call Body ADDs is really just a MODIFIER OF HOW WE DO A DEXTERITY (paradox and symposium are cool, but I think we could see them not so much as a body ADD but as a Dex Modifier, like X-Dex). I see people circling there legs around the bags in many different and interesting ways, and its real cool, but now I have to ask, "what else can you show me?"
I see all the possible things to do in freestyle represented on pie-chart. Dexterities are one piece of the whole pie, and we've been slicing up that one piece into smaller and smaller bits and telling ourselves we're adding to our overall variety, but its still just that same one piece of the pie, and when you cut it into more sections it isn't really becoming MORE PIE.
Since the mid-1990's new DEX concepts HAVE UNDOUBTEDLY added alot to our game. But in that same period of time, Ducks and Dives have, on the whole, added more real variety to freestyle and have made our game cooler overall. I like the new DEX varieties that I see (Allan's Far Symposium Swirling stuff, Jorden's Slicing and Sidewinding are particularly cool) but I'm much more anxious to see the next new kind of BODY move than I am to see the next new kind of DEX.
In competition where we reward for variety, how much reward do we want to give when all of the variety was DEXing variety? I'm not saying that we limit how many dexterity moves in total are allowed, but simply that the dexterity moves demonstrated be of a more varied nature. To do a bunch of stepping dexing tricks, and then to essentially repeat those motions but from the toe, is only a very meager display of variety.
So thats my rant against dexterities. One more issue I have with the rules is the double standard. I am not really totally against the idea that a different set makes a trick unique. I understand that point of view and I sometime feel that I like that point of view. My problem is that we apply it inconsistently. In some cases, we say, a different setting surface makes the same dexing (or ducking, or spinning, I guess) elements unique from one another. In other cases it does not ("Paradon is unique from Barfly, but Butterfly is not unique from Infinity." "Why?" "Because Butterfly is too easy.") This application of the rules is arbitrary and based on the opinions of what some people find easier or harder. I don't find that to be a fair system of judging. I feel that we must make everything unique if it differs only because of the setting surface, or nothing. Anything in-between is just a bunch of loopholes in the rules, and a precedent for the rules to be changed based on how a few motivated people feel about things that year. We know that the ADD System is inadequate to judge difficulty, but are we now to say that it is equally bad at describing variety? I think it happens to do a pretty good job of describing variety, and so when the ADDs are the same...
My position in summary: More slices of the pie rather than subdividing one piece further, and a consistent rule without a double standard.
I am not going to insist that Worlds or any other competition be run the way I would like it. How could I expect to get away with that anyway? Freestylers are free to play the game as they like, to decide for themselves what they like about the game, and the people that organize the sport, who do all that work on our behalf, have every right to say how things are going to be run. I don't expect anybody to adopt my point of view, I just want everybody to understand it. When I see Dex > Dex > Clipper > Dex > Dex > Toe > Dex > Dex > Clipper, I see potential for lots of variety, but not infinite variety. That dex was faster, that dex was slower; that dex was uptime, that dex was downtime. Still, a dex is a dex is a dex, at least in relation to all our other options.
"The time has come to convert the unbelievers..."
Jonathan Schneider --- sometimes showers with his Lavers on (to clean them)
The Ministry of Silly Walks
NYFA
BAP
Jonathan Schneider --- sometimes showers with his Lavers on (to clean them)
The Ministry of Silly Walks
NYFA
BAP
-
shreddaily
- Flower Child
- Posts: 1665
- Joined: 03 Sep 2003 16:56
nice jon, i made it through that whole post this time 
some real good points in there, although I don't relate that to shred 30 at all. I see it more in relation to pleasing the general public.
When I first started being able to shred I NEVER kicked alone or in seclusion, always in public. It was always interesting to see what got the reaction. and 9 out of ten times it wasn't a dex moved. because to most people(non shredders) a dex is a dex is a dex. thus when I'd duck or spin or do a pincher or juggle 2 bags or any random hack move I'd get way more aplause and reaction than if I did blurriest>PS whirl.
that beening said WE ARE SHREDDERS. a whirl is not a dod is not a step is not a ilussion. I fell in love with dexes when I whatched my first footbag video. And when I could tell what was going on I dug it even more.
So the question I'm always asking myself when shredding in public is "do I do tricks I know people will understand or do I do tricks that push me to my limit". It varries for me but I'd support someone who said "screw the general public, dex dex dex".
In summary are most of us just clones of what BAP created in the early 90's? probably and I'm very proud to be a BAP clone, its what I always wanted. Sure integrateing some other stuff would be cool, but I never wanted to dedicate my life to hackysack, I like shred!
some real good points in there, although I don't relate that to shred 30 at all. I see it more in relation to pleasing the general public.
