Paradon vs Barfly

Laroche · Post by **Laroche** » 30 Nov 2004 18:36

I am SOO going to hit covenent > plasma rifle > jonhson (clipper>smell bag>same clip) in a sick 3

hacksterbator · Post by **hacksterbator** » 30 Nov 2004 20:38

i hit plasm rifle back in 99. i just kept it on the down low. it's a fun move though.

ptaku · Post by **ptaku** » 01 Dec 2004 03:51

Tsiangkun wrote:If ( Barfly == DDD) {
void=vortex;
drifter = paraddox drifter;
paradox torque = blender;
dyno = butterfly;
...
}else ( sanity){
/** the world is normal
nothing to see here
**/
}

First.. examples with drifter-moves:
No - because the change of sides bring another body add - PARADOX - that makes these moves totaly diffrent.

And with blender and dyno:
I don't understand your point. These are totaly DIFFRENT moves. dyno = butterfly ? Heh... In Dyno you have another component that are after a downtime dex, ,so this part of move is downtime too. And you have one more diffrent component.

With Pdx Torque and Blender - you have another spin direction and this change the move... And Pdx Torque has a mirage included, and Blender has a Whirl... And Pdx Torque is paradox move.... etc. etc. etc.

Now James persuaded me. All double downs are the same move, like all butterflies are the same move. Hmm maybe not the same, but we should talk about uniquenes, not if the moves is the samoe move. These aren't unique, and aren't the same...

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 01 Dec 2004 07:57

ALL of the EXTRA things you think distinguish the moves ARE THE DIRECT result of the relationship between the setting leg, and the leg performing the first dexterity. The same relationship that you and James claims to be insignificant. By discarding this information, you can not determine the paradoxness of a trick, xdex eligibility, or uniqueness.

Right. . . . Here tell me what trick this is

set> in [dex] > op out [dex] > same toe

You can't tell me, because you have discarded information that distinguishes unique moves, and it IS this bit of information you and james are claiming to have no importance.

BUT without revealing the setting side or surface, but by knowing the relationship between the set and the dex . . . uniqueness is determinable

set> op in [dex] > op out [dex] > same toe

Voilla, unambiguous.

--
The quick explanation of the example.

the drifters demonstrate two tricks which are relatively identical after the first dex, and since the first dex and it's relationship to the setting leg does not count, they must be the same trick.

Blender and paradox torque, same trick. Both a single inside out dex tricks that end on the same clipper. The move is not relatively the same, but EXACTLY the same except for the relationship between the setting leg and the first dex leg. This is the same relationship which has no value to you and james in determining if DoD is unique from paradon.

Dyno and butterfly are the same trick, in the same way paradox torque and blender are the same trick.

Drifter and paradox whirl differ in exactly the same way as paradon differs from DoD.

What is unique and what is scored as unique need not be the same.

ptaku · Post by **ptaku** » 01 Dec 2004 10:59

Ehh... Now I don't understand what you are talking about, because my english is too weak to understand your deduuction and all this wise words.
But these parts which I understand are, imho, sensless.

Are Toe set Symp. Mirage and Toe set ss Symp. Mirage unique? No, the aren't. Are SS Butterfly, and Far Butterfly unique? No. Same with Toe set Butterflies, and with DOUBLE-DOWNS. This is very simple. And for me this is the one, and only, argument in this whole discussion.

EOT

Bye.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 01 Dec 2004 11:32

They ARE unique.

set > same
set > op

Without knowing anything about which surface sets the bag these tricks are distinguishable.

They may or may not be scored as unique, but they are infact unique variations of single dex tricks.

IMO, It is entirely incorrect to call the "symposium SS mirage" any mirage at all. A mirage always starts set>OP in [dex].

IF you take away this as the distinction between tricks . . . oh lets just look at it, cuz you are missing something HUGE

you would claim these are the SAME trick, I would say they are UNIQUE.
toe> op in [dex] > op toe [del]
toe> same in [dex] >op toe [del]

By your logic then these are the SAME
toe> op in [dex] > op out[dex] > same clip [del][xdb]
toe> same in [dex] > op out [dex] > same clip [del][xbd]

Further more, you would claim these are the SAME
clip > same in [dex] >op toe [del]
clip > op in [dex] > op toe [del]

And since your logic would claim that these are the same,
clip > SAME out > SAME out > OP clip
clip > OP out > SAME out > OP clip

Then on what grounds would you claim these are different.
clip > op in >same in > same toe
clip > same in > same in >same toe

or why would these be different and how is that consistent with your theory.
clip > op out > op clip
clip > same out > op clip

The uniqueness of a trick is intimately tied to , and cannot be seperated from the relationship of the setting location relative to the leg performing the first dexterity.

