******Add-on to the interrupted theory*******


Aim of this complement :
to help avoiding the detailed notation without losing much information on the linkages.
to differency the different types of interruption that clearly exist.



1 - Add-on to the "~" symbol use

My main idea in the interrupted discussion was to implement new symbols, in addition to the "~" one, representative of the interruption.
As you already have noticed, "~" is used in place of a traditional ">" or "->" between two tricks, making the difference between a simple one-to-one linkage and a case of interruption, where one at least of the two tricks is not complete.
My idea is to mix the "~" symbol with the ">" symbol to create some kind of hybrid symbol, to represent each kind of interruption.

Basically, ">" means, at the opposite of a "~",
that the tricks made in relation are both complete tricks. Mixing it with "~"
would make much more different symbols, 5 in total. I suggest to give this new symbols a sense, different for each of them :

~ : means that first trick is done without the catch, second without the push.
TOTAL interruption.
example : Twisted sonic ~ Shadow still 12 = Devil's sonic.

> : means that both tricks are done complete, the first one with its catch and the second with its push. NO interruption.
example : TA > TA reverse = TA harmonic

~> : means that first trick is interrupted by the second and so lacks of its catch, but that the second is still a
complete trick done with its push.
PARTIAL interruption.
example : TA ~> FL TA = Double TA ( FL TA got its push, even if its a particular type of push, the fingerless push )

>~ : That would mean first trick with its catch and second without its push.
It's not a clear case of interruption, for first trick is not interrupted, but it can have its part to play to clarify some hybrids.
We could consider that the second trick can be said "interrupted" at its start if its push is missing.
PARTIAL interruption.
example : not yet.

>~~> : means that the trick is interrupted at the middle by a bracketed {trick}. Will mostly be used in nesting cases, as we will show later. NESTED interruption.
example : further, in the nesting case.


That gives us three new symbols, "~>" ,">~" and ">~...~>, each designing a different kind of interruption.


2 - Compatibility with the current system

** - Compatible with the [p] [s X] [c] system.

The new symbols can easily be implemented in a [p] [s X] [c] notated linkage, as shown below :

A [p][s x]~> X [p][s x][c] >~ Y [s x] ~ B [s x][c].

And even more, it can be used without [p][s x][c] notations without making readers confused about push and catch :

A ~> X >~ Y ~ B .

A misses its catch, X is complete, Y misses both push and catch, B misses its push.
the only informations lacking deals with start and end of the combo : we don't know about the push of A or the catch of B.
Of course, used in a complete breakdown, we can only suppose that A is pushed and B is catched.

** - compatible with the nesting system.

I will show how my idea is compatible with the nesting system by an example.

In the current system, let's use this case of nested interruptions :

A ~ {B ~ {C - D}}

We don't have many informations about push or catch of each trick using this shorthand notation.

But it's hard to notate it with [p][s x][c] system because of the nesting. Placing the [] requires hard reckoning and makes the breakdown quite long.
With the "~,>~,~>" system, we need to introduce a new notation, using the brackets of nesting.
To facilitate and to shorten the notation, and to keep fitting with both my idea and the nesting system, I had to mix brackets and transiting symbols.

So let's suppose it this way :

A has its push and its catch, it is interrupted during its spin part. ( need the use of >~{}~> )
B has no push, but its catch. Interrupted in its spin part also. ( need the use of ~{}~> )
C has no push, no catch, is interrupted at the end by D.
D has its push but no catch. ( no more nesting, so just need of ~> between C and D)

If you get the point until here, you've already understood that

A ~ {B ~ {C - D}} would become

A >~ {B ~ {C ~> D} ~>} ~> .

N.B. : That notation gives a full account for the catch and push of each trick, but not for the number of rotations.



3 - Pros and Cons

Pros :
*it shortens notations radically.
*the main informations are conserved.
*It can be used with or without the [p][s x][c] system.
*It's easier to apply than [p][s x][c] in nesting cases.
*Makes the difference between the different types of interruption.

Cons :
*it's harder to understand, especially in case of nesting, than [p][s x][c] notations.
*too much symbols for only one kind of tricks...
*where's my p s x c ! Murderer...
*Not adapted to general public, too hard to understand.


Thanks for attention.

----
Original Thread