ADD system changes brainstorming

janis · Post by **janis** » 12 Feb 2006 20:38

I totally agree about the stall part.
Doing alternating clipper kicks is so much harder than alternating clipper stalls and ATW from a kick to a kick is soooooo much harder than stall dex stall. So perhaps a kick-dexes-kick trick should get and extra add.

Boyall · Post by **Boyall** » 12 Feb 2006 21:52

there is some Logic in Janis's last statement but wether that warrants a completely new add for really only fundamentals is another issue

Matt,

Guest_2 · Post by **Guest_2** » 12 Feb 2006 22:09

Illusions are harder than mirages-do they get an extra add?

shredzilla · Post by **shredzilla** » 12 Feb 2006 23:33

Outsider wrote: Lets get real: an Additional Degree of Difficulty should be rewarded for each trick we link WITHOUT stalling.

Get a JOB Hippie!!!

mc · Post by mc » 12 Feb 2006 23:51

to regamey: the carry add for zoom would go on to the end of the move it was ending, and the next move would be considered set from xbd position from frigid osis.

to the dragon slayer, in regards to how my definition of unusual delay differs from the standing one: oh, I don't know, it happens to include a little stall called "Dragon", have you heard of it?

To chris miller and mirken: Thanks for posting, you inadvertently brought up a point I forgot to mention. To you, osis is a hard 3, worthy of each of those points. To you, clipper as a much harder move than toe stall. However, the add system is used to score the top players in the world at championship level competition. Clipper / osis might be of relative difficulty to you, but to an experienced, competition level player, clipper is just as easy as toe delay... Some people might argue with me, but come on! watch any run by anyone in the past 5 years, and most of the time, you'll see, it's clipper clipper clipper, and I think that's because clipper moves are more highly valued. I don't think it matters that it takes a long time to learn clipper when you start, by the time that you're good enough to be worthy of being scored, you better have those clipper stalls dialed unless you're an anomaly like chris pinkus or michal biarda.

shredzilla · Post by **shredzilla** » 12 Feb 2006 23:54

Wow, sorry for all the edits. I'm probably not even qualified to be making this much sense of all this. But, the bottom line in my opinion is the only solution to the add system is to get rid of it altogether, and just rank moves according to difficulty, without any system. ie. clipper would still be 2, toe 1, but an easy, yet more advanced clipper move would have less value than a harder advanced toe or unusual surface move. You could probably stretch the points out from 1-10 (or more) under that new format.

qphox · Post by **qphox** » 13 Feb 2006 00:46

Matt Cross wrote:I don't think it matters that it takes a long time to learn clipper when you start, by the time that you're good enough to be worthy of being scored, you better have those clipper stalls dialed unless you're an anomaly like chris pinkus or michal biarda.

Hey me too! Although those two guys are probably more accomplished...

Also, I understand the zooming deal now.

I still think a xbd add should exist though.

It's a hard line to define...how hard a trick really is. I think what we're really measuring is NOT how hard tricks are, we are in fact measuring how hard tricks are to LEARN.

Pdx Mirage is easily as difficult as regular mirage. For me.

That said, back in the day when I was learning clippers for the first time, and toe-set mirages were cake, hitting a pdx mirage was out of the question.

So what then. "Clipper is easy for me, so it should be judged as such for everyone." - ...?

Osis is SO hard for me....but I can hit symposium eggbeaters on command. Obviously that isn't the case for everyone, so I don't think we shouldn't be judging difficulty of elements based on an individual's ability.

Anz · Post by **Anz** » 13 Feb 2006 00:56

Wasn't Steve Goldberg doing some totaly new scoring system, where the setting surface and the ending surface effect scores?

professor · Post by **professor** » 13 Feb 2006 01:29

shredzilla wrote:But, the bottom line in my opinion is the only solution to the add system is to get rid of it altogether, and just rank moves according to difficulty, without any system. ie. clipper would still be 2, toe 1, but an easy, yet more advanced clipper move would have less value than a harder advanced toe or unusual surface move. You could probably stretch the points out from 1-10 (or more) under that new format.

This is what I've been thinking about. Think about all the sports that don't have a scoring system for individual tricks. Skateboarding, snowboarding, ice skating, and most other creative sports for that matter. All they rely on, is judging with two equally important scoring categories: Difficulty and Creativity (or some variation of the two). Our routines are like this, so why can't shred 30? It seems that many recent judging, awards more for difficulty(adds) than it does for creativity and many people are picking tricks with this in mind. If we balanced these out and got rid of adds altogether, I think you would see an increase in the variety of tricks being performed.

Ya, some people find some tricks more difficult than others, but that is why you have multiple judges. I also think that most people agree on the majority of trick difficulties. For example, I think most people would agree that a ripstein is more difficult than a ducking butterfly even though they are awarded the same adds. I think picking a diversity of judges would make this system work very well. Have one judge who specializes in toe tricks and one that specializes in clipper tricks, etc, etc.

