Should Circle contest be an official IFPA event?

[mosher]

NO

It is too hard to judge.

This past weekend a totally revised version of the circle contest was tested/premiered. I really feel like Ianek took the time to take into consideration the comments that people had made about the system.

I think he will be posting a thread about that most likely, but definitely judging has become easier as the rounds are now each different and with a set goal. That makes it easier to judge as the judges have a criteria they are looking for. (At the montreal jam it was three rounds, variety, big tricks/hard links and the third was the density round) (though those may be tweaked in the months ahead)

I really like the circle contest.

[Ian Brill]

Circle Competition:
1) It gives a new opportunity for the sport to demonstrated from a fascinating, but, difficult to describe perspective. Of course the add-system (let alone Jobs) is a bit of a challenge for the bystander as well. So maybe this is not important. Just a concern.
2) It seems to go one of two ways:
A) Encourage people to drop tricks outside of their norm or league
B) Attempt only what they have mastered, and withold their skills from the community (either from maintaining secret strengths, or by just not trying anything hard during events)

I'm gonna vote against it until it has evolved a bit more. Giving themes for a round would make it better for me, as it could be random and thus more honest of a players improvisational capacity to demonstrate their strengths (the aesthetic I believe this event is intended to emphasize) but then, who determines what themes can adequately help determine a champion, let alone a world champion?

Right now things are hard enough for determing what makes a title-holder. It is unclear to me if adding another events would help. Well, actually, I think it would... but I still vote no. Too hard to judge. Too new to grok.

[blitz]

Circle Competition:
1) It gives a new opportunity for the sport to demonstrated from a fascinating, but, difficult to describe perspective. Of course the add-system (let alone Jobs) is a bit of a challenge for the bystander as well. So maybe this is not important. Just a concern.
2) It seems to go one of two ways:
A) Encourage people to drop tricks outside of their norm or league
B) Attempt only what they have mastered, and withold their skills from the community (either from maintaining secret strengths, or by just not trying anything hard during events)

Wow. You have no idea what you are talking about. While all opinions are welcome, informed ones are more valued. FYI, adds have nothing to do with the Circle.

Anyone who complains about people holding back in Circle comp has either not seen a Circle comp or was unfortunate to see only a poor example (not that I've heard of any such events). Watch the new MSJ2 video. I'm not saying you will see the absolute top level of peoples' abilities in a Circle comp, but pretty close. Players have to push it if they want to win, and players push it anyway because they are unrestricted and they want to do their best.

[Ian Brill]

edit

[Ian Brill]

I don't believe that you understand my post. If you do, it seems odd that you concentrate on something that has little to do with the content. The only reason the concept of add was mentioned was to give an example for comparison purposes of a confusing system for outside obsevers. My point was that the circle competition is grossly more confusing, even to someone like myself who has been involved in footbag on and off since the mid 90's.

Yes, I had already seen the link you posted. I find your reaction sharp considering it hardly relates to anything closely related to what I was trying to convey.

With all that said, I still can't figure out how this event can be judged fairly. It seems really open to interpretation and ripe for personal and political preference. I would hate to see this sport go in that direction. I

All the best, and please keep up the great work.

[blitz]

sorry to upset you. I should know better how to "play nice". Please don't take it personal. Even if we have met in person, I have no idea who "LOFA" is, nor 98% of the usernames on this forum. I'm explicitly responding to the words I read.

There are about 50 things I *should* respond to in this thread, but I simply don't have the time. I chose to respond to one part of one message (yours), and that is my right. Plus, I did not understand the point you were trying to make.

When you say you have "seen" numerous circle comps, do you mean in person or on video? If on video, then it's pretty obvious why you are having trouble declaring a winner. If in person, then there is a problem somewhere, and all I can say is we (mostly Ianek) are working on it.

I would also like to add that judging the Circle should NOT be quantified. Counting adds, uniques, etc. (hyper-technicalifying ) are what alienate people from footbag, and arguably footbag from it's true nature.

Regarding the add system, it is the predominant measure of technical skill, for good or bad, that we have. If this is not the measure for technical level in this routine then the event is even less credible than I had assumed.

I could not disagree more. And I'll leave it at that.

[david]

Why do you care so much about a sport you quit?

david

[blitz]

following through on a commitment.

Does my answer satisfy you?

[Ian Brill]

Why do you care so much about a sport you quit?
david

Was this directed to me? If so, I can't say I ever quit, just that my level plateaued for a unusually long time

edit: sorted

Blitz: Yeah, I admit that I have not wittnessed the circle competition in person, and that this could have a big impact. I'm open to the idea.

I appreciate this:

I would also like to add that judging the Circle should NOT be quantified. Counting adds, uniques, etc. (hyper-technicalifying ) are what alienate people from footbag, and arguably footbag from it's true nature.

I think this event has the potential to help display footbag in a way I also see it, and not strictly tied to the add sytem. As the sport evolves I can't seem to tell if this system is more of a crutch or a backbone.

[dyalander]

judging the Circle should NOT be quantified. Counting adds, uniques, etc. (hyper-technicalifying ) are what alienate people from footbag, and arguably footbag from it's true nature.

I agree with the sentiment that complex quantifications of judgement alienate people - but the moment you judge something you must quantify it - judging the ciorcle is quantifying it - it's simply trying to supress the complexity of that judgement beneath a simplified ranking system. YEs it is simpler than the judging systems of Routines and Shred 30 because it doesn't need to be judged on a single scale which should apply across all competitions - Ie instead of quantifying competitors across all competition you only need to quantify them within each circle - this however, does not reduce the complexity of the quantifying process by which a judge is to understand the ability demonstrated by each player - you still get one look and need to judge control, cleanliness, amplitude, creativity, etc etc etc. and need to hold a quantification of that run in your mind or on your page while you compare it to the following runs in the round. This is an extremely complex and difficult task and to say otherwise is simply unture - ranking players against eachother sounds all nice and simple but the reality is that the sport at its highest level is incredibly complex and technical and such a task is potentially extremely difficult.
I agree that so far it has been a solid spectacle and at most, no more difficult than any other comp to judge, but I envision a time when more competitors are competing at a higher level and will be distinguished by the slightest of differences and these will be extremely difficult to see in this format - just as they will in every other comp format. My point is that this "ease of judging argument" is not significant enough to consider circle comp to be a significantly better format.
Circle has its advantages and is a solid format, but to say that it will remain significantly easier to judge than the other formats is, in my opinion untrue. Shred 30- will always be the easiest to judge. It will reamin arguable which out of routines offers a better spectacle or abetter measure of all-round or shred skill. Yes circle is a good format - no it will never fully replace routines or shred 30, they will co-exist as seperate disciplines. Given this is the case I think the few people able and willing to make an effort should direct it at the existing problems before adding new formats.