As most of you people have probably seen Anz' have been doing a bunch of posts discussing the concept of genuine.
This got me thinking about what directions I would like my game and our sport to take. This is my conclusion:
It seems like footbag go thru these periods where one player dictates what makes you good.
I think now we are in the post Ryan period - The Vasek Period.
In the Vasek period you get evaluated based on how good you are at playing guitless, hitting 5's and above and you definitely need to have a furious set.
In the August 2006 Sick One Competition David Castillo hits Blurtigo. It gave him a 9th place which was very good in one of the best sick one comps ever.
He hits it in front of like 30 persons - to no reaction. Why? It's not as cool to look at as it's hard.
This is the main thing about the entire style of the Vasek Period, and genuine, it is alot harder than it looks cool.
In the May 2006 Sick One Competition Phil Morrison entered with Pendulum set blind pincher and last time Jorden Moir entered with Spinning Blind Sole Kick.
Why isn't this considered to be something that the best players should be able to do? I am sure that these would have gotten a much better reaction from the crowd.
I understand that some people have minds that makes them unusually good at playing footbag in a shredbased kind of way (Yves for example).
I think it is good that the people who feels shred comes natural for them should focus on this.
I think that "shred-style" footbag is necessary for the best players even if creativity got a more important role.
But the technical qualities of a player should just be a tool to get to the goal (having fun and pleasing other persons eyes) not be the goal itself.
For example a DJ can be DMC World Champion because his or her scratching is really good but on the other hand the person might suck at a club because the person doesn't have a clue about music, how to connect with people, mood etc.
All tech but no feel might be good inside the community but boring outside of it (and in the long run also boring inside of it)!
Let's take the sick three contest as an example. Thats a thing that is waay too much caught up in adds.
I think it's should be more like the dunk contest in NBA.
To win that you have to do something that takes alot of skill but it also has to be something creative, suprising, something people have never seen before!
I think the best players have to think more like this also when doing runs. Bring some flavour!
What I am trying to say is that Anz' genuine idea is something that leads us to dictate our game based on adds. I believe this is wrong.
Making genuine a standard for the best players makes the best players only focus on technical ability and consistency. Two important things for sure.
But what about creativity? What about Reverse Swirling Toestall and Symple Legovers and other cool 2 add moves?
I am not against the idea of the best players eliminating BOPs from their game.
I am against the idea that the best players should let add's define their game.
What do you guys think?
P.S.
I don't want to step on anybodies toes with this. It is just some thoughts that I would like to hear your opinion on.
I am not trying to dictate how people should play footbag and say what is right or wrong for you! This is only my opinion!
P.P.S.
Thanks to Daryl for helping me with getting all of this down on paper.
The Developement of Shred
I agree a bit with your basic sentiment, but I also find it really boring playing with people who hit very long and very easy runs. Butterfly, paradox mirage and osis are very easy moves, regardless of what you think about adds. In my mind, there is nothing skillfull or impressive in hitting those moves, once you've moved above a "genuine" level. Likewise, those two moves you mentioned; reverse swirling toe stall and symple legover, are both moves where there is no reason why you can't throw an extra component in. Reverse swirling toe stall could be a genuine move if you did it all really downtime, but most likely you'd be doing it just like a rev up, but without the pickup. Symple legover is just a double legover with less stuff to do. I do agree that both those moves are harder and cooler than butterfly, osis, and pdx mirage.
I'm all for getting rid of adds and just hitting things that look cool, although I'd like to be much more solid on all my basics first, but I also think playing genuine is much better than playing with bails. I know I bail a lot, and I'm trying to do that less.
Those two moves you mentioned; pendulum set blind pincher and spinning blind sole kick are both moves that I'm sure, given enough time filming by myself, as they were, I could hit. Maybe they hit them first attempt, and if so, that's impressive, but I've seen hacky sackers who have never seen freestyle footbag hit spinning blind sole kicks (by random luck), and I've seen them hit blind pinchers (although probably not from a pendulum). They're moves that would impress a crowd because they can understand what's going on and why they're difficult, but there are a lot of tricks hit in the sick 1 competitions that I couldn't hit just by repetitively attempting the move on camera, and that I'd have to train really hard for weeks to be able to do.
I've always played footbag for myself. I've always worked to get good at the moves that I want to hit and the things I think look cool. This is why I can hit big apple fairly well, despite struggling to hit 5 consecutive spinning clippers. I don't learn moves deliberately to impress crowds of non footbaggers. As long as I'm impressed with what I'm doing, I'm happy with that.
I'm all for getting rid of adds and just hitting things that look cool, although I'd like to be much more solid on all my basics first, but I also think playing genuine is much better than playing with bails. I know I bail a lot, and I'm trying to do that less.
Those two moves you mentioned; pendulum set blind pincher and spinning blind sole kick are both moves that I'm sure, given enough time filming by myself, as they were, I could hit. Maybe they hit them first attempt, and if so, that's impressive, but I've seen hacky sackers who have never seen freestyle footbag hit spinning blind sole kicks (by random luck), and I've seen them hit blind pinchers (although probably not from a pendulum). They're moves that would impress a crowd because they can understand what's going on and why they're difficult, but there are a lot of tricks hit in the sick 1 competitions that I couldn't hit just by repetitively attempting the move on camera, and that I'd have to train really hard for weeks to be able to do.
