UPSB v3
Naming Committee / [project][5.18] 1P2H Notation
Discuss possible naming conventions.
-
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 07:56:26
This is an attempt to establish an official notation for 1P2H combos.
I have a proposition that I've had for awhile, and I still stand by it.
I believe we should expand our current notation to include both hands as one unit, as I feel they should be.
Basically the new finger slots would be T1234 Y5678.
Note that the "Y" was chosen for lack of a better choice, as it looks somewhat like a T; if anyone has a better suggestion, that would be nice.
Using this notation, transfer tricks can be easily notated with an understandable starting and ending position. It also allows for very simple right to left hand conversion and so on.
I've made two example transfers that I will break down with this system.
Transfer One -
Twisted Sonic Reverse 56-67 > Pass Reverse 67-78 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 78-67 > Twisted Sonic 67-56 > Pass 56-Y5 > Thumbaround Release Y5-12 > Charge Reverse 12 ~> Pass 12-23 > Warped Sonic 23-34 > Demon's Sonic 34-12 ~ Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Twisted Sonic Bust 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Extended Thumbaround T1-12
Transfer Two -
Sonic Clip 78-68 ~> Pass 68-56 > Pass 56-67 > Inverse Twisted Sonic 67-56 > Inverse Twisted Sonic Reverse 56-67 > Twisted Sonic Reverse 67-78 ~> Pass 78-67 > Twisted Sonic 67-56 > Pass 56-Y5 > Charge Y5 > Pass Reverse Y5-1Y > Water 1Y-12 > Fingerless Charge Reverse 12 > Pass 12-23 > Pass 23-34 > Sonic Clip 34-24 ~> Pass 24-12 > Pass 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-12 > Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Devil's Sonic 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Extended Thumbaround T1-12 -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 08:16:34
T = Left hand?
Then instead of 'y' use 'R'.
T = Right hand?
Instead of 'y' use 'L'.
In fact, it may be best to omit 'T' completely in this notation and just use R and L. -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 08:37:45
IMO it's a bit confusing but I would say there can be better notations, not that I can think of it but yea..It can be worked on though.
I think the 5678 concept should be removed. The "[Left/Right hand] Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic...." is convenient but the only problem is "Pass Reverse Y5-1Y > Water 1Y-12". There is no convenient notation for that. I think that'll find its place when Assissted Spinning Concept gets its notations done.
I would notate the first combo like this:
[RIGHT HAND (OR) R] Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Twisted Sonic 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Thumbaround Release T5 > [LEFT HAND (OR) L]12 > Charge Reverse 12 ~> Pass 12-23 > Warped Sonic 23-34 > Demon's Sonic 34-12 ~ Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Twisted Sonic Bust 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Extended Thumbaround T1-12
The second combo however is not that easy. -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 08:38:00
Interesting, but the idea was to integrate into the existing notation, which would mean we would have to officially change T to R... seems a bit radical
plus it forces a change in 1p1h notation that negatively affects bidexterous notating, imo
@outsmash
One thing i'd like to note is that though it may seem strange, i dont think it's any more strange than our standard notation. I believe our ability to read 12-23-34 notations easily is a simple matter of familiarity, and a little time with this would make it easy -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 08:43:10QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 7 2009, 02:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Interesting, but the idea was to integrate into the existing notation, which would mean we would have to officially change T to R... seems a bit radical
plus it forces a change in 1p1h notation that negatively affects bidexterous notating, imo
@outsmash
One thing i'd like to note is that though it may seem strange, i dont think it's any more strange than our standard notation. I believe our ability to read 12-23-34 notations easily is a simple matter of familiarity, and a little time with this would make it easy
That I'd probably have to agree to. It doesn't look/seem familiar but we could used to it. As of now, that is the only easy way to notate hand to hand linking. -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 08:46:21
Yeah, and i'd like to stress that. This may seem very foreign, but i've been working with it for only a week or so and it's already becoming quite familiar. I truly believe this can work.
-
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 08:59:05
So the dominant hand gets the 1234 and non dominant gets 5678, or is right always getting 1234? What about cases where the spinner doesn't show a dominant hand in his/her combo, how do we go about determining which hand gets 5678.
I don't see the problem of saying TA release L T1- R 12 It seems much more intuitive, and doesn't completely change one hands notations, you say changing T to R and L is to radical, but your proposing to change 1/2 the slots instead, I don't get it
Thats my two cents on it -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 09:09:38
The spinner breaking it down can choose, whichever side doing the most difficult tricks can be 1234, it really doesnt matter
and i think this makes sense because i think the hands should be treated as one unit. How else can we effectively notate inter-hand slots? L1RT-L12RT1? -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 17:56:34
The inter hand slots do look a little complex with the R and L notation, but it is simpler and a convention used informally, therefore it is a lot less confusing initially for the common spinner using it. Its has instant familiarity where as what you suggested you need to use for a bit.
That said your way does make extensive 1p2h breakdowns a lot cleaner, after thinking about it for a bit I like your method better, since it can be applied to other spinning concepts much more efficiently and cover more then just simple transfers with ease. -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 20:13:36
Alright
Well, anymore suggestions for Y?
Or anymore oppositions? I would like to address them -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 22:04:28
Shadow's talked to me before about this and I really do agree that the notation's a lot cleaner and more efficient than the R L suggestion. It may seem a bit strange but I really do think it'll grow on people like T1234 did.
It definitely solves the problem with notating any transfers and assisted spinning.
Although there are some tricks that are still problematic to notate. I'll try to post a vid, but I don't have a tripod so I'm not sure how I'll film... Can't really hold it in the other hand.
And as I told you before, I like Y. It's like an upside down T. R and L definitely doesn't work as well as T and Y.
Also, I'd say dominant hand uses T1234 and non-dominant uses Y5678. -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 22:11:09
i was thinking, how about just a lowercase t? i thought it might be problematic because some people might lazily type t on their own, but charlie mentioned those difficult hybrids to me, and i was worried as to how we'd notate P and B on the other side as well
-
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 22:15:58
I like Y better, a lower case can be confusing because people are lazy, and it isn't as distinct.
For the P and B we would have to come up with other letters that are a bit more arbitrary. mabye P on of hand becomes d since it is 180 flip for p.
IDK though it gets a bit to abstract for those notations -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 22:17:09QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 7 2009, 02:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>i was thinking, how about just a lowercase t? i thought it might be problematic because some people might lazily type t on their own, but charlie mentioned those difficult hybrids to me, and i was worried as to how we'd notate P and B on the other side as well
hmm, I kind of like Y, but a lower case t p and b could also work. -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 22:47:55
well yeah... like awesome and i said, some people might type t out of laziness
although i dont really see lowercase Ts alot...
so i dont really know -
Date: Sat, Mar 7 2009 23:58:26QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 7 2009, 02:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>well yeah... like awesome and i said, some people might type t out of laziness
although i dont really see lowercase Ts alot...
so i dont really know
What about NT, NP, and NB? N = non-dominant. -
Date: Sun, Mar 8 2009 00:23:38QUOTE (Charlie @ Mar 7 2009, 06:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>What about NT, NP, and NB? N = non-dominant.
I like that a lot more than lower case letters, but I think ideally we should use one letter abbreviations to make the break downs look as simple as possible. Although Ps and Bs aren't used extensively in breakdowns so NP and NB shouldn't be an issue, and I like just using Y for the non dominant thumb, because it looks so closely to a T -
Date: Sun, Mar 8 2009 00:28:18
how about Y for T and lowercase p and b for P and B?
or NB and NP is fine i guess
i dont think we need to worry about that too much
i'd like to hear from some other people, so hopefully i can put up a vote soon -
Date: Sun, Mar 8 2009 06:28:39
I think the Dominant (1234T) and Non-Dominant (5678Y) can be replaced with Right and Left Hands. This is because we can easily figure out which the spinner is spinning with. I mean, if the Dominant - Non-Dominant rule exists, we'd have to actually watch the video to figure out which hand is dominant.
But again, this will also lead to problems as if the Right-Left rule exists, then the spinner who spins with his left hand (if right hand = 1234T and left hand = 5678Y) would have to change all his notations to suit the 5678Y rule. This would be irritating as well.
I think we should work on this a 'little' more. -
Date: Sun, Mar 8 2009 07:24:38
what im saying is it really doesnt matter...
you look at the breakdown and you pick which side you want to be which, it's that simple
that's why i want to stray from actually including left or right anywhere in this -
Date: Sun, Mar 8 2009 20:57:50
I think Outsmash brings up a valid point, looking at a breakdown a spinner should be able to reproduce the combo. It is kind of a big detail to leave up to interpretation. We want break down to be as accurate as possible.
It would be irritating breaking down left handed spinners asOutsmash suggested if we apply Y5678 to the left hand instead, but as you said Shadow, we can get used to a new notation. It should defiantly be considered. -
Date: Sun, Mar 8 2009 22:10:02
but it IS accurate
think about it
when a right handed spinner writes out a combo, they'd write something like
Twisted sonic 23-12 > pass 12-T1 > Ext Ta Bust T1-12
so if a left handed spinner comes along and reads that combo, what do they do? They perform that combo, on their left hand.
So, a two handed spinner breaks down their combo, and picks the side with a higher difficulty as their T1234. Whoever is writing the combo chooses which side to be T1234, but the spinner reading the breakdown can choose as well. -
Date: Sun, Mar 8 2009 23:58:28
There is a difference between left hands and right hands, sure a left handed spinner reading a right hand breakdown will do it with his left but, just because that happens doesn't mean it is accurate. You wouldn't find a spinner copying a left handed combo with his right hand in a copy collab and break downs should reflect that.
Assigning Y678 to the left hand assures the accuracy of the current system. As well if the spinner wants to perform the harder parts of a combo he can easily switch it around, even if it goes away from the breakdown. At least this way the spinner knows that they are deviating from the original combo.
Its a little radical, especially to left handed spinners, but I am sure people will adopt to the system. Where as Shadow's is just an add on to the current system. Personally I would prefer to have a breakdown to be as close to the actual combo as closely as possible. -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 00:07:45QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 8 2009, 04:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>There is a difference between left hands and right hands, sure a left handed spinner reading a right hand breakdown will do it with his left but, just because that happens doesn't mean it is accurate. You wouldn't find a spinner copying a left handed combo with his right hand in a copy collab and break downs should reflect that.
Assigning Y678 to the left hand assures the accuracy of the current system. As well if the spinner wants to perform the harder parts of a combo he can easily switch it around, even if it goes away from the breakdown. At least this way the spinner knows that they are deviating from the original combo.
Its a little radical, especially to left handed spinners, but I am sure people will adopt to the system. Where as Shadow's is just an add on to the current system. Personally I would prefer to have a breakdown to be as close to the actual combo as closely as possible.
So, all left-handed spinners must use Y in their breakdown instead of T? Sounds like a possiblity... might work. What about P and B for left-handed spinners? NP and NB wouldn't work, since that's their dominant hand. -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 00:42:45
i really disagree with this, are you saying all left handed spinners should break down their combos using Y5678? I don't think anyone will do that, I wouldnt even do that, I think it's unfair.
-
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 01:08:45QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 8 2009, 05:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>i really disagree with this, are you saying all left handed spinners should break down their combos using Y5678? I don't think anyone will do that, I wouldnt even do that, I think it's unfair.
Haha, indeed. Quite...handist, eh?
Awesome's ideal is quite radical, I don't know if the general public would accept it too easily. It's like trying to get everyone to notate Fingerless Around Reverse Fall instead of Backaround Fall. -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 01:17:22
YES!
well i called it dexterist
but w/e -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 01:24:19
True, but we should include some way to say what hand is spinning, instead of just allowing who ever is breaking or reading to just choose. We should give this some thought at least.
-
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 02:35:09
okay, simple.
at the beginning of the combo, write [RO] or [LO] for Left/Right-Oriented
yeah? -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 03:14:29
That would work
-
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 03:37:15
Itd be nice if it wasn't just us 3 posting...
That sounds fine shadow. -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 03:51:05
lol
i think we care the most, we're the predominant 1p2h spinners aren't we?
Zombo, any thoughts?
too bad sketching isn't here >>
and uhm.... idk how polls work here, how many votes are necessary, how long to keep it open, etc...
but i'll open it either tomorrow or tuesday if no one has anything else to suggest -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 04:20:33
the LR is better than the TY system, the problem with LR is that it is not handedness-neutral.
Mats used X to denote a transfer, but if the combo uses the 2 hands interweavingly, it's not convienent.
Someone else suggesetd the use of Switch/Goofy/Fakey like in skateboard/snowboard to indicate the opposite hand. Could also use Off-hand here. -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 04:43:16
yeah but again, interhand tricks would be too difficult or complicated, which is why i like this system
-
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 04:46:34
we can also try
T1234
T'1'2'3'4' = off-hand
or any small symbol -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 04:50:30
that's a good idea, however, i prefer 5678 because i feel that once it's been seen enough, it'll be familiar to a point where it can be seen much easier. When i see things like 34-23, there's a bit of visual recognition in my mind that instantly tells me where the trick is, and also allows me to recognize anomalies like 13 and 24. I think if we made it so similar like 3'4'-1'2', it wouldn't be so easy to read.
-
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 04:50:32
I don't see what's wrong with Y5678. T'1'2'3'4' works, but so does Y5678. T'1'2'3'4' is just harder to write. But, I agree tricks that require two-hands at the same time would be hard to breakdown.
-
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 05:04:57
First off I agree with shadow for the most part, but when it comes to reading notation there needs to be a more obvious symbol like
T* 1* 2* 3* 4*
the apostrophies are too hard to see or even just use
T& 1&...etc.
(Just a thought)
Anyways.
Well, maybe this isn't what you guys are looking for, but here's my idea.
Why no introduce a hold notation. just using a (H). for non-aerial transfers. The hands have to touch in some way to complete the combo.
Example:
T12(H)67 [trick].
