What defines a move?

FlexThis · Post by **FlexThis** » 25 Oct 2010 12:10

Inspired by the DS.

What defines a move? When is a move unique? How do you know?

With all the back and forth over spinning gyro clipper vs. spinning osis, I got to thinking, what defines a move and how do you know?

Back in the day (could still be the case) butterfly no matter where you set it is a butterfly and counts only 1 time per side as a unique move. However Fairy Clipper (aka crispy butterfly) is counted as a NEW unique move. This occurs for osis as well, with the gyro clipper variation. This does not occur for crispy PDX Mirage (pdx mirage with a plant) Why NOT? It follows the same logic.

Butterfly = downtime dex to clipper
Fairy Clipper = uptime set to clipper

Osis = half back spinning set to clipper
Gyro Clipper = half back spinning set to clipper (with a pause and plant)

Pdx Mirage = far miraging toe (no plant true PDX)
Crispy PDX Mirage = far miraging toe (with a pause and plant)

Now as I see it Butterfly and Fairy Clipper have clearly distinct components. Butterfly has a downtime dex while fairy clipper has an uptime dex. The dexes are also done completely differently. They appear to have different definitions with a familar ending of clipper.

Osis is a downtime move, perceivablely the spin and clipper are done most often downtime. Gyro Clipper is an uptime spin followed by a downtime clipper. The distinctions are on the spin portion. If spin [bod] is settable(???) then they are clearly 2 different moves. The planting is irrelevant to the definition in this case because it adds no value to the move. I would argue however, that if the spin in gyro clipper were to become downtime, then the distinction is lost and "gyro" is no longer relevant as the move has already passed the point where a gyro (uptime set) can occur. This would blur the lines between spinning osis and a spinning gyro clipper.

The last comparison is a bit trickier. In the first 2 examples we had measurable components as the defining factor regardless of any additional plants or pauses. In a traditional pdx mirage, there is a far set to mirage with no interrupting plants. While in a crispy pdx mirage the exact same components take place at the exact same time and therefore do not create any definable difference regardless of any plant between the start and finish of the move. These moves are the same!

In fact I would argue that crispy pdx mirage is nothing more than a training trick for blur. Crispy far whirl is also a training trick for blurry whirl.

What about a trick comparison that is not as cut and dry, or maybe it is.

Drifter = downtime miraging far clipper
Muted drifter = uptime miraging clipper
stepping far clipper = uptime miraging clipper (with a plant)
Muted Stepping far clipper = ???

The first 2 tricks are considered the same, the muted variation being the less popular one (in the current system). Stepping far clipper however has a distinct uptime step followed by a downtime clipper. What about muted stepping far clipper? It is essentially a muted drifter correct? If drifter and stepping far clipper are considered 2 uniquely different moves. Then what the hell is muted drifter in comparison to stepping far clipper? And what is muted stepping far clipper in relation to drifter?

What do you think? I know there are plenty of other examples.

Comments please!!!

h0ag3yb3atZ · Post by **h0ag3yb3atZ** » 25 Oct 2010 18:02

keep in mind that I fucking blow at footbag and havenâ€™t been able to play for six months and am not a huge advocate of the DS but i figured I'd contribute.

Pdx Mirage = far miraging toe (no plant true PDX)

Crispy PDX Mirage = far miraging toe (with a pause and plant)

These moves are the same!

Well...ya your right but I think your definition of crispy is wrong.
this isn't crispy pdx mirage. I believe the term crispy only would apply to a trick if the first dex is uptime. An example of this would be stepping torque (grave digger) being â€œcrispyâ€

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 25 Oct 2010 19:41

7evinkogan wrote:
Pdx Mirage = far miraging toe (no plant true PDX)

Crispy PDX Mirage = far miraging toe (with a pause and plant)

These moves are the same!
Well...ya your right but I think your definition of crispy is wrong.
this isn't crispy pdx mirage. I believe the term crispy only would apply to a trick if the first dex is uptime.

Correct. Crispy implies an uptime dex. Planting is simply "planting." Muted implies a trick where traditionally a plant is done, but in this case there isn't.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 26 Oct 2010 02:35

I don't think there is a clear distinction. Much like with species and their ancestors in biology, deciding things are different is just arbitrary. It would be easy to keep shortening the gap in a muted fairy clipper until you end up with a butterfly and there'd be no specific line that you'd cross to make it one or the other. There are blacks and whites, but grey between them.

Also for the record, there has never been anything in the official rules saying that butterflies from different sets are, or are not, unique. That's a definition imposed by tournament directors/head judges, as is their prerogative.

