Rino Set!

Zeb Jackson · Post by **Zeb Jackson** » 03 Aug 2006 19:00

gangsta wrote:
shreddaily wrote:I use it all the time now, why just the other day I hit highplains drifter and James E says "nice jani walker", and of course I replied "nice rino set" and we both had a good laugh!
Either your IQ/reading comprehension is that of a 2nd grader, or you are a jackass. Nate, to you I award modified's most immature award. You haven't contributed anything to this thread, other than immaturity.

habitat wrote:Just please stop trying to "invent" stuff and then name it after yourself. It's selfish, lame, and unessesary. Especially when it's something that has been done forever
Im glad you agree it's a set. If it has been hit before, then Ben has no right to name it. BTW, who has hit it? What Is it called?
Selfish, Lame, and Unecessary... *ahem* Janiwalker, SunilWalker, RIPwalk, RIPstein, etc... C'mon people. As a great person(nate) once said

habitat wrote:You are all t eh suxorz. It's not a set, never will be a set.
"t eh suxorz"? Self 'pwnage' indeed. This was a very civilized and intruiging discussion...

Peter Irish, undeniably one of the best freestylers ever, said, in this thread, top of page 2... "You could alter it a bit though and make it a set..."

Nate, self-pwning habitat, to you I say, If you're not interested in the evolution of footbag, and don't have anything useful to add, then don't. Period.

yes, but also criticizing two established shredders who can do more than legover, isnt the right option either. I see it more as two tricks, maybe if it IS a set we should look it up or something, because something like this HAS to have been hit before, i mean ive been playing for a year and ive hit this, if a newb such as i can hit this, maybe others have to, so naming the set out of nowere, as i see it is the incorrect path.

i think tomorrow im going to invent a set i think ill do an around the world motion, and except for catching it on my same foot, ill land it on the op toe and call it a Zeb set toe, OH WAIT! dangit i think this is already called pixie! ahwell, ill call it zeb set maybe everyone will acept it then.....

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 03 Aug 2006 19:12

Zeb Jackson wrote: yes, but also criticizing two established shredders who can do more than legover, isnt the right option either. I see it more as two tricks, maybe if it IS a set we should look it up or something, because something like this HAS to have been hit before, i mean ive been playing for a year and ive hit this, if a newb such as i can hit this, maybe others have to, so naming the set out of nowere, as i see it is the incorrect path.

Zeb, Ben can shred Tripless, and hit Fearless links, and he's only been shredding for ONE year. I agree, if it has been hit before, then Ben has no right to name it. However, it does need SOME kind of name. Whether it be a technical name like 'flying-whirling' or a cooler name like 'rino', we can't just... not refer to it at all. That's like not giving Symposium a special name. That's all... "a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet"

We've already been over the 2 tricks issue. The first trick is a flying clipper. The 2nd trick Starts with a Mid-air, uptime whirling dexterity, just as A ripwalk starts on a clipper. If I were to write clip > op in [dex] >> op out [dex] > op clip [del], you could Say "That's TWO tricks! A clipper, then a miraging butterfly!"

Furthermore, I believe a whirl, performed mid-air, after a flyer, should deserve an extra add.

Zeb Jackson wrote:i think tomorrow im going to invent a set i think ill do an around the world motion, and except for catching it on my same foot, ill land it on the op toe and call it a Zeb set toe, OH WAIT! dangit i think this is already called pixie! ahwell, ill call it zeb set maybe everyone will acept it then.....

Sorry Zeb, this is irrelavent.

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 03 Aug 2006 19:14

Yeah, this is one of those moves that probably won't have an 'inventor' as such. It's just a move that's been done for ages. So, you may find a video somewhere, you may not. But it makes no difference, you don't need a video, you've got a bunch of old skoolers telling you "this is not new".

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 03 Aug 2006 19:23

james_dean wrote:Yeah, this is one of those moves that probably won't have an 'inventor' as such. It's just a move that's been done for ages. So, you may find a video somewhere, you may not. But it makes no difference, you don't need a video, you've got a bunch of old skoolers telling you "this is not new".

