Should Circle contest be an official IFPA event?

[Blue_turnip]

If it is implemented as an official competition, judging and rules would evolve over time to make it fairer and less easy to abuse.

I reckon it should happen.

[Texta]

edit: oops

[shredzilla]

Texta my MAAAN!! LTNS WHRE U BEEN SON???>!!/?

[dyalander]

Truly the problems perceived with the Circle comp are not the fault of the format. They are the fault of a lacking judging standard.

I don't undersatnd how this is not something that is lacking in the format - isn't the way a comp is to be judged an integral part of that comps format. The only way it wouldn't be a fault of the format is if you're saying that the judging has not been up to the standard set by the format. But I don't think this is what you're saying?

In the end, at some point, judges will be asked to quantify whether or not a long run beats a more difficult/stylie/creative/etc shorter run. The format must guide this decision if it is to set a standard for judging. In the other comps this is set by the wayin which each component of the performance is given a differntly weighted input into the final score - of course circle replaces such a weighted scoring system with a ranking system, but I don't see how this alters the core decisions that need to be made by a judge, all it means is that these decisions become more implicit. As I've said, while I don;t think this necessarily poses a problem now, it will, when tougher judging decisions will need to be made as players become more plentiful and closer in skill level.

To me it seems the intention is for it to be crowd pleasing, but not dumbed down for an audience that doesn't understand the sport. I think amplutiude is a good way to describe what I think the key component to a good perfomance in circle should be dependent, and that seemsto be what it was intended to reward. This could come from the sheer size of the run (given a high enough level of difficulty) or by sheer difficulty. Either way though the specifc nature of the trade of needs to be articualted in some way within the format, even if only in a general description of the type of play to be rewarded.

[blitz]

dyalander, thanks as always for your comments.

You and I seem to have very different definitions of "format." To me, judging is independent of the format, considering that the Circle can be judged in any number of ways, based on any number of factors and criteria. Same goes for any other competition *format*. Routines are always routines, no matter which judging system is used. True the judging could affect the Circle's format, but in extreme cases only. If for example judging (or just player understanding) is not able to solve the problems we have now (players predictably going long for the sake of going long), then some things may have to change in the format, such as maximum string-length, set turns for specific criteria, or other requirements/restrictions. But I think that is the full extent of the relationship between the two... and hopefully a better understanding among players and judges about what should be done in the Circle will solve everything. In due time, folks, in due time. The Circle is about to turn 1 year old, and it has already been held at 19 events! That is huge. I think it's a keeper.

eli

[mosher]

The circle comp is definitely a keeper.

Regarding people going long on purpose, I think it is selfish and judges should penalize (to whatever extent is appropriate) someone who *wastes* everyones time demonstrating they can do easy boring tricks for a week.

I think it's great to show that you are consistent and can lay out a big string on command. If it's so easy to do long boring strings then go harder, challenge yourself and do something interesting instead of bitching that it's boring to do boring things.

I think Matt Cross demonstrated his opinion of this practice best through metaphor when he sat down and waited for Dave to finish his bail-y filler string when they were in circle comp together once.

The way it should work idealy is people demonstrating that they are consistent and varied and interesting. Being daring enough to try hard things, even if it is a risk! Judges should place greater importance on a player being well rounded, if players think it's an issue that long runs are rewarded too highly then when they get the chance to judge they can be the judge they always wanted.

I don't think there is any problem with the system, I think it's people being too narrowminded (oddly) in a format that is designed to be totally flexible.

[blitz]

that could very well be the best post I have ever read on this forum. Thanks, Tom.