When I first started being able to shred I NEVER kicked alone or in seclusion, always in public. It was always interesting to see what got the reaction. and 9 out of ten times it wasn't a dex moved. because to most people(non shredders) a dex is a dex is a dex. thus when I'd duck or spin or do a pincher or juggle 2 bags or any random hack move I'd get way more aplause and reaction than if I did blurriest>PS whirl.
that beening said WE ARE SHREDDERS. a whirl is not a dod is not a step is not a ilussion. I fell in love with dexes when I whatched my first footbag video. And when I could tell what was going on I dug it even more.
So the question I'm always asking myself when shredding in public is "do I do tricks I know people will understand or do I do tricks that push me to my limit". It varries for me but I'd support someone who said "screw the general public, dex dex dex".
In summary are most of us just clones of what BAP created in the early 90's? probably and I'm very proud to be a BAP clone, its what I always wanted. Sure integrateing some other stuff would be cool, but I never wanted to dedicate my life to hackysack, I like shred!
I feel the need to quote myself. I don't care about the 'rules', they are fallible, but reality is not.
Haha just who's reality is the question...ok that's pointless...here's the quote which should settle the set location issue.
' There is a specific number of moves that can be down ENTIRELY in downtime. These moves I shall call core moves. What defines a core move is the direction of the dexes in relation to one of FOUR end locations:
Same clipper
Opposite clipper
Same toe
Opposite toe
It does not matter where the bag STARTS, because the move still keeps it's identity. I will demonstrate with a simple example.
Toe stall: What is it that defines this move? It is the fact that the bag has been stopped on the upper surface of your foot. That is the most irreducible description of the move 'toe stall'. THAT is what defines a toe stall. It doesn't matter if you dropped it from your hand, or set it from your head or clipper or same toe or op toe because all that stuff is extraneous to the toe stall. What you do before the toe stall definitely AFFECTS the probabality of successfully hitting the toe stall but does not change the NATURE of the toe stall.
Now using the all or nothing rule we either declare that ALL variations done before a move change the nature of a move (including arm wiggling, winking, cajoling, cahorting, snorting, burping, SET LOCATION etc) or none do.
What makes more sense? That there is one and only one toe stall or that there are thousands of moves that are not toe stalls because of some slight variation before the bag is delayed?
As a description it's nice to know what happens before the move occurs, like if you just dropped it from your hand or did it midstring. There is a difference in difficulty based on where you set a toe stall from, but this difference does not change what a toe stall is.
Now that we have applied this to one move, we must apply it to ALL downtime moves in order to be consistant. Nobody likes when things are arbitrary. '
And so on, I could talk and explain all I goddamn want but it won't do a damn thing.
Dexes ARE footbag. I don't play some hippie wonky half-assed hobby/game. This is a technical competitive sport and we are athletes.
Quantum and stepping are completely different concepts and not just some lame variation.
Haha just who's reality is the question...ok that's pointless...here's the quote which should settle the set location issue.
' There is a specific number of moves that can be down ENTIRELY in downtime. These moves I shall call core moves. What defines a core move is the direction of the dexes in relation to one of FOUR end locations:
Same clipper
Opposite clipper
Same toe
Opposite toe
It does not matter where the bag STARTS, because the move still keeps it's identity. I will demonstrate with a simple example.
Toe stall: What is it that defines this move? It is the fact that the bag has been stopped on the upper surface of your foot. That is the most irreducible description of the move 'toe stall'. THAT is what defines a toe stall. It doesn't matter if you dropped it from your hand, or set it from your head or clipper or same toe or op toe because all that stuff is extraneous to the toe stall. What you do before the toe stall definitely AFFECTS the probabality of successfully hitting the toe stall but does not change the NATURE of the toe stall.
Now using the all or nothing rule we either declare that ALL variations done before a move change the nature of a move (including arm wiggling, winking, cajoling, cahorting, snorting, burping, SET LOCATION etc) or none do.
What makes more sense? That there is one and only one toe stall or that there are thousands of moves that are not toe stalls because of some slight variation before the bag is delayed?
As a description it's nice to know what happens before the move occurs, like if you just dropped it from your hand or did it midstring. There is a difference in difficulty based on where you set a toe stall from, but this difference does not change what a toe stall is.
Now that we have applied this to one move, we must apply it to ALL downtime moves in order to be consistant. Nobody likes when things are arbitrary. '
And so on, I could talk and explain all I goddamn want but it won't do a damn thing.