Things don't have to be radically different in form or difficulty to be unique, they just have to be distinguishable from every other thing. By definition if a trick is clearly distinguishable from all other tricks, it is unique. By our own conventions these tricks are distinguishable. You are making tricks that should be distinguishable into the same trick, but you don't want to apply your logic consistently because your logic is flawed.

Unique is unique. Different is different. There is no middle ground in the word unique, it is an absolute. There is no mostly unique, or partially unique. You have taken tricks that ARE unique and called them the SAME. What I think you want to do is leave them as UNIQUES and group them as the SAME for scoring purposes. That does not make the tricks the SAME, it means you are DECIDING to TREAT THEM as the SAME.

habitat · Post by **habitat** » 01 Dec 2004 12:13

james wrote:MY WORD!!! HOT DIGGITY DAMN!

Well I'm gonna wiggle mah foot a little extra 'afor I do my next legover and that's gonna be called 'covenant' because it's a NEW move. And if I plant twice real loud THEN wiggle it's ANOTHER move and I'm calling it 'plasma rifle'.

Someone was just playing Halo

dblthnk84 · Post by **dblthnk84** » 01 Dec 2004 12:47

Woohoo! I've hit plasma rifle!

The tricks are different. But they have the same core to them. They don't deserve uniques unless you have a way to quantify the differences. You need a way to tell what differences quallify as a different trick, and which ones don't. If your only support is that they have a different base set, then inside set legover, toe set legover, ect all are different tricks as well.
________
volcano digital

brian relly · Post by **brian relly** » 01 Dec 2004 12:57

Tsiangkun wrote: toe> same in [dex] > op out [dex] > same clip [del][xbd]

Wow, Pixie Grifter? That's pretty hard....

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 01 Dec 2004 13:16

dblthnk84 wrote:Woohoo! I've hit plasma rifle!

The tricks are different. But they have the same core to them. They don't deserve uniques unless you have a way to quantify the differences. You need a way to tell what differences quallify as a different trick, and which ones don't. If your only support is that they have a different base set, then inside set legover, toe set legover, ect all are different tricks as well.

Do you not read, or just don't comprehend what I've wrote/
I am not claiming anything about setting surfaces.

set>
could be a toe, a inside, a clipper . . . who the fkcu cares

the important part comes right after the set>
> OP
vs
> SAME

There . . . You need to examine no farther to determine these are unique tricks.
Who cares how they are scored, to claim they ARE the same is wrong. They may COUNT the same, they might FEEL similar, but they are unique motions.

dblthnk84 · Post by **dblthnk84** » 01 Dec 2004 19:23

So, would you consider Cliper set op toe to be a different trick than clipper set same toe?
________
Honda CB125 specifications

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 01 Dec 2004 19:26

yes, abeit both tricks are relatively simple.

One uses both feet, and one only uses one foot.

dblthnk84 · Post by **dblthnk84** » 01 Dec 2004 19:38

That would be the difference then. I see a toe stall as a toe stall, no matter what its set from. I don't think we're really arguing about the tricks, we're arguing about the definition of the term unique. You see it as any minor difference, and I have a bit more room that could be included and make it the same trick. I know your definition is correct in real world, but I've always seen it as different for footbag. Like 'bee sauce'. Does this make sence, or am I just crazy?
________
vapor genie review

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 01 Dec 2004 20:59

Makes perfect sense to me, well put. We differ in our interpretation of unique. It is a seemingly pointless differentiation on the little tricks, but I see it as a big deal because of the implications it has on higher level tricks.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 01 Dec 2004 23:13

I think the problem with this debate is skill level. I think that because you find toe stall easy of any set - you just think of it as one move. But at the same time we think of pdx torque and torque as different moves. But what's the difference? Just the set. And of course you have to have slightly different footwork to get into position before you do the moves. If you watch people like Vasek, Ales, Lon etc. - you'll see that they negate the "double hip pivot" by jumping sideways before the dex - so they don't do a double hip pivot that some people think defines pdx at all - the only difference between pdx torque and torque when hit by these players is that they have slightly less time to perform the move.