[dyalander]

I agree that its a great format, and I get what you're saying now -
To me, the question of the thread was whether or not circle should be an official ifpa format, and that should be different from whether or not its a good format. Toi me its not entirely about the format its as much about the ifpa and what 'official ifpa event' means. I think I said in my origianl post that I think the ifpa needs to do more with what it has before moving onto the next thing - I believe that the ifpa needs to impose a single standard for competition and this can only be done comprehensively if that includes a standard for judging. Currently you can judge the formats however you want even at worlds and still get the event ifpa sanctioned. To me that undermines a key part of why sanctioning is important - to set a single and universal standerd across events and years. Thus I don't think you should seperate the format from the judging when you're talking about ifpa sanctioning.
One of the stated aims of the ifpa is to get footbag into the olympics, that will never happen if the ifpa is sanctioning events that have different judging systems each time they are run. I'm not saying that all events should be forced to judge formats in the same way - I'm simply saying that worlds should be judged the same way every year and its up to the ifpa to demand that - furthermore if, in the fututre satelite events are going to be used to rank and seed players, those events would also need to be run to the same standard. There should be tiered system of event sanctioing to allow for a standard to be set as well as to allow flexibility for event organisers.
The thread asks whether circle comp should be an official part of an ifpa sanctioned event, I still think that ifpa sanctioning should be made to mean more first, and that if this was to happen, the circle comp format would need to be changed to deal with that.

[Jeremy]

To answer the question, I don't think the event should be an official IFPA event at the moment. I think it's clear from this topic that there are all kinds of changes and improvements that could be made. Are you confident that the current rules for the circle comp will remain the same for the next 10 years?

I think it would be much better to wait and keep working on the event until you are confident that you've got specifically good rules; not just a good idea, but all the specific details worked out.

The IFC process at the moment is such that it would be exceedingly painful and time wasting to be constantly making changes to the rules of the event. A simple clarification of the rules would take 1 year to be debated and added to the official rules.

It would save so much time and effort if you waited until you were completely confident with the rules for the event, and that you could see no areas where extra decisions or clarification needed to be made.

When you make statements like;

" If it turns into a "who can go long every time" competition, we will have no choice but to impose restrictions, and then the solution is complicated."

Imagine having to spend half a year waiting for that solution to be approved, and then having to wait a year until it's actually implemented. Wouldn't it better to work out those issues now?

[Outsider]

I agree with O'Wheel. Sure Circle Comp is great and all, (I guess.. I haven't seen it live in any of the half-dozen events I've been to in the last year, and the videos I've seen aren't exactly stunning) but whats the big hurry? Circle Contest has been around for One Whole Year... So what? Is it going to go away unless its an official event? Is it so perfectly conceived already that it can't stand to use some more test-runs and modifications? (It has, after all, already undergone considerable change in just its first year: didn't there used to be three Heats in each round?) Is our sport going to be completely delegitimized and collapse without an "Official" cirlce contest at Disney this summer? Personally, I can stand to wait a little bit.

[ianek]

First of all, thanks to everyone for such interesting reply.

We are already working on adjustment and will try some next month at Montreal Spring Jam 2.

After reading Jeremy and John's post, we will definitly wait a while before trying to make Circle approved by IFC.

From what i've read so far, a lot of people are very interested in Circle contest, so i will organize it at Worlds 07. It won't be official, it might be in a parking lot or at night, but i will find a way to make it.

keep giving your thoughts and ideas.

[C-Fan]

i will organize it at Worlds 07. It won't be official, it might be in a parking lot or at night, .

How about in a liquor store at night? I'll...uh, judge it. Yeah...

keep giving your thoughts and ideas.

Well, can't say you didn't ask for it.

[Jeremy]

Regarding worlds 07; I assume you've spoken with Chris Ott?

There is no reason why it can't be a serious event at worlds, without being an official IFPA event. Sick 3 has been at many worlds competitions, but still isn't an official IFPA event.

[Skippy!]

I didn't know that sick3 wasn't IFPA sanctioned...


...that said, in regards to Jeremy's post, then what would be the point of getting IFPA sanctioning at all? I'm not trying to be confrontational as much as I'm just trying to understand all of this...cause like, from the jams and tourneys that I've been to, Sick 3 has kinda just been a standard and I never questioned that. I of course could only assume that they held Sick 3 competition at Worlds, because it'd be weird if they didn't. What I'm trying to say is, if Circle Comp got IFPA sanctioning, what would be different? Would it only make a standard set of rules that everybody HAS to use or something? I guess maybe this means that if they held Circle Competition at Worlds without IFPA sanctioning it wouldn't be 'official'. But I mean, other than saying 'This is IFPA sanctioned', does it have any effect?