That's just an idea though. -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 05:16:26
well im confused as to iMatt's stand (im talking to him right now), but he brings up another point i forgot about
in some situations there is no clean trick starting-ending transfer. the spinner simply grabs the pen abruptly from the other hand
in this situation, we may need to implement another letter to notate that
maybe we could change - to _
infinity T1_56
?
kinda weird... -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 12:43:19QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 9 2009, 09:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>lol
i think we care the most, we're the predominant 1p2h spinners aren't we?
Missed me
Anyways, I hate the " T' or T* " idea.
There is no way that'll work out. Breaking down a combo in that format will be really annoying. Lets just stick to T&Y or L&R.
I personally prefer L and R because it gives you an idea about which hand is spinning.
Combinations dont really matter (like no difference between L1234, R5678 (OR) R1234, L5678).
The only problem is that people should stop using "T" for this to carry on so probably T&Y might work.
The [RO] and [LO] concept is perfect. Or something like R = T (OR) R = 1234 would also do - It shows that the right hand ® is the Dominant hand.
And @shadow and iMatt: On the interrupting trick thought: Again " _ " is not so nice. We could just ude interrupted trick notation, like:
Infinty T1-12 ~ Infinty Y5-56 and
Index Bak 56 ~> Index Around 12-12
Wow! I got used to the Y5678 notations. This could actually work perfectly
-
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 13:30:27
imatt, this is the same thing as the X notation by Mats.
the problem is when the combo is interweaved with 2 handed spinning when you have a lot of tricks using fingers of both hands at same time linked together, there would multiple transfers in quick succession, it would be very confusing. it only works with simple "combo in right hand - transfer - combo in left hand" type of situation. -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 13:54:38QUOTE (Outsmash @ Mar 9 2009, 04:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Missed me
Well i meant the three of you and i.
Well, the idea is that the 5678 notation CAN work for those interweaved tricks... the only time it doesnt work is basically when a two handed fingerswitch occurs. I think the solution to this can be found once we find the solution to fingerswitching notations, which I intended to bring up next -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 13:56:06
Anyone thought of using colour to denote which hand is doing what? For instance, we could set a standard of:
Black = Right hand
Red = Left hand
BackAround T1-T1 > Fingerpass > ThumbAround 12-23 > Sonic Reverse 23-34 > Sonic Reverse 34-12 > Sonic Reverse 12 - 23 > Sonic 23-12 > IndexAround Release 12-12 > IndexAround > ThumbSpin 2.5. -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 13:59:40
for forum posting its not convienent
and if you have to notate like
BackAround T1-T1 > Fingerpass > ThumbAround 12-23 > Sonic Reverse 23-34 > Sonic Reverse 34-12 > Sonic Reverse 12 - 23 > Sonic 23-12 > IndexAround Release 12-12 > IndexAround > ThumbSpin 2.5.
a slot using 2 fingers from different hands it might be easy to miss it. maybe you're color-blind too.
the reason I don't like Y5678 is because both hands are supposed to be named the same way. the only thing you need is adding an extra thing to tell them apart. with Y5678 its not obvious it corresponds to T1234 on other hand -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 14:05:42QUOTE (Zombo @ Mar 9 2009, 01:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>for forum posting its not convienent
and if you have to notate like
BackAround T1-T1 > Fingerpass > ThumbAround 12-23 > Sonic Reverse 23-34 > Sonic Reverse 34-12 > Sonic Reverse 12 - 23 > Sonic 23-12 > IndexAround Release 12-12 > IndexAround > ThumbSpin 2.5.
a slot using 2 fingers from different hands it might be easy to miss it. maybe you're color-blind too.
the reason I don't like Y5678 is because both hands are supposed to be named the same way. the only thing you need is adding an extra thing to tell them apart. with Y5678 its not obvious it corresponds to T1234 on other hand
I think it is very rare to not be able to tell black + red apart? You would have to be completely blind to colour.
Change in font then?
Right hand = Normal
Left hand = Arial black
BackAround T1-T1 > Fingerpass > ThumbAround 12-23 > Sonic Reverse 23-34 > Sonic Reverse 34-12 > Sonic Reverse 12 - 23 > Sonic 23-12 > IndexAround Release 12-12 > IndexAround > ThumbSpin 2.5
If people are going to fuck it up when they post on the forum, surely they are also likely to fuck up normal notation of tricks? All people need to do is not fuck up. If they do, I'm sure it will be spotted. -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 14:11:41
Colour is not very convenient (as Zombo pointed out). And I think we should just stick to Y5678 since it also paves a way to Assissted Spinning Concept.
It's a very simple method and interrupted trick notation can also be used on it.
Basically, everyone HERE somewhat accepts this idea except that we want to change the "Y5678" part to something more convenient?
I think once we agree on this idea, we can just solve that. It's a minor issue actually. -
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 20:50:41
I am all for Y678, it won't take that long to realize that they correspond with T1234 on the other hand
-
Date: Mon, Mar 9 2009 21:45:53
For interweaving tricks why not do this... since two hands are acting upon the pen at the same time...
[RO]CODE
Sonic 34-23 > Figure 8 T2 > Rev IA 56-YF (Non-dominant hand thumbflap) > FL TA Rev YF-56
Pass Reverse 67-56
EDIT
whoops, forgot about the spacing, i'll put it in a codebox -
Date: Tue, Mar 10 2009 04:21:18
Well I'm still completely for Y5678.
@zombo, my idea was that it shouldn't be "corresponding", I want the two hands to be united as one unit, which I believe is the only way to properly include them interchangeably in combos.
@Mats, all of those methods are rendered obsolete in plain-text. I don't think we should allow for something reliant on HTML (?) capabilities -
Date: Tue, Mar 10 2009 16:21:15
We should do this. I think it isn't worth wasting time to think of another way to notate this. People would get used to typing and(OR) seeing Y5678.
-
Date: Tue, Mar 10 2009 19:16:32
how about I II III IV instead of 5678
T for dominant hand thumb
t for non-dominant hand thumb -
Date: Tue, Mar 10 2009 22:33:15
I don't like that, I think it's too hard to read and recognize quickly. And as said before, some people might type t in lowercase out of laziness
-
Date: Tue, Mar 10 2009 22:39:47QUOTE (Outsmash @ Mar 10 2009, 12:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>We should do this. I think it isn't worth wasting time to think of another way to notate this. People would get used to typing and(OR) seeing Y5678.
Its hardly a wasye of time thinking of a new way, but I think Y678 is a good system, I doubt we will get anything better, and the people who actually use 1p2h in combos are rare, although that is on the rise.
and I II III IV is just weird, we aren't trying to make a "coesponding" system for the off hand, but rather use the hands as a whole unit, as shadow stated many times already, thats what good 1p2h spinning makes use of, and the notation should reflect that. Y678 does a much better job at representing this -
Date: Tue, Mar 10 2009 23:05:01QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 10 2009, 02:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Its hardly a wasye of time thinking of a new way, but I think Y678 is a good system, I doubt we will get anything better, and the people who actually use 1p2h in combos are rare, although that is on the rise.
and I II III IV is just weird, we aren't trying to make a "coesponding" system for the off hand, but rather use the hands as a whole unit, as shadow stated many times already, thats what good 1p2h spinning makes use of, and the notation should reflect that. Y678 does a much better job at representing this
I agree completely.
Summary:
Outsmash, it isn't a waste of time, we do want to make sure we cover all the points, but I like what we've got here.
Zombo, I feel that treating the hands as one unit will be much more efficient and correct. -
Date: Wed, Mar 11 2009 00:20:18
to treat as one unit doesn't mean you have to give them different names
you have to keep the symmetry of the hands for better understanding
Y5678 is useful only for interweaving combos, for combos where there are clear transfers between hands it is very tiring to read.
to me I II III IV is easier to read than 5 6 7 8, reading in roman is faster than doing (5-4), (6-4), etc. -
Date: Wed, Mar 11 2009 00:30:27
Right, but I don't think we'll have to think 8-4 and 6-4 like you said, it's only been a few weeks and already I recognize the 5678 notations as the slots they are; no need for conversion
-
Date: Wed, Mar 11 2009 01:11:35
All i'm saying is, we already have notation for fingers
its T1234, doesn't matter if its your left hand or not.
Therefore if you use both, you need a way to differentiate both hands.
Therefore it simply needs to be an equivalent notation to T1234 for the non-dominant hand.
having Y5678 means one of my two hands will have 2 different notations for it, because if I did only a left-handed combo I would use T1234.
We need to use T1234 on both hands because thats whyat you use normally, + something very simple to distinguish both hands.
To me it's very clear that it should be T1234 but with some added stuff to differentiate from regular T1234, not a whole new set which creates duplicate notation for one of my hands.
Yes 1p2h means you have 10 fingers, but let's not forget that we have pairs of fingers, we need to use this property to our advantage. If we had 10 unique fingers then it would be ok to use Y5678. But because of symmetry property, we can simplify -
Date: Wed, Mar 11 2009 01:40:51
Y5678 is hardly complex, and 1p2h is an advanced concept, so its not like we have to worry about teaching new spinners it, although they should quickly grasp the concept anyway.
Y5678 produces the cleanest looking breakdowns, out of what has been suggested so far. Plus it easily expands into assisted spinning with little confusion a slot like 1III looks weirder then 17 and I feel a small t isn't as distinct as a Y. We already have single character finger notations with Y5678 any attempts to simplify it actually make it more complex. Having separate, unique notations for the off hand makes for the least amount of confusion, instead of trying to purposely trying to imitate other slots. With the other hand having distinct, single character per finger notations is the simplest, least confusing way, which Y5678 accomplishes. -
Date: Wed, Mar 11 2009 02:53:03
I stand by my original proposition
T1234 with some way to distinguish
like T&1&2&3&4& as suggested by imatt -
Date: Wed, Mar 11 2009 03:24:28
well i guess we'll add it to the poll once that gets up?
but you'll have to decide on a symbol -
Date: Wed, Mar 11 2009 07:45:47
I have an idea (which is not nearly good):
How about we use "" to split the combos, i.e., we use "" for transfers instead of -.
Example:
Twisted Sonic 23-12 > ThumbAround T1 "" 12 > Pass Rev 12-23...
That breakdown signifies that the "Twisted Sonic 23-12 > TA" was done on the Right hand and it was passed to the Left hand 12 and the left hand continues with the pass reverse. (Vice-Versa).
And also,
"" = Change of hands completely
" = Change of hands partially. Eg: waterfall kind of thing, assissted spinning, etc.
I'll break down Shadow's combo in some time.
EDIT:
TRANSFER ONE:
Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Twisted Sonic 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Thumbaround Release T5 "" 12 > Charge Reverse 12 ~> Pass 12-23 > Warped Sonic 23-34 > Demon's Sonic 34-12 ~ Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Twisted Sonic Bust 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Extended Thumbaround T1-12
TRANSFER TWO:
Sonic Clip 34-24 ~> Pass 24-12 > Pass 12-23 > Inverse Twisted Sonic 23-12 > Inverse Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Twisted Sonic Reverse 23-34 ~> Pass 34-23 > Twisted Sonic 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Charge T1 > Pass Reverse T1 - T"1 > Water T"1 "" 12 > Fingerless Charge Reverse 12 > Pass 12-23 > Pass 23-34 > Sonic Clip 34-24 ~> Pass 24-12 > Pass 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-12 > Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Devil's Sonic 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Extended Thumbaround T1-12 -
Date: Wed, Mar 11 2009 22:46:52
I don't like it.
I think we're getting too complicated with this. -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 00:22:07
actually this is a good ide its just that outsmash explained too complex
basically
T1234 for dominant hand
T" 1" 2" 3" 4" for non-dominant hand
so far same idea as me.
but when you do long combos on the left hand, you don't want to write T" 1" 2" everytime, cuz thats too long. so you write """" to indicate that whatever is between "" "" is on non-dominant hand, even though we use regular notation to simplify.
thats another idea to simplify naming in combos with long sections on non-dominant hand.
we can make it more clear
for example
[NDH] blah blah blah [/NDH] to indicate you read whatever inside as for non-dominant hand. -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 00:25:46
Haha. What ever was wrong with:
Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Twisted Sonic 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Thumbaround Release T5 (to LH) 12 > Charge Reverse 12 ~> Pass 12-23 > Warped Sonic 23-34 > Demon's Sonic 34-12 ~ Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Twisted Sonic Bust 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Extended Thumbaround T1-12? -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 00:36:56
@Mats, that's just so informal, it took me a minute just to find the switch
so zombo, it seems we basically have the same idea but you want some sort of correspondent rather than 5678?
alright well i still think 5678 is a better choice, and i stick by it. I'd like to hear other people's opinions on it -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 00:59:13QUOTE (Mats @ Mar 11 2009, 08:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Haha. What ever was wrong with:
Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Twisted Sonic 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Thumbaround Release T5 (to LH) 12 > Charge Reverse 12 ~> Pass 12-23 > Warped Sonic 23-34 > Demon's Sonic 34-12 ~ Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Twisted Sonic Bust 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Extended Thumbaround T1-12?
yea exactly,
same concept
its just that in addition we need a system for tricks that uses fingers from both hands.
so we actually 2 things: one for long transfers, one for tricks using fingers from both hands.
@shadowserpant, that's right Y5678 is not the ideal substitute for T1234, there's better. -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 02:54:09
I am with shadow on Y5678 the other methods make it harder to pick out the spinning on the off hand and the transfers don't stand out as much.
I don't think the point is to substitute T1234 but instead have a easily distinguishable notation for the other hand -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 14:29:31
Shadows idea could probably help out more efficiently in complex combos.
My idea is simple to read, etc. With some planning, it can also work as well as Shadows.
I'm not for anything specifically. Whatever gets picked, I don't mind. -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 17:37:38
I still don't see how having T''1'' 2'' 3'' 4'' would be better. I really prefer the cleanness of a Y5678. We'll adapt to the change soon enough.