Personally if I say I'm going to drill torque - I drill a lot of different torque moves - but I don't say "today I drilled torque, pdx torque, baroque, mobius, blurry torque, pixie torque, tapping torque, atomic torque etc." - to me hitting all those moves are just hitting torque moves.

To be honest I wouldn't mind if it was decided that all the basic double down moves were the same - so long as we were consistant and said that all basic drifter, torque, whirl - etc moves were the same.

Perhaps for judging shred 30 what should be counted is not unique moves but unique up time and downtime components. - So you can only hit two stepping sets (one on each side) that count as unique - only one butterfly etc.

So a combo like this:

Ripwalk>sidewalk>ripwalk>sidewalk>blur>dimwalk>blur>dimwalk>ddd>barfly>ddd>barfly - which is 12 unique under the current system - has stepping both sides, pixie both sides, butterfly both sides, mirage both sides and double down both sides - and is only 10 unique.

Ripwalk>blur>pixie ss mirage>smoke>drifter>osis - is also 10 unique - stepping both sides, mirage both sides, pixie both sides, drifter both sides, a butterfly and an osis. - but it's half the contacts of the first combo.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 02 Dec 2004 00:15

That does not make those tricks the same, it only means you are counting them as them same. Unique is a mathematical/philosphical concept, and to say that blurriest is not unique from blurrier is a fundamental misunderstanding of the word unique. Scaled down to the lowest moves, clip> same toe is unique from clip>op toe.

It has nothing to do with skill level, I can hit toe stall on both sides.

If one trick uses one leg and another uses two, they are not the same, and are unique with respect to each other. To say these are not unique is equivalent to saying that there is no paradox version of any trick, they are all the same.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 02 Dec 2004 00:26

I didn't say they were the same move. Infact I'm pretty sure I said that they are different moves. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. Certainly if you read my other posts before the last one it is clear that I think barfly and paradon are different moves and I believe in consistancy.

I was trying to come up with a compromise that kept consistancy but stopped people from hitting boring combos in their shred 30s like I'm going to until things are changed

My shred 30 for Aus champs starts off something like this - dimwalk>blur>dimwalk>blur>atomsmasher>atomsmasher>parkwalk>sidewalk>ripwalk>sidewalk>ripwalk - which is 11 moves for a score of 88 - but is pretty boring I think. - everything ends with a butterfly or a mirage.

Edit: We have to face the fact that this is not black and white. I could hit dlo from a clipper set, then later crispy - fair enough both unique - but then I could hit it semi crispy - and then I could hit it with a bit of a spin (as in turning my hips towards the bag as I dex) - and then I could hit it with a "sunil" legover at the end - these are all different ways that people hit the move. Personally I'd only count two uniques there - but we have to find a place to draw that line - I presume Cameron - you'd only count two as well?

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 02 Dec 2004 00:29

i thought you were saying they were different, and then I misread your last post as you saying you thought they should be the same.

I see, you just want consistency.

MegaFighter_X · Post by **MegaFighter_X** » 02 Dec 2004 01:33

From the last couple of posts, I think that what is trying to be debated is would a different style affect the way it's scored? If that's the case, yes, only one unique. I suppose a simple example of this would be legover. 2 ways to do it. Hopping as you set to bring your leg around it, or setting and planting, then quickly bringing your other leg around it. two different styles, one move, one unique.

Also, I think what jeremy was saying is we should group the base components together (I.E. drifter, butterflys, torques, etc.). There could be quite a bit of dissent as to where to draw the line (how basic, mainly), but that's not a bad idea...

However, to implement this would be difficult... It could work in a torunament... but for casually playing, it would kill the game.

I have to agree with Tsiang, though.. I though you were saying paradon and barfly were the exact same moves.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 02 Dec 2004 02:50

MegaFighter_X wrote: It could work in a torunament... but for casually playing, it would kill the game.

Why?

I don't count uniques when I'm casually playing. Do you?

modified

Paradon vs Barfly

Are Paradon and Barfly the same move?