Shred 30: Seconds or Moves?

bigdirtyfoot · Post by **bigdirtyfoot** » 12 Jul 2005 12:38

Should Shred 30 be 30 seconds or moves? I've heard various reasons for each type of event, and I figured I'd start a poll on it.

slapdash21 · Post by **slapdash21** » 12 Jul 2005 12:40

i feel like there was a completely identical thread and poll, but OF COURSE nothing was settled.

edit-
i think it should be thirty seconds, but then there should be a 20 contact competition, with Big One and Big Three comps as well.

Bander87 · Post by **Bander87** » 12 Jul 2005 13:13

30 seconds definatly. Its more fun with a race against the clock thing - see what you can pull off

travismontoya · Post by **travismontoya** » 12 Jul 2005 13:46

30 seconds definentally!!

Colin · Post by **Colin** » 12 Jul 2005 13:55

Moves! No time to explain, I've got bags to pack!

slapdash21 · Post by **slapdash21** » 12 Jul 2005 14:03

i used to think moves, based on the height and style difference, but i dont think that anymore...i think you need to have at least one competition thats based on time and not on number of tricks...its redudnant, even though 30 is more than 3 or 1.

brian relly · Post by **brian relly** » 12 Jul 2005 17:14

Seconds.

It adds another level of competition to the event. You have to select your moves based on how many adds there are, and how long they take to perform as well. Plus you have to pump everything out FAST. You can't just sit there with the bag on your toe while you rest and finish up your last 10 contacts.

freestyler4life · Post by **freestyler4life** » 12 Jul 2005 20:31

time makes you stay consistant with your routine (not slowing down)

contacts let you make your own pace(which is good if your shred is totally dialed)

So with the difficulty on each one, i'll go with time

Post by **Allan** » 12 Jul 2005 21:04

How about 30 contacts, with a 40 second time limit?

Speaking as a person greater than 6 feet tall, I think it sucks to be penalised just because my legs are longer

Outsider · Post by **Outsider** » 12 Jul 2005 21:21

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

I prefer the 30 SECONDS. I think the pressure of the clock makes it interesting.

However, I'm game to try a 30 CONTACT contest only if there is NO TIME LIMIT.

Allan, the 30 tricks that you'd like to do take you longer than 30 seconds, so you want more time. Okay, fine. The 30 tricks that I want to do take me longer than 40 seconds. Why have a time limit at all if everybody will get the same amount of tricks? Any time limit could theoretically limit what kinds of tricks I will be able to do in such a contest, and so I've always played accordingly. Its one of the challenges of that particular contest format. But if we stretch that time limit to accomodate your slower trick selection, why not mine too? I require 90 seconds. No, make it 120, just in case.

Genzu · Post by **Genzu** » 12 Jul 2005 21:42

30 contacts. I don't think people should be rewarded for having lower sets. I think 35 seconds is pleantly long to do 30 contacts. Any longer than that, and you're "stalling", and have extra time to catch your breath. There should also be a 2 second limit per trick... BLAH. I don't really know actually, cause it gets all subjective. Who's to say if someone is resting or not? You could say, 30 contacts, with no break in flow, and no stopping of motion. I dunno, I just think that 30 contacts evens the playing field (Of course you could make the same arguement for 30 seconds), but that's how I see it, and I'm always right about everything

(sometimes)

.

Peace.

BalinorNZ · Post by **BalinorNZ** » 12 Jul 2005 21:42

Moves.

If its seconds then players with faster styles have an advantage. Should we be disadvantaged for our styles? Ryan mulrony was very good at shred30 because he barely delays.

Also, 30 seconds means you must only do fast moves, no spins, no ducks, all setted moves (its more efficient to make use of the uptime). Basicly this competition makes freestyle no free anymore, you have to play a certain way to do well.

Seconds = Lame

(Btw I was the one who made the poll on this a while ago. Seconds won back then)

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Jul 2005 21:43

Yeah exactly (to Jon). The event is Timed Technical Variety - if you were to change it to contacts it would really be a different event. With all sports there are physical disadvantages and advantages of particular body types. Had I been 20 centimetres taller and 20 kgs higher I might be playing professional Australian rules football today. As it is coaches chose not to put me in rep teams despite my on field performance because they were afraid I would get hurt. That's why I gave up AFL - because I didn't have the right body for it and I thought it held me back too much. In hindsight I think I could have made it but I had the wrong attitude. I should have used the criticism about my size to motivate me to work harder and prove those people wrong.