I kind of like outsmash's idea, but maybe if it was fixed up a bit. -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 18:10:33
Y5678 appears more abstract than T" 1" 2" 3" 4"
you can relate to T" 1" 2" 3" 4" better
but maybe there's a better modifier than " -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 22:50:11
i just think 5678 will be much easier to read in the end, as well as cleaner
and i see no purpose in marking the transfer, if the slots end up on the opposite hand, it obviously transferred -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 23:07:02
its not a question of marking the transfer
its a question of making the notation easier to read
when you have a big chunk of tricks on the left hand, you don't want to keep using Y5678 for no reason. -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 23:35:03
the transfer part was @outsmash's 12-23 -----> 12 "" 23 idea, I dont think it's necessary
and i dont see why not, what im saying is it only takes a bit of time to become familiar with it, and once you are, it's very simple to just use 5678 instead of 1234. For me, it's become a natural notation of my right hand. -
Date: Thu, Mar 12 2009 23:45:41
uhh
the "" part was to indicate that the rest that follows is notated as if on right hand, but its actually on left hand. then you write "" again to indicate you're notating the rigth hand again.
what's easier to read:
Sonic 34-23 > Sonic 23-12 > Shadow 12-56 > Pass 56-67 > Sonic reverse 67-78 > Sonic 78-56 > Leigun Y5-12
or
Sonic 34-23 > Sonic 23-12 > Shadow 12 "" 12 > Pass 12-23 > Sonic Reverse 23-34 > Sonic 34-12 > Leigun T1 "" 12
seems pretty obvious to me. -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 00:20:20
The 5678 is pretty easy to read, and if the combo is transfer heavy its confusing using the " method Y5678 covers a lot more ground, and once you become familiar with it it becomes easier then trying to figure out what hand is what in the break downs. Y5678 is far more versatile then any other suggestion and is suited for stuff beyond simple transfers, since once you get so many " marks its hard to tell which parts are in them and what ones are not
-
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 00:24:38QUOTE (Zombo @ Mar 12 2009, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>uhh
the "" part was to indicate that the rest that follows is notated as if on right hand, but its actually on left hand. then you write "" again to indicate you're notating the rigth hand again.
what's easier to read:
Sonic 34-23 > Sonic 23-12 > Shadow 12-56 > Pass 56-67 > Sonic reverse 67-78 > Sonic 78-56 > Leigun Y5-12
or
Sonic 34-23 > Sonic 23-12 > Shadow 12 "" 12 > Pass 12-23 > Sonic Reverse 23-34 > Sonic 34-12 > Leigun T1 "" 12
seems pretty obvious to me.
uh...
i honestly feel that the first one was easier to read -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 01:20:27QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 12 2009, 08:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>The 5678 is pretty easy to read, and if the combo is transfer heavy its confusing using the " method Y5678 covers a lot more ground, and once you become familiar with it it becomes easier then trying to figure out what hand is what in the break downs. Y5678 is far more versatile then any other suggestion and is suited for stuff beyond simple transfers, since once you get so many " marks its hard to tell which parts are in them and what ones are not
no
because if you have a lot of transfers, you don't use "" you use " only
Sonic 34-23 > Sonic 23-12 > Shadow 12 "" 12 > Pass 12-23 > Sonic Reverse 23-34 > Sonic 34-12 > Leigun T1 "" 12 > Pass 12-1"2" > Thumbaround T"3"-34 etc.
you use "" when you have long combos on the off-hand.
you use " when you have interweaving combos.
of course you can change those symbols to make it more clear.
example:
Sonic 34-23 > Sonic 23-12 > Shadow 12-[12 > Pass 12-23 > Sonic Reverse 23-34 > Sonic 34-12 > Leigun T1]-12 > Pass 12-1"2" > Thumbaround T"3"-34 etc.
makes it obvious that whatever is in [] is for the off-hand.QUOTEuh...
i honestly feel that the first one was easier to read
if you thought it was easier to read, then I really have nothing to say... I can't see how reusing old notation everybody knows T1234 + adding a simple indication harder to read than creating 5 new symbols (Y5678)...
creating 1 new symbol vs creating 5 new symbols, seem obvious to me.
Other advantages:
When you see a slot progression like 12-23, 12-34, 23-34, you have the feeling that the pen is going down the fingers. Why? Because the numbers are ascending. If you use Y5678, you break this. A progression like 34-56 actually goes up even though the numbers are ascending. Use 34-1"2", and you keep this same feeling. Something like 12-1"2" clearly shows you're moving from one hand to another hand at the same relative position. If you look at 12-56, the meaning is lost.
Honestly, the only advantage I see for Y5678 is that each finger takes 1 character to type for every finger, but that's a very small advantage compared to adding a modifier symbol. -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 01:48:05
The brackets are an improvement I think, but I still stand by Y5678
You get the feeling the pen is going done from familiarity of the concept, not because of the ascending numbers that you seem to make it out to be.
I think its harder to read and type the " and "" than Y5678, I don't think creating new symbols is really an issue here, since either system creates a whole new % symbols since 2" is treated as one symbol, its merely disguising old symbols as new ones by adding an addition to them. Having a misleading appearance is actually a disadvantage. When you write 1" or 2" you regard the 2 characters as one symbol, regardless of appearances, you still create 5 new symbols and add in a rule with the "" or [] what ever you are going to use. That way is actually introducing more concepts, but makes it look familiar which is a huge disadvantage in my mind.
With Y5678 we aren't adding new structure concepts with brackets, its simple an addition of slots to the old system. It actually introduces less new symbols since it doesn't have "" parts to it. Also it isn't masking new symbols by recycling old ones, which makes it easier to get used to. As well, to top it off each symbol is one character. They are easier to type and makes the finished breakdown look neater. The less typing involved without losing accuracy makes the system more efficient. -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 02:08:07
yeah. I still feel that Y5678 is more efficient.
-
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 02:09:07QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 12 2009, 09:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>You get the feeling the pen is going done from familiarity of the concept, not because of the ascending numbers that you seem to make it out to be.
uhh, if we wanted familiarity of concept we wouldn't have used T1234 in the first place (when we first started naming pen spinning years ago).
we would have used the regular names for figners: thumb, index, middle, ring, pinky. Those names we know them because we memorized them. That's familiarity.
We use T1234 for 2 reasons:
1. easier to write than thumb, index, etc..
2. Because it's easy to visualize the numbers 1 to 4 as the fingers going down the hand.
so I don't agree. I think there's deffinitely some information in the way the numbers are ordered. We would like to keep that information intact.QUOTEI think its harder to read and type the " and "" than Y5678
that's right, the only advantage of Y5678 is that we retain the property that each finger is denoted by a single character. This means we're saving one character per finger... not that much.QUOTEI don't think creating new symbols is really an issue here, since either system creates a whole new % symbols since 2" is treated as one symbol, its merely disguising old symbols as new ones by adding an addition to them. Having a misleading appearance is actually a disadvantage. When you write 1" or 2" you regard the 2 characters as one symbol, regardless of appearances, you still create 5 new symbols and add in a rule with the "" or [] what ever you are going to use. That way is actually introducing more concepts, but makes it look familiar which is a huge disadvantage in my mind.
Arguing semantics here. Yes, both ideas have set of 5 symbols, but
T"1"2"3"4" is composed of only one new symbol " in addition to naming we already know.
Y5678 is much more abstract.
If I had to teach someone the " idea I would say: " means off-hand. All they have to remember is put " after a finger to mean it's off-hand. They learn 1 new idea. They're not literally learning that T" is T, 1" is 1, 2" is 2, etc. all they know is " means offhand. That's it.
If I had to teach someone the Y5678 I would say: T1234 on the off-hand is Y5678. Now they have to remember 5 new things.QUOTEWith Y5678 we aren't adding new structure concepts with brackets, its simple an addition of slots to the old system. It actually introduces less new symbols since it doesn't have "" parts to it.
The idea of using bracket is independent of the " idea. You can apply the bracket to Y5678 as well.
Sonic 34-23 > Sonic 23-12 > Shadow 12-[12 > Pass 12-23 > Sonic reverse 23-34 > Sonic 34-12 > Leigun T1]-12 > Pass 12-56 > Thumbaround Y7-34
So we should debate whether to use Y5678 vs T"1"2"3"4", and then argue whether to use brackets form or not, regardless of Y5678 or T1234.QUOTEAlso it isn't masking new symbols by recycling old ones, which makes it easier to get used to.
??? Recycling old ideas is ALWAYS better than creating new ones... that's why we refrain from using hybrid naming... and created interrupted notation.QUOTEAs well, to top it off each symbol is one character. They are easier to type and makes the finished breakdown look neater. The less typing involved without losing accuracy makes the system more efficient.
Yes the "single character" is the only advantage. And i don't really think its advantage is significant. You save 1 character per finger... If you want to talk about accuracy how about ppl getting confused in their math and type a wrong number in the 5-8 range.
If we had 10 truly unique fingers, I would agree to naming them T1234 Y5678. But because naturally we have 5 pairs of 2 identical fingers, it's better to exploit that advantage and use T1234 on both hands, but differentiating which hand we're using.
In short, the problem should be differentiating the hands, not the fingers. -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 05:56:10QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 13 2009, 08:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I think its harder to read and type the " and "" than Y5678, I don't think creating new symbols is really an issue here, since either system creates a whole new % symbols since 2" is treated as one symbol, its merely disguising old symbols as new ones by adding an addition to them. Having a misleading appearance is actually a disadvantage. When you write 1" or 2" you regard the 2 characters as one symbol, regardless of appearances, you still create 5 new symbols and add in a rule with the "" or [] what ever you are going to use. That way is actually introducing more concepts, but makes it look familiar which is a huge disadvantage in my mind.
Totally Disagree. Would you rather just put "" and continue with normal notations on the other hand or use Y5678 for the off hand notation throughout the combo?
If you guys insist on making it more clear then we could use || and | instead of "" and ". That way we could notice the off hand notations at a glance.
Anyways, @Zombo: You failed to understand my point. I did not want to use the T" 1" 2" 3" 4" here. Let me make this more clear:
When "" is put, it means that the whole hand changes, i.e., from left - right or right - left. This is used for simple transfers and not for interweaving of tricks.
When " is put , it signifies that the letter/number before the " is the hand that was doing the previously and the number/letter after " is the other hand.
Eg: In Shadow's second combo, the "T" is on the right hand and the "1" is on the left. But " is placed between to show the difference of hands.
It's not comlicated at all. When anyone sees a "", they know the breakdown after that is on the other hand and when they see ", they know one half of it is on one hand and the other on the other hand.
Coming to typing, Hinestly, this is MUCH easier. Analysing the combo when seeing a breakdown is also easy.
EDIT:
TRANSFER TWO:
Sonic Clip 34-24 ~> Pass 24-12 > Pass 12-23 > Inverse Twisted Sonic 23-12 > Inverse Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Twisted Sonic Reverse 23-34 ~> Pass 34-23 > Twisted Sonic 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Charge T1 > Pass Reverse T1 - T|1 > Water T|1 || 12 > Fingerless Charge Reverse 12 > Pass 12-23 > Pass 23-34 > Sonic Clip 34-24 ~> Pass 24-12 > Pass 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-12 > Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Devil's Sonic 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Extended Thumbaround T1-12
Or we could use " for " and || for "". So:
TRANSFER TWO:
Sonic Clip 34-24 ~> Pass 24-12 > Pass 12-23 > Inverse Twisted Sonic 23-12 > Inverse Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Twisted Sonic Reverse 23-34 ~> Pass 34-23 > Twisted Sonic 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Charge T1 > Pass Reverse T1 - T"1 > Water T"1 || 12 > Fingerless Charge Reverse 12 > Pass 12-23 > Pass 23-34 > Sonic Clip 34-24 ~> Pass 24-12 > Pass 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-12 > Twisted Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Pass Reverse 23-34 >~ Inverse Twisted Sonic 34-23 > Devil's Sonic 23-12 > Pass 12-T1 > Extended Thumbaround T1-12
Seems complicated but it isn't (once we come to a conclusion). -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 06:06:50
...that's just too hard to read. Y5678 is so much cleaner, and so much simpler.
-
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 06:17:28QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 13 2009, 12:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>...that's just too hard to read. Y5678 is so much cleaner, and so much simpler.
I (somewhat) made it more complicated.
But again I don't agree, Y5678 takes sometime to get used to but " and "" is just obvious.
It's like [to R] and [to L]. It's not hard to read at all - not as hard as Y5678 which takes a while to interpret/understand. -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 06:22:23
It takes maybe a week to learn. After that, it takes significantly shorter to read, and I think that's important.
-
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 06:36:45QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 13 2009, 12:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>It takes maybe a week to learn. After that, it takes significantly shorter to read, and I think that's important.
I get that but what is so hard in "" showing the off hand?? And " is not so hard to understand either.
We probably have to wait for the votes to tell. -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 06:47:34
I think it's difficult to read, recognize, and definitely difficult to write.
-
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 07:36:10QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 13 2009, 01:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I think it's difficult to read, recognize, and definitely difficult to write.
Opinions. I would much rather put "" and continue with my off-hand combo rather than continue with a whole set of new terms (Y5678). -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 11:36:31QUOTE (Outsmash @ Mar 13 2009, 01:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Spoiler:
I'm not sure about this. It's much easier if | is ALWAYS placed after off-hand fingers. If you make it such that | can represent a switch too then its less clear. I'd rather have it such that you ALWAYs put | to represent off-hand.
And also if you use ||, its better to make it [], and you ALWAYS close your brackets to clearly show that a section belongs to off-hand. Also, you ALWAYS use [] to show off-hand spinning.QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 13 2009, 02:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>...that's just too hard to read. Y5678 is so much cleaner, and so much simpler.
That's your only argument and it's just an opinion. I think T"1"2"3"4" is much clearn, much simpler, easier to read, easier to reason about.
It's not "so much" simpler, it's only saving 1 character at most per. That's not extremely more effecient.
You should try notating with " for a while, you'll see it's more logical.
