Should Sick1 and 3 be official IFPA events?

BalinorNZ · Post by **BalinorNZ** » 12 Jul 2005 07:03

This means, should these competitions be able to be run 'officially' at large tornements (including worlds) under a set of IFPA rules?

Which means, should we have sick1 and sick3 at major competitions!

Some people have argued that the word 'sick' is a fad and will be annoying and hard to change in 10 years time, that is a LAME excuess not to include this event, if it's that bad, call them Big one and Big three!!

What do YOU think?

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Jul 2005 07:07

I think the reason for those events not to be official IFPA events isn't based on the nature or popularity of the events but because the IFC hasn't been very active in the last 6 years or so. However personally I think it's likely that they will become official IFPA events by the end of this year. Really all that needs to happen is official rules be written (already happening) and then a proposal made to the IFC and a vote. I can see this happens regardless of the outcome of this poll.

Edit: Just wanted to add that everybody who plays footbag should give a big thank you to John Leys for his efforts that are going on right now in reactivating the IFC. I see that action as one of the most significant things to happen in footbag this year. Be the change you want to see in the world!

bigdirtyfoot · Post by **bigdirtyfoot** » 12 Jul 2005 07:07

I think that a format where players hit one trick (Sick Trick) and a linked combo (Sick Three) is a good idea. I do think that the names should be changed, or at least that they should not both be "sick"-something. I think Sick Trick is a cool name. I just think that Sick Three should be renamed.

Want an even worse name?

Bomb Combo

BalinorNZ · Post by **BalinorNZ** » 12 Jul 2005 07:10

bigdirtyfoot wrote:Bomb Combo

I am amazed and horrified at the same time

.

Lol the naming is a minor minor minor issue compared to the fun people will have participating in these events and others watching!

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Jul 2005 07:11

Something like "technical trick combination" would probably be appropriate.

The official name for shred 30 is timed technical variety competition incidentally...

james · Post by **james** » 12 Jul 2005 09:56

I'm hoping there's going to be an official change to make it 30 contacts instead of seconds...?

brian relly · Post by **brian relly** » 12 Jul 2005 10:05

I'm hoping there's not going to be, since that is a terrible, terrible idea.

bigdirtyfoot · Post by **bigdirtyfoot** » 12 Jul 2005 10:08

This thread is about Sick 1 and Sick 3 becoming official, not about the length/format of Shred 30.

Outsider · Post by **Outsider** » 12 Jul 2005 13:33

Sure. Official. Why not. Whatever.

What to name the competitions?

How about

"Best Trick"

and

"Best Combo"

Personally, I don't feel all that keen on naming a particular number for "Best Combo". Not that everybody should do a different amount of tricks, just that different tournaments could be free to declare the "Best Combo" contest at that tournament to be a two trick combo, or a four trick combo, or something else. I mean, whats so damn special about the number 3 anyway? I'd say that a combo of three actually has one fundamental problem: you can't do a full mirror or repeat combo with only three tricks. Oh, you could have a mirror or repeat of just two tricks, but if the "best combo" contest is always three tricks in length than you can do a mirror or repeat and rewind or whatever but you'll be stuck with having one extra trick to do, or being one trick short of a cool 4 trick mirror/repeat/rewind. Its something that has always bothered me about 3.

So, if these are to be "Official" events, how are they to be judged? Official events need some specific guidelines for the judges to follow in order to determine who has done the "best" trick or combo.

Just some food for thought: this is one contest format that might actually be well suited to be judged by audience approval (i.e. cheers and applause) rather than expert judges.

james · Post by **james** » 12 Jul 2005 16:21

Thank you for that clarification David.

I agree with everything you just said Jon.

travismontoya · Post by **travismontoya** » 12 Jul 2005 16:58

Outsider wrote:Sure. Official. Why not. Whatever.

What to name the competitions?

How about

"Best Trick"

and

"Best Combo"

Personally, I don't feel all that keen on naming a particular number for "Best Combo". Not that everybody should do a different amount of tricks, just that different tournaments could be free to declare the "Best Combo" contest at that tournament to be a two trick combo, or a four trick combo, or something else. I mean, whats so damn special about the number 3 anyway? I'd say that a combo of three actually has one fundamental problem: you can't do a full mirror or repeat combo with only three tricks. Oh, you could have a mirror or repeat of just two tricks, but if the "best combo" contest is always three tricks in length than you can do a mirror or repeat and rewind or whatever but you'll be stuck with having one extra trick to do, or being one trick short of a cool 4 trick mirror/repeat/rewind. Its something that has always bothered me about 3.

So, if these are to be "Official" events, how are they to be judged? Official events need some specific guidelines for the judges to follow in order to determine who has done the "best" trick or combo.

Just some food for thought: this is one contest format that might actually be well suited to be judged by audience approval (i.e. cheers and applause) rather than expert judges.

Agreed!

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 12 Jul 2005 17:01

Outsider wrote:Just some food for thought: this is one contest format that might actually be well suited to be judged by audience approval (i.e. cheers and applause) rather than expert judges.

*runs home to skool double atw and pendulum*

Post by **Allan** » 12 Jul 2005 17:13

C-Fan wrote:
Outsider wrote:Just some food for thought: this is one contest format that might actually be well suited to be judged by audience approval (i.e. cheers and applause) rather than expert judges.
*runs home to skool double atw and pendulum*

Yeah, I agree with this sentiment.

Audiences are stupid. Nice, but stupid. They shouldn't be allowed to judge anything

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Jul 2005 19:54

Outsider wrote:
So, if these are to be "Official" events, how are they to be judged? Official events need some specific guidelines for the judges to follow in order to determine who has done the "best" trick or combo.

I would guess that a panel of judges would view the combos and give each combo a score or maybe two scores. Scores would then be ranked from best to worst as given from each judge, then all the ranks would be totalled up and the person with the overall lowest rank would win. The two scores would be something like "Technical merit" and... hmm actually sick 3/sick 1 is pretty much just a technical event. Maybe "technical merit" could be split up into "difficulty" and "form" or something like that. Obviously how much variety a player shows in any one combo is part of difficulty.

BalinorNZ · Post by **BalinorNZ** » 12 Jul 2005 21:51

We are learning ALOT about judgeing sick3 and sick1 events from the online competitoins. I think after the next few months it won't be hard to come up with a standard set of judging techniques for these events.