Edit; So osis and gyro clipper are clearly different moves, and there's a grey area between them.

FlexThis · Post by **FlexThis** » 26 Oct 2010 08:01

Thanks for the clarity on Crispy. This is why I asked.

I have never done downtime drifters, but understand why people do, especially for bigger moves like vortex. I hit mine more like Vasek's drifter swirls, a quick uptime dex and then all day to hit the ending clipper. This sets me up for symp blur, whirly gig, torque screw, etc.... So that's why I brought that one up.

Not a big fan of stepping clipper or clipper only moves in general, they seem like drill practice moves for larger tricks. I can do stepping clipper but prefer ripwalk for example. I do ducking clippers but prefer ducking butterflies. Seems like a bail otherwise.

I have never seen anyone regard butterflies from different sets as uniques. I don't count them that way in my game.

I guess I would like to see some rules wrapped around the definition of moves that takes form and distinction into account. Right now the add system does not do such a good job with clarity.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 26 Oct 2010 08:15

I've always considered a unique trick unique. I never bought into that BS about butterflies are all the same because they are easy.

Cod · Post by **Cod** » 05 Nov 2010 00:30

I agree Paradox Mirage with plant and without it are the same moves but what about harder tricks like Dada Curve vs. Yoda? Yoda is not a Crispy version of Dada Curve. Both dexes are downtime so we couldn't call it Crispy. The only difference is the plant after the first dex. I hit both and can tell you they're totally different moves with different feeling. As far as I know they're called unique. And what about Swirls? One can do them up and downtime, standard way or Symple. In my opinion they're all different tricks with different motions and feelings but counting Shred 30 we'll not give them points for being unique. So, as someone said before, it's more about the arbitrary decission of footbaggers, there are no strict rules.

Muffinman · Post by **Muffinman** » 05 Nov 2010 10:26

Tsiangkun wrote:I've always considered a unique trick unique. I never bought into that BS about butterflies are all the same because they are easy.

Word

Outsider · Post by **Outsider** » 05 Nov 2010 10:39

Jeremy wrote:Also for the record, there has never been anything in the official rules saying that butterflies from different sets are, or are not, unique. That's a definition imposed by tournament directors/head judges, as is their prerogative.

That is not correct.

I remember quite clearly learning from my Official Rules of Footbag Sports (vol. 5? vol. 7? - I can't remember anymore) that, for purposes of competition using the "Formula-Based" judging system (as opposed to the Ranked Component judging system) that, specifically, a different setting surface did not make a move unique. To paraphrase, a move was unique if it had different ADD components than another move. A move was also unique if, even with the same ADD components, the dexterity direction was different, or the spin direction was different, etc. A move was unique if it was performed on the opposite side of the body. A move with the same dexterity and catching surface but a different setting surface, was not unique, unless that different setting surface caused the existance of another add component such as paradox. So, whirl starting on right clipper and ending on right clipper is not unique from whirl starting on right toe and ending on right clipper, but a whirl starting on left clipper and ending on right clipper is unique from those other two examples because, by setting from the other clipper it becomes Paradox.

A move was unique if it was CAUGHT on a different surface, but not if it was SET from a different surface.

This was definitely in the IFAB rule book in the late 1990's and beyond, though not in these exact words, of course.

By the example above, a butterfly ending on, for instance, the right foot clipper, is not unque from any other butterfly ending on the right foot clipper, even if you do one from both toes, both clippers, and both knee-stalls, etc. All those would NOT be counted as unique from one-another, for purposes of competition using the formula-based judging system that I know and love... It didn't really have anything to do with the "ease" of the particular move. The same rules would apply to Torque (not unique from toe, but it is unique from the opposite clipper because it becomes Paradox), or any version of Paradon/Barfly/Double Down. Likewise, by that old rule, Ripwalk and Tripwalk and Dimwalk would not be unique from one-another.

I'm not in the mode to debate the issue right now. I'm just saying that, right-or-wrong, it WAS in the official rulebook. It applied specifically to the Formula judging system of 2-minute routines, and, over the years, I had argued that it should also apply to Shred contest.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 06 Nov 2010 05:42

Ok that might be right, sorry I was thinking in terms of shred 30, not routines. Shred 30 rules are a very recent addition, while the formulae based system for routines has never been used at worlds since I started playing footbag (last used somewhere between 1999 and 2001 I think?)

Outsider · Post by **Outsider** » 07 Nov 2010 12:19

Word.

I'm tempted right now to start getting into a rambling recollection of the history of freestyle competitions (from my limited perspective) and also some personal feelings and explainations of where I stand on rules and what they SHOULD be, but, screw it... I'll save it for another time.