Would you go to this tournament?

[Splint]

Awesome reply Matt. I was hoping to get that kind of response from someone. You hit the nail right on the head with "there's no adds unfairly making some moves and techniques more valuable than others." If you take a players style such as yours, Moshers, or Evan Lovely's, it's impossible for any of you to play in your true form in any of the other contests. Routines have become 2 minute shreds, 30 sec shred is too heavily dependent on adds and you guys all have difficult tricks that are difficult to add count. Sick Trick and Big 3 still work for you guys, but they are often diminished at most tournaments.

Another point on intermediates entering in Open competition. Most intermediates choke in Open comp or even Open circles. They want to play harder than they usually due because everyone in the circle is busting huge. They try things that they normally would practice outside of circles. I think the Circles are meant to bring back the natural essence of freestyle footbag while interjecting some friendly competition. Putting Intermediates with Pros in a contest totally goes against that.

[dyalander]

I'd go to a circle only comp if the circumstances were right - but then I'd also go to a shred 30 only comp or a routines only comp under the same circumstance (and i think that's the underlying question here?)
Circle does look a hell of a lot of fun, but I still feel theres a place for the other comps too - also the fact that routines often becomes 2 minute shred is due to poor judging - I'm sure circle comp could also be undermined by poor judging - obvously there are other pros and cons to the two comps (which is no doubt the basis for your descision in this case), but if you're not holding routines because its 2 minute shred what you're really saying is that you can't get decent judges who will judge it properly to difficulty and artistry not to adds and shred. Judging circle comp seems largely easier for the most part (I'll know more after I've judged one in oct), but it is potentially very difficult and demanding so if you're worried about the standard of your judges then switching to circle won't necessarily solve the problem.
We're holding a Jam in Sydney in OCt - its mainly about getting everyone in Oz together on an occasion other than at nationals - competition is a secondary concern. But it will provide an oppurtunity to get some comp organising experience (as well as comp experience for players) and for that reason we're running routines, shred30, circle, and probably also rippin run, and big 3. But at the same time, we don't want anyone to have to sit out because they're judging, so we're organising it as a peer judged comp. Its not easy and perhaps it won;t work out, but it's just another option and theres the up side of giving players the oppurtunity to see the other side of the bench so to speak. We were thinking of leaving circle out simply because if we we have a peer judged circle comp - why not just use that time to shred in circles like always - it would offer a similar experience with less effort - the only reason we are including it is so we can get an idea of how it will work a nationals next year.

[ianek]

We only had the Circle contest at the Montreal Spring Jam, and it was great. I didn't feel we missed something. We kinda had all of the other competition format "inside" the Circle contest (except routine).

About "a looser braket/everybody having a second chance", it was the original plan, but it's complicated to have a totally efficient roadmap. So we decided to keep it simple at first to see how it's going. But it's obvious that it's the way to go. We are working on a second version of the document and we are trying to figure out different "kind" of tournament. (1 or 2 day event, 20 or 100 players, 1 or 3 round/circle, the most or the less people advanced to next round, you lose you're out or you lose you have a second chance, etc.)

Our goal is to give people the choice to organize a Circle competition the way it will fit the best for them.

and about intermediate, why not? that's up to the organizer. Just make it shorter (3 min/round instead of 5 for example)

[mosher]

Hehehe, I am stoked to be next in line in the world (along with Hackrifice and the Danish Footbag Open (though I am not sure if either are)) to throw a Circle Contest!

I plan on doing things a little different than the other recent iterations, though most of the core will of course be the same.

I like the fact that it is so easily adjustable.

I plan to run it much like the Berlin crew did, with the early rounds done during the day and then the finals in the club with the roaring crowd.

I am actually beginning to lean towards cutting Shred 30 from the schedule. Does anyone REALLY want to do it? Perhaps I'll offer that if people really really want to do shred 30 then they can also organize the scoring.

I think the venue Ive got for KICKASS2 will make for a thrilling environment for the finals! '

Ianek is the ultimate master of this format, he knows it so intimately. I look forward to discussing more details when he is here for KICKASS2.

PS everyone should come to KICKASS2.

[Outsider]

I am actually beginning to lean towards cutting Shred 30 from the schedule. Does anyone REALLY want to do it?

Personally, I'd go to an even that ONLY had the Circle Contest, or one that ONLY had the Shred 30 or ONLY had the whatever. The exact nature of the contest hardly matters to me. If I feel like competing, I'll take my best shot at any format, just don't ask me to get warmed up for one contest, then wait around for twenty minutes while the intermediates go in the next contest before I go again, and then sit around waiting while we move to the third event...

If I don't feel like competing, it also doesn't matter which kind of format is available (actually, if I don't really feel like competing, I'm more likely to do Shred 30 anyway, just cause it would require less thought from me [ my strategy in shred contest = just do some tricks for thirty seconds, try not to drop ] than the other formats, but then, if I don't really feel like competing I might not enter a shred contest anyway). My feelings as an attendant of an event is that if its a big jam with very modest or almost no spectatorship (other shredders, jugglers, and a few of your friends don't count, I'm talking about a large public audience that you've attracted of the street or something), than the less events the better. The events, after all, are sometimes just a good excuse to get together and jam, and running one event after the other, with pauses to assemble judges or breaks to get the music together, or whatever, is just an interruption of the jamming, and I've seen those interruptions get out of hand, so that you spend too much of time just sitting around watching instead of on your feet playing, and you can get cold and bored. If its an event that actually has put alot into location and publicity and is being professionally MC'ed and has, perhaps, a paying audience, then two or three different events might be called for (in that case, I think its best to go with the two most different looking formats, like, perhaps a routine and a big three, or a rippin' run and a big trick, but not a pair like rippin' run and shred or shred and routine, because those seem to me to look alot alike in excecution, and to put myself in the shoes of a spectator I think I might feel like they kind of just did the same thing twice in a row and I might wonder why they ran some contest and then seemed to run all the same people all through virtually the same kind of contest [with some slight alteration] again. I've seen that and I've felt bored watching.

[shreddaily]

I was diggin it all unitl,

(in that case, I think its best to ...

Need the " ) " bro... 5 yard penatly, first down.