I've always played footbag for myself. I've always worked to get good at the moves that I want to hit and the things I think look cool. This is why I can hit big apple fairly well, despite struggling to hit 5 consecutive spinning clippers. I don't learn moves deliberately to impress crowds of non footbaggers. As long as I'm impressed with what I'm doing, I'm happy with that.
haha, I was going to write about this in my blog... totally agreed, Genuine is not an alternative for overusing BOPs by the top players.
I've been thinking pretty much lately, where is footbag going and which direction it should develope. Do we really need 6 dex or 10 add moves? Or perhaps more tiltless, geniune of fearless players? Maybe Inventors? Is Technique really more importnat than style? I'm far from answering, everyone can choose whatever path he wants, but IF we want our sport to be better appreciated and taken more serious by the people, maybe it's the time to change the direction of developement?
After reading Jorden's blog post (Thursday, March 12th, 2008) I realized how important for me is what people outside our comunity think about this activity. Also I started comparing Footbag to Dancing. Dance is based on rythm, beauty of movement, emotions, impressions etc., so it's easly appreciated and understood by everyone. As opposed to Footbag which is still strongly based on adds. Who cares if someone plays tripless or genuine or whatever, does it really make a difference (of course for those playing more than half a year, spoiled by adds it does...)?
Once again, I'm far from criticizing, any choice is cool. I believe I'm an example of shredbased player with a lot of difficult tricks - but I don't care about adds at all (5 and 7 adds are the same, but 7s are usually easier to drop, heh), I only choose links I like. I just feel good playing this way, although it's probably not the best way showing footbag for the public...
All for now, got one more thought...
Watching Lon, Johnny or Jorden I have the feeling they live in a different, add-free world. It's a nice feeling.
I've been thinking pretty much lately, where is footbag going and which direction it should develope. Do we really need 6 dex or 10 add moves? Or perhaps more tiltless, geniune of fearless players? Maybe Inventors? Is Technique really more importnat than style? I'm far from answering, everyone can choose whatever path he wants, but IF we want our sport to be better appreciated and taken more serious by the people, maybe it's the time to change the direction of developement?
After reading Jorden's blog post (Thursday, March 12th, 2008) I realized how important for me is what people outside our comunity think about this activity. Also I started comparing Footbag to Dancing. Dance is based on rythm, beauty of movement, emotions, impressions etc., so it's easly appreciated and understood by everyone. As opposed to Footbag which is still strongly based on adds. Who cares if someone plays tripless or genuine or whatever, does it really make a difference (of course for those playing more than half a year, spoiled by adds it does...)?
Once again, I'm far from criticizing, any choice is cool. I believe I'm an example of shredbased player with a lot of difficult tricks - but I don't care about adds at all (5 and 7 adds are the same, but 7s are usually easier to drop, heh), I only choose links I like. I just feel good playing this way, although it's probably not the best way showing footbag for the public...
All for now, got one more thought...
Watching Lon, Johnny or Jorden I have the feeling they live in a different, add-free world. It's a nice feeling.
Olaf Piwowar, My Footblog
Haha, it seems we're having our footbag equivalent of the fundamental debate of power vs style in bboying 
Which is pretty much about if you should do hundreds of windmills with air flares in between, or just go for the dancing moves with creative links, and more of a "show".
My thoughts: as we know right now footbag is a very technical sport, that get's boring very quickly to the untrained eye. I watch extreme sports from time to time, and skateboarding is shown there much, much less then bmx, surfing, or freestyle motocross. Why? Because even with the grinds and jumping down huge sets of stairs it's still too technical, and not as easy to follow and appreciate as huge motorbikes flying in the air with their riders in some equilibristic poses.
Footbag is even more technical then skateboarding. That is the nature of this sport, and not really something we can change, especially with all the progress that was made in the last 10 years.
Let's think about what could happen if we went in the direction of "crowd pleasing". Asmus wrote about dunk contest, and I'm not so much into it, but I've seen some tournaments and it looks like right now, it's getting less about who can hit the hardest dunk, but who can sell it best. Players start to use costumes and various props, and that's means slowly moving away from the essence, which should be busting a crazy dunk, that you could actually perform during a game.
We could do the same thing in footbag, and there are some people that try this. In Poland we coined a term "clowning" for this - someone doing a routine, that doesn't really have much footbag in it, but lots of crowd pleasing, with props and all that. The truth is that very often the audience liked those routines more then classic, technical ones, and that's not a big surprise. Would I want routines to go that way? Definitely not.
In my opinion footbag is a sport, not a performance (even though it can be used to perform), and we should take it for what it is. If we wanted to go super popular, the only way I can see that happen, is doing what an article posted by Jorden suggested - using easy footbag to do comedy. But to me that would not be the sport of Freestyle Footbag anymore.