Dexes ARE footbag. I don't play some hippie wonky half-assed hobby/game. This is a technical competitive sport and we are athletes.
Quantum and stepping are completely different concepts and not just some lame variation.
James McCullough
This debate really got me thinking 
In response to James Plasma Rifle (funny, btw):
That is exactly why we still need Jobs. Because it is the only rule we have, preventing people from inventing Paradox Plasma Rifles etc.
set>same vs. set>op IS important, no matter if a trick is an "easy" Butterfly/Infinity or "harder" Barfly/Paradon. They are different.
Same with the most basic set>same Toe vs. set>op Toe. They ARE different (my opinion).
As for the general Freestyle...I really like the variety in Body and Unusual elements. But if I needed to pick just one, I would go with the Dexterity style. Dexing is what seperates Circle Kicking from Shreding. Dexing got me into this sport. So yeah, screw the public! I say show them a few Body elements, show them some Unusual Surfaces and THEN destroy them with Dexing. If then they turn away (saying you belong in a circus or something like that), fine. They are not ment to play Freestyle anyway. And if they like Dexing stuff, they will see the beauty of Freestyle for the first time and maybe just maybe fall in love with it.
Ok, went offtopic
Paradon and Barfly are different.
Seting from a hand does NOT count as unique. Footbag is played with our legs! The seting surface MAKES a trick unique (in terms of difficulty and variety) but a seting surface is refered to our feet. Do not go into stupid questions like that...the same goes to seting from a forhead or knee. Let's decide now and say that seting only makes a difference in a toe vs. clipper situation.
I couldn't say anything about the competitons, because I am not a judge...But I believe that variety shows in some way or another and that perhaps it does not need a rule at all?
In response to James Plasma Rifle (funny, btw):
That is exactly why we still need Jobs. Because it is the only rule we have, preventing people from inventing Paradox Plasma Rifles etc.
set>same vs. set>op IS important, no matter if a trick is an "easy" Butterfly/Infinity or "harder" Barfly/Paradon. They are different.
Same with the most basic set>same Toe vs. set>op Toe. They ARE different (my opinion).
As for the general Freestyle...I really like the variety in Body and Unusual elements. But if I needed to pick just one, I would go with the Dexterity style. Dexing is what seperates Circle Kicking from Shreding. Dexing got me into this sport. So yeah, screw the public! I say show them a few Body elements, show them some Unusual Surfaces and THEN destroy them with Dexing. If then they turn away (saying you belong in a circus or something like that), fine. They are not ment to play Freestyle anyway. And if they like Dexing stuff, they will see the beauty of Freestyle for the first time and maybe just maybe fall in love with it.
Ok, went offtopic
Paradon and Barfly are different.
Seting from a hand does NOT count as unique. Footbag is played with our legs! The seting surface MAKES a trick unique (in terms of difficulty and variety) but a seting surface is refered to our feet. Do not go into stupid questions like that...the same goes to seting from a forhead or knee. Let's decide now and say that seting only makes a difference in a toe vs. clipper situation.
I couldn't say anything about the competitons, because I am not a judge...But I believe that variety shows in some way or another and that perhaps it does not need a rule at all?
Ales Zazaro
*sigh*
different huh? In the fact that they are set from a different location, but that does not make them a different move. Please read the example I quoted of myself, I thought I was quite clear in it. I don't feel like quoting myself a third time.
I'm just going to give up. You can all 'think' what you want and have any 'opinion' you like, but opinion is not reality.
different huh? In the fact that they are set from a different location, but that does not make them a different move. Please read the example I quoted of myself, I thought I was quite clear in it. I don't feel like quoting myself a third time.
I'm just going to give up. You can all 'think' what you want and have any 'opinion' you like, but opinion is not reality.
James McCullough
Actually I've been converted and agree with James now - at least as far as uniques in shred 30s are concerned.
I completely believe that barfly, paradon etc. are different moves - but I also think that the line on uniques in shred 30s should be drawn such that all downtime moves be the same unless they recieve a different add value.
I guess it's about consistancy - either you can hit 8 unique butterflies and 8 unique double down moves or you can hit 2 - at least that's how it should be - the rules should be consistant.
I guess there are still grey areas - for example is clip set swirl and clip set far symple swirl unique moves? I guess I'd have to say that they aren't - but I guess it's not a big issue since not many people are going to hit a hard 3 add like far swirl in their shred 30.
I guess that's where I think this arguement should focus - not on if paradon and barfly are the same move or not - but if they are unique enough to count as seperate uniques in a shred 30. And if they are - which move is the cut off point? Clip set symp mirage and toe set symp mirage? Drifter? Whirl? Butterfly?