Yep. It may not be new, but just as they are telling us that, they are also saying that it is valid.

There is no mention of it anywhere. It needs to be mentioned, and that's what we're here for! We don't care about naming rights; we care about informing the community and assisting in the evolution of this great sport. Knowledge is Power.

Edit: James_Dean, you are obviously one of the most mature, knowledgable members that have posted here. Thanks for being so cool and straight-forward.

Zeb Jackson · Post by **Zeb Jackson** » 03 Aug 2006 19:43

lol i can hit frearless links and ive been shredding for 8 months doesnt mean im an old schooler, or that i have any knowledge of footbag, just because someone can hit a trick doesnt mean that they know everything about footbag. I not saying this to be mean or anything else im just pointing out fact.

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 03 Aug 2006 19:58

Zeb Jackson wrote:lol i can hit frearless links and ive been shredding for 8 months doesnt mean im an old schooler, or that i have any knowledge of footbag, just because someone can hit a trick doesnt mean that they know everything about footbag. I not saying this to be mean or anything else im just pointing out fact.

Noone said any of that. You said "...shredders who can do more than legover" as if you were trying to imply we're neophytes; I was only letting you know that Ben is a masterful shredder so that you're uninformed implication didn't destroy his credibility. Infact, the only concepts ive never seen him hit are some double-dex sets (sailing, frantic, etc).

Please don't clog this thread with irrelevant rambling. I'm not saying this to be mean, im just pointing out that it's not necessary.

Zeb Jackson · Post by **Zeb Jackson** » 03 Aug 2006 20:04

...i wouldnt even call him masterful..no offense..i was just talking to jim penke, and i showed him rhinage, and he even agreed with me that there was no set there

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 03 Aug 2006 20:08

Zeb Jackson wrote:...i wouldnt even call him masterful..no offense..i was just talking to jim penke, and i showed him rhinage, and he even agreed with me that there was no set there

Masterful in that he learns fast. (Intelligence: The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge)

Ben himself even agreed theres no set in the video because it was THE. We're not debating that. That's already been established.
Please, please, please contribute something useful, or nothing at all.

Zeb Jackson · Post by **Zeb Jackson** » 03 Aug 2006 20:13

lol i give up....i hate one sided people like you...

how can you THE a delay?

there was no set there i looked at both of them SEVERAL times and i see no "new set"

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 03 Aug 2006 20:19

There was no Delay. What delay are you talking about?

It was a flying clipper kick. The Set (that was supposed to be after the kick) was THE because it was done before the kick.

"lol i give up....i hate one sided people like you..."

One sided people like me? You're just as one sided. I'm sorry that my argument is solid.

Zeb Jackson · Post by **Zeb Jackson** » 03 Aug 2006 21:17

im not one sided, i looked at the video hoping that it was a new set, and now im just pointing out that theres not..., either way lets just pm each other if were going to continue arguing that way we dont bog the thread down

quadgun · Post by **quadgun** » 03 Aug 2006 21:24

i didnt read the most recent stuff written in this topic.

but if it was a set ... then it's not flying blazing each time ... only when the following move is paradox, right?

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 03 Aug 2006 21:41

quadgun wrote:but if it was a set ... then it's not flying blazing each time ... only when the following move is paradox, right?

Yes! That is absolutely correct! The Whirling SS component set is called 'whirling.'

Zeb: What delay were you talking about? Im curious to know.

-----
Matt Coffman (2nd post) knows what's going on, and all he had to do was read the 1st post and watch the video! He's a smart, open-minded individual, for sure.

Several posts down from that, Liam says he's been hitting this set for ages!

quadgun · Post by **quadgun** » 03 Aug 2006 21:52

gangsta wrote: Yes! That is absolutely correct! The Whirling SS component set is called 'whirling.'

THANKS!

habitat · Post by **habitat** » 03 Aug 2006 21:53

I was mostly just talking shit, so calm down. You act as if you have invented the barraging set (and if I'm not mistaken, maybe I am, but sunil didn't name it sunilwalker, or even janiwalker ...)

Yes, it COULD be a set.
No, there is nothing more to contribute.