Pozdrawiam
Szymon Kałwak (Ners)
Which is pretty much about if you should do hundreds of windmills with air flares in between, or just go for the dancing moves with creative links, and more of a "show".My thoughts: as we know right now footbag is a very technical sport, that get's boring very quickly to the untrained eye. I watch extreme sports from time to time, and skateboarding is shown there much, much less then bmx, surfing, or freestyle motocross. Why? Because even with the grinds and jumping down huge sets of stairs it's still too technical, and not as easy to follow and appreciate as huge motorbikes flying in the air with their riders in some equilibristic poses.
Footbag is even more technical then skateboarding. That is the nature of this sport, and not really something we can change, especially with all the progress that was made in the last 10 years.
Let's think about what could happen if we went in the direction of "crowd pleasing". Asmus wrote about dunk contest, and I'm not so much into it, but I've seen some tournaments and it looks like right now, it's getting less about who can hit the hardest dunk, but who can sell it best. Players start to use costumes and various props, and that's means slowly moving away from the essence, which should be busting a crazy dunk, that you could actually perform during a game.
We could do the same thing in footbag, and there are some people that try this. In Poland we coined a term "clowning" for this - someone doing a routine, that doesn't really have much footbag in it, but lots of crowd pleasing, with props and all that. The truth is that very often the audience liked those routines more then classic, technical ones, and that's not a big surprise. Would I want routines to go that way? Definitely not.
In my opinion footbag is a sport, not a performance (even though it can be used to perform), and we should take it for what it is. If we wanted to go super popular, the only way I can see that happen, is doing what an article posted by Jorden suggested - using easy footbag to do comedy. But to me that would not be the sport of Freestyle Footbag anymore.
Pozdrawiam
Szymon Kałwak (Ners)
Footbag is a performance sport. Let's not get rid of the sport.
Making footbag to be like the dunk contest in the NBA would be degrading to the sport. Why? The dunk contest is a side show at one game of the year (All Star Game). Not only is it a side show, but it's at the All Star Game which isn't an "official" game in the first place. So, I want footbag to be treated as highly as the NBA, not as highly as a side show in a game that doesn't even matter.
We don't have to change footbag to get people to like it. Golf is very similar to footbag in that everyone plays by themselves against others and everyone does what looks like the same thing (swing). Do people reject this sport? I don't know, let's ask Tiger Woods who made $112 million last year. OVER DOUBLE of what any other athlete made.
We don't have to pander to people's untrained eyes to make footbag popular. What we need to do, is train their eyes to understand what they're seeing. This should be the goal when we do presentations/talent shows/etc. Good example? David's presentation from GRASS 2007.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjvn8OT0h0I[/youtube]
When people understand what's going on, they appreciate it a heck of a lot more and can watch it for longer periods of time. So, let's teach people to understand footbag, not dumb down footbag to their level.
In short, let's bring other's understanding up to our level, not our level down to their understanding.
Making footbag to be like the dunk contest in the NBA would be degrading to the sport. Why? The dunk contest is a side show at one game of the year (All Star Game). Not only is it a side show, but it's at the All Star Game which isn't an "official" game in the first place. So, I want footbag to be treated as highly as the NBA, not as highly as a side show in a game that doesn't even matter.
We don't have to change footbag to get people to like it. Golf is very similar to footbag in that everyone plays by themselves against others and everyone does what looks like the same thing (swing). Do people reject this sport? I don't know, let's ask Tiger Woods who made $112 million last year. OVER DOUBLE of what any other athlete made.
We don't have to pander to people's untrained eyes to make footbag popular. What we need to do, is train their eyes to understand what they're seeing. This should be the goal when we do presentations/talent shows/etc. Good example? David's presentation from GRASS 2007.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjvn8OT0h0I[/youtube]
When people understand what's going on, they appreciate it a heck of a lot more and can watch it for longer periods of time. So, let's teach people to understand footbag, not dumb down footbag to their level.
In short, let's bring other's understanding up to our level, not our level down to their understanding.
Ben Skaggs
Amateurs practice until they can get it right.
Professionals practice until they can't get it wrong.
No, I don't play soccer. Yes, there are competitions. 4 years. Lots of practice.
Amateurs practice until they can get it right.
Professionals practice until they can't get it wrong.
No, I don't play soccer. Yes, there are competitions. 4 years. Lots of practice.
Working towards genuine is a good goal but please leave the "hacky sack" stuff out of the games (my opinion). No offense ment but I just didn't like that trick Jorden did in the online competitions because I think it's way below his level. Also learning new tricks or concepts that are unique indeed but unnatural movements for your body are neither stylish or healthy for you, (again, this is my opinion).
Kim Berg
I don't really think that any of us disagree just that some of my examples where a little extreme.
I wasn't saying that the entire sport should get like the dunk contest in NBA I said that I think sick3 should.
Which is also a side-event just like the dunk contest is.
And please explain me how this is all clowning and no skill:
[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=3y5yb_u3OFw[/youtube]
That is also my conclusion in this debate.