I believe you're grasping at straws and not provided sufficient arguments to prove me Y5678 is a better system. It's functional, but I find T"1"2"3"4" superior.QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 13 2009, 02:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I think it's difficult to read, recognize, and definitely difficult to write.
Another opinion. Here's the thought process behind " notation:
Ok I see 1"2". I know for sure it's about index and middle fingers. Oh, but now I see the " after each finger. It means they're both on left hand. very simple.
Thought process behind Y5678.
Ok I see 56. Those are beyond 4 so it must be on the left hand. What fingers are they? 5-4 = 1. 6-4 = 2. Ok so it's 12. It's index middle fingers.
Y5678 makes it unnecessarily more complicated to find out which fingers they are, and the only way you know it's on the off-hand is because it's above 4.
T"1"2"3"4" is extremely simple, you just see two things: a regular T1234 notation and " to indicate the hand.
Why complicate ourselves in making a whole new set of notations for the off-hand. The problem is that if you made complete off-hand combo (1p1h), you would use T1234 anyway, not Y5678. This means you're already used to calling your off-hand T1234!!! Y5678 would mean you have in memory two different ways of calling the same fingers. -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 11:48:46
You have the same problem with the " system, except the appearance looks the same as I said before, either system has two ways for the same slot my off hand with Zombos system is either T1234 or T"1"2"3"4" those are two sperate sets of symbols although the look is the same as I stated before. None of the points I made there were addressed. Either systems gives two separate ways to call the same slot considering 1" is one symbol made with two characters, Y5678 is not masking these details and makes it much more obvious that the combo is on the other hand.
The " is more complicated then Y5678 its doing the same way but gives you two ways to say the same thing with the " " system. Y5678 follows all the same rules, its just an addition of new slots -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 12:43:58QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 13 2009, 05:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>You have the same problem with the " system, except the appearance looks the same as I said before, either system has two ways for the same slot my off hand with Zombos system is either T1234 or T"1"2"3"4" those are two sperate sets of symbols although the look is the same as I stated before. None of the points I made there were addressed. Either systems gives two separate ways to call the same slot considering 1" is one symbol made with two characters, Y5678 is not masking these details and makes it much more obvious that the combo is on the other hand.
The " is more complicated then Y5678 its doing the same way but gives you two ways to say the same thing with the " " system. Y5678 follows all the same rules, its just an addition of new slots
I'm not all for the T" 1" 2" 3" 4". It's harder to type.
The [] is somewhat perfect. It's easy to look at a combo and see which part of the combo is off-hand. Combining that with my " or | (not "" or ||) system, it would make sense easily.
And again, to put my way in an easier manner:
"" or || is put in place of a hyphen (-) or after the trick.
" or | is put in between the slots.
Simple. -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 13:45:29QUOTE (Outsmash @ Mar 13 2009, 08:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I'm not all for the T" 1" 2" 3" 4". It's harder to type.
it's not harder to type if you use the [] system on top of it... you'll eliminate a lot of " with it.QUOTEAnd again, to put my way in an easier manner:
"" or || is put in place of a hyphen (-) or after the trick.
" or | is put in between the slots.
Simple.
it seems to me your system creates more notation than necessary.
How would I notate:
1"2"-12"?
|| 12-1|2 ??
12" - 1"2 vs 12" - 12"? I'm not sure how to notate in | form.
What's wrong with saying that " means off-hand and THAT'S IT. don't have to consider anything else.QUOTEYou have the same problem with the " system, except the appearance looks the same as I said before, either system has two ways for the same slot my off hand with Zombos system is either T1234 or T"1"2"3"4" those are two sperate sets of symbols although the look is the same as I stated before. None of the points I made there were addressed. Either systems gives two separate ways to call the same slot considering 1" is one symbol made with two characters, Y5678 is not masking these details and makes it much more obvious that the combo is on the other hand.
The " is more complicated then Y5678 its doing the same way but gives you two ways to say the same thing with the " " system. Y5678 follows all the same rules, its just an addition of new slots
Ok let me make this clear.
For 1p2h, ask yourself, what do we truly need? We already have a finger notation system, and that is T1234, which is valid for any hands under any circumstances.
What is the problem in notating 1p2h? The problem is that we need a way to differentiate between hands. In other words, we need a way to indicate in which hand the fingers are located. What we need is a hand notation system. This is DIFFERENT from a finger notation system.
The Y5678 is a HAND + FINGER notation system. You are bundling two types of information in the same notation.
The " system is a HAND notation system. It describes NOTHING about the finger used, it is just there to indicate which hand is used. How does it work?
(nothing) indicates dominant hand
" indicates non-dominant hand.
That's all it does! Then you add it on top of the regular T1234, a finger notation system, and you can now use the two systems together to indicate which finger from which hand is used.
In other words, T1234 is STILL the finger notation for both hands. This has not changed. What we have added is something to indicate which hand is used.
Since it's a hand notation system it works with any finger notation system. If we used 12345 as finger system, " would still work. Any finger notation system you want, it works, because it's not meant to describe fingers, only hands.
Y5678 on the other hand, is meant to work sepcifically for 1p2h, using T1234 for the dominant hand. It describes fingers and hand at the same time.
Why are we trying to create a new finger notation system, when we have one solidly in place? All we need is hand notation.
edit: * is another strong candidate for off-hand indication. -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 17:38:27
Talking to Zombo and reading this thread,
I tend to agree with him.
Coming from a cubeing and Physics way of thinking, Using * or ' or " is meant to be interpreted as, a change or the opposite of the original.
From an understand point.... its much easier to no that the opposite of your dominant hand index, is your non-dominant hand index. (1, 1*)
If you where told that your non-dominant hand had different finger names right now, like non-dominant index= clicker finger. or something ridiculous like that, would you remember that? or would you remember index* ?
I dunno just from a mind standpoint, its much easier to say something is the opposite of one thing, rather than developing an entirely new name for it... -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 22:54:13
I realize these are my opinions, that's why for the most part I did add "I think," and my arguments are as much opinions as yours.
That being said, I'd like to say that I've thought about this for a long time, and I've heard your arguments and considered them, tried them, and compared them. I still stand by Y5678.
There's not much else to say apart from I believe it's easier to read, and cleaner.
Although, whereas you seem to think of this as two hands with 5 fingers each, I think of it as 8 fingers and 2 thumbs. I think that adding hands into it adds another element which further complicates the notation.
We may just have to vote with both options up and see what happens. -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 23:45:29
ok so all this discussion made me think really hard why I thought the * (yea I prefer * than " now) system is better. At first it was more of a hunch, but now I have found strong, compelling evidence. Here it goes:
- First of all, let's think about the basic philosophy of Y5678 compared to the * system. As I stated before Y5678 is a hand + finger notation, while the * system is a hand notation only. The * system is built on top of the finger notation system already present because * is essentially a modifier. In the history of Pen Spinning, there are a lot of instances where we build on top of existing notation. For example, we invented modifiers like "Reverse" and "Twisted" for tricks. We could have called Sonic Reverse something like Flash or whatever, but instead we chose to build on top of an existing notation and adding a modifier. The disadvantage is that it's less efficient and longer to type out. But it's much easier to understand. So for trick naming, we already have the concept of modifier.
Then when we started making too many names for hybrids, so we invented the interrupted notation. Before we used to only use > to chain tricks together, but with the interrupted notation we invented "combo linking" modifiers in the form of ~. So again we see that in combo and hybrid naming, we already have the concept of the modifier. Again, the same disadvantages apply: it takes longer to write a combo in details than inserting hybrid naming (PROVIDED you memorized the hybrids names already).
So then naturally, why can't we apply the concept of modifiers to finger/slot notation! Instead of building from scratch, you got to build on something you already know. * would be a modifier for finger/slot notation, same thing we did in the past!
- Second, the * system is much more flexible and expendable. This is because it is modular. By modular I mean that the * system only takes care one thing and one thing only: hand identification. On the other hand, the Y5678 is a coupled system: it binds finger and hand information together. The advantage of modularity is that it can mix and match with any other modular naming system. So far, we have 2 systems in place: finger notation system and hand notation system. Using both we can describe 1p2h. In the past, there wasn't so much 1p2h, so hand notation system wasn't a necessity. Now that it is, we have to create a system for it.
Now let's think about the future and what needs may arise. Think about other notation systems we may need. I thought of several already: how about 2s1p1h? By that I mean, 2 spinners 1 pen 1 hand (each). In other words, two spinners each using one hand, making a combo with multiple transfers or tricks that involve fingers from different hands, just like 1p2h. What is the problem here? We need a notation to differentiate spinners. In other words, we need a spinner notation system.
If we use the same philosophy as the * system, which is the philosophy of making modular systems using modifiers, the answer to this problem is very clear: we create a new set of modifiers to differentiate spinners. For instance, we can tag all fingers of the first spinner by the letter a, all fingers of the second spinner by letter b. The notation 1a1b means the index finger of the hand of spinner a and the index finger of the hand of spinner b. Although the details need to be worked out, immediately we can see we can build a super intuitive and easy-to-learn system using modifiers.
Now think about the Y5678 philosophy, which is NOT to use modifiers and instead assign new names. In this case, what would you do? One solution could be, for instance, to re-use the Y5678 notation to denote Spinner B, and use T1234 to use Spinner A, since we still only have 2 hands, so it can be reduced to the 1p2h problem.
That's cool, but how about 2s1p2h now? That's 4 hands. 16 fingers. 4 thumbs. How the heck are you going to the Y5678 route here without using modifiers? You'll have to make a pretty clumsy legend of what each number and letter means what finger.
But using the modular approach, this is not a problem AT ALL! 2s1p2h means we require 3 "modules" total: the finger notation system, the hand notation system and the spinner notation system. By combining all 3 together, we can describe 2s1p2h without even having to think about it!!!
For instance, 1a*2b means the slot between the index finger of the non-dominant hand from spinner a on top of the middle finger of the dominant hand of spinner b. This makes perfect sense. You can see that using a modular design, you have great flexibility in combining them as necessary to describe whatever complex situation you have!
What about other systems required? For 2p1h, you need a pen notation system, to differentiate between pens. For 1p1h1f (1 pen 1 hand 1 foot), you need a finger + foot notation systems, however for 1p2h2f, you don't need anything new, since the hand notation system applies as well for differentiating left and right feet, etc.... the possilibities for expansions of a modular design are limitless, we won't have to worry about creating new systems ever again, we would simply have to work out details like which symbol represents what!
Now the other great thing about modularity is that you only use what you need, if you're making a simple 1p1h combo, you only need finger notation system. 1p2h, finger + hand. 2s1p1h, finger + spinner notation. This means that even there are a lot of expansions possible, you only need to use notation as complex as you need! you will probably never need to use all the expansions at once. And all of them are perfectly compatible with one another.
True modular notation system, this is what we must strive for. The way to do it is through modifiers. -
Date: Fri, Mar 13 2009 23:51:39
Shadow is right about it being 8 fingers and 2 thumbs, I consider myself to be even strength on both hands but the tricks and linkages I know on each hand are different. I don't see why you are so convinced that your left hand slots are exactly the same as your right hand ones, they are different slots, and just because they look the same, doesn't mean they function the same
For example;
A spinner can learn twisted sonic 23-12 we can "map" it to 23-34 and we have to relearn the trick, now we can move twisted sonic to the opposite hands 23-12, and once again its just like we mapped it to a completely new slot. The fingers on the left hand do not function symmetrically when you learn stuff with them
The actually "symmetry property" is arbitrarily designed from how it actually is to spin on both hands, I never think of my left hand slots as the same as my right hand slots, I am sure most 2 handed spinner views their hands the same and the " does a terrible job reflecting that Y5678 is a much more natural for me to read, and actually start performing the combo from the breakdown quicker then the " " system does. -
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 00:00:36QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 13 2009, 07:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Shadow is right about it being 8 fingers and 2 thumbs, I consider myself to be even strength on both hands but the tricks and linkages I know on each hand are different. I don't see why you are so convinced that your left hand slots are exactly the same as your right hand ones, they are different slots, and just because they look the same, doesn't mean they function the same
For example;
A spinner can learn twisted sonic 23-12 we can "map" it to 23-34 and we have to relearn the trick, now we can move twisted sonic to the opposite hands 23-12, and once again its just like we mapped it to a completely new slot. The fingers on the left hand do not function symmetrically when you learn stuff with them
The actually "symmetry property" is arbitrarily designed from how it actually is to spin on both hands, I never think of my left hand slots as the same as my right hand slots, I am sure most 2 handed spinner views their hands the same and the " does a terrible job reflecting that Y5678 is a much more natural for me to read, and actually start performing the combo from the breakdown quicker then the " " system does.
the symmetry property only refers to locations, not your relative strengths... I don't understand why you're talking about subjective skill level in notation, which is objective and true regardless of who performs it.
furthermore, when you think that your left hand is not as good as your right one, you're not first thinking "my 56 is worse than my 12". The FIRST thing that go in your head is "my left HAND is worse than my right HAND". you think of HANDS before FINGERS when you talk about skill in 1p2h. This means the * tells you immediately, this is on the opposite hand. This is why we need a hand notation system, not a finger+hand notation system. -
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 00:05:36
What I am saying is that Y5678 is much more natural to read for people who can spin on both hands, and I only say hands because its easier then saying my "thumb index middle ring and pinky finger on my left aren't as strong as those on my right" not so much that I think of hands first. It is much more natural and efficient to read and actually use the combo, while preserving the accuracy.
and for multi spinner foot combos I will use a quoteQUOTESo far, we have 2 systems in place: finger notation system and hand notation system. Using both we can describe 1p2h. In the past, there wasn't so much 1p2h, so hand notation system wasn't a necessity. Now that it is, we have to create a system for it.
same concept applies. -
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 00:05:50
im not really sure where two spinners and feet came into play, but it still doesnt make sense to me
when did we notate number of spinners in the first place?
well anyways, i think that's an entirely different issue really, and it's barely ever needed, to a point where i'd be fine with leaving it informal. Besides, with multiple spinners, wouldnt it be beneficial to show the spinners' names?
you mentioned hybrids, and here's my take on that:
hybrid notation was obviously a great development. No one could possibly memorize millions of hybrid names, the way unorganized communities like skateboarding do. I would love to do away with names like angel's sonic, drummer, and korean pass, but i would NEVER want to abolish the twisted sonic. why? because it's used so much, it's part of the foundation of breakdowns. Same for extended thumbarounds, devil's shadows, devil's sonics, and sonic clip.