If you think being tall or having a slow style is a disadvantage than you're probably right. But lets face it. Lon Smith has probably scored the second best shred 30 score in the world (maybe even the best in practice) and he has a slow style. I think results of Vasek first, Lon second would accurately reflect shred ability. No offence to Lon, but I think Vasek is better - at least at the moment. I really don't think I've seen results where it appeared that being slow or tall made a significant impact on the results of a competition.

Shred 30 is probably the most tactical event in footbag. Trick selection is very important in a shred 30. I actually rewrote my most recent shred 30 to include butterflies and pdx mirages because even though hitting an all genuine shred 30 is more impressive. If I'm going to hit 3s then I want to hit all the easiest ones. Shred 30 is all about add hunting, unique hunting and time conservation - if you change the event you change the tactics involved and you change the spirit of the event.

Post by **Allan** » 12 Jul 2005 22:06

Jeremy wrote:The event is Timed Technical Variety

Let's not get bogged down in semantics here

It's just a name. Names can change.

I like the analogy about physical limits being just part of life, but I'm not so sure it applies here.

I dunno. I don't really want to get involved in the debate. I've just been on a posting spree recently, so here I am

I've stated my opinion - now I'm out

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Jul 2005 22:29

Of course names can change. It seems like a big step though to change a competition that has always been about time to a contact based competition. It's like changing the 100m at the olympics to a 10 second sprint - person who can run the furthest in 10 seconds wins. I mean the outcome would be pretty similar it just seems like a big step.

The story about physical limits - if you're tall or have a slow style or whatever you may be disadvantaged in shred 30. You'll just have to live with it and come up with a way where you can still achieve a good score. Lon achieves great scores despite his slow style - I guess because he thinks about what he's doing. Which is why Lon's scores are higher than what Ryan usually got - even though Ryan had a faster style, Lon beats him on the thinking aspect of the competition.

Good work on the posting spree though Allan

Genzu · Post by **Genzu** » 12 Jul 2005 22:40

Jeremy wrote: Lon Smith has probably scored the second best shred 30 score in the world (maybe even the best in practice) and he has a slow style.

But, hypothetically speaking, if he were up against (superfast) Ryan, and they both hit the same tricks, Lon would lose, whereas, IMHO it should be a tie.

Also, slow or fast, I think we can all agree that ducking/diving takes longer than shuffle. Simple phyiscs. I don't think lower set tricks should be rewarded.

Peace.

BalinorNZ · Post by **BalinorNZ** » 12 Jul 2005 23:54

Genzu wrote:Also, slow or fast, I think we can all agree that ducking/diving takes longer than shuffle. Simple phyiscs. I don't think lower set tricks should be rewarded.

I totally agree with Daryl.

bigdirtyfoot · Post by **bigdirtyfoot** » 13 Jul 2005 03:58

Okay, to be honest, I didn't vote in this... my own poll! I would vote for 'both' if I could go back and choose again. Not because I'm indecisive, but because I was hoping that this poll would create interest for a NEW type of event. One based on contacts (higher than Sick 3, but lower than Routines). I think the "beat the clock" aspect of Shred 30 is very interesting, but I also think that I would like to watch Jon Schnieder be able to compete in something like a 30-contact run more than Vasek! That's just my preference on style. I think we should keep Shred 30, but add a new competition format to competitions. Perhaps it doesn't even have to be a 30-contact event. I agree with Daryl - taking ducks/dives/spins/tall people out of Shred 30 is a bad thing for now, because there is not another format *similar* to Shred 30 to put these things in. I actually prefer the Shred 15 time limit as seen on Sick 03's video game. I'd hoped this poll would cause people to think about the pros and cons for both competition formats, and I think it did. Does anyone else see any advantage for including both formats in competition, and cutting them down a little so as to fit them in a little easier?

modified

Shred 30: Seconds or Moves?

Shred 30 Format?

Shred 30: Seconds or Moves?