I wasn't saying that the entire sport should get like the dunk contest in NBA I said that I think sick3 should.
Which is also a side-event just like the dunk contest is.
And please explain me how this is all clowning and no skill:
[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=3y5yb_u3OFw[/youtube]
Also learning new tricks or concepts that are unique indeed but unnatural movements for your body are neither stylish or healthy for you, (again, this is my opinion).
Isn't the conclusion obvious? That both looks much cooler when mixed!Ners wrote:fundamental debate of power vs style in bboying
That is also my conclusion in this debate.
I completely couldn't disagree with you more [Asmus] about the goal being to please others. I am completely against Jorden's notion that it is most important to cater to the layperson.
I understand about the BOPs and comp though. That's why I don't compete. Andrew Grant and I discussed this yesterday. Shred 30 is all about dada curves and blurry osis > ripwalk > spinning butterfly [repeat]. Andrew said that he'd heard a rumour that Shred 30 was gonna be replaced by Circle at Worlds, and this pleased me because of what Shred 30 has become. It is boring to watch like you say Asmus.
You didn't really go into the genuine discussion that you touched on, but I can see that being not too different. Players have their own BOPs, and sure they're different from everyone else's, but I know I get bored watching myself hit too many ducking clippers. Players will just start repeating other tricks that are natural for them that aren't butterfly, osis, or paradox mirage. Unless by genuine you mean the true definition meaning no repeated tricks in addition to no BOPs.
EDIT: I hadn't read other peoples' replies before posting. I completely agree with Ben. That is the greatest thing I ever have read about footbag and the public! Brilliant! That is how it should be. We should not change our sport for people who don't understand it. That would be the ultimate perversion -- the ultimate bastardization of the sport.
I understand about the BOPs and comp though. That's why I don't compete. Andrew Grant and I discussed this yesterday. Shred 30 is all about dada curves and blurry osis > ripwalk > spinning butterfly [repeat]. Andrew said that he'd heard a rumour that Shred 30 was gonna be replaced by Circle at Worlds, and this pleased me because of what Shred 30 has become. It is boring to watch like you say Asmus.
You didn't really go into the genuine discussion that you touched on, but I can see that being not too different. Players have their own BOPs, and sure they're different from everyone else's, but I know I get bored watching myself hit too many ducking clippers. Players will just start repeating other tricks that are natural for them that aren't butterfly, osis, or paradox mirage. Unless by genuine you mean the true definition meaning no repeated tricks in addition to no BOPs.
EDIT: I hadn't read other peoples' replies before posting. I completely agree with Ben. That is the greatest thing I ever have read about footbag and the public! Brilliant! That is how it should be. We should not change our sport for people who don't understand it. That would be the ultimate perversion -- the ultimate bastardization of the sport.
Last edited by Muffinman on 20 Apr 2008 13:30, edited 1 time in total.
Shred30 served its purpose, but I could definitely see it being replaced by Circle. It was nice though to have an objective event in competition.
I think Erik raises a good point about each player having their own bails. When I play I actually consider flip osis or flip pdx mirage to be more interesting than strongside smear or either ducking clipper.
I think genuine is a good goal, especially in the traditional sense it was first proposed: going bail free with interesting links and no (little) repetition. Going "genuine" with ducking clipper or tricks which are bails for you is similar to going fearless with dada curve tricks.
I think Erik raises a good point about each player having their own bails. When I play I actually consider flip osis or flip pdx mirage to be more interesting than strongside smear or either ducking clipper.
I think genuine is a good goal, especially in the traditional sense it was first proposed: going bail free with interesting links and no (little) repetition. Going "genuine" with ducking clipper or tricks which are bails for you is similar to going fearless with dada curve tricks.
when i talked to Asmus about this thread, he said that he was hesitant
to post it because of the possible results, to which i replied " a debate
is a result in it self, as long as it starts bouncing around some ideas " .
well, this applies only when the topic it self and its intention are
more or less clear to everybody involved .
anyhow, this debate took a curvy and possibly unitented route .
the way i understood it, the problem in current freestyle is the
somewhat unneccesary dualism of TECH and CREATIVITY .
in my head, tech would be everything related to the actual skills,
i.e. being able to hit a wide range of tricks in a clean and effortless
manner, or simply a mastering/understanding of all fundamentals .
Creativity to me is not so much inventing odd and fresh concepts,
but the intuitive, unpredictable and somewhat poetical linking of
all the previously acquired skills . Like in free jazz for instance .
Considering the current perception of the two phenomena, i can detect
two things ;
one, without a solid foundation of skill,higher level stuff - be it harder
or creative tricks/links - shouldnt be wasted time on( not in terms
of trying, but in terms of properly practicing ).
two, too many players are stuck on focusing on their tech almost
exclusively . Sergey k is a good example of that kind, hitting massive
drills all over the place and having achieved a great and robotastic mastery of all standards,
as well as of all prestige tricks and links .
Technical mastery is important, meaning "basic" or "fundamental",
creativity is important as in "meaningful".
Skills should be the soil on which creativity can flourish - its a simple
form of hierachy if you will : skills first, then funky freejazz .