So okay, we learn a few names or so, to make things easier.
Right?
Well what we're talking about here is the very foundation of these breakdowns, the finger slots. I think it's well worth it to learn this one thing in exchange for faster breaking and reading, and for much cleaner breakdowns. -
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 00:19:06QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 13 2009, 08:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>What I am saying is that Y5678 is much more natural to read for people who can spin on both hands, and I only say hands because its easier then saying my "thumb index middle ring and pinky finger on my left aren't as strong as those on my right"
well you just named all the fingers of the left hand, so to me thats pretty much equivalent to saying my left hand. If you were truly first thinking stuff like "my 5 is worse than my 1, but my 8 is better than my 4, my 2 is about equal to my 6", then maybe. Not only that, but you need to also think of stuff like:
"my Y is better than my 4" or something, because if you compare only in corresponding pairs, then you're proving my property that we should think in pairs of fingers of opposite hands.QUOTEnot so much that I think of hands first. It is much more natural and efficient to read and actually use the combo, while preserving the accuracy.
I have very much my doubt about it being more efficient to read, since it's just 1 more character to add. How long can it be to read 1 more character? I already see both at the same time because I'm used to seeing nothing if its a normal finger. Seems to me like you already got used to Y5678 which is why you find it hard. That's normal, ppl get used to things. But logically, the * system is superior to Y5678.QUOTEand for multi spinner foot combos I will use a quote
same concept applies.
Why would we waste our time discussing every possible combination like 2p1h, 2p2h, 2s1p1h, 2s2p1h, 2s2p2h, and produce a ENTIRELY new system for every single combination possible, when we can create a framework which is easily expandable and covers all combinations? THe modifier philosophy provides just that, all we need to do is determine which symbol represents each modifier! Easy!QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 13 2009, 08:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>im not really sure where two spinners and feet came into play, but it still doesnt make sense to me
when did we notate number of spinners in the first place?
In the future, it's plausible to think to think that pen spinning will go beyond a single individual: in fact we already see quite a few combos with multiple spinners in the same combo. So the * system is future-proof and can allow for expansion for pretty much anything you throw at it without much work.QUOTEwell anyways, i think that's an entirely different issue really, and it's barely ever needed, to a point where i'd be fine with leaving it informal. Besides, with multiple spinners, wouldnt it be beneficial to show the spinners' names?
I'm talking about interleaving combos like:
Sonic 1 (the 1 is from A) 2 (the 2 is from B ) - 23 (23 is from B ) or something like that. You can't notate that informally without being clumsy. Same reason why we need to notate 1p2h systematically right?QUOTEyou mentioned hybrids, and here's my take on that:
hybrid notation was obviously a great development. No one could possibly memorize millions of hybrid names, the way unorganized communities like skateboarding do. I would love to do away with names like angel's sonic, drummer, and korean pass, but i would NEVER want to abolish the twisted sonic. why? because it's used so much, it's part of the foundation of breakdowns. Same for extended thumbarounds, devil's shadows, devil's sonics, and sonic clip.
So okay, we learn a few names or so, to make things easier.
Right?
Well what we're talking about here is the very foundation of these breakdowns, the finger slots. I think it's well worth it to learn this one thing in exchange for faster breaking and reading, and for much cleaner breakdowns.
The thing, is we still haven't got used to Y5678, so we can decide not to adopt it at all. If we didn't already have the Twisted Sonic, we might do things differently. THe problem is that people got used to things.
I know that well, because I used to call the ThumbAround ThumbSpin Single and ThumbSpin I called it ThumbSpin 1.0 or sometimes Forward 1.0. I've used that notation for years until we decided to change to ThumbAround. I was reluctant at first cuz it felt weird, but logically I KNEW this was the correct thing to do. It seems to me that you're already used to Y5678, which is why you feel weird using something else. That's normal, but it's hardly any objective evidence why it's better than a modular and easily expandable system like modifiers. I believe I presented plenty of arguments and evidences which support the * system compared to Y5678.
I would love to hear feedback from more people... I mean that's my way of thinking and I personally believe it is the way which will be more accessible and easier to read and understand to the public but then I could be way off and not think like other ppl. -
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 00:37:59
We could say the same thing about you and the " system, its what your used to.
Plus there has to be a balance between names and modifiers obviously, with Y5678 we can always implement a modular on top of that for 2 spinners doing complex assisted spinning on each others feet. the Y5678 substantially reduces the need for the number of modifiers involved for the insane combo "possibilities" anyway instead of coming up with 2 new modifiers for a new spinner introduced we only come up with one and apply that one onto Y5678 slots. Y5678 actually is better at adopting new notation issues.
You got used to accepting modifiers as the only way to expand spinning notations and are reluctant to change yourself. These sort of arguments don't say anything at all, since the same can be said about both sides. -
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 00:50:43QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 13 2009, 08:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Plus there has to be a balance between names and modifiers obviously, with Y5678 we can always implement a modular on top of that for 2 spinners doing complex assisted spinning on each others feet. the Y5678 substantially reduces the need for the number of modifiers involved for the insane combo "possibilities" anyway instead of coming up with 2 new modifiers for a new spinner introduced we only come up with one and apply that one onto Y5678 slots. Y5678 actually is better at adopting new notation issues.
that's a fair argument and indeed it is true that we can make Y5678 part of the foundation as shadowserpant said and then build modifiers on top of it. I guess my biggest gripe was to stick with creating new naming for everything we do in the future, which would be a true pain to memorize, but if you guys are willing to accept that it is inevitable that we will resort to modifiers eventually, then that's OK I think. It's just that Y5678 is on the slippery slope away from modular design that's why I was afraid of how it could degenerate.
Also you say "substantial" reductions... dude it's just 1 modifier per finger...
However I can argue that for the * system in23 ways:
1- Having a lot of expansions doesn't mean we will use all of them at once. If you use maybe 2-3 of those expansions at most at once, then you can have maybe 2 modifiers on a single finger. That's still pretty readable. The average complexity is still fair. The biggest advantages of modular design is not that you can use all the expansions at once, it is that you can arbitrarily mix and match any expansions together.
2- I still don't like fact that Y5678 doesn't say anything about hands and treat all 10 fingers as a unit when the natural (biological) division is 2 pairs of 5 fingers. To me Y5678 bundles and hides hand information in it. IMO it's still better to seperate hand and finger notation systems. You don't create dependencies that way. If you want a clean modular design, might as well reduce it to its most basic form. Why should we make an exception for 2h naming.
3- What if some dude had 6 fingers on one hand then Y5678 = fail lololol
-
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 01:10:34
well, basically my argument against yours was simple: you want to make it modular, and are applying modifiers to what you define as units.
I consider the two hands as one unit, and thus your system can still work along with this one -
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 04:12:13
its not one unit though... biologically we've been defined with a pair of hands...
-
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 07:32:19QUOTE ("Zombo")it seems to me your system creates more notation than necessary.
How would I notate:
1"2"-12"?
|| 12-1|2 ??
12" - 1"2 vs 12" - 12"? I'm not sure how to notate in | form.
What's wrong with saying that " means off-hand and THAT'S IT. don't have to consider anything else.
More notations? It only has two: "" and " (OR) ** and * (OR) || and | etc..
1"2" - 12" = It depends. If you want to show that the first part id off hand then: [12] - 1"2 (since 1 is off hand and 2 is the other hand - like explained before)
If you don't care about the first part, then: 12 - 2"1 (2 = the hand that does the combo in the start and 1 = the other hand).
I think your second breakdown is wrong. It signifies a hand change in the starting when there is no other hand breakdown before it.
12" - 1"2 would be 1"2 - 1"2 (since the first "1" is the first hand then the "2" is on the other hand. Since we have switched hand notations now, the second "1" is on the same hand as the first "2". Then the second "2" has a " before it so it shows that it goes back to the other hand, i.e., the first "1")
12" - 12" would be 1"2 - 2"1 (since both the twos are after and before the " it's on the same hand)
I haven't really explained it well here, so hopefully you'd be able to understand it. -
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 14:27:48
too complicated man... you have to keep remember a lot of states to be able to read and the notation keep changing depending in what state you are.
better to just say " means off-hand and that's it, and keep [] for long combos, not for single slots.
your system is more confusing cuz it's all relative to what "mode" you're in, whereas the * system is not ambiguous, it says * means off-hand, regardless of situation.
there's a few more things I'd like to address.
BTW you can't change the orders the fingers appear in.
2"1 is different from 12". 2"1 means the 2 is on top, 12" means the 1 is on top.QUOTEYou got used to accepting modifiers as the only way to expand spinning notations and are reluctant to change yourself. These sort of arguments don't say anything at all, since the same can be said about both sides.
- It's not narrow-mindedness. It's called CONSISTENCY. Why would we want to make special exception for Y5678 when we're going to use modifiers everywhere? Consistency means you create a logical framework which applies everywhere, and people can derive with confidence any breakdown they want once they learn the general framework. If you put exceptions and mix different ideas together, you're going to confuse people.
- To me, any time you think of introducing an idea which violates the general principles for the sake of efficiency you're actually creating a shorthand notation. You're cutting the corners and making something less formal which doesn't quite fit the general framework, but is used as convienence. Hybrid naming is an example of shorthand notation: in theory we can express everything using the logical framework that is interrupted notation, but for convience we sometimes use hybrids.
I have nothing against shorthand notation and if you want Y5678 as shorthand, that's fine by me. But to me it's too flawed to be part of a consistent logical framework for notation in general like modifiers are. We can say: "Modifiers is the big picture, the modular system which can allow you to express any situation we will need in the future, but for practical purposes, you can use Y5678 for 1p2h."
What I mean is that a formal system should value consistency, logical soundness, flexibility over efficiency. The system should make logical sense and be solid. Shorthand needs to be efficient. Both can coexist.
- It's clear that the 10 fingers are naturally divided into 2 hands of 5, and each finger has a corresponding finger on the opposite hand. Think about how the english language describes our fingers: we don't have 10 names for fingers, as Stevie mentionned, we have 5, which apply to 2 fingers each. When we want to disambiguate, we say "the Left thumb and the right thumb", where left and right refer to the hand they're on. I'm not pulling this out of thin air, natural languages already seperate fingers into hands. Why would we want to deny that division in pen spinning? It's intuitive, everybody know it. You can't possibly tell me you've never thought of your fingers as being grouped into 2 sets, one for each hand. I don't know how they notate in other manipulations, but in piano music, fingering is 1 to 5 regardless of which hand, and the hand information can be derived from other sources to tell which actual finger on which hand we're talking about.
It would be like deciding that a day should last 38 hours, when naturally, the day-night cycle is 24 hours. Why would you even want to do that?
Furthermore, you think you can ignore hand notation for 1p2h, but it's not possible. What we've talked about right now are only the finger slots, but in fact, to complete describe 1p2h we also need a hand position notation system. In regular 1p1h, we have 3 positions: palm-up, palm-down, sideway. For 1p2h, each hand can be independent in those 3 basic positions creating 9 different combinations. Not only that, but the relative position of each hand matter. Both hands could have the palms facing each other, either in parallel or orthogonally. Likewise, they could be facing back-to-back. Or back-to-palm. Both hands could be interlocked.
Therefore you can't ignore hand information, you'll need to notate it as well if it's relevant to the combo. Therefore, if you can't ignore hand information, might as well use it everywhere to be consistent. BTW, the FPSB RD already worked out a system for notating hand position, so we can simply review what they did. -
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 18:30:07
Most modifiers for tricks are intuitive, like rev stand for reverse, so without an explanation I can tell right away the trick is going in reverse, other modifiers for tricks aren't as clear, but they make sense. Those are intuitive as well as logical. Where as " might be logical in terms of structure, but it is an arbitrary symbol. Where as Y5678 is an extension onto the old slots. That is far more logical in terms of how the symbols were derived.
Another thing is verbally saying the slots with Y5678 its obvious how to pronounce slots, I can just say "five six", "six eight" etc. but with the " system you also need to come up with a non intuitive pronounceation I suppose something like "prime" from physics could work but saying "one prime three prime" is tedious for a single slot, and people have to actually "learn" the proper way to say it. What ever you choose that one symbol does become tedious to say for every single slot. If it was a clear cut transfer you could say "on the left hand..." but for assisted spinning it could become an issue.
The Y5678 is far more logical in how we came up with the names for the slots. Also when we come up with modifiers for everything else we will want less modifiers. The modifiers for tricks are one thing, because the immediately make sense, even to non PSers for the most part; but when we come up with modifiers for hand positions, multiple spinners etc, those are going to be less intuitive and people will opt for another abstract symbol. We could end up with slots looking like 1"VA 3F^B for a single slot for when spinner 1 is doing assisted spinning with his off hand palm down on spinners 2 dominant foot, I doubt we will ever have to break down stuff like that, but it seems like we want to prepare a system for any possibility. Once we start adding more modifiers though we will start seeing the disadvantage of just adding arbitrary symbols to current slot names is no longer "its only one symbol its not a big deal" Some situations might need modifiers, but if we do everything with modifiers it gets over whelming.
