. He can hit crazy shit with Terraging set (he hit lately Terraging ss Swirl - invention?) but Terraging DSO is imposible for him... 
Has (insert viable, difficult trick name here) been hit? PG1
has this been hit?
I don't know exactly how to describe this trick... it's like a pendulous double dex rake...
i'm calling it smokey bear if it hasn't been done!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=af6L5XemMYA
i'm calling it smokey bear if it hasn't been done!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=af6L5XemMYA
brian "bear" sherrill
buy my footbags
via freedom footbags
or on occasion (also for fabrics) thru modified
buy my footbags
via freedom footbags
or on occasion (also for fabrics) thru modified
Ok, I have a serious problem with this.
Here we have Brian, a gentleman trying not to be a generic cookie-cutter player, attempting to invent moves and bring something new to the sport.
Regardless of whether or not the move was executed by the book (which can be arbitrary) or matches up with the technical name, innovation should be encouraged and not fucking spat on!
Whatever happened to constructive criticism?
Brian, you're experimenting with some cool stuff. Now is the time to throw away all these notions of technical names to keep your imagination limitless. Naming moves quantifies the move and limits you as well. I've learned that over the years. Ignore 'the book' and do what feels right to you. The possibilities are endless! If a move you do is between two other moves who cares! There are an infinite number of legit variations of the same move that are all worth exploring.
Style and creativity are what matters, and you've got that.
Just keep doing your thing and ignore the shit on the forum.
Jorden
Here we have Brian, a gentleman trying not to be a generic cookie-cutter player, attempting to invent moves and bring something new to the sport.
Regardless of whether or not the move was executed by the book (which can be arbitrary) or matches up with the technical name, innovation should be encouraged and not fucking spat on!
Whatever happened to constructive criticism?
Brian, you're experimenting with some cool stuff. Now is the time to throw away all these notions of technical names to keep your imagination limitless. Naming moves quantifies the move and limits you as well. I've learned that over the years. Ignore 'the book' and do what feels right to you. The possibilities are endless! If a move you do is between two other moves who cares! There are an infinite number of legit variations of the same move that are all worth exploring.
Style and creativity are what matters, and you've got that.
Just keep doing your thing and ignore the shit on the forum.
Jorden
Jorden Moir
-
semiconscious
- Multidex Master
- Posts: 205
- Joined: 21 May 2006 14:15
- Location: All over the place
Jorden's right. Quit ripping on innovation. Although the move might be best described with our current nomenclature as a fairy, it's really not. And also, there's def. another dex before the 'toe stall'.
on an entirely different note, I just had a dream where someone hit toe set symp rev. swirling gyro symp mirage (and they did it standing ankle deep in water!). Water aside, has anyone hit this trick? is it possible? I feel like the symp rev swirl would be hard to get any height out of.
on an entirely different note, I just had a dream where someone hit toe set symp rev. swirling gyro symp mirage (and they did it standing ankle deep in water!). Water aside, has anyone hit this trick? is it possible? I feel like the symp rev swirl would be hard to get any height out of.
Last edited by semiconscious on 03 Sep 2008 10:21, edited 1 time in total.
Sam Neale
Right. Exactly my thoughts. I don't know if that pendulous move was really well executed or not, but why shouldn't one be allowed to do "new" stuff. Jeremy must be having a really bad day for posting all of that wack stuff here today, not only on this thread. How do you expect footbag to expand if all you do is to tell people to play according the standards.
Kim Berg
You are on crack! That trick is sick man......you should invent it!semiconscious wrote:Jorden's right. Quit ripping on innivation. Although the move might be best described with our current nomenclature as a fairy, it's really not. And also, there's def. another dex before the 'toe stall'.
on an entirely different note, I just had a dream where someone hit toe set symp rev. swirling gyro symp mirage (and they did it standing ankle deep in water!). Water aside, has anyone hit this trick? is it possible? I feel like the symp rev swirl would be hard to get any height out of.
Actually i kinda want to try symp rev swirl set....i've never tried but the timing seems doable. I second sams question if anyone has hit this set...
I don't think anybody was saying anything against innovation.
They where saying something against Brian's notion of what he was doing and against his idea of naming the trick.
In my opinion pendulous is only cool and clean when done cross body.
But the main problem with it is how hard it is to play into.
They where saying something against Brian's notion of what he was doing and against his idea of naming the trick.
In my opinion pendulous is only cool and clean when done cross body.
But the main problem with it is how hard it is to play into.
Clearly nobody was ripping on innovation. I watched the video and I posted what I saw in the video. In fact what I said wasn't even ripping on what it was. It was just an objective opinion on what he's doing.
As usual, rather than people responding to the content of what is posted, we see Jorden, Semiconscious etc. launching into these completely unconstructive desconstructionist attacks on the way the content was presented.
It is far better, in my opinion, to give honest assessments of people's games, rather than trying to sugar coat everything and pretend things look great when they don't. That just leads to people continuing their bad habits, which is far worse, and I really wish people had have been more honest about my game when I was starting.
Also re; "And also, there's def. another dex before the 'toe stall'" - the "dex" is half of a reverse whirl/illusion. You don't get the dex attributed to you unless it passes completely behind the leg.
