why is there not an official footbag?

sen · Post by **sen** » 03 Mar 2011 19:42

I'm a little curious as to how an Official Bag will help with the popularity of the sport. Why will people that are currently not interested in the sport suddenly seek out a website to buy an official bag? Am I missing something there?

lvnsckl · Post by **lvnsckl** » 04 Mar 2011 09:38

I'd prefer no one check my shoes or bags, I put magnets in 'em

.

When I kicked with Kevin, Dan, and Vasek in Circle's '07, I believe we used Kevin's bag. Someone could say he had an advantage, minus my magnet shoes and Vasek's right foot of God. If there were an official bag, no one could dispute even the slightest advantage or error in the bag. Furthermore, we all agreed on it. If someone had suggested an official bag and we all agreed, it would be no different. How many circles do you join where people kick with their own bags? And what if the forces that get together to create an official footbag, discover something that enhances play in some way, makes it easier to progress, expands the game, or just makes people want to purchase them? I don't see how an official bag would be a hindrance on circle or net competitions, nor how it couldn't be beneficial to the sport.

Sporatical_Distractions · Post by **Sporatical_Distractions** » 04 Mar 2011 13:24

lvnsckl wrote:I'd prefer no one check my shoes or bags, I put magnets in 'em .

When I kicked with Kevin, Dan, and Vasek in Circle's '07, I believe we used Kevin's bag. Someone could say he had an advantage, minus my magnet shoes and Vasek's right foot of God.

That bag was within the confines of the rules. I do not feel I had an advantage though, as everyone ripped it up except for me. lol

Outsider · Post by **Outsider** » 04 Mar 2011 14:22

This is off-topic, but it just occurs to me that, in the interest of fairness, in Circle Contest there should be a rule that says that the competitors must agree upon a bag THAT IS NOT OWNED BY ANY OF THE CONTESTANTS. That is to say, in the interest of fairness, the four or five people in the circle should all get to vote on the bag, but, ideally, it shouldn't be one that one of the competitors has already spent dozens of hours shredding with while the other competitors are now only using for the first time ever. At an medium-to-large event, it shouldn't really be that hard to find a good selection of bags to choose from that are all owned by players NOT in that contest, or at least, not in that particular round of the circle contest.

As long as I'm finally writing in this thread, though, I suppose I might as well weigh-in on this topic, so...

I'm not in favor of a standardized bag.

#1 -- I think its not relevant to footbag in the way that it is relevant to other ball-games. All the other ball games that I can think of require the players to use the same ball simultaneously (except Golf, and, come on, do we really want to compare freestyle shred to Golf?) -- 22 different guys on the soccer team all use the same game ball at once, it wouldn't be fair to allow one team or one player to have an advantage over another because the ball provided an advantage to one over the other. The same goes for Tennis, even though its only one-on-one, both competitors will use the same ball simultaneously (is there really even one "official" tennis racquet? I suppose there may be rules that allow some kinds of racquets but not others, but I don't think that all pro or amateur players are required to use the same racquet). Even in Footbag Net this makes sense, but not in Freestyle. When I perform a 2-minute routine or a 30-second shred, nobody else will, by necessity, have to use the same bag as I do, so it doesn't necessarily follow that we need a standarized bag.

#2 -- I don't think that standarized equipment will benefit beginner players -- If there were standardized equipment that was suitable for upper-echelon players (and what would be the point of "official" footbags that aren't suitable for the expert players?), that equipment would not necessarily be suitable for beginner players. I have often observed beginner players showing a steeper learning-curve using bags that are must floppier and "stall-i-er" than the bags that expert players prefer. Encouraging beginner players to learn using pro equipment might do more harm than good. In particular, I have seen with my own eyes many times the sad sight of a beginner player so very excited over his new hand-sewn high-quality 32-panel bag that he wants to use that bag in circle of players of some experience, not knowing that the bag needs significant breaking-in before it will really be acceptable to good players. Its both funny and frustrating and sad...

#3 -- In freestyle competition, players are not required to perform the same tricks. If there were an extensive set of required moves that all competitors had to perform, a standardized footbag might be acceptable. But I might perform dozens of tricks that none of my competitors will use in their performance, and vice-versa. Different sorts of tricks work best with different sorts of bags. Standardizing the bag may disadvantage players who are trying to perform non-standard tricks -- this could have the effect of surpressing the growth of the art of freestyle in general.