As for the hand position; that is a whole other issue that applies to one handed spinning also it is off topic here, for that case I probably would favor a modifier. It would be nice to see what FPSB did for that though. -
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 19:55:30QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 14 2009, 02:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Most modifiers for tricks are intuitive, like rev stand for reverse, so without an explanation I can tell right away the trick is going in reverse, other modifiers for tricks aren't as clear, but they make sense. Those are intuitive as well as logical. Where as " might be logical in terms of structure, but it is an arbitrary symbol. Where as Y5678 is an extension onto the old slots. That is far more logical in terms of how the symbols were derived.
like I said, what the symbol itself is not important at this point, we're only debating whether to use modifiers at all or not. Once we decide we want to use modifiers, then we pick a symbol which is appropriate. * and ' are good choices because * is used in cubing to denote reverse already and ' is common in math and scientific notation to denote a "copy" of the original (for example x and x'). If you want something more explicit how about o (off-hand) or n (non-dominant hand). You can't argue that such letters are more abstract than saying "well Y kinda looks like T you know".QUOTEAnother thing is verbally saying the slots with Y5678 its obvious how to pronounce slots, I can just say "five six", "six eight" etc. but with the " system you also need to come up with a non intuitive pronounceation I suppose something like "prime" from physics could work but saying "one prime three prime" is tedious for a single slot, and people have to actually "learn" the proper way to say it. What ever you choose that one symbol does become tedious to say for every single slot. If it was a clear cut transfer you could say "on the left hand..." but for assisted spinning it could become an issue.
that's a pretty far-fetched argument considering our concern has always been written notation. Example: ~ can't be expressed verbally. THat's because verbal exchanges tend to be less formal and less employed. Often this is because you are in presence of the person you're talking to so you're just going to show them. If absolutely necessary, I see no problem in using shorthand notation to discuss in those situations, and that means using Y5678 verbally. The same minor drawback will come later anyway if we decide to use modifiers again for more complex situations. Minor issue if you ask me.QUOTEThe Y5678 is far more logical in how we came up with the names for the slots. Also when we come up with modifiers for everything else we will want less modifiers. The modifiers for tricks are one thing, because the immediately make sense, even to non PSers for the most part; but when we come up with modifiers for hand positions, multiple spinners etc, those are going to be less intuitive and people will opt for another abstract symbol. We could end up with slots looking like 1"VA 3F^B for a single slot for when spinner 1 is doing assisted spinning with his off hand palm down on spinners 2 dominant foot, I doubt we will ever have to break down stuff like that, but it seems like we want to prepare a system for any possibility. Once we start adding more modifiers though we will start seeing the disadvantage of just adding arbitrary symbols to current slot names is no longer "its only one symbol its not a big deal" Some situations might need modifiers, but if we do everything with modifiers it gets over whelming.
Like I said, always favor consistency and logical foundation over efficiency and readability in formal systems. Then reduce your formal system for practice usages. Always go with the most formal you have, then go down if needed. To me the * system is a higher level formalism than Y5678, therefore it should be adopted as the formal system, and use Y5678 as a shorthand reduction.QUOTEAs for the hand position; that is a whole other issue that applies to one handed spinning also it is off topic here, for that case I probably would favor a modifier. It would be nice to see what FPSB did for that though.
(1:38 PM) monkanar@hotmail: The hands can be Parallel or perpendicular
(1:39 PM) monkanar@hotmail: If they are parallel, they can be side to side, or in opposition
(1:40 PM) monkanar@hotmail: If they are perpendicular, the left hand can be perpendicular to the right hand, or the right hand can be perpendicular to the left hand
(1:41 PM) monkanar@hotmail: And the different positions of each hand are: Palm Up, Palm Side, Palm Down, or Back side (the inverse position of the palm side)
(1:43 PM) monkanar@hotmail: So: 2*2*4*4
they gave me a figure but I can't find it. -
Date: Sat, Mar 14 2009 20:22:29
So basically have the " as a formal system but have Y5678 as a valid alternative. If both systems have the same amount of accuracy shouldn't the one that will be used more often be the only one, I have no problems with a "formal system", if people are going to use Y5678 anyway.I just don't see the advantage of 2 systems when they are both just as accurate. You're doubling the amount of learning people have to do, considering both would be valid ways to break down combos, spinners would be expected to know both.
-
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 04:51:01
well in case of doubt you should always rely on the formal system, because thats the one thats consistent with the rest, but if you want, learn the shorthand, but don't expect others to know it.
for example, if someone tells a bunch of hybrids I dont know, i will ask them to translate it into interrupted. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 05:17:03
i still want Y5678 to be the official notation for this
these aren't hybrid names, they're finger slot notations. you only need to learn it once. i think it's worth it -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 05:36:27QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 15 2009, 01:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>i still want Y5678 to be the official notation for this
these aren't hybrid names, they're finger slot notations. you only need to learn it once. i think it's worth it
im not sure what you mean... hybrids are leared only once too. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 06:20:30
I want Y5678 to be the official notation as well, its quick and intuitive to learn, as well you only have to get used to it once. As shadow said these are finger slots, so it is still consistent to the rest. Both systems have relatively the same amount of time to get used to, and both are just as accurate. The " might be consistent by the fact it is a modifier, but Y5678 makes just as much sense, but " seems to have quite a bit of "minor" disadvantages that add up.
Both have the seem degree of functionality and neither reduces the amount of memorization required, unlike interrupted notation. I see no need to have 2 naming systems because one "looks formal". You said so yourself on a few issues that have "minor disadvantages". (two characters to type, messier appearance, hard to pronounce) while offering only vague, subjective advantages("looks" formal, "follows consistency) those advantages depend entirely on the person, where as the disadvantages apply to everyone.
Also comparing this to hybrids is a poor comparison, the possibilities for hybrids are in the hundreds if not thousands, the possibilities for fingers are 10.
You double the amount of typing for slots with a symbol system, the " system is 50% less efficient then Y5678. For heavy use with dual handed combos Y5678 is far more efficient.
We are defined by a pair of hands, with each hand in the pair being different. The two different hands make a pair of hands, a pair is singular, so it is one unit composed of two different hands. Its like saying a yard is one unit composed of 3 feet. You can't say any one is less a unit as the other.
Why have two systems, that is a far worse alternative then either option, that's doubling the amount of learning and creates room for confusion. There is no need for two systems when they both fulfill the same role identically. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 07:01:40
This is getting nowhere.
It's either:
- Adding a Modifer to the existing fingers (Zombo) OR
- Adding a New Set of notations for fingers (Shadowserpant).
So, let's just have a poll because neither of you are going to give in (cave). -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 07:55:35
right, but it's still good to try to clear things up first
QUOTE (Zombo @ Mar 14 2009, 09:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>im not sure what you mean... hybrids are leared only once too.
but there's more than one hybrid, and we cant learn all of their names so we need interupted trick notation
there's only one of these to learn -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 14:17:33QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 15 2009, 02:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I want Y5678 to be the official notation as well, its quick and intuitive to learn, as well you only have to get used to it once.
I'm not sure I agree with this... Shadowserpant himself admitted to the fact it take some time to get used to Y5678. * has a smaller learning curve IMO, because you only need to memorize one thing and that is that * indicates off-hand.QUOTEAs shadow said these are finger slots, so it is still consistent to the rest.
Inconsistent to what? We have always been talking about fingerslots. When we will introduce notation to different between spinner, we're still describing slots between two spinners' fingers. Feet have finger slots too. We've always been talking about slots and modifier system can describe any kind of slots.QUOTEBoth have the seem degree of functionality and neither reduces the amount of memorization required, unlike interrupted notation.
Arguably, you have to memorize two things for Y5678: that Y stands for T, that 5678 continues 1234. * you have to memorize 1 symbol.QUOTEI see no need to have 2 naming systems because one "looks formal". You said so yourself on a few issues that have "minor disadvantages". (two characters to type, messier appearance, hard to pronounce) while offering only vague, subjective advantages("looks" formal, "follows consistency) those advantages depend entirely on the person, where as the disadvantages apply to everyone.
How are those advantagse subjective. It's a fact that it is consistent, that it follows the general system. If anything, "messier appearance" is subjective. I actually find it easier to reason about.QUOTEAlso comparing this to hybrids is a poor comparison, the possibilities for hybrids are in the hundreds if not thousands, the possibilities for fingers are 10.
Talking about 2h notation is a subdomain of the broader spectrum of talking about any finger slots. You can argue that we can only look at a small subset of hybrids and use only hybrid naming on those and disregard interrupted notation for that subset only. This is the exact same situation as Y5678: trying to ignore the overall system and make an exception for 2 hands.QUOTEYou double the amount of typing for slots with a symbol system, the " system is 50% less efficient then Y5678. For heavy use with dual handed combos Y5678 is far more efficient.
That's why you use Y5678 if you need shorthand notation.QUOTEWe are defined by a pair of hands, with each hand in the pair being different. The two different hands make a pair of hands, a pair is singular, so it is one unit composed of two different hands. Its like saying a yard is one unit composed of 3 feet. You can't say any one is less a unit as the other.
Both hands form a whole, but the whole idea is that it can be broken down into 2 parts.QUOTEWhy have two systems, that is a far worse alternative then either option, that's doubling the amount of learning and creates room for confusion. There is no need for two systems when they both fulfill the same role identically.
Ideally, I'd only put the * system in, but my compromise is that using shorthand notation can offer people a choice between convience and consistency.
Tell you what: you guys do your own thing, release this as the system to notate 1p2h. Then I'll myself release the modifier system which deals with the big picture and it's gonna contain a section about hand notation.
I can't see any acceptable resolution to this issue other than that. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 15:44:32
You have to resort to one.
- [] OR
- "
Having both of them is irritating to write.
IMO the bracket stuff is neat - []. But it does not help in interweaving combos - For which we need to bring in the modifier.
OR if we avoid the brackets and only use the modifier, It would be something that no one would type (because it's irritating).
Which is why I like Shadow's because it's just a single type. Or something like mine - where you only use modifiers to notate shifting of hands or interweaving combos. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 15:53:21
uh yes
i'm absolutely pro-[] for long sequences and modifier for small.
I would do something like this
[O]some tricks for off-hand[/O]
and we had 2s1p2h it could be like
[S1] some tricks for spinner 1 on dominant hand [O] some tricks for spinner 1 on non-dominant hand[/O][/S1][S2] some tricks for spinner 2 on dominant hand[/S2]
this should be easy to understand for long sequences.
and then by making it in this format, we can actually add those as BBCodes on forums.
[O] [/O] could change formatting of whatever is inside as well. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 16:17:47QUOTE (Zombo @ Mar 15 2009, 10:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>uh yes
i'm absolutely pro-[] for long sequences and modifier for small.
I would do something like this
[O]some tricks for off-hand[/O]
and we had 2s1p2h it could be like
[S1] some tricks for spinner 1 on dominant hand [O] some tricks for spinner 1 on non-dominant hand[/O][/S1][S2] some tricks for spinner 2 on dominant hand[/S2]
this should be easy to understand for long sequences.
and then by making it in this format, we can actually add those as BBCodes on forums.
[O] [/O] could change formatting of whatever is inside as well.
I don't think the Two Spinners thing would work (Even in the future).
People would still resort to being simple, like:
"Spinner 1:
Spinner 2:"
If they're spinning simultaneously, then they would just mention that before the combo.
-
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 16:23:30
2s1p2h... only 1 pen, theres no simultanous spinning, everything is linear.
2s2p2h is tricky becuse of timing issue, its another issue altogether, one that we did have tried to tackle in the past. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 16:25:23QUOTE (Zombo @ Mar 15 2009, 10:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>2s1p2h... only 1 pen, theres no simultanous spinning, everything is linear.
2s2p2h is tricky becuse of timing issue, its another issue altogether, one that we did have tried to tackle in the past.
I meant simultaneous spinning by spinners. And anyways, It's not really useful (like I mentioned before). -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 16:27:02
for 2 spinners to spin simultanously means you have at least 2 pens.
-
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 16:30:35QUOTE (Zombo @ Mar 15 2009, 10:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>for 2 spinners to spin simultanously means you have at least 2 pens.
Yea, but I'm just against the whole 2s1p2h thing.
My point = We don't need "2s" as of now or later. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 16:34:24
why do you think that in the future people wont be spinning 1 pen for 2 persons?
-
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 16:46:52QUOTE (Zombo @ Mar 15 2009, 11:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>why do you think that in the future people wont be spinning 1 pen for 2 persons?
I misunderstood this whole thing
But there's always time for that later. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 17:35:06QUOTEI'm not sure I agree with this... Shadowserpant himself admitted to the fact it take some time to get used to Y5678. * has a smaller learning curve IMO, because you only need to memorize one thing and that is that * indicates off-hand.
Memorizing either system is really simple, most people would be able to learn both with only being told once how they work, and they both have a learning curve.QUOTEInconsistent to what? We have always been talking about fingerslots. When we will introduce notation to different between spinner, we're still describing slots between two spinners' fingers. Feet have finger slots too. We've always been talking about slots and modifier system can describe any kind of slots.
Using a symbol or new names for slots are both consistent with old systems, only modifiers have been added to tricks, only symbols have been added to slots, there is no predetermined consistency for either to followQUOTEArguably, you have to memorize two things for Y5678: that Y stands for T, that 5678 continues 1234. * you have to memorize 1 symbol.
Memorizing the two thing might take as long as reading a sentence, and you only do it once. Where as typing two things happen ever slot you type and read.QUOTEHow are those advantagse subjective. It's a fact that it is consistent, that it follows the general system. If anything, "messier appearance" is subjective. I actually find it easier to reason about.
It only helps people who actually understand the "logic" behind it, obviously not everyone sees that or we wouldn't be having this debate, where as everyone has to type and read two symbols, and it makes breakdowns cluttered with extra characters that can be avoided.QUOTETalking about 2h notation is a subdomain of the broader spectrum of talking about any finger slots. You can argue that we can only look at a small subset of hybrids and use only hybrid naming on those and disregard interrupted notation for that subset only. This is the exact same situation as Y5678: trying to ignore the overall system and make an exception for 2 hands.
comparing hybrids and finger slots are different subjects with different reasons why we use them, you can't make a direct comparison between the two.QUOTEThat's why you use Y5678 if you need shorthand notation.