[King Monkey]

Its possible that the 'IFPA sanctioning' you are talking about, Dan, covers things like insurance coverage for the event, prizes and prize money, time on the program devoted to it (which involves cost in manpower, venue hire etc), amongst other things.

Also there is an element of professionalism i think. Some people may wonder why bother with sanctioning when the sport is so small in the scheme of things, but laying down these groundings now is an investment for the future, makes the governing bodies of footbag, and the sport itself, appear more professional.

EDIT: Question about Sick3 - anyone know when will it be an official event? Its been around for quite a while now, why does it remain sidelined? Is it a question of judging or something? Is there a push to have it included?

[Jeremy]

I wrote up some rules for sick 3 events. Up until then, there wasn't really any consensus on how the event should be judged, but it was rewarding to see those rules used at Euros. Presumably the IFC is going to vote on it eventually. I really lost all motivation in the task.

Regarding Skippy's question; The IFPA offers a lot to footbag. Most importantly in my eyes, it offers legitimacy. Basically footbag is not a sport at all if it doesn't have an organising body. While things are small at this stage, if you ever want footbag clubs and events to be getting government support like most other sports get, it needs an organising body. My brother's debating club gets tens of thousands of dollars in government grants every year, and about 50 people participate annually. That's because they have a very strong organising body that has been very strong for a long time. Don't you think it would be great if the top footbaggers in the world could all compete at the one event? That hasn't happened in years.

The other thing the IFPA obviously offers is world championships. How could you have official events if there was no organisation to make it official. If the IFPA didn't exist, what would stop me from organising an event in my backyard, and then crowning myself World Footbag Champion.

I think you're a little confused about the word "sanctioning." The IFPA sanctions many tournaments that include circle comp and sick 3. I know this because I'm often the person who has volunteered my time to read through the applications and approve them. At the moment being sanctioned doesn't really change anything physically, it just gives your event much more legitimacy and credibility. It changes it from being a bunch of guys standing around in short shorts kicking a bag around to being a sport. It's also great for telling sponsors and promoting your event.

If circle comp became an official event in the eyes of the IFPA, that would mean that there would be official rules to be followed. At the moment the tournament director would be able to change those rules at their discretion, so long as the IFPA approved, which they probably would. In fact until recently nobody used the official IFPA rules for freestyle events. This is because there are essentially 4 freestyle footbaggers in the whole world who have been prepared to help do something about that.

Obviously having an official set of rules is crucial in getting all kinds of support. As it stands at the moment, footbag would not be considered an official sport in most countries, and because of the lack of support for the IFPA, is not in a position to be recognised as an official sport.

Maybe one day that will change, but when you look at the older players in footbag, and the amount of effort they've put into the sport beyond their own events, I think we'll probably have to wait a fairly long time.

[Skippy!]

Ahhhh, I see. So at this stage in footbag, that sort of thing really only applies to worlds...and I guess if you had a jam where the only competition was circle and sick3, the ifpa wouldn't support it? Or at least, not financially?

This is a super interesting topic to me, I can't explain why.

Prolly cause I'm down with footbag.

EDIT: I wrote this before Jeremy's post and didn't post it till after. Whoops. I think my questions got answered there.

EDITEDIT: Okay, I read all of Jeremy's post. I understand what you're saying for sure, and I do realize that legitimacy is something that footbag is super-thirsty for right now, so that makes sense. I guess my real question then, which I'm beginning to think is almost rhetorical; other than donating (I did that already) what else can I personally do to get the ball rolling a little bit faster with things like this? I mean, it kinda seems to me like the folks at the IFPA, though passionate and good at what they do, they're stretched a little thin. I know they don't have infinite resources, but is there a plan for the infrastructure of the IFC (?) or whoever makes decisions etc. etc. to expand along with the expansion of the popularity of footbag, so that when something like this does come up, it doesn't take 2 to 3 years to go through the reviewing process? And how can I, enthusiastic but not greatly experienced, help this process along? I'd love to offer some volunteering support for the IFPA if it were available. Again, I may be interpreting this whole process kinda wrong, and if such is the case, then so be it.

