For this thread, you have to pick one or the other (not both, and not something other than these two choices)...
big tricks
or
long dense strings
big tricks or long dense strings?
big tricks or long dense strings?
Last edited by Rieferman on 10 May 2011 11:22, edited 1 time in total.
Bob R.
"Big tricks".
My definition of big tricks here, is more about risk involved, in completing it, versus something like adds or number components.
For me, watching a 30 contact run with lots of dexes, typical links (spinning whirl->scorp, blur->dimwalk) is worth watching a few times, or sporadically. However, it doesn't really hold my interest, and often times you begin to really depreciate your interest in how hard the links are. When you see blurry whirl->stepping whirl, my brain sort of knows it is coming, and counts it more as a checkpoint..Or, fearless for that matter, once I see two fearless contacts, I begin to say "Ok, now a ps whirl->spinning whirl is coming", and, simply count numbers, and impressed by something over 10. It takes a lot of effort to learn shuffle, but, once I know it is coming it usually turns into a "ok, how long will he shuffle for?" game in my head. No longer noticing that "shit, that pickup->quantum was pretty cool".
So, big tricks, interests me more. A gyro dyno will sooner get an "ooh" out of me, 20 contacts into a string, than the much more energy consuming blurry whirl->blurry whirl. Seeing even a far muted twist out of a motion would get my gears going, the same way seeing a swirling whirl would.
Just thinking of some favourite players to watch: Juho, Jorden, Felix, Honza, Olaf, Johnny, Dave.
While all of those players have, do, and can hit 10+ Fearless, each one of them has an absurd crazy factor, of knowing "At any moment, they could hit a trick you haven't seen before". I like the suspense.
My definition of big tricks here, is more about risk involved, in completing it, versus something like adds or number components.
For me, watching a 30 contact run with lots of dexes, typical links (spinning whirl->scorp, blur->dimwalk) is worth watching a few times, or sporadically. However, it doesn't really hold my interest, and often times you begin to really depreciate your interest in how hard the links are. When you see blurry whirl->stepping whirl, my brain sort of knows it is coming, and counts it more as a checkpoint..Or, fearless for that matter, once I see two fearless contacts, I begin to say "Ok, now a ps whirl->spinning whirl is coming", and, simply count numbers, and impressed by something over 10. It takes a lot of effort to learn shuffle, but, once I know it is coming it usually turns into a "ok, how long will he shuffle for?" game in my head. No longer noticing that "shit, that pickup->quantum was pretty cool".
So, big tricks, interests me more. A gyro dyno will sooner get an "ooh" out of me, 20 contacts into a string, than the much more energy consuming blurry whirl->blurry whirl. Seeing even a far muted twist out of a motion would get my gears going, the same way seeing a swirling whirl would.
Just thinking of some favourite players to watch: Juho, Jorden, Felix, Honza, Olaf, Johnny, Dave.
While all of those players have, do, and can hit 10+ Fearless, each one of them has an absurd crazy factor, of knowing "At any moment, they could hit a trick you haven't seen before". I like the suspense.
Jay Boychuk
Big tricks! There is a difference between "big tricks" and "single tricks." For me when I watch or play footbag I anticipate a big trick like every seven contacts or so which I guess represents my attention span. Sort of like the epic ending to a firework show. If the player drags on too much with the blurs and dimwalks it is time for a new video.
Edit
I pretty much agree with everything Jay said. I like the suspense that a lot of the best players have in their game. Knowing that a vortex rake or a spinning ducking spinning osis could be right around the corner is what keeps me watching. Watching long shuffle runs seems so boring to me because i feel like everyone besides be can easily hit long shuffle runs.
Edit
I pretty much agree with everything Jay said. I like the suspense that a lot of the best players have in their game. Knowing that a vortex rake or a spinning ducking spinning osis could be right around the corner is what keeps me watching. Watching long shuffle runs seems so boring to me because i feel like everyone besides be can easily hit long shuffle runs.
What impressed me the most are long string with a pretty good variety. Don't have to be realllly hard tricks, but tons of small cool moves/links. The better exemple i can find about that might be Scott Bevier?
I'm totally the kind of player jay describe : long shuffle strings haha. Wich doesn'T mean this is what i prefer.
Mathieu
I'm totally the kind of player jay describe : long shuffle strings haha. Wich doesn'T mean this is what i prefer.
Mathieu
Long-winded answer coming up:
I enjoy doing/watching both, though for different reasons.