I would be fine with it being a shorthand notation if it had some kind of information that it leaves out, or was ambiguous, but its not. Usually with shorthands you trade off some kind of accuracy for ease of writing, with Y5678 you don't lose any accuracy but you reduce the amount of writing. You don't have the disadvantages that a shorthand normally carries.QUOTEBoth hands form a whole, but the whole idea is that it can be broken down into 2 parts.
Either way you want to look at it is fine, but it is valid to say our hands are one unit.QUOTEIdeally, I'd only put the * system in, but my compromise is that using shorthand notation can offer people a choice between convience and consistency.
Tell you what: you guys do your own thing, release this as the system to notate 1p2h. Then I'll myself release the modifier system which deals with the big picture and it's gonna contain a section about hand notation.
I can't see any acceptable resolution to this issue other than that.
I suppose, or we leave it to a poll and accept the majorities view on it. That seems like the democratic way to do things, its fair, and avoids two separate notations for the same thing. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 17:46:02QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 15 2009, 01:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Memorizing either system is really simple, most people would be able to learn both with only being told once how they work, and they both have a learning curve.
Not so much the memorizing that is hard, but the learning curve to attain fluency. When I first learned Y5678 I had to do math everytime to figure out what fingers we're referring (I still do). I think it's easier to be fluent with modifier.QUOTEUsing a symbol or new names for slots are both consistent with old systems, only modifiers have been added to tricks, only symbols have been added to slots, there is no predetermined consistency for either to follow
But we've already concluded the fact that modifiers is an inevitability for future slot notation, therefore a modifier for hand notation would be consistent with that.QUOTEMemorizing the two thing might take as long as reading a sentence, and you only do it once. Where as typing two things happen ever slot you type and read.
It's more about fluency.QUOTEIt only helps people who actually understand the "logic" behind it, obviously not everyone sees that or we wouldn't be having this debate, where as everyone has to type and read two symbols, and it makes breakdowns cluttered with extra characters that can be avoided.
When you introduce a notation, you explain the logic. If the logic makes sense then everybody will understand.QUOTEcomparing hybrids and finger slots are different subjects with different reasons why we use them, you can't make a direct comparison between the two.
I'm saying that the relationship between hybrids and the interrupted system is the same as the relationship between Y5678 and the modifier system. Both hybrids and Y5678 are for convenience.QUOTEI would be fine with it being a shorthand notation if it had some kind of information that it leaves out, or was ambiguous, but its not. Usually with shorthands you trade off some kind of accuracy for ease of writing, with Y5678 you don't lose any accuracy but you reduce the amount of writing. You don't have the disadvantages that a shorthand normally carries.
The disadvantage is inconsistency with the overall system. Same thing with hybrid notation vs interrupted notation: hybrid is jsut as accurate, but not consisten.tQUOTEEither way you want to look at it is fine, but it is valid to say our hands are one unit.]
I think looking at it as pairs of hands is more intuitive, because that's how we see our hands and fingers from the moment we are born. Body part symmetry is intuitive.QUOTEI suppose, or we leave it to a poll and accept the majorities view on it. That seems like the democratic way to do things, its fair, and avoids two separate notations for the same thing.
Regardless of what happens, we need to write an article on modifiers for fingerslots. Its very easy for the system to include a notation on off-hand. For the sake of completeness, you would add it even if it's not used. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 18:15:43QUOTENot so much the memorizing that is hard, but the learning curve to attain fluency. When I first learned Y5678 I had to do math everytime to figure out what fingers we're referring (I still do). I think it's easier to be fluent with modifier.
I guess its different for different people, I have a hard time knowing what parts are on the other hand with a modifier, where as with Y5678 I had to count dow my fingers at first, but I caught onto what finger was what way quicker.QUOTEBut we've already concluded the fact that modifiers is an inevitability for future slot notation, therefore a modifier for hand notation would be consistent with that.
But modifiers might not always work best, it should be decided on a case by case basis.QUOTEIt's more about fluency.
Either system people can become fluent in rather quicklyQUOTEWhen you introduce a notation, you explain the logic. If the logic makes sense then everybody will understand.
Either system can do this, they both can be explained.QUOTEI'm saying that the relationship between hybrids and the interrupted system is the same as the relationship between Y5678 and the modifier system. Both hybrids and Y5678 are for convenience.
But interrupted system is almost nessasary, you would have to memorize way to many names for hybrids to work for everything. Y5678 can work because we only have to remember Y5678 and then its doneQUOTEThe disadvantage is inconsistency with the overall system. Same thing with hybrid notation vs interrupted notation: hybrid is jsut as accurate, but not consisten.t
The overall system isn't even in place yet, this should be decided on a case by case basis, so we can get the best solution for every part, instead of just trying to do everything with one concept. Just saying use modifiers for everything seems to be rushing the issue, even if some or most parts might adapt to modifiers best, this is not always the case. If some parts need something else that works better, then we should use that, after analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of the situation. This is a case where I think that Y5678 accomplishes the job better then modifiers.QUOTEI think looking at it as pairs of hands is more intuitive, because that's how we see our hands and fingers from the moment we are born. Body part symmetry is intuitive.
True, but you can't say it is incorrect to view them as one unit either.QUOTERegardless of what happens, we need to write an article on modifiers for fingerslots. Its very easy for the system to include a notation on off-hand. For the sake of completeness, you would add it even if it's not used.
If its a completeness issue thats fine, but I feel that Y5678 should be the main one in use.
-
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 18:30:27QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 15 2009, 02:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I guess its different for different people, I have a hard time knowing what parts are on the other hand with a modifier, where as with Y5678 I had to count dow my fingers at first, but I caught onto what finger was what way quicker.
this might be an issue with the symbol itself, not the system. " is not so noticeable, that's why I like * better.QUOTEBut modifiers might not always work best, it should be decided on a case by case basis.
I like the idea to have a guarantee of a system that always work regardless of the situation. Because then it becomes a solid fondation to build on.
Also it would reduce the learning curve tremendously, because you learn one system and always apply it the same way for everything, whereas if we make different notation for every situation ppl have to learn multiple systems.
IMO even if its not the absolute best system for a certain, but its good enough, you still use it to unify all situations.QUOTEEither system can do this, they both can be explained.
it was in reply that * system wouldn't be understood.QUOTEBut interrupted system is almost nessasary, you would have to memorize way to many names for hybrids to work for everything. Y5678 can work because we only have to remember Y5678 and then its done
Yea well, I can say "You can only remember Demon and then you know all those types of hybrids". 1p2h is only a subset of all possible situations. Therefore it becomes an exception to learn a system specifically for it.QUOTEThe overall system isn't even in place yet, this should be decided on a case by case basis, so we can get the best solution for every part, instead of just trying to do everything with one concept. Just saying use modifiers for everything seems to be rushing the issue, even if some or most parts might adapt to modifiers best, this is not always the case. If some parts need something else that works better, then we should use that, after analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of the situation. This is a case where I think that Y5678 accomplishes the job better then modifiers.
Sure we can take more time to discuss specifically the modifiers system. But even if a system works better for a specific situation, you have to remember that having too many systems is worse than one system which is slightly worse. And that's exactly what we have for interrupted notations: there's a bunch of modifiers for a lot of hybrids because when people first introduced their tricks, they didn't think wide enough and decided to just give it a name cuz they thought "well it's pretty easy to remember because the name means" without considering that having too many of those names is a problem. When you focus on a case-by-case you lose sight of the big picture and you end up creating too many details. That's why we had to step back and say, let's make a general system for tricks. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 18:56:04QUOTEthis might be an issue with the symbol itself, not the system. " is not so noticeable, that's why I like * better.
* might help, but I would still have to look at what one its being applied to, and have to take care to look at every slot closely, its not as fluent, readable, efficient whatever you want to call it.QUOTEI like the idea to have a guarantee of a system that always work regardless of the situation. Because then it becomes a solid fondation to build on.
Also it would reduce the learning curve tremendously, because you learn one system and always apply it the same way for everything, whereas if we make different notation for every situation ppl have to learn multiple systems.
IMO even if its not the absolute best system for a certain, but its good enough, you still use it to unify all situations.
Its a valid point, but we won't have hundreds of situations, I think if we take a better system for each one, it will still be manageable, and we can make it more efficient then trying to come up with a system designed for infinite possibilities. A complete modular system seems to be over kill, considering there is only so many places we can spin pens, and then the amount of those that we actually need to be able to describe what they did formally reduces it more.QUOTEYea well, I can say "You can only remember Demon and then you know all those types of hybrids". 1p2h is only a subset of all possible situations. Therefore it becomes an exception to learn a system specifically for it.
But to actually learn enough modifiers to have a complete system is to much, where as Y5678 is all you need to do for a complete system.QUOTESure we can take more time to discuss specifically the modifiers system. But even if a system works better for a specific situation, you have to remember that having too many systems is worse than one system which is slightly worse. And that's exactly what we have for interrupted notations: there's a bunch of modifiers for a lot of hybrids because when people first introduced their tricks, they didn't think wide enough and decided to just give it a name cuz they thought "well it's pretty easy to remember because the name means" without considering that having too many of those names is a problem. When you focus on a case-by-case you lose sight of the big picture and you end up creating too many details. That's why we had to step back and say, let's make a general system for tricks.
I think tricks and slots are 2 completely different subjects, there are a lot more tricks then there are places to spin your pen. There are hundreds of tricks, then consider hybrids and the amount goes way up. Where as anything beyond right and left hand is rare to see, and even when they do a pen can only spin in a limited number of places, we have a limited scope to where we actually need to formally describe with where the pen is spinning. I think you are extrapolating what worked for hybrids a bit to far. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 19:15:24
all I'm saying is I'd rather have a general system which is guaranteed to work everywhere and then later make adjustements or add specific notation for certain situations, rather than start with a lot of small specific notations that describe precise situations and then realizing that in the end we still needed something more general.
In other words, it's easier to go from something general to something specific, than from something specific to something general.
Because then you cover all cases, you don't have to go through them all. And when you see places for improvements you fix those up.
Start with a general solution then work your way into details.
also I'm not so concerned about the number of places to spin, but rather their combination. Covering all cases means it doesn't matter if your combo uses a certain combination of hands, spinners, feet, whatever, it still works. Wouldn't you feel more at ease knowing you have this solid fondation without considering all posibilities?
It seems to me it is the goal of all researchers to be able to create a general framework applicable in any situations. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 20:06:45
I would rather have an easier system to use and function with to be the main one, since the bulk of the breakdowns will be done with it, I don't see why we should hinder its efficiency to allow for what if situations. I think the focus should be on making the parts that are actually going to be used the most efficient as possible.
Yeah a general frame work might be nice, but shouldn't we try to make it as practical as possible, even if it might not deal with all the what if situations. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 20:42:41
you can't predict the future, you don't know what's going to be used, the interrupted notation was built in hindsight and I wish it was introduced from the start to avoid confusion. why repeat the same mistake here.
QUOTEYeah a general frame work might be nice, but shouldn't we try to make it as practical as possible, even if it might not deal with all the what if situations.
that's the definition of shorthand notation... cutting corners to denote a specific situation conveniently. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 20:58:52
We aren't cutting corners though, and Y5678 can still be incorporated into a general frame work for everything, it might not fit in as nicely with the general framework modifier idea, but it can still work pretty easily.
The way I see it is would you rather have the common break downs harder to read, or have the what if situations be slightly harder to understand. Personally I would rather have the common break downs be easier to write and read, and have the complexity on the less common combos, which won't be seen as much. Y5678 can still work with a general framework and modifiers fairly easily. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 21:22:08
everything can be incorporated into anything, but the solution might not always be elegant.
for example we can say: for simple hybrids, you can write them as is and then link those simple hybrids together using interrupted notations. yes you can do that, yes it will be faster to write, but the most formal way is still to seperate all the hybrids into their atomic form.
it's all about the levels of formalisms. to me the highest level of formalism is to use the same system everywhere. then depending on your need, you can combine this with shorter forms. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 22:05:14
But in this case we apply modifiers to Y5678 just as we would the other way it fits in nicely
To me I don't see why we need formalism if there is no practical reason behind it. Interrupted notation has a reason, people can't remember hundreds of hybrids, technically the correct way is to use it for anything, so a no hybrid way is technically the most correct way, or more formal.
But in this case its just a matter of learning one more rule instead of typing out an extra character for every finger,
Another issue I had with the " or * system is I ended up typing !*@*#*$* or !"@"#"$ a lot to, its triple the key strokes of the Y5678 once you factor in the shift, and its a lot harder to type I found. So the symbols that the most efficient don't need the shift key on a standard key board. I doubt I am the only one who doesn't find it to go shift unshift shift unshift as I type out a finger slot. If you do want a symbol try to use ones that don't need shift. That leaves us with ` or ' that wouldn't be right confusing. Formality is one thing, but how much are you willing to sacrifice to avoid a minor deviation from the general system. Y5678 is just as formal as any symbol if its made the official system. -
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2009 22:33:15
well i already said i would include hand notation for completeness so i dont see what's the problem... there would be nothing wrong with using Y5678 along other modifiers, suit yourself.
but somehow my mind is programmed to think that you see the base cases, which is T1234, and then you apply all modifications on that. I don't consider Y5678 a base case at all, because of the natural seperation between the hands. this tells me hand information modifiers finger information.
modifiers don't have to be symbols, they can be letters. i already suggested o and n as 2 possible letter candidate. but for me using shift is not a hassle, I already use the shift key a lot anyway.
highest level of formality must be absolute, that's what formal means. you can then yourself tone it down if you want, it's really up to you. nobody is forcing you to write at the most formal level all the time, just like nobody write animals with their scientific names most of the time. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 00:23:38
Using whatever system that is the official system will be the formal way of doing it, if we pick Y5678 then using that would be formal, no less then if we use symbols.
I don`t see what you`re trying to say here. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 00:44:24
Im amazed by the fact that you guys will not accept modifiers.