Another idea, that would take much more effort and time would be to rank tricks in categories, like chris was saying. I believe juggling ranks their tricks in categories. Something like A, B, C, D, and X. Where A is the easiest tricks and X is "extreme" tricks. I think this could work, but it would take a lot of work.

My two cents.

mc · Post by mc » 13 Feb 2006 07:26

Jeremy said:

"First I have to agree with Dyalan that adds really are fairly insignificant in footbag these days - apart from shred 30 and I'd rather use a new system of scoring shred 30s than change the add system - that seems like a much more effective way of dealing with the problem. "

I think there's a part of the problem you might not be noticing... The add system acknowledges value for a very limited set of what you can actually do with a footbag, and entirely leaves out acknowledgement of lots of body rolls, carries, unusual delays, kick sets, etc. people respond to these acknowledgements, and consequently, EVERYONE does blurry whirl and ps whirl and the same shuffle tricks. This is the real problem to me, not scoring.

The reason I feel the system could use some of these changes I've suggested is that it stands to reason that if the acknowledged elements were greatly diversified, so would be the styles of all the players who so obviously buy into the "values" of the add system.

or maybe changing the system isn't the way to do it. we just need more players like Jorden who push "weirdness" (not really weirdness, just differentness) so that everyone starts realizing how cool it is.

But then, even if that happens without changes to the scoring system, wouldn't it be cool to have our more diversified styles acknowledged in competition?

I think the add system reflects a very limited and outdated perception of freestyle, and, yes, it's hard to think up something new and implement it, but I'm glad I'm getting so many responses to this topic, thank you everyone. I think even getting these ideas out in the air could open up some minds to new ideas, and if one kid in bulgaria does a whirling infraction instead of a symposium whirl one day, I'll be happy

shredzilla · Post by **shredzilla** » 13 Feb 2006 08:02

shredzilla wrote:Wow, sorry for all the edits. I'm probably not even qualified to be making this much sense of all this. But, the bottom line in my opinion is the only solution to the add system is to get rid of it altogether, and just rank moves according to difficulty, without any system. ie. clipper would still be 2, toe 1, but an easy, yet more advanced clipper move would have less value than a harder advanced toe or unusual surface move. You could probably stretch the points out from 1-10 (10-100 points may be even better) under that new format.

Now having said that, I still like the current system in regards to personal achievement. Of course putting that UND ADD would be a great idea, and the way things work now, there are easy 3s, 4s and 5s as well as hard ones. Most of us know the difference and upper-level players don't dispute this it seems most of the time. The argument usually only comes up in regards to fairness in scoring.

Keep the current system in regards to personal achievement ie. tiltless, guiltless, genuine guiltless, etc., but create a whole knew point system based on move difficulty, with a higher point range.

ie.
Toe=10 points
Clipper=20 points
Butterfly=30 points
Osis=33 points
Drifter=33 points
Whirl=34 points
Dimwalk=40 points
Ripstein=49 points
Phoenix=50 points
Mobius=52 points

(Obviously these numbers are somewhat arbitrary and would be refined by higher-level players)

dazza · Post by **dazza** » 13 Feb 2006 08:08

Hah ! I knew it - i'm only two points away from mobius

slapdash21 · Post by **slapdash21** » 13 Feb 2006 08:12

but thats again based on PERSONAL difficulty...i find drifter hard than whirl, and like someone mentioned previously, im sure someone finds witchdoctor (for example) easier than...crispy torque. i dunno, bad example. then again, our current add system is obviously flawed in the same way...different tricks are easier for different people...i guess all sports are kinda like that, which is why people specialize (sp?) so what im saying is, i dont think a completely new scoring system changes anything.

shredzilla · Post by **shredzilla** » 13 Feb 2006 08:19

slapdash21 wrote:but thats again based on PERSONAL difficulty...i find drifter hard than whirl, and like someone mentioned previously, im sure someone finds witchdoctor (for example) easier than...crispy torque. i dunno, bad example. then again, our current add system is obviously flawed in the same way...different tricks are easier for different people...i guess all sports are kinda like that, which is why people specialize (sp?) so what im saying is, i dont think a completely new scoring system changes anything.

Right, the numbers are still arbitrary. If we all agreed that whirl and drifter were equally as hard to learn (or close enough to where disputing this fact is impractical), then we'd just give them both 33. I just put them up like that as a frame of reference. It WOULD however cut out the whole Butterfly being the same amount of scoring points as Barrage problem. You can't tell me that Bubba and Legover are on the same learning curve. It would at the very least be a step in the right direction, and give true reward where it's due.

slapdash21 · Post by **slapdash21** » 13 Feb 2006 08:39

well, i learned whirl before i could do a flipside clipper, and i can still barely do drifter, as you may or may not recall from the roch. jam

though i admit learning barrage was harder than butterfly for me...

mistah o'wheely wrote:The body that would make such changes is the IFC and there have been no changes to the add system in a fairly long (relative) period of time. Probably because at the moment the only members of the ifc-freestyle committee are myself, Jan Zimmerman, Jan Struz, Steve Goldberg, Vince Bradley and Scott Davidson - all of which are very busy people with a number of priorities that we're working on apart from the add system. (like updating the freestyle routine rules). Topics like this one come up all the time but nobody ever takes the next step and actually does anything to implement those ideas. Any IFPA member can apply to join the IFC but it's pretty unlikely that your opinions will ever have any impact if the only place you voice them is at modified. Modified has no official status and does not make any decision regarding the rules for freestyle footbag.

also i read the above a few days ago and forgot to say something about it. i realize modified doesnt have any official sway, but i feel like its a pretty good measure of whats going on with the most active section of the worldwide footbag community (coupled with .org). if we are dedicated enough to discuss all of this clearly modified is a forum for baggers that are very interested in the sport and actively observing where the sport is going.
or something like that.

mc · Post by mc » 13 Feb 2006 10:31

bowler said:

"different tricks are easier for different people...i guess all sports are kinda like that, which is why people specialize (sp?) so what im saying is, i dont think a completely new scoring system changes anything."

one of my main points is that a lot of people DON'T specialize, and that's because the scoring system to which they subscribe places too much value on a far too limited set of move components. So, it stands to reason that if people value the system, and the system is changed to value more diversity, then the people will come to value more diversity, and the sport will be better for it.

qphox · Post by **qphox** » 13 Feb 2006 13:03

@ Chris Miller:

I can't help but notice that people seem to be ignoring the fact that there are in fact thousands of tricks, and thousands more that haven't been touched yet.

Is someone actually going to sit down and decide the difficulty of sailing ingyro mirage, and quantum ss reverse swirling ss toe, and surging gyro clipper, and atomic diving mobius? These are all entirely possible tricks, so tell me "how hard" they all are. Tell me how hard ALL of the tricks are.

shredzilla · Post by **shredzilla** » 13 Feb 2006 13:26

qphox wrote:@ Chris Miller:

I can't help but notice that people seem to be ignoring the fact that there are in fact thousands of tricks, and thousands more that haven't been touched yet.

Is someone actually going to sit down and decide the difficulty of sailing ingyro mirage, and quantum ss reverse swirling ss toe, and surging gyro clipper, and atomic diving mobius? These are all entirely possible tricks, so tell me "how hard" they all are. Tell me how hard ALL of the tricks are.

Yeah, well the current add system which WORKS for many moves could be used as a guide to how many points those would be worth. For instance, frantic X Move would be the same as sailing X Move in points, you wouldn't really have to assign points to every single move, a lot of moves would get thrown into point groups, similar to how they already fit into their respective add categories currently. My system would just mainly eliminate ridiculously easy moves being the same value as hard moves.

And hey, someone had to name all the moves to begin with. I'm just saying if you really wanted to be ULTRA-FAIR about the whole thing, that seems like a viable solution.

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 13 Feb 2006 15:04

Not really viable. A LOT of work and no one would end up agreeing. Apart from the fact that X and Y set, which we agree to be of same difficulty, would not be the same difficulty to A and B downtime component.

As in, X >> A would not necessarily be as difficult as Y >> A.

I'm not sure if I explained that very well... But for my part I agree with scoring with technical and artistic merit. If we stop scoring with adds, they will no longer influence shred (eventually). I think it's only a matter of time before this happens... no arbitrary system will ever accurately guage difficulty.

dyalander · Post by **dyalander** » 13 Feb 2006 16:10

WE HAVE JUDGES! THEY DO NOT JUDGE ON ADDS>
Like I said originally, in routines unusuals, variety and originality are valued highly (at least they are by good judges). Look at the January comps where the lap set thing will probably win the novice sic 1 - the judging for which should have nothing to do with adds. Its only in shred 30 that uniques etc aren't valued. If people want to change that you should push to make shred 30 JUDGED in the same way as routines making it "routine 30". I don't see how this would be a good thing.
I don't think the reason people don't put flyers, unusuals etc in their shred is because it isn't recognised by the add system and isn't of use in shred 30. In part it's because it is so difficult. In part it is simply a matter of taste and trends. Moves come in and out of fashion. They're not called UNUSUALS for nothing. Unusuals are a bit like women (or men depending on what you're into): if you think they're cool, do them and show others, and rave about how cool they are. Get really good at them and put them in good routines and videos. Soon everyone will want to do them.
AS for modified being "active," this sort of "activity" will NEVER change the add system. What will is if people JOIN the ifpa and/or hassle them until changes are made. Or perhaps another way might be to contact the ifpa and tell them you will not renew your membership until changes are made though personally i don't think that's the best thing to do. A third way might be to set up/get in contact with your national footbag organisation (we have Ausfootbag in Australia <www.ausfootbag.org/msgboard>) and construct a system you're happy with to judge your national competition. These things are truely "active."
As far as I can see the priority should be to see x-dex (and the concept of "full dexs" in general) added to the official rules, and the unique rules for shred 30 (in which changing the set does not change the uniqueness unless it changes the adds) put into the official rules before the next worlds.