Now, to me all sorts of dualism are only relativly real, and in this
case this seperation of tech and creativity is highly artificial .
They arent on the same plane, they dont cotradict eachother,
they arent mutually exclusive - i think they are to be put in perspective !
So i encourage everybody to try to view tech as "mere training tools"
and to see "spontaneous creativity as something every freestyler should aspire towards" [Jorden] .
A focus on eliminating bails ( whatever they are to you ) is again
a focus on a technical issue, although its also has aestetic
connotations, and at least to me, getting rid of easy stuff isnt
as important as getting rid of predictable, robocop stuff
.
Playing genuine is definitly kool, but i think it would be even kooler
to see more people like Tuukka, Jorden, Byrin, Nick l, Renato Zülli
or Serge Kaldany . Clavens was awesome when he was all tech,
but look at how much more awesome he is now, mixin it all up
At the end of this over long, self indulgent post i want to say that
i agree footbag/shred is a performance SPORT, and that the struggle
is clearly against one self, and i also think that the respect from my
peers is ten thousand times more important than impressing laymen.
peace
to post it because of the possible results, to which i replied " a debate
is a result in it self, as long as it starts bouncing around some ideas " .
well, this applies only when the topic it self and its intention are
more or less clear to everybody involved .
anyhow, this debate took a curvy and possibly unitented route .
the way i understood it, the problem in current freestyle is the
somewhat unneccesary dualism of TECH and CREATIVITY .
in my head, tech would be everything related to the actual skills,
i.e. being able to hit a wide range of tricks in a clean and effortless
manner, or simply a mastering/understanding of all fundamentals .
Creativity to me is not so much inventing odd and fresh concepts,
but the intuitive, unpredictable and somewhat poetical linking of
all the previously acquired skills . Like in free jazz for instance .
Considering the current perception of the two phenomena, i can detect
two things ;
one, without a solid foundation of skill,higher level stuff - be it harder
or creative tricks/links - shouldnt be wasted time on( not in terms
of trying, but in terms of properly practicing ).
two, too many players are stuck on focusing on their tech almost
exclusively . Sergey k is a good example of that kind, hitting massive
drills all over the place and having achieved a great and robotastic mastery of all standards,
as well as of all prestige tricks and links .
Technical mastery is important, meaning "basic" or "fundamental",
creativity is important as in "meaningful".
Skills should be the soil on which creativity can flourish - its a simple
form of hierachy if you will : skills first, then funky freejazz .
Now, to me all sorts of dualism are only relativly real, and in this
case this seperation of tech and creativity is highly artificial .
They arent on the same plane, they dont cotradict eachother,
they arent mutually exclusive - i think they are to be put in perspective !
So i encourage everybody to try to view tech as "mere training tools"
and to see "spontaneous creativity as something every freestyler should aspire towards" [Jorden] .
A focus on eliminating bails ( whatever they are to you ) is again
a focus on a technical issue, although its also has aestetic
connotations, and at least to me, getting rid of easy stuff isnt
as important as getting rid of predictable, robocop stuff
.Playing genuine is definitly kool, but i think it would be even kooler
to see more people like Tuukka, Jorden, Byrin, Nick l, Renato Zülli
or Serge Kaldany . Clavens was awesome when he was all tech,
but look at how much more awesome he is now, mixin it all up
At the end of this over long, self indulgent post i want to say that
i agree footbag/shred is a performance SPORT, and that the struggle
is clearly against one self, and i also think that the respect from my
peers is ten thousand times more important than impressing laymen.
peace
EASYKINKI
i don't think we should HAVE to dumb down footbag in order to get a good reaction from a crowd, but there should be a bit of variety. It doesn't really matter what the general public thinks, but in a way i guess it kinda does for footbag's publicity. Then again it was the secret that footbag was that kind of drew me to it.
It could refer to pretty much every trick in footbag when not done right.
Thanks for clearing up my points Daryl.
I never said anything about having to dumb down the sport. I said we shouldn't get caught up in adds and that creativity is one of the most important elements in footbag.
I would much rather see Johnny Suderman hitting Double Guay > Hopover Swirl than see anybody hitting an average beast.
"Clavens was awesome when he was all tech, but look at how much more awesome he is now, mixin it all up"
Really good example!
Thanks for clearing up my points Daryl.
I never said anything about having to dumb down the sport. I said we shouldn't get caught up in adds and that creativity is one of the most important elements in footbag.
I would much rather see Johnny Suderman hitting Double Guay > Hopover Swirl than see anybody hitting an average beast.
"Clavens was awesome when he was all tech, but look at how much more awesome he is now, mixin it all up"
Really good example!
It seems I'm too much of an idealist sometimes... I always dreamed about footbag as a popular sport, with lots of people getting into all the time, sponsors maybe, etc. It wasn't easy, but I came back on the planet earth and rethought this once again.
I like Footbag for what it is, changing it for the people who don't get it would be a damage. Presentations like Dave's is the best way to advertise our sport and explain what it's all about (as what it really is).
I'm really looking forward to seeing how Jorden's game developed. Anyone who wants to make a living out of Footbag has to change it to get people like it (as much as it's only possible). I don't know if this necessarily means "clowning" (but maybe it does). I don't know if it should still be called a "footbag freestyle" show anymore and I don't think we're able to answer on this question until we see a few professional performers descended from Footbag Freestyle.
Everyone can play as he like, that's obvious. If anyone puts Toes between beastly runs or 7 adds and likes that, it's cool. Somebody wants to be an addhunter, then great. Same about players being on a high technical level still using BOPs frequently. Thing is, we are talking about developenemt of footbag freestyle, and they would rather push it backwards.
Although it could sound like I'm against Genuine, I am not. Actually, I've got some doubts if it would work as it should - I'm afraid avoiding BOPs would generate its substitutes (like Pdx Illusion, Blender, Dyno, Symp Butterfly, Duckings and so on) and would build more dexes/components (Steppings, Pixie or Spinnings all the time). Bails would change, but not disappear. Only the few world's best players would maaaybe manage to really play Genuine with good creativity and variety (which is our aim, right?).
Another thing that bothers me, are rules formed by some genuine/tripless/whateva keywords, rules killing the idea of FREESTYLE Footbag, as an "act of taking your body, mind, and / or chosen object and using them to make your imagination into reality" [Matt Cross]. I wouldn't see it Freestyle anymore if I couldn't use Butterfly, Osis and Pdx Mirrage. Tricks like those play a major role in Fbg, not just as bails, but also as a characteristic "slow downs" (to end a hard combo or separate some parts of the whole run) and look cool, not only in my opinion (if not overused!!). After watching 'The Tryptich' Gielnik (Twister) said, he loved my... OSIS (...Dbl Blender > Osis > Inspinning...), as a pause between two harder elements and rotating divert.
This is gonna be veeery subjective, but I get bored watching those super-varied, Genuine runs with barely varied intensity (paradoxically variety all the time is no variety)... just my opinion, but I'm the last one against, footbag needs it and I appreciate anyone who plays this way. I'm curious if there's at least one more freak who thinks the same?
Last time I thought more about the people outside our sport, this time I'm thinking about footbag (as what it is) and us players (subjective, of course), and I'm still affraid the technical tendency will turn it wrong way... not by pushing the limits, but rather setting limits thus turning the clock back...
Last time I mentioned Johnny, Jorden and Lon as those, who seem not depending on adds or any guiltless/genuine/whateva rules, use BOPs and are sooo creative, stylish, varied, and what is even more important FUN TO WATCH!!
In brief, footbag should be enjoyable to watch, but most of all fun for the player.
PS. I have a strange feeling I might be misunderstood, translating thoughts precisely into english feels like a one big compromise between my opinion and abilities. Oh well... Submit.
EDIT. Last thought: clarifying, it would be a shame if footbag would develope technically, in a wrong, limiting way. Just like shred 30 forces us to play like robots (Vasek's drill's a good example). Creativity, variety, style... this is the place for the biggest improvement.
I like Footbag for what it is, changing it for the people who don't get it would be a damage. Presentations like Dave's is the best way to advertise our sport and explain what it's all about (as what it really is).
I'm really looking forward to seeing how Jorden's game developed. Anyone who wants to make a living out of Footbag has to change it to get people like it (as much as it's only possible). I don't know if this necessarily means "clowning" (but maybe it does). I don't know if it should still be called a "footbag freestyle" show anymore and I don't think we're able to answer on this question until we see a few professional performers descended from Footbag Freestyle.
Everyone can play as he like, that's obvious. If anyone puts Toes between beastly runs or 7 adds and likes that, it's cool. Somebody wants to be an addhunter, then great. Same about players being on a high technical level still using BOPs frequently. Thing is, we are talking about developenemt of footbag freestyle, and they would rather push it backwards.
Although it could sound like I'm against Genuine, I am not. Actually, I've got some doubts if it would work as it should - I'm afraid avoiding BOPs would generate its substitutes (like Pdx Illusion, Blender, Dyno, Symp Butterfly, Duckings and so on) and would build more dexes/components (Steppings, Pixie or Spinnings all the time). Bails would change, but not disappear. Only the few world's best players would maaaybe manage to really play Genuine with good creativity and variety (which is our aim, right?).
Another thing that bothers me, are rules formed by some genuine/tripless/whateva keywords, rules killing the idea of FREESTYLE Footbag, as an "act of taking your body, mind, and / or chosen object and using them to make your imagination into reality" [Matt Cross]. I wouldn't see it Freestyle anymore if I couldn't use Butterfly, Osis and Pdx Mirrage. Tricks like those play a major role in Fbg, not just as bails, but also as a characteristic "slow downs" (to end a hard combo or separate some parts of the whole run) and look cool, not only in my opinion (if not overused!!). After watching 'The Tryptich' Gielnik (Twister) said, he loved my... OSIS (...Dbl Blender > Osis > Inspinning...), as a pause between two harder elements and rotating divert.
This is gonna be veeery subjective, but I get bored watching those super-varied, Genuine runs with barely varied intensity (paradoxically variety all the time is no variety)... just my opinion, but I'm the last one against, footbag needs it and I appreciate anyone who plays this way. I'm curious if there's at least one more freak who thinks the same?
Last time I thought more about the people outside our sport, this time I'm thinking about footbag (as what it is) and us players (subjective, of course), and I'm still affraid the technical tendency will turn it wrong way... not by pushing the limits, but rather setting limits thus turning the clock back...
Last time I mentioned Johnny, Jorden and Lon as those, who seem not depending on adds or any guiltless/genuine/whateva rules, use BOPs and are sooo creative, stylish, varied, and what is even more important FUN TO WATCH!!
In brief, footbag should be enjoyable to watch, but most of all fun for the player.
PS. I have a strange feeling I might be misunderstood, translating thoughts precisely into english feels like a one big compromise between my opinion and abilities. Oh well... Submit.
EDIT. Last thought: clarifying, it would be a shame if footbag would develope technically, in a wrong, limiting way. Just like shred 30 forces us to play like robots (Vasek's drill's a good example). Creativity, variety, style... this is the place for the biggest improvement.
Olaf Piwowar, My Footblog
First I wasn't going to reply to this thread, because it is useless anyway. It's frikkin useless because nothing's going to change anyway. But some of these posts made me really angry, so what the hell, I'm letting it all out now.
I just fucking hate you hypocrites who are all "I don't think about adds!" Trying to act like heroes who are salvaging this sport. "Unusual links are so much cooler than Fearless" is just bloody hilarious coming from someone who hasn't even hit a 5-5. It can't be a coincidence that most of those who try to get rid of adds aren't even guiltless players. Unusual tricks just seem so cool because they're so rare. Well I still prefer Whirlwind over Spinning blind sole kick, because blind sole kick looks retarted hacky sack and unprofessional.
The other thing is those who say that they don't play for anyone else but themselves. Bullshceisse! Then why the hell do you surf on Modified or post your videos? Actually I know why: you want props to to make you feel good, and to do so you hit stuff that we want to see. Why do you play guiltless and if you don't, is it just an excuse for being so bad at footbag!?! Makes me sick to hear hypocritical mumbojumbo.
Allright, now on topic.
Like Ben Skaggs said, footbag can't be brought down to people, their understanding must be brought up. If anyone has a problem with that, he should make an appointment with his shrink.
Footbag doesn't become cooler if you start doing more Hopover Swirls or Bent Knee Clippers and less Genesis and Marius. How stupid would a string be with trick selection going from Nemesis and Montage to Stallberger and Gyro Dragonfly. The Stallberger being there just because it's uncool to play guiltless. That's a huge gap in difficulty as well.
And what the hell - if it ever happens that nowadays unusual tiltless tricks become mainstream and someone does a guiltless string everybody goes like "That's so olds skool, no props!"
And nobody speak about Genuine not being a good idea, unless you've read my blog!
Why the hell did my Genuine idea had to be mixed with this circus stuff anyway? What the keypoint in my idea has always been, is that nowadays circle shred has too wide trick selection in difficulty. Playing Genuine would not just eliminate the easiest, but also lower the number of hardest tricks in runs.
The sport of footbag can't go through a major change, so don't you heroes think about any of those revolutions of freeing us from the add-system.
The only change that can happens is that as more players are becoming pros, a new class of Genuine players is born from the old ones. That would not take much. As what's happening now is that only harder links and tricks and brought in the circle game, instead of rising the bar on bails. It is the next step, and yes, propably it would create new BOPs to replace the old ones and recieve critisism from the same old bloody whiners. But that is the only possible new aspect that can be brought into this game.
But it's not like if you play Genuine and do Reverse Swirling Toe Stall mid-string, everybodys going to go all "OMFG YOU NOOB THAT WAS A TWO ADDER!!" It is not that serious!
Harsh text, I know. I'll just explain it with that I had a rough day at work and I've been wanting to say something back at the whiners for a long time now. Nobody take anything personally.
I'm not going to write in this thread again, so if you want something from me, PM me.
I just fucking hate you hypocrites who are all "I don't think about adds!" Trying to act like heroes who are salvaging this sport. "Unusual links are so much cooler than Fearless" is just bloody hilarious coming from someone who hasn't even hit a 5-5. It can't be a coincidence that most of those who try to get rid of adds aren't even guiltless players. Unusual tricks just seem so cool because they're so rare. Well I still prefer Whirlwind over Spinning blind sole kick, because blind sole kick looks retarted hacky sack and unprofessional.
The other thing is those who say that they don't play for anyone else but themselves. Bullshceisse! Then why the hell do you surf on Modified or post your videos? Actually I know why: you want props to to make you feel good, and to do so you hit stuff that we want to see. Why do you play guiltless and if you don't, is it just an excuse for being so bad at footbag!?! Makes me sick to hear hypocritical mumbojumbo.
Allright, now on topic.
Like Ben Skaggs said, footbag can't be brought down to people, their understanding must be brought up. If anyone has a problem with that, he should make an appointment with his shrink.
Footbag doesn't become cooler if you start doing more Hopover Swirls or Bent Knee Clippers and less Genesis and Marius. How stupid would a string be with trick selection going from Nemesis and Montage to Stallberger and Gyro Dragonfly. The Stallberger being there just because it's uncool to play guiltless. That's a huge gap in difficulty as well.
And what the hell - if it ever happens that nowadays unusual tiltless tricks become mainstream and someone does a guiltless string everybody goes like "That's so olds skool, no props!"
And nobody speak about Genuine not being a good idea, unless you've read my blog!
Why the hell did my Genuine idea had to be mixed with this circus stuff anyway? What the keypoint in my idea has always been, is that nowadays circle shred has too wide trick selection in difficulty. Playing Genuine would not just eliminate the easiest, but also lower the number of hardest tricks in runs.
The sport of footbag can't go through a major change, so don't you heroes think about any of those revolutions of freeing us from the add-system.
The only change that can happens is that as more players are becoming pros, a new class of Genuine players is born from the old ones. That would not take much. As what's happening now is that only harder links and tricks and brought in the circle game, instead of rising the bar on bails. It is the next step, and yes, propably it would create new BOPs to replace the old ones and recieve critisism from the same old bloody whiners. But that is the only possible new aspect that can be brought into this game.
But it's not like if you play Genuine and do Reverse Swirling Toe Stall mid-string, everybodys going to go all "OMFG YOU NOOB THAT WAS A TWO ADDER!!" It is not that serious!
Harsh text, I know. I'll just explain it with that I had a rough day at work and I've been wanting to say something back at the whiners for a long time now. Nobody take anything personally.
I'm not going to write in this thread again, so if you want something from me, PM me.
I don't want it to look like I'm taking this topic over, but after the last two replies I realized I went too extreme with my strict definition of Genuine (ONLY 3 and more adds, NO BOPs, ALL tricks unique...) and because of that conjured up some worries...
***
Speaking about possible changes, I doubt the number of hardest tricks in runs will decrease anytime soon, but it's just my opinion (besides, we are mostly what-if-ing, right?). Seeing the tendency I'm sure the lower boarder will increase (eliminating the easiest tricks), though. The difference between easiest and hardest tricks in a run definitely shouldn't be too big, but TO MY VIEW the variety of intensity is a good thing (as a contrast makes a run more attractive, exciting).
***
Speaking about possible changes, I doubt the number of hardest tricks in runs will decrease anytime soon, but it's just my opinion (besides, we are mostly what-if-ing, right?). Seeing the tendency I'm sure the lower boarder will increase (eliminating the easiest tricks), though. The difference between easiest and hardest tricks in a run definitely shouldn't be too big, but TO MY VIEW the variety of intensity is a good thing (as a contrast makes a run more attractive, exciting).
Olaf Piwowar, My Footblog
Personally I feel the current system is extremely outdated and way to easy to follow to be legit.
I have been discussing the potential for a new system that would include:
- Energy required (in Joules)
- Amount of bodily movement required
- Transitions in and out of a trick
- Placement of a trick in a run (1st verses, 5th or last)
- How the trick is performed (for instance furious toe stall versus barrage)
- How clean the move is performed
We live in a technological age yet still rely on personal opinion or an archaic add system that is useless in order to determine difficulty and give a score.
Why not let a computer do all the work? I'm not saying it will be easy to setup. But just like learning any harder version of a move, you must master the basics first. Same deal here: Let's master the concepts of difficulty first then apply the rules to our sport?
JMO
I have been discussing the potential for a new system that would include:
- Energy required (in Joules)
- Amount of bodily movement required
- Transitions in and out of a trick
- Placement of a trick in a run (1st verses, 5th or last)
- How the trick is performed (for instance furious toe stall versus barrage)
- How clean the move is performed
We live in a technological age yet still rely on personal opinion or an archaic add system that is useless in order to determine difficulty and give a score.
Why not let a computer do all the work? I'm not saying it will be easy to setup. But just like learning any harder version of a move, you must master the basics first. Same deal here: Let's master the concepts of difficulty first then apply the rules to our sport?
JMO
Go out and shred already.
~Damon Mathews
~Damon Mathews
It is really cool that we have a sport that people in the community can understand, but to the general public our notion of technical difficulty means little. The notion of guiltless shred to me seems very arbitrary, I think aiming for Genuine shred is a much better goal regardless of whether on not people actually achieve that goal.
The really funny thing is that there aren't any professional players out there and that everyone is trying to say that what the public thinks is unimportant. Nobody is making a good living off doing high technical difficulty shred alone. While I think that technical difficulty is cool I don't think people should immediately jump to criticize aesthetically motivated moves.
just waiting to get flamed here!
The really funny thing is that there aren't any professional players out there and that everyone is trying to say that what the public thinks is unimportant. Nobody is making a good living off doing high technical difficulty shred alone. While I think that technical difficulty is cool I don't think people should immediately jump to criticize aesthetically motivated moves.
just waiting to get flamed here!