swirling: is one name enough?

Xain · Post by **Xain** » 22 Aug 2006 10:38

Swirling is a name that describes a motion, but is also assigned to the technical name for every move with that motion.

A swirl is when you end a move with this motion, and the same foot delays the bag.

Swirling is anytime this motion occurs when the bag is not immediately delayed on the same foot.

So whats wrong with that? Most other dexterities have a different name for each variation. For example, and in-out dexterity. It has 4 basic names; around the world, pickup, mirage, pixie and whirl.

We already have swirl, which covers ATW and Pickup, and swirling which covers pixie,but in my opinion, there needs to be a third name to cover mirage. Maybe it should be twirl?

HG · Post by HG » 22 Aug 2006 10:44

wtf are you talking about

Xain · Post by **Xain** » 22 Aug 2006 10:48

you really didnt get it at all?

swirl is to pickup, or atw
as swirling is to pixie
as ? is to mirage

Im saying that ? should have a name, instead of just being called swirling

Zeb Jackson · Post by **Zeb Jackson** » 22 Aug 2006 11:05

just because all those moves have the same job notation, doesnt mean they are infact the same moves, because the all involve different out-in or in- out motions.

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 22 Aug 2006 11:34

Totally excessive. When used in context of a move's name swirl's definition is easy enough to figure out.

brinard · Post by **brinard** » 22 Aug 2006 11:49

those tricks have those different names because they are different tricks.

a mirage is not a swirl.

nor a pixie a mirage;

a swirl is a swirl, and for that reason, should remain with the name :swirl

mc · Post by mc » 22 Aug 2006 15:37

I say keep it simple. swirl or swirling is good. it's totally clear.

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 22 Aug 2006 17:43

a swirl is a swirl is a swirl.

no need to confuse things, it's perfectly clear as it is.

Xain · Post by **Xain** » 23 Aug 2006 14:56

Keeping it simple is good, I accept that.

I'm not sure everyone got what I was talking about though.

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 23 Aug 2006 19:13

swirl to mirage, as in:

toe > op back [dex] > op toe [del]

That's what I thought you meant with a 'mirage' like swirl.

Xain · Post by **Xain** » 23 Aug 2006 21:05

no, I was using analogies

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 23 Aug 2006 22:58

Then I really have no idea what you're talking about...

grek · Post by **grek** » 24 Aug 2006 04:38

hm.. another pointless thread...

Xain · Post by **Xain** » 24 Aug 2006 12:50

just to be clear...

I was saying that there should be a different name for swirling as a set, and swirling as a full dex

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 24 Aug 2006 13:04

It comes into effects on moves like, say, butterfly swirling osis, where the dex and delay alternate. If you were to give it a name like, say, pancaking, a move like Allan Haggett's swivel would be like... far symple reverse pancaking osis or some shit. Anyway, I still don't think it's useful at all.

Senor Grommet · Post by **Senor Grommet** » 24 Aug 2006 14:27

i think much of the reason for inventing new names for things is for clarity, another is for brevity (shortening long names). As is, "swirling" is short and quite direct.

We can see Xain's different names point in effect when examining legover as a set (tapping) or illusion as a set (atomic). Swirl as a set could have another name, but does it need it? It has been hit for so long and has become so routine for good players to hit that it seems silly to change its name so far after its conception. Another point to consider, is that most sets which are named are names fairly immediately after they are hit so that there is still a lot of mystery behind how to perform it and who has done it up to that point. This is not so true for swirling.