All penspinning uses are modifiers!!!
sonic-----sonic rev.
shadow---------inverse shadow
pretty much all tricks are based of a small amount of moves, which we all know, and then are given modifiers to give their variations.
From an efficiency standpoint.... we started saying TA instead of thumbaround, why dont we just change all of the tricks.
Charge is c, sonic is s.... and so on.
And on a Keyboard.. the * is 2 keys beside the - button.... which is used even more often in notating combos than * is.
It seems to me that this is just becoming into a, "My idea is better than yours" battle, and you guys wont budge... no matter how logical, or correct the other side may be.
Which is understandable. Once you've used something for a while, its natural to be reluctant to change.
But you should really consider the system because in the end the * modifier is the superior symbol. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 00:56:06
let me get something straight here: formal doesn't mean better and it doesn't mean superior. just because a notation is formal doesn't mean it's better in all aspects. if I say * system is more formal than Y5678, it doesn't mean it's superior.
formal notation has its own uses, shorthand other uses.
formal notation is used in situations where consistency is required, where you need a highly structured/systematic way of notating. Shorthand means it's being optimized for the common case.
when we're dealing with notation we want to present formal notation and also shorthand alternatives. Example: TA stands for ThumbAround. One is shorter to write, the other is formal, both are equally accurate and interchangable.
now I imagine the follow-up question is "what uses can the * system possibly have that the Y5678 doesn't cover" and I can already think of many already.
one of the biggest flaws of the Y5678, and the reason it cannot be formal, is its coupled nature. Y5678 denotes both hand and finger notation together. to me this is a messy design, it's not pure. You can't seperate hand and finger information properly. * system is independent of T1234. One describes finger notation, the other describes handedness. both types of information are well seperated.
Now so far, the only use of * system is to indicate which hand is being used, but in fact that is not true: the truly general definition of * is that it indicates non-dominance.
What this means is that it can differentiate dominance from non-dominance, regardless of what it is. suppose in the future we need to expand our notation to notate body parts in generals, not just fingers. the * modifier would de facto already be applicable to differentiate between dominant and non-dominant part. for instance, notating the dominant arm vs the non-dominant arm by modifying the arm notation with a *. This can already justify the existence of the * system. And if the * system has to exist in the first place, there is no reason why it would not be applicable for the basic T1234.
- Now, EVEN for 1p2h, there are situations where you require hand and finger information to be isolated. Suppose you are conducting a research analysis on combos, trying to determine if there is a relationship between some property (e.g. difficulty) and the frequency of the usage of both hands. As a tool, surely you must agree that in this situation having the hand information isolated from the finger information makes it easier to perform this analysis than using the Y5678 where the information is hidden in a conditional ("if its between T and 4 it's dominant hand, if its between Y and 8 its non-dominant). Maybe in another situation you just need finger information, but don't care about the hand even though its present. The fact that it's seperated makes it easy to do that. Coupling has the disadvantage that you have to take "all or nothing", and that is true for Y5678.
- One area of research we're interested in is combo generation: the ability to create combos through various systematic and aleatoric processes. I've written an article on one such process: Serialism. In those processes it's perfectly plausible to think such generation works in phases and first generate the finger information, and then the hand information or vice versa. As a tool, the * system is much better here because it can be used independently.
- One related area I've yet to work on, but I am thinking about is combo transformation. It is about the ability to create new combos based on old combos which exhibit certain absolute properties or perharps properties derived from the original combo. In short, think a function where the input is a combo and the output is another combo. Such transformation could focus on certain elements only like handedness. For example, what happens if I mathematically change the handedness of a finger in a breakdown according to some rule? Can any conclusion be derived from such transformation? etc. In this situation, as a tool, it is useful for the notation to be able to have a distinction between handedness and fingering. Another transformation example which is pretty simple is to reverse all tricks of a 1p1h combo and invert its handedness. In a 2p2h context, performing both the original and transformed combos at the same time has a "mirror" like effect where both pens get closer and further away from a symmetric center between the two hands. Inverting handness is super easy in * notation, whereas in Y5678 you have to do +4 and change T for Y.
All those are evidence of a (future) need for a formal system which is modular, where all types of information are classified and seperated. I agree that in normal circumstances, there is probably not many situation where you require total independence of all information, in which case you can bundle information together for convenience, which is what shorthand do. But because there are also situations where modularity is required, the most formal system you have must accomodate those needs, however rare it is.
PS: Even in normal circumstances, you could argue that amongst a list of letters and numbers to denote slots, a symbol will stand out. Therefore, at a glance, it will be easy to determine if a particular combo is 1p1h or 1p2h simply by seeing if there is a * somewhere real quick. For Y5678, it's slightly more difficulty because Y5678 are letters and numbers just like regular 1p1h notation. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 01:02:33QUOTE (Stevieboy7 @ Mar 15 2009, 08:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Im amazed by the fact that you guys will not accept modifiers.
All penspinning uses are modifiers!!!
sonic-----sonic rev.
shadow---------inverse shadow
pretty much all tricks are based of a small amount of moves, which we all know, and then are given modifiers to give their variations.
From an efficiency standpoint.... we started saying TA instead of thumbaround, why dont we just change all of the tricks.
Charge is c, sonic is s.... and so on.
And on a Keyboard.. the * is 2 keys beside the - button.... which is used even more often in notating combos than * is.
It seems to me that this is just becoming into a, "My idea is better than yours" battle, and you guys wont budge... no matter how logical, or correct the other side may be.
Which is understandable. Once you've used something for a while, its natural to be reluctant to change.
But you should really consider the system because in the end the * modifier is the superior symbol.
But tricks and finger slots are not the something, there are hundreds of tricks without modifiers there is no way we could remember the names, here its Y5678 thats it. Just because it works for tricks doesnt mean its best here.
But yeah, neither one of us is moving, I would rather have one system then two, lets just have a poll and accept the results as the official system. I am sure more people can make a more objective descion then we can. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 01:23:39QUOTE (Stevieboy7 @ Mar 15 2009, 04:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Im amazed by the fact that you guys will not accept modifiers.
All penspinning uses are modifiers!!!
sonic-----sonic rev.
shadow---------inverse shadow
pretty much all tricks are based of a small amount of moves, which we all know, and then are given modifiers to give their variations.
From an efficiency standpoint.... we started saying TA instead of thumbaround, why dont we just change all of the tricks.
Charge is c, sonic is s.... and so on.
And on a Keyboard.. the * is 2 keys beside the - button.... which is used even more often in notating combos than * is.
It seems to me that this is just becoming into a, "My idea is better than yours" battle, and you guys wont budge... no matter how logical, or correct the other side may be.
Which is understandable. Once you've used something for a while, its natural to be reluctant to change.
But you should really consider the system because in the end the * modifier is the superior symbol.
We aren't reluctant to accept modifiers, I'm not sure where that statement came from.
And why do you suggest that we refuse to listen to arguments? Or insist that yours is correct? Are we not making any logical arguments? Aren't you not budging as well?
And of course, you suggest that we haven't considered your side, which is very wrong. I've tried it, thought about it, discussed it, and still I and everyone I've asked prefers the Y5678 system.
You're right that neither side will budge, you as much as we, and that's why this is a debate. And that's why we need to wrap this up and make a poll and let that decide, because that's the way the research department is meant to run. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 01:33:29
I'm not against using Y5678 for common use, although in my opinion, * is easier to read and write. I mean, objectively, it's clear that Y5678 is shorter to write, but to me that does not translate to "easier to read/write". That's because to me * is easier to visualize.
Like I said, you guys can use Y5678 for practical purposes if you want, but I insist in saying that we do need a formal system, and that the formal system cannot be Y5678. Read my previous post for the reasons.
Shorthand notation doesn't means it's bad. It doesn't have a negative connotation. It means it's optimized for common use, which is exactly what Y5678 is.
I see nothing wrong in having two systems. If you recall, ~ is actually two systems. There's the [psc] system, which is the most formal notation, and then you have the ~> which is considered shorthand. We introduced both together and it wasn't a problem at all. Nowadays, most people only use ~ which is fine since it's designed for common uses, but there are some precise situations that call for [psc]. However I must say that the convenience advantage of ~ vs [psc] is much bigger than Y5678 vs *.
Why can't we do the same here?
ps: it's funny cuz I asked 4 people if they rather have * or Y5678. 3 told me * is better than Y5678, one was in favor of the other. I did not tell them who invented what. so it goes both ways. or maybe we frequent different crowds. it makes sense that it's disputed otherwise we would have reached a consensus a lot sooner. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 01:35:53
But the formal interupted notation system is used to describe things that can't be described with the informal.
Does * accomplish this? I'm asking, because I'm not sure. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 01:41:11QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 15 2009, 09:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>But the formal interupted notation system is used to describe things that can't be described with the informal.
Does * accomplish this? I'm asking, because I'm not sure.
yes!
read my previous post on the other page.
summary:
Y5678 is a handedness + finger notation system
* is only a handedness notation system.
There are situations where you need the handedness and the finger information to be seperated. * contains the handedness information isolated, whereas Y5678 needs a conditional translation to extract the handedness information. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 01:44:55
But what situations? Isn't it obvious that 56 would belong to the switch hand?
-
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 01:49:23QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 15 2009, 09:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>But what situations? Isn't it obvious that 56 would belong to the switch hand?
if I'm doing analysis I want to count the number of times the off-hand is used, it's much easier to count the number of * then look at all the numbers written, pick out those between 5-8 and Y.
if I want hand information only, I won't even look at the numbers, I'll only look at the *.
if I use Y5678, I have to look at every single number and check if its bettwen 5-8 or Y.
-
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 01:53:20
but it's not a flat * for every trick in one hand, some slots may have 1-4 of them in it, and plus i find it easy to recognize 5678
also, that doesnt mean it covers more information that Y5678, which i think would be the only reason to include a seperate formal notation -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 01:58:17
If you are willing to put all that effort into collecting hand data, and analyzing it, adding 4 should no longer be your biggest concern, neither should counting numbers instead of symbols.
-
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:02:27QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 15 2009, 09:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>but it's not a flat * for every trick in one hand, some slots may have 1-4 of them in it, and plus i find it easy to recognize 5678
also, that doesnt mean it covers more information that Y5678, which i think would be the only reason to include a seperate formal notation
sorry I meant to say the number of "off-hand finger" usage, not tricks.
In the realm of 1p2h, Y5678 is equivalent to T1234 + *. But the fact that the finger and hand information are isolated makes it more formal. The fact that the information is seperated neatly makes the design cleaner.
And then you get the added benefit that * can be used with any kind of notation where you have a dominant and a non-dominant part. Flexibility.
Plus, isn't the big deal about Y5678 is that it's more convenient to use in common situation. In which case, why can't you accept the fact that sometimes it is not the most convenient in some situations that call for highly formal notation? In which case, use modifiers?
How about theses examples:
I'm running an analysis to determine the frequency of fingers used in a combo, regardless of handedness. Using T1234 + * notation, I can simply disregard the * modifier and look for the numbers. For Y5678, I need to perform a translation to T1234.
I want to test the hypothesis that creativity of a combo is related to how different it is from regular 1p1h. I create a metric called "modifier deviation" which counts the number of modifiers used per trick and try to relate that to some creativity metric of the combo (perharps scored by judges). If I use modifiers I can count the number of symbols after each finger. If I use Y5678, I have to remember the fact that Y5678 is 2 hands, which according to my original hypothesis, counts as modifier from basic 1p1h.
Seriously it's not hard to find situations where having seperated hand and finger information is very useful. And those are perfect examples of research projects we might do.QUOTEIf you are willing to put all that effort into collecting hand data, and analyzing it, adding 4 should no longer be your biggest concern, neither should counting numbers instead of symbols.
It's still more convenient than using Y5678, same argument you used against * was that it uses one more character per finger, not sure why it can't apply here. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:06:01
Right... but what I'm saying is that in the end, it does not offer more information that Y5678. So how can it be called the formal notation?
-
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:06:48QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 15 2009, 10:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Right... but what I'm saying is that in the end, it does not offer more information that Y5678. So how can it be called the formal notation?
formal does not necessarily mean MORE information, it can also mean more STRUCTURED.
surely you agree that * is a more structured way of notating handedness? -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:08:13
Yes but I find notating handedness unnecessary, when we can notate fingers, with the implication of handedness.
In which case, it wouldn't be formal vs. informal, it would be finger oriented vs hand oriented? -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:09:02QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 15 2009, 10:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Yes but I find notating handedness unnecessary, when we can notate fingers, with the implication of handedness.
In which case, it wouldn't be formal vs. informal, it would be finger oriented vs hand oriented?
you can call it whatever you want, it doesn't change the fact that Y5678 embeds hand and finger information together, while * only describes handedness.
if you don't like the word formal and informal for some reason, then call it something less. semantics mean nothing to me. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:09:32
Those are far beyond the purpose of a standard break down, why would we want to release system that spinners would be expected to know and read, when only researches would even dream of using it.
and if youre analyzing combos translation should hardly be an issue relative to the workload you took, and those translations would become nearly automatic after you worked with it for a while -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:13:28
The reason I don't like informal vs. informal is because it suggests that formal is the proper, correct way, whereas informal is the sloppy slang version, and I don't feel that's an accurate depiction.
-
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:16:24QUOTE (Awesome @ Mar 15 2009, 10:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Those are far beyond the purpose of a standard break down, why would we want to release system that spinners would be expected to know and read, when only researches would even dream of using it.
and if youre analyzing combos translation should hardly be an issue relative to the workload you took, and those translations would become nearly automatic after you worked with it for a while
that's what I've been saying all along dude, FOR THE COMMON USE, Y5678 is just fine! I'm not arguing against that at all anymore. but why would you want to not release it (the modifier system)? if the system is ready to use, the public deserve to know it. im sure there are some who will find a use for it. the goal of the research department is not keep its findings to itself!!
and why would I want to work in a clumsy system where hand information is embedded when I can CHOOSE to use soