So perhaps you understand why for me what best indicates the strongest player in the world is the one actively demonstrating the goods.
I agree with that statement. That would make him/her best in the world currently. All-time however - still goes to Vasek.
Personally I'd like to see someone study Vasek's style as intently as he studied EVERYONE else. Then come out and show it, with the holes in Vasek's game filled.
Kidding guys [calm down] - but I wouldn't be surprised.
One thing bugs me though. I kick with Jason Crook [he is my roommate] and he put the bag down for a little while and took up skating again just for fun. If you don't know Jason, he is a phenom with a bag and can hit a good number of ground breakers like genesis and blurry whirling swirl. Well I figured his blades were probably getting dull and it would be a good time to slap him around a bit. I have been playing daily and getting pretty good.
Boy was I totally wrong on that one. He may have shown a little rust, but he still handed me my ass.
I guess the point I am making is that Vasek will probably always be able to hit certain moves and play at a certain level (until his knees fall off). So it bugs me that he did not perform even at 80% of his usual 150% self.
Interestingly, if you discount the results the Polish judges (and the Czech judge if you like, but it doesn't matter since his are equal anyway) then the result would have been a draw between Vasek and Damian, and still a draw on a count-back (unless you counted Ales' results in which case Vasek would win).
Not that I'm trying to imply anything, I don't for a minute think any deliberate scoring occurred. I just wanted to show that the evidence supports the idea of not having people judging when they have compatriots competing.
It's also interesting that if you were to just take the results of the top 3 most experienced judges you get these results;
Vasek 1,2 1,1 1,3 = 9
Damian 2,1, 2,2 2,2 = 11
Which I think is pretty accurate, except for Sergey getting raped.
as in all established sports ... drops and bails need to have defined penalties. makes people either compete at their skill level ... or play out of their skin to win .
drop = 0.5 deduction
bail = 0.1 deduction
this would promote professionalism, put even more emphasis on flawless and artistic routines ... and would have created a different result at this most recent worlds.
Hello. First, I think it is very good that people care about how to judge routines better. Personally I really appretiate this effort. Many of opinions here are for me reasonable and clearly understandable. For myself I have to say, that I really really tried as hard as I could to evaluate everything well and make all the combinations correspond in given marks. It was very very hard...I was put in this situation when I had to negativelly respond on my friends performances. I tried to be as objective as I could, but I also agree, that many people would see this differently.
Another thing is, that I was responsible for choice of the judges. Yes, I had to take two polish judges, but Im very gladfull for their professional work. I would like to thank them all now!
Now about my given marks. When I first made rankings in both columns I was little bit shocked. It was something I totally didnt expect. I had Vasek on first place in artistic(still), eventhough it was very slight difference. AI Vasek:5.6, AI Damian 5.5. This was a very unusual situation, because I was used to see Vasek dominating in technical, but not being so excellent in artistic. This time it was the other way around. I would like to note, that even the slightest difference "makes a cut". If we could see the whole scale, we would reflect the differences better...
But because we dont sum the given scores, but rankings(which I dont really like), we dont have a better "zoom". When I summed the rankings I got 4 vs. 4 and in given marks it was 10.6 Vasek vs. 10.7 Damian.
Well Actually I had a tie on first 2 places(rank sum), then Segrey 3rd, then another tie on 4th and 5th Place->Honza and Arek, then another tie for all last places.
I could also explain what led me to give these marks, but not now. It would be too long for text. Maybe sometime else...
I believe that every judge should be responsible for his/her statement and be able to explain it.
Thank you Ales for your message. Although a lot of people here feel that the judging system is bad, it seems to me that the judges did the best they could with the system they had to work with and made the best and most fair decisions they could make.
Personally, I have only judged once at a very small tournament, and it was really difficult to be completely unbiased. Everyone has friends in the footbag community, certain playing styles they prefer over others, tricks and combinations they prefer, and so on.
Things can only get better, and they will so long as this community continues to support each other and push this sport beyond its limits.
mikeanello wrote:Things can only get better, and they will so long as this community continues to support each other and push this sport beyond its limits...Peace.
Well-stated.
Also, Ales- Thank you very much for your post. Your opinion is held in high regard and it makes me more optimistic that you support and encourage such conversations as this one.
I could also explain what led me to give these marks, but not now. It would be too long for text. Maybe sometime else...
I believe that every judge should be responsible for his/her statement and be able to explain it.
I would really love to see this. I think this is where the most gains are to be made in improving judging - looking at the logic behind the scores and closely analysing it.
THe other stuff can also help make small gains but analysing the logic behind the scores tells us exactly what is being measured and how - it would allow us to better articualte those things for future judges and competitors, and point out specific flaws. Essentially it would make it clear what, *specifically*, made a good score and what *specifically* let people down, beyond just general broad terms such as choreography and technical difficulty.
This has made great reading! I've pretty much sat on the edge of my seat reading all 7 pages today going from "thanks for putting up the videos" to actual competitors and judges speaking honestly about their own feelings, then having the entire event's worth disputed. lol its been a crazy read haha. I'll try to put forward the reasons that i think most Geilnik supports have in mind.
Summary:
1. Gelnik
2. Sergey
3. Vasek
Upon first watching I didnt rate sergey, but I've had to rethink that a lot. He spoke about how he thinks routine isnt legitimate and its just dancing in what is broadly the 'vaudeville' approach to routines. I think his approach showed, and that he was deliberately trying to play to his stereotype of a routine, it was a very gimicky song which I think may have 'cheapened' the artistic quality. He'd be better off picking a song which really gets him pumped that he feels expresses his own feelings and playing well to that. people should try to play to songs that they'd listen to in their own time rather than trying to fit in to a corny stereotype of a routine, because the fakeness of a performance can be pretty bad.
Sergey did use the space, but in a very obvious and distracting way. he should make a large figure eight and not move so fast, it just looks very forced.
the theme where he did the small toe catches was repeated too many times, and in combination with the fact that most of the routine was steps really hurt the variety.
Seregy's routine was droppless, but leaving out the first 10 seconds of the routine there was were only two repeats (blurry whirl and step ducking clipper). THe middle was really little more than a stepping drill.
I think his game plan was to do 3 hard tricks to start, then do a circle, put up the pretense of variety by doing a couple of pdx whirls and drifters, then symposium whirl to finish.
There wasnt a lot variety wise, or difficulty wise, because you can only get the difficulty credit for moves the first time you hit them.
there were clear themes that he played to, he knew the music well, and has beutiful form to watch.
Vasek didn't drop, but had a number of slops where he going for another trick but had a complete bail (usually to inside). Vasek's variety was also down on Damien's. Vasek's choeography was very choppy because the music kept changing, and i found it a bit gimmicky. What was the juggling section? How many times does he bail to side to side clipper or butterfly. all the double dexes are on the same side. I went back and checked, and i am pretty sure it doesnt touch his flip toe, and he does one pixie set trick, the rest is clipper to clipper, with very little going above his waist. so not only was the type of trick (height, dex style) quite a narrow focus, within that, he does his ripwalks way too much. Its true that you need to ignore previous efforts and expectations for routines, but i think a lot of the people complaining about that, are people that more or less suggest vasek should have won because we know he is a better circle player and has more ability outside of the routine. to whoever said that you need to beat someone by a lot to knock off the old world champion is a bit random. whoever does the best on the day is the winner. period.
Damien's artistic merit, I'm guessing, would have been quite high. He played consistently on the music, did hard tricks during climaxes and showed a lot of control during slower sections. Damien's music suited him, he was able to speed up and slow down, and he was WITH the music. People who say his artistic was terrible are watching it with preconceptions about his game, I can't understand how you didnt see how obviously he was playing to the music and choreographing things. Each section flowed to the next and he showed us differnt types of tricks consistently throughout. I felt like his routine was "going somewhere" like the development of the tricks and the music had meaning. whereas with Sergeys he was just doing those small toe delays became filler the second and third times he did them. there were a lot more 'risky' moments in damians, double spin, ripstein, fog, blurrier, spinning whirl. He put it on the line in a much bigger way than the other two
His overall form isn't as good to watch as vasek's but people don't lose a routine over that, his spins don't look the best. His finish was very very strong. I felt like he packed more in and it seemed like more or less every link went exactly as he planned. He really finished so so well. Packed in the hard tricks to finish, and showed a lot of hard links. His drop wasn't as significant as it could have been because it didnt really halt the flow of the routine.
Damian had hard tricks all throughout the routine, and a very long shuffle, which despite the drop was a more impressive series of linked 2 dex tricks than in all of vaseks. Lack of links would have really hurt vasek and sergey, they usually went to a switch or butterfly or some easier trick before another two dex.
I say good on Damian, he performed the best on the day, and i think he prepared better as well - all power to the new world champ.
ednie wrote:
People who say his artistic was terrible are watching it with preconceptions about his game, I can't understand how you didnt see how obviously he was playing to the music and choreographing things.
Well, I can tell you that I love Damian's game and that I am really happy for him, because he is obviously playing hard.
He deserved to win, I bet he has put more effort into his routine than Vasek.
However, I still claim that Vasek had the most breathtaking performance, regardless of his bails and lack of shuffle.
If routines are not about the drops..and if they are not about the difficulty..and if they are not about the general level of a player..than they are about making a show.
Who made the best show? Vasek did.
I really liked Dan's post. I wonder how relevant the comments about Sergey's performance are. Specifically, the ones that suggest he was sort of expressing a lack of appreciation for the event. If this was the case, then it would be in bad form. Why compete in an event that you do not respect? I am trying to think of adequate answers to that question. He did a good job though!
.