Big tricks are like a monster dunk in a basketball game, or a piece of sugary candy. There is an immediate wow factor that hits you intensely and is a lot of fun, and you don’t get the same impact from long dense strings (LDS).
Extending the simile, the basketball equivalent of LDS is like running a three man weave, then having your shooting guard run off multiple delayed screens, get a pass off the mismatch, and make a layup. No single part of the sequence is jaw dropping, but there is a beauty to seeing 5 people work together to execute a complicated play that works. Foodwise, a LDS is like a well-planned meal with the correct wine picked out for it. There’s a complexity of flavors, the various side dishes compliment each other’s flavors, and the whole is more than the sum of the parts.
LDS don’t deliver the same “in your face” unexpected thrill that big tricks do; they won’t make you shout out “yes!” or jump up and down. At the same time, seeing a series of unexpected varied links that flow well is a pleasure that a big trick can never replicate.
As for which I prefer? If I’m watching a video, I usually prefer big tricks. If there’s a mix between LDS and big tricks, I prefer seeing more big tricks in a video. For much of my footbag career, I’ve enjoyed going for big tricks over LDS. I liked chasing that junkie rush of hitting something I’d never hit before. As I’m getting older and it’s harder for me to hit big tricks, I’m hoping to move more in the LDS direction. That’s not even entirely true… I’d be just as happy just going for long flowing strings, even if they aren’t dense. I’ve developed a deeper appreciation as I’ve gotten older for this type of string, and hope to move in that direction with my own game as well:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvNrk0ca8B0[/youtube]
I enjoy doing/watching both, though for different reasons.
Big tricks are like a monster dunk in a basketball game, or a piece of sugary candy. There is an immediate wow factor that hits you intensely and is a lot of fun, and you don’t get the same impact from long dense strings (LDS).
Extending the simile, the basketball equivalent of LDS is like running a three man weave, then having your shooting guard run off multiple delayed screens, get a pass off the mismatch, and make a layup. No single part of the sequence is jaw dropping, but there is a beauty to seeing 5 people work together to execute a complicated play that works. Foodwise, a LDS is like a well-planned meal with the correct wine picked out for it. There’s a complexity of flavors, the various side dishes compliment each other’s flavors, and the whole is more than the sum of the parts.
LDS don’t deliver the same “in your face” unexpected thrill that big tricks do; they won’t make you shout out “yes!” or jump up and down. At the same time, seeing a series of unexpected varied links that flow well is a pleasure that a big trick can never replicate.
As for which I prefer? If I’m watching a video, I usually prefer big tricks. If there’s a mix between LDS and big tricks, I prefer seeing more big tricks in a video. For much of my footbag career, I’ve enjoyed going for big tricks over LDS. I liked chasing that junkie rush of hitting something I’d never hit before. As I’m getting older and it’s harder for me to hit big tricks, I’m hoping to move more in the LDS direction. That’s not even entirely true… I’d be just as happy just going for long flowing strings, even if they aren’t dense. I’ve developed a deeper appreciation as I’ve gotten older for this type of string, and hope to move in that direction with my own game as well:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvNrk0ca8B0[/youtube]
-
Frank_Sinatra
- Avenging Disco Godfather
- Posts: 1660
- Joined: 09 Jan 2007 12:43
- Location: Chicago, IL
+1 for "whatever Bevier is doing"...
Difficulty, variety, surprise, and style, all the time.
I am also a big fan of long strings that fit a beat.
For any given footbagger that I'm watching, I like to see a long, flowing string of moves that fit in to their comfort zone. To me, style and control is a lot more pleasing to watch than single difficult moves or short strings. If someone is good enough to hit technically difficult stuff without losing their flow, all the better.
Difficulty, variety, surprise, and style, all the time.
I am also a big fan of long strings that fit a beat.
For any given footbagger that I'm watching, I like to see a long, flowing string of moves that fit in to their comfort zone. To me, style and control is a lot more pleasing to watch than single difficult moves or short strings. If someone is good enough to hit technically difficult stuff without losing their flow, all the better.
BRICK!
rfa::never give up::
nyfa
rfa::never give up::
nyfa
I wrote:
just bustin' your chops ken
Keep the replies coming, these have been interesting to read so far (and +1 million regarding "whatever bevier is doing")
and then Ken wrote:For this thread, you have to pick one or the other (not both, and not something other than these two choices)...
I enjoy doing/watching both
just bustin' your chops ken
Keep the replies coming, these have been interesting to read so far (and +1 million regarding "whatever bevier is doing")
Bob R.