I think sets should be treated differently to downtime components because the difference between say a fairy set and a bubba set is very different - while with downtime components - once you can hit them well - you can hit them out of any good set. Usually when I drill a downtime move I'll hit it from every set I can - so I'll hit drifter, pdx drifter, pixie same/op drifter, atomic/tapping drifter, stepping blurry drifter etc. But I never drill all my in dex sets as if they were the same move - that would be stupid because they clearly aren't. I really don't think I've explained this very well but anyway this is how I think the shred 30 unique rules should be:
All downtime versions of a move are only unique if hit on the opposite side as before or recieve a different add value (ie pdx or x dex add).
Up time moves are unique depending on the set, leg/body/head direction and add value.
I also think regarding sets there are four main positions - xbd right, xbd left, non xbd right, non xbd left. So unusual surfaces etc do not count as being different. Also ducking and spinning do not count as uptime - so toe set ducking and clipper set ducking are not unique (unless the downtime component gets a pdx add)
I completely believe that barfly, paradon etc. are different moves - but I also think that the line on uniques in shred 30s should be drawn such that all downtime moves be the same unless they recieve a different add value.
I guess it's about consistancy - either you can hit 8 unique butterflies and 8 unique double down moves or you can hit 2 - at least that's how it should be - the rules should be consistant.
I guess there are still grey areas - for example is clip set swirl and clip set far symple swirl unique moves? I guess I'd have to say that they aren't - but I guess it's not a big issue since not many people are going to hit a hard 3 add like far swirl in their shred 30.
I guess that's where I think this arguement should focus - not on if paradon and barfly are the same move or not - but if they are unique enough to count as seperate uniques in a shred 30. And if they are - which move is the cut off point? Clip set symp mirage and toe set symp mirage? Drifter? Whirl? Butterfly?
I think sets should be treated differently to downtime components because the difference between say a fairy set and a bubba set is very different - while with downtime components - once you can hit them well - you can hit them out of any good set. Usually when I drill a downtime move I'll hit it from every set I can - so I'll hit drifter, pdx drifter, pixie same/op drifter, atomic/tapping drifter, stepping blurry drifter etc. But I never drill all my in dex sets as if they were the same move - that would be stupid because they clearly aren't. I really don't think I've explained this very well but anyway this is how I think the shred 30 unique rules should be:
All downtime versions of a move are only unique if hit on the opposite side as before or recieve a different add value (ie pdx or x dex add).
Up time moves are unique depending on the set, leg/body/head direction and add value.
I also think regarding sets there are four main positions - xbd right, xbd left, non xbd right, non xbd left. So unusual surfaces etc do not count as being different. Also ducking and spinning do not count as uptime - so toe set ducking and clipper set ducking are not unique (unless the downtime component gets a pdx add)
get rid of that "unless they differ in add value" crap.
So, because whirl and paradox whirl differ in adds, they are unique.
Down Double Down and barfly, the same trick.
weak.
I think we should lose the paradox concept all together in your theory, because it's just creating a bunch of unique tricks where we could just make them all the same !
So, because whirl and paradox whirl differ in adds, they are unique.
Down Double Down and barfly, the same trick.
weak.
I think we should lose the paradox concept all together in your theory, because it's just creating a bunch of unique tricks where we could just make them all the same !
Something else I thought of that might be controversial but would (I believe) make for better competitions. All moves that score an add or more count as unique - rather than just 3 add moves. (and the time starts on either the first move that the player tells the judges they'll be starting on or the first add). This would mean it would be a lot easier for people to hit dropless unique shred 30s - which would mean higher scores and players ultimately being pushed harder - a shred 30 with 10 2 adds, 10 3 adds and 10 four adds could score as much as 180 points - that's a good score that is fairly easily achievable. This would mean closer competitions (so more exciting) and more of a focus on droplessness as well as uniques.
Anyway it's just an idea. Of course 10 unique tiltless would be harder if downtimes aren't dependant on set (clipper, mirage, illusion, legover, pickup bsos - and those are probably the only 2s people would hit).
Anyway it's just an idea. Of course 10 unique tiltless would be harder if downtimes aren't dependant on set (clipper, mirage, illusion, legover, pickup bsos - and those are probably the only 2s people would hit).
I think that now I see the whole thing the same as Jeremy, and James...
I think that what Jon wrote doesn't apply to the actually school of freestyle - moves with sets school. This is just my opinion...
I think that uptime concepts are always unique. Of course Atomic isn't unique from atomic set from inside. The feet doesn't change, only the surface of the same feet changes, not the location...