As usual, rather than people responding to the content of what is posted, we see Jorden, Semiconscious etc. launching into these completely unconstructive desconstructionist attacks on the way the content was presented.
It is far better, in my opinion, to give honest assessments of people's games, rather than trying to sugar coat everything and pretend things look great when they don't. That just leads to people continuing their bad habits, which is far worse, and I really wish people had have been more honest about my game when I was starting.
Also re; "And also, there's def. another dex before the 'toe stall'" - the "dex" is half of a reverse whirl/illusion. You don't get the dex attributed to you unless it passes completely behind the leg.
Last edited by Jeremy on 03 Sep 2008 17:48, edited 1 time in total.
Where did I say that he wasn't allowed to hit the trick? Where did I say it was a bad trick? All I said was what I could see. Perhaps you should practice your reading and logic skills a little.Kimbe. wrote:Right. Exactly my thoughts. I don't know if that pendulous move was really well executed or not, but why shouldn't one be allowed to do "new" stuff.
Where have I told people how to play or to what standards? I don't think it's that difficult to read a 14 word post accurately.Jeremy must be having a really bad day for posting all of that wack stuff here today, not only on this thread. How do you expect footbag to expand if all you do is to tell people to play according the standards.
Brian, keep working on the pendulum set and don't forget flipside!
I disagree. I think there is a rake in this trick regardless of the cleanliness of the reverse whirl dex. The set is straight up and behind the body, and because he doesn't rotate or move backwards to the bag the toe stall is caught in a cross body position. Sure the rev whirl isn't great but Brian will be able to clean up the execution when he gets better at the trick.Jeremy wrote:I would call the trick you're doing in the video fairy set toe stall.
That's possibly true, I didn't really consider whether there was rake or a toe stall. However you can't do a reverse whirling rake unless you catch the toe stall in a cross body position. If you catch it on the inside of the knee, surely you haven't completed the dex for the reverse whirl. The key thing is that the bag needs to pass behind the dexing foot, not just infront of it.
yeah the rev whirl is unclean, I'm not arguing about that.Jeremy wrote:That's possibly true, I didn't really consider whether there was rake or a toe stall. However you can't do a reverse whirling rake unless you catch the toe stall in a cross body position. If you catch it on the inside of the knee, surely you haven't completed the dex for the reverse whirl. The key thing is that the bag needs to pass behind the dexing foot, not just infront of it.
Kimbe. wrote:Right. Exactly my thoughts. I don't know if that pendulous move was really well executed or not, but why shouldn't one be allowed to do "new" stuff.
To me, your statement of what you saw sounded ironic. Clearly you can see the trick isn't fairy toe stall on the basis of the execution.Jeremy wrote:Where did I say that he wasn't allowed to hit the trick? Where did I say it was a bad trick? All I said was what I could see. Perhaps you should practice your reading and logic skills a little.
Where did you say he wasn't allowed to hit the trick?
Well, you don't always have to read everything word for word and I think I made my point and you understood it, but you always tend to analyze everything excessively. Maybe I didn't express myself perfectly but I think you got it. I might just post another 7700 comments to practice my English and to become as wise as you.
Kim Berg
I think you're confused.
I posted a very short and clear message stating exactly what I thought. You are the one who analysed it and made the interpretation that I was saying that he "wasn't allowed" to hit "new stuff" and that people had to play by my "standards."
Don't analyse my posts. If I wanted to say more than what I meant, I would say more. I try to always say exactly what I want to.
The point I was making was the question in this topic is "has this trick been hit before?" The trick in question was stated as "it's like a pendulous double dex rake." In my opinion that's not what the trick is.
Classifying tricks is only useful if we follow the same standards. If you want to hit stuff that doesn't have a name, that's great, but don't give it the name of things that it isn't - that just confuses things. If you take the time to watch the video, you'll see that what is it is not a "pendulum set double dex rake." I think that's fairly obvious to any experienced player, and that was the only intention of my post.
People can't learn if you don't correct their mistakes. I learnt this because nobody corrected my mistakes, and that sucked. If getting one negative comment on an internet forum stops somebody from playing footbag, they were never going to be any good anyway.
edit; Also you need to look up "ironic" in a dictionary. That's not the word you're looking for.
I posted a very short and clear message stating exactly what I thought. You are the one who analysed it and made the interpretation that I was saying that he "wasn't allowed" to hit "new stuff" and that people had to play by my "standards."
Don't analyse my posts. If I wanted to say more than what I meant, I would say more. I try to always say exactly what I want to.
The point I was making was the question in this topic is "has this trick been hit before?" The trick in question was stated as "it's like a pendulous double dex rake." In my opinion that's not what the trick is.
Classifying tricks is only useful if we follow the same standards. If you want to hit stuff that doesn't have a name, that's great, but don't give it the name of things that it isn't - that just confuses things. If you take the time to watch the video, you'll see that what is it is not a "pendulum set double dex rake." I think that's fairly obvious to any experienced player, and that was the only intention of my post.
People can't learn if you don't correct their mistakes. I learnt this because nobody corrected my mistakes, and that sucked. If getting one negative comment on an internet forum stops somebody from playing footbag, they were never going to be any good anyway.
edit; Also you need to look up "ironic" in a dictionary. That's not the word you're looking for.