Worlds Shred 30

jon · Post by **jon** » 10 Aug 2004 18:45

warning: sorry to anyone I offend with this post. I put some thought into whether to post it or not but I believe discussion can never be truely bad so please dont hate on me or think I am just some bitter punk
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was just looking through the worlds results and saw something that I felt was odd. I considered not posting about it but I guess what can it hurt just to bring up a topic. I was looking at the intermediate shred 30 results (incase your wondering i came last in btw

i hit like 4 moves got discouraged and stoped which I knew at the time was sad and a sign of bad sportsmanship but anyways) and saw that the top placed intermediate shredder was 3.3 points away from the 10th placed open competitor. Now I assume that both groups are marked using the same scoring system, and if I am wrong please ignore me RIGHT NOW, but if not doest this seem a bit odd. I am not saying people are sandbagging and I applaud everyone with a good score but I think that perhaps there should be a new system used for shred 30, a system where there is no classes of players but everyone is in the same pool. I know intermediates like to see how they place against other intermediates but since the two groups are judged the same does this really need to still happen and does there need to be a winner for each grouping of players? I was hoping to hear others thoughts and opinions on this idea and simply create discussion, I hope thats all I achieve with this post.

Jon Haber

marc · Post by **marc** » 10 Aug 2004 18:59

Cheebs won shred 30 !!

LameR · Post by **LameR** » 10 Aug 2004 19:05

Chris and Dave both had really good routines and shred 30's. I know this was Dave's first world's and I'd assume the same with Chris (could obviously be wrong). They didn't know what the competition would be like. In my opinion, if this world's had been held in Europe, they may not have placed as high as they did. There's a LOT of good intermediate/lower open level players in Europe. You were saying that you think everyone should be in the same pool? I think that's kinda dumb. It should be intermediate vs. intermediate. Some will have better routines, some will do better in Shred 30's. This year Chris and Dave both ended up doing really well in both. There's no reason to set intermediate players up vs. all of the open players, I think that's just dumb.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 10 Aug 2004 19:15

I agree with Jon. I presume he's only talking about shred 30. I always think it's better to compete at the highest level you can and better to put yourself there as soon as possible. You'll find it tough, but you'll also learn a lot more.

As Jon said shred 30 is judged on the same scale in both divisions so you can easily compare scores between competitors and rank the players regardless of the division they entered in. I think the level defined as intermediate has risen a lot recently. People who can hit 20 contact guiltless runs with big moves midstring should be open. We should try to go back to the stage where intermediate shred 30's were judged with 2 adds counting as unique - and a player capable of doing a guiltless shred with a few drops should compete in open - this encourages the newest players to compete and forces the better (but still newish) players to really push themselves.

I don't think Chris or David deserve any criticism - they made the descisions they felt were right and they will probably never be allowed to compete in intermediate again!

cheebs · Post by **cheebs** » 10 Aug 2004 20:32

Yes, this was me and dave's first worlds. We both started playing around the same time and neither of us have much competition experience. I think both of our routines and shred 30s could be open. Dave especially rocked in routines (only two drops) I choked

. But we've both done them dropless multiple times and if you can do that then imo you're "pro". Therefore looking back now I think we both should have just gone open, I dont think it was very fair. We honestly didn't know how other competition would be performing. I hope there aren't any grudges between me and any other intermediate competitors. I'm definately competing open from now on (I'm assuming the same with Dave). My intentions were for World's to compete open but when Dave told me he's entering intermediate and me knowing that he's just as good if not better(which he is

), I assumed I should too. I think it's better to push yourself early, I did at Chilly Philly and New Paltz. It's less pressure too cause you want to do well but since you're with the pros its more like ahh doesn't matter as much, it can be more fun

Also, I think jeremy's idea for intermediate and open shred 30 is a good one

hacksterbator · Post by **hacksterbator** » 10 Aug 2004 20:43

having judged the intermediate routines, and having seen each and evey one of them, you 2 were way way WAY above the level of every one else. it was really a battle for who would get third. congrats to both of you for playing at such a high level and for achieving what you did, but i think you both could have gone open, and maybe even could have made semis, unless you were in the pool of death (shudder). yeah, i went open and got my ass handed to me, but i still had fun, and that's what footbag is all about.
my opinion: i think it's better to get last in open than first in intremediate, and i'm sure many would agree with me. at least you went for the big one, know what i mean?

mosher · Post by **mosher** » 10 Aug 2004 22:30

And Andrew, haven't they both been playing longer than you?

You're so hardcore andrew, props.

ptaku · Post by **ptaku** » 10 Aug 2004 23:39

This is the reason why, here in Poland, Shred30sec is ONLY for Open players. Like a Sick3 and BigOne. To compete in shred30 sec you should be a guiltless player (to hit lots of unique and to make many adds in your score). If you are guiltless player you should compete at Open level. Shred30sec isn't for intermediate, because REAL intermediate isn't able to make good score. I think that if intermediate makes score 80++ that means that he isn't intermediate.

Greats.

SeRiAl ThIlLa~ · Post by **SeRiAl ThIlLa~** » 11 Aug 2004 00:47

well jon i feel your pain man. I came 3rd from being last in shred30. I can honeslty say that i choked. I got soo nervous. But i went out there to have fun and not to worry about placeing this year. Maybe next year ill do better

Brett · Post by **Brett** » 11 Aug 2004 12:31

I agree with Andrew's comment.

HooD · Post by **HooD** » 11 Aug 2004 13:26

I feel that when competeting, in whatever level of competition you enter, you should give everyone a challenge. When I saw the competetion at Worlds, I really thought that some of the open competition should have dropped to intermediate. When I think of Open, I think of the best, and at Worlds, it should be the best from all countries slugging it out. What I saw was a big gap between the elite and then others who had skill, but not enough to be any challenge.

I'm not saying this only for open, when entering in intermediate, I believe you shouldn't just enter in when you're not ready, because they say experience is key. You should train and prepare so when the day comes to compete, you can challege others in your bracket, not just challenging yourself. I also feel that eventually there should be some sort of qualifying event so that when people enter in, there won't be such large gaps of skill and play. Until then, there will be a very large margin of player skill in intermediate and open contests.