I think that what Jon wrote doesn't apply to the actually school of freestyle - moves with sets school. This is just my opinion...
I think that uptime concepts are always unique. Of course Atomic isn't unique from atomic set from inside. The feet doesn't change, only the surface of the same feet changes, not the location...
Pawel Ptaszynski
"I know I can! Be what I wanna be.
If I work hard at it, I'll be where I wanna be."
NAS
Be strong, LIVESTRONG
http://www.laf.org
http://www.wearyellow.com
"I know I can! Be what I wanna be.
If I work hard at it, I'll be where I wanna be."
NAS
Be strong, LIVESTRONG
http://www.laf.org
http://www.wearyellow.com
I have to also agree with James. I used to think paradon/barfly/dod/ddd as different tricks, but I've changed my mind.
I'm also thinking of x-dex being good addition for shred 30 as soon as it is clear enough for use 'cos competition is different than just plain shredding. When shredding in the streets and trying my new fearless/beastly run, I won't accept x-dex (meaning=sumo->dominatrix->fusion 4>4>5), but in competition it could add some variety for sure.
I think what we really need, is to get flawless rules for the shred30. That would end all this rule changing between competitions. Of course the sport developes and we have to update rules, but it should be done officially too...
I'm also thinking of x-dex being good addition for shred 30 as soon as it is clear enough for use 'cos competition is different than just plain shredding. When shredding in the streets and trying my new fearless/beastly run, I won't accept x-dex (meaning=sumo->dominatrix->fusion 4>4>5), but in competition it could add some variety for sure.
I think what we really need, is to get flawless rules for the shred30. That would end all this rule changing between competitions. Of course the sport developes and we have to update rules, but it should be done officially too...
-Tuukka Antikainen
Symposium whirl and PS whirl are essentially the same move, it's just ingrained in our footbag minds that PS whirl is this completely different move but it's just a symposium whirl. Paradox doesn't have to go anywhere, it doesn't change the identity of a move, but merely tries to give some credit to it's increased difficulty due to the set location (which I have shown does not play a part in the identity of a move but can affect difficulty of hitting the move).
I'm glad some people finally agree with me
, not that it would have mattered because I know I'm right.
I'm glad some people finally agree with me
, not that it would have mattered because I know I'm right.James McCullough
I'll agree with that, they are essentially the same trick.
I take issue with your theory only applying to downtime tricks. If barfly and paradon are close enough to be the same thing, I think pixie, stepping, and quantum are the same thing too. Fairy, atomic, nuclear, hopping, also all the same.
Duck/Dive, same thing.
Get rid of paradox, get rid of the different sets, and you might be onto a theory.
You can't give paradox to tricks that are the same as non-paradox tricks. This is a huge hole in yoiur theory, and paradox has got to go.
I still think using a liberal definition of unique and variety modifiers is the next step beyond what we use now.
I take issue with your theory only applying to downtime tricks. If barfly and paradon are close enough to be the same thing, I think pixie, stepping, and quantum are the same thing too. Fairy, atomic, nuclear, hopping, also all the same.
Duck/Dive, same thing.
Get rid of paradox, get rid of the different sets, and you might be onto a theory.
You can't give paradox to tricks that are the same as non-paradox tricks. This is a huge hole in yoiur theory, and paradox has got to go.
I still think using a liberal definition of unique and variety modifiers is the next step beyond what we use now.
Hey I appreciate the fact that you used the term 'hopping' 
As to the uptime sets, the same rules do not apply as for downtime. For uptime the set location in relation to the dexing legdoes affect the identity of the set.
Paradox only affects the adds of a move, not the theoretical definition of the move. It can be there or not, it doesn't affect anything I'm saying. Unless we're talking about uniques in competition, but the official rulebook seems to be the right course of action for that.
If we get rid of pdx and xdex we're raising the bar on the add system but we're still doing the same moves....so really nothing changes. The whole problem here is trying to rate difficulty and uniqueness in a competitive setting.
We seem to be doing good enough and things can only get better right?
As to the uptime sets, the same rules do not apply as for downtime. For uptime the set location in relation to the dexing legdoes affect the identity of the set.
Paradox only affects the adds of a move, not the theoretical definition of the move. It can be there or not, it doesn't affect anything I'm saying. Unless we're talking about uniques in competition, but the official rulebook seems to be the right course of action for that.
If we get rid of pdx and xdex we're raising the bar on the add system but we're still doing the same moves....so really nothing changes. The whole problem here is trying to rate difficulty and uniqueness in a competitive setting.
We seem to be doing good enough and things can only get better right?
James McCullough