Anything more? Your coming off as a arrogant dickhead over this "intranizzied" thing. Let's try not to do that. Thanks.

shreddaily · Post by **shreddaily** » 04 Aug 2006 01:16

gangsta wrote: Please don't clog this thread with irrelevant rambling.

You haven't been around here long have you?

You posted a 'the' trick...end of "discussion", begin of usless banter/flaming! Thats how we role sucka!

I'm really starting to enjoy your style though. You post a lot, you talk up your unkown brother, and you retaliate back at peoples comments... I can smell a new flamini' damin in the makin!

What you don't know who flamin' Damin is??? Dude, knowledge is power! Get some.

PS- I did put some usefull stuff in the other topic about this set. But after reading your retoric over and over and over and over, I decided this topic needed some life. Come on 4 pages for a freeking flying whirl??? There best be some smack talking goin' down!
Please respond with a bit more anger and hatered, then we'll really have a ragin rino.
sincerly,
your award winner

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 04 Aug 2006 04:47

Nate: Yep, we posted a The trick, but the concept in question is completely valid. I don't feel the need to flame anybody, that's not how I 'role'

.

Anyway, the 4 pages aren't necessary, only the first and 2nd post.

Yep, I relataliate back at peoples' comments; it's called debate.

All i've pointed out is the facts, and if you can point out where i'm wrong, then please do.

Habitat:

"Yes, it COULD be a set.
No, there is nothing more to contribute."

That's what we've been saying this whole time (from the 1st post on!). Why didn't you just say this in the first place?

Skippy! · Post by **Skippy!** » 04 Aug 2006 05:23

The other day I hit symposium mirage with a DISTINCT 90 degree turn. NEW TRICKKKKK. I call it Cyrrage. I'm gonna take it to worlds and win Sick 1

For real though, it seems to me like your biggest concern is tacking your name on to this 'new' trick. I read through all four pages, and I have to say I basically agree with...well..everybody other than the two who are mainly supporting this 'new' trick. If I were to notate this trick, I would not put [no plant while] anywhere in it, because it doesn't look symposium to me at all. Using the example in the video, the first time he hits toe>op flying dealie. But he plants the setting foot...soooo...that means that there IS a plant while...right? I tried this trick WITHOUT planting the support foot, now THAT really IS a hard trick.
[EDIT: I read this part over. I don't really understand what I'm getting at here.]

I'm not a big add player. And I can't boast about hitting any fearless links, but this just doesn't seem like a mindblowing new concept. I think people saying that this isn't a new set shouldn't really bug you so much. If you're that obsessed with attaching your name to a set, then it looks like you're gonna have to try something else, cause this just isn't gonna cut it.

Also, I've noticed 'gangsta' has been pretty adamant about coming back at people and basically outright saying, "You're completely wrong, you closeminded prick. I am right." It just seems like you're really desperate to attach your name to the trick. Weak.

Anyway, you shouldn't take this so personally. Not everyone can invent tricks, no matter how badly you want to. Maybe one day you WILL invent a new trick, but I just don't think this is it.

EDIT: This also reminded me, I've seen Matt Cross hitting pixie from a kick. So instead of starting it with a toe stall, it starts with a kick. But again, it doesn't get any extra adds/components/names because it's not any different from a regular pixie. Just like this is blazing set from a kick.

janis · Post by **janis** » 04 Aug 2006 06:36

not planting the support foot reminds me of a screwaround move that we called "broadway" that me and some guys did except "broadway" doesn't really have a dex and I'm sure we weren't the first people to try it either.

mikeanello · Post by **mikeanello** » 04 Aug 2006 07:08

I am so, so glad someone brought up Matt Cross. I saw Matt bust the pixie set with a kick back in 2003, and you can too in this video!

http://www.footbag.org/gallery/show/-9309

Modified Sets Hit by Matt Cross:
- Kick Set Pixie @ time 3:22
- Kick Set Neo @ time 3:30

At the time Matt and I referred to these sets as "kick set whatever" or "toe kick pixie" and "inside kick neo".

Enjoy.