#4 -- Lastly, I can imagine that something like this would drive many stitchers of footbags out-of-business, and this would also be bad for the sport. I mean, one stitcher or group of stitchers might be the big beneficiary of this, but dozens of others would lose-out. Their bags, now that they're not allowed in competition any more, may quickly become worth far less; so much less that it wouldn't even be worth the time and effort that goes in to making them. And these footbag stitchers, these talented and generous individuals, supplement their income while providing a valuable service to other players. This extra $$ is sometimes the reason why they're able to make it to an event at all -- so, its a win-win because they get nice new bags into the hands of the people that need them and they also bring themselves to events that they otherwise might not be able to get to. Of course, in addition to the bags they sell, they also donate their valuable products as prizes to support many footbag events all-over every year. I can only see this as a big loss for footbag in general. Actually, I'm very suprised that this issue hasn't come up in this topic already (maybe it has -- I haven't been reading THAT closely, but I didn't notice it yet). I think that would be a pretty sad turn in this game. Has anybody else addressed this issue from the point-of-view of our footbag-makers?

zachatree · Post by **zachatree** » 04 Mar 2011 15:16

nice john, i think you made a lot of good points. the idea of all agreeing on a bag that isnt owned by a competitor seems to be a really easy way to make it fair. in the case that as said earlier, if there was a much bigger prize at stake an the playing field had to be as level as possible.

BUT it easy to see how someone could then say the reason they droped, or did poor was due to the bag they where forced to use.

most people seem happy with the way the way it is now. i think most people agree, there's no need at this current time for a standardized bag.

this actually turned out to be a interesting thread. little food for thought.

Pasquar · Post by **Pasquar** » 06 Mar 2011 12:42

I totally agree with Jon's idea of using a "non-biased" footbag for circle competitions that is no the property of one of the competitors. I also agree that it should be a democratic vote among the competitors as to what bag is used. This may make the process of completing circle comps a smidge longer, but... by how long, like 3 minutes?

Also, I think one of the best and most unique aspects of freestyle is the variety and complexity of hand-stitched bags. having an 'official' footbag to me would strip away a lot of the authenticity that I associate with the sport.

lvnsckl · Post by **lvnsckl** » 08 Mar 2011 12:54

Sporatical_Distractions wrote:That bag was within the confines of the rules. I do not feel I had an advantage though, as everyone ripped it up except for me. lol

Enough garbage! I miss you the most.

Elliott · Post by **Elliott** » 09 Mar 2011 10:59

congrats lee - you just killed all the momentum of the thread. i'm gonna scissor kick you in the head this weekend!

honestly, i think everything has been said here anyway. thanks to everyone for weighing in on the topic. i thought it was a talk worth having.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 09 Mar 2011 11:15

You forgot to talk about how the $CERTIFICATION_BODY could approve bags for play. Stitchers could pay a small fee to get their bags approved, and then advertise them as certified for official competition use.

So yeah.
1) Stitch Bags
2) Get Bag Certified
3) Profit.

sen · Post by **sen** » 09 Mar 2011 17:31

Tsiangkun wrote:You forgot to talk about how the $CERTIFICATION_BODY could approve bags for play. Stitchers could pay a small fee to get their bags approved, and then advertise them as certified for official competition use.

So yeah.
1) Stitch Bags
2) Get Bag Certified
3) Profit.

This is an interesting idea. But what would be in place to stop stitchers from sending in a bag for approval and then changing the stitching style, filler, weight ect. How would the IFPA know to revoke that stitchers certification until a new bag was submitted and approved, or if not up to standards not approved? I think there is something to that idea though and it might allow for the best of both sides of the argument.

Bags have to be official so no one has an unfair advantage.
There is still variety to choose from so players are happy.
Stitchers can still stitch and have the option to get certified if they want.

But on the other hand, do we need to create something when really, that is what we are doing already. Minus the certification. And honestly, can't the judges at competition do the certification to ensure the bag is qualified and therefore essentially certified.

I wonder if another topic on the subject of bag weigh-ins would be benificial...

abstract · Post by **abstract** » 29 Apr 2011 11:27

i feel the current rules as quoted by Anssi work great, in that they provide performance guidelines without restricting the creativity of the stitching community.

however,

1. Diameter of footbag: Minimum: 2.54cm (1.0 inches) Maximum: 6.35cm (2.5 inches)
2. Weight of footbag: Minimum: 20g (0.71 ounces) Maximum: 70g (2.47 ounces).5

footbags are TOO SMALL.

often when people are more than 50 feet away, they cannot see the bag at all & think people are doing some weird rain dance.

( i have received comments like this on numerous occasions, as i'm sure many of you have as well )

the number one comment i have when showing people footbag videos is, "that looks really cool, but i can't see the bag".

players have to use HD cameras with fish eye lenses filming at an angle close to the ground to make the sport look awesome to the casual observer.

i saw a video on fb, i link matt cross linked it, where a freestyle soccer player hits gyro barraging eggbeater or something similar with a soccer ball--the size of the object we work with doesn't impact the tricks we can hit to the extent we perceive it to.

honza's recent writeup on fb touches on this as well, saying he wasn't sure about why jorden chose to use a big bag in his black jumpsuit todexon routine, but now he is starting to understand--media coverage has a hard time representing our sport because of the size.

look at vasek's "boom boom" video. big, bright bag, easily visible, looks good. all of vasek's tricks, imo, actually look better because the object is bigger.

not advocating any rule changes, but a bigger bag is worthy food for thought with respect to growing awareness of the sport.

i play for fitness & enjoyment these days, i have no illusions of grandeur regarding competition, but i will be making a move to using larger footbags this year.

also, outsider rocks. support our stitchers! they are the lifeline of the game.