how tall?

janis · Post by **janis** » 06 Nov 2006 23:12

I was wondering what sort of height footbaggers generally are, also what do you think the ideal height is for footbag?

I'll start, I'm 188cm (6foot2inches) and roughly 85kgs

zeroman13 · Post by **zeroman13** » 07 Nov 2006 04:12

I'm 6 foot 2, and weigh around 160.

Carlos · Post by **Carlos** » 07 Nov 2006 04:35

Yeah I was wondering does being to short or to tall effect footbag players? I'm 5ft 4inchs and 170 pounds(Yeah I know fatty), but is my height really going to effect what tricks I do? I would say no

slapdash21 · Post by **slapdash21** » 07 Nov 2006 04:41

im pretty damn skinny. exactly 6 feet and 141 lbs.

HooD · Post by **HooD** » 07 Nov 2006 07:08

I'm 5'6"-5'7" weighing in at 130 - 135lb. and I can't say for sure what the 'perfect' height would be. However tall Vasek is, that is perfect

. I really appreciate my build and think it's pretty efficient for what I have, minus the gimp left leg.

Caleb · Post by **Caleb** » 07 Nov 2006 10:29

I am 6ft - 165lbs. I tend to think that 5'6" is the most efficient height in almost any activity. I've never seen anyone above that height move gracefully in all my years of martial arts and I always thought that my basketball games, and ones I've watched, were just displays of freakism. "Look at how accurate that tall, goofy looking guy can shoot the ball! He can't even run straight though."

I think footbag displays this even more. A tall guy has bigger windows and can step out of anything. But when Chad D tries a PS whirl, the whole world will shake and one year is permanently erased from his knees' lifetime. It seems like most taller players gravitate toward shuffling and double dexes, leaving spinning and symposiums to the little man. A 6 footer just has way too much trouble gracefully exitting mobius>PS whirl. (And the common misconception is wrong imo...ducking is no harder)

That's just what I've found. I could be wrong.

Oroza · Post by **Oroza** » 07 Nov 2006 10:54

i'm 6'1ish i think.

i guess the shorter you are, the closer to the ground you have to start a dex, unless you jump.
the taller, lower center of gravity, more weight to move around.

funny, the sport started to help knees.

how tall is vasek?

Iron Clad Ben · Post by **Iron Clad Ben** » 07 Nov 2006 11:06

At the US Open I was watching a rather lanky and tall and "Bustin" Justin Dale do his shred 30.

Some middle aged guy in sunglasses who was standing next to me said "hey do you think his height is advantage or a disadvantage to play this game?". Figuring he was just some spectator or at best the parent of one of the shredders, I just kinda BSed with him for a few minutes saying stuff like "there's pros and cons either way... shorter guys can hit more tricks in fewer time but taller guys have big legs to be able to circle the bag lots of times".

"Some middle aged guy" turned out to be none other than John Stallberger. I had no idea, all the while I was trying to dumb down my explanation of things figuring he was just some shriv who knew nothing about footbag. It was pretty humbling, but at the same very cool to meet the original godfather of footbag in person.

Back to the discussion I think it depends on what you're trying to do. For shred 30 short guys definitely have a slight advantage because they may be able to squeeze in 1 or 2 more tricks in 30 seconds time being that their sets are lower. Beyond that I can't really speak to advanced moves and concepts.

I'm 6'1" (185cm) and 170lbs (78kg-ish). I don't find that my height gives me any distinct advantages or disadvantages for hitting moves that I can discern. If any move is giving you trouble, and you think your body type is a factor, just keep drilling it! It seems to me like limitations in footbag are about 90% mental and 10% physical. You can do anything if you train hard enough and train long enough.

mc · Post by mc » 07 Nov 2006 11:31

I think the more extreme your height : lankiness ratio is, the more of an advantage you have. IE: if you're quite short, but have incredible lankiness, you will have a big advantage. take nate pipenburg for example, or Norek. Both super lanky, both short. Both can hit some pretty crazy tricks. Yves Kreil is lanky as well, and look what he can hit with those crazy windows.

BenRea · Post by **BenRea** » 07 Nov 2006 12:33

6,1 ish here.

freestyler4life · Post by **freestyler4life** » 07 Nov 2006 14:08

I'm 5'10"-5'11" and about 165lbs

anyone know how much Ales Zelinka weighs?

Spontaneous Spaz · Post by **Spontaneous Spaz** » 07 Nov 2006 18:40

i'm 5'10" and weight 145 lbs

Post by **Zac Miley** » 07 Nov 2006 18:45

5' 7", 130 lbs.

RawSko · Post by **RawSko** » 07 Nov 2006 20:01

5'11.5" (

), 140-145 lbs

Matt Cross, I think you're the first person to make me feel happy about being a squirell.

I'll just tell everyone that I'm like this on pourpose! It's cuz I'm an athlete, don'cha know.

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 07 Nov 2006 20:23

I'm 5'9" 139lbs. I'm pretty content.

I completely agree with Matt's comment about lankiness.

People originally thought small and compact people would be the best at footbag (following Mulroney, Tuan, etc), but looking at players like Will Digges, Yves, the Polish nation, and a lot of others tells of something different.

mc · Post by mc » 07 Nov 2006 22:13

go lank!

wait, just you wait until footbag catches on in africa... those super skinny marathoner types are going to be able to shred!

setman · Post by **setman** » 08 Nov 2006 02:56

183 cm, 64 kg

Moxie · Post by **Moxie** » 08 Nov 2006 03:14

About 5'6" and 122lbs.

King Monkey · Post by **King Monkey** » 08 Nov 2006 04:14

Im exactly the same as Kamil (Setman). If i had flat ankles i would be pretty good i think, ive already got skinny and i guess averagely tall down pat

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 08 Nov 2006 09:34

Wow, I'm a dumbass and voted for the wrong height.

modified

how tall?

what height are you?

how tall?