Hmmm...I seem to be talking myself into circles though, which I tend to do often.

[Outsider]

So at this stage in footbag, that sort of thing really only applies to worlds...and I guess if you had a jam where the only competition was circle and sick3, the ifpa wouldn't support it? Or at least, not financially?

With the exception of the World Championships, I don't think that the IFPA supports ANY tournament or jam FINANCIALLY, unless you consider the internet resources made available to everybody hosting an even (that is, posting your event on footbag dot org, talking it up on that forum, using the membership database or video-hosting resources to try to promote your event to interested kickers, etc.) financial support, since those resources, free to us, are not without actual cost. IFPA does provide financial support for footbag dot org, though I'm pretty sure most of the time and money it takes comes from Mr. Goldberg, bless his heart.

Getting your event sanctioned by IFPA does not bring with it any direct financing from IFPA. I'm not exactly sure what it brings with it (since the whole "legitimacy thing" doesn't mean much to me personally) unless having IFPA sanctioning helps a tournament director to persuade other parties (like the owners of the site you wish to play at) to support the event. I'm not at all sure about this, but I believe that by being sanctioned by the IFPA, you are then operating as an agent of a non-profit organization (the IFPA getting themselves officially registered as such in the USA was one of their bigger accomplishments, apparently, and took some real work) and thus anyone sponsoring your event could claim their contribution to your event as a donation to a non-profit organization and thus claim the expense as a tax write-off. At least, I think that's how its supposed to work in the United States. Again, I'm very iffy on this subject, though I know that a monetary donation directly to the IFPA can be counted as a charitable donation on your taxes in the USA.

I've also heard that the IFPA is working towards developing a program to help an event director obtain insurance for the event, as some potential event locations would require you to have insurance. Its been a while since I've spoke to anyone directly about these things.

what else can I personally do to get the ball rolling a little bit faster with things like this?

Well, IFPA has an official meeting every year at Worlds, and anyone is allowed to sit in on that meeting. (I'm making the assumption that you're going to Disney this summer...) Its one way to start becoming more involved with it all, and I sort of recommend it (these meetings are conducted somewhat formally, and are pretty unexciting, and not all that much really happens). If nothing else, its a good way to see exactly who is actually involved with that little beaurocracy, so you can talk to them face-to-face about some particulars afterwards.

Its also my personal feeling that you shouldn't obsess too much over "rules." Yes, the IFPA is the official governing body of the sport, in charge of official rules of competition, but I think that there is more important work to do for the promotion of footbag than to codify specific rules for every type of freestyle contest we have. Having more detailed rules of competition doesn't actually do much to really expand the size and financing and public awareness of our sport. I mean, I can see how being more formally codified could help, but I doubt that does anything to get many more people to care about footbag. Working to make it easier for people across this continent to host events, though, and get themselves seen in the media, now that might do some good. IFPA works on all these fronts. What I mean is, I think its more important that we have a premier event like Worlds at all, regardless of what the specific rules of competition at that event are. Any decent rules will do, so long as there is a World Championships. So dealing more quickly with issues of the rules of competition, well, I think that stuff should be secondary to actual organizational and promotional efforts.

[dyalander]

Personally i disagree, I think the priority should be to codify comp rules and instill a structured, ordered beuracracy linking players, to clubs, to national organisations to the ifpa.
Promotion of the sport and getting out there is the the responsibility of individual players and clubs - if they get out there they will bring attention and money to themselves and their clubs, which will filter up. Of course the ifpa should facilitate this as much as possible, but the primary responsibility lies with the individual in my eyes .
On the other hand, with rules and regulations the primary responsibility lies with the ifpa if it wants to be a relevent governing body of the sport.

[ShredOnLawn]

NO

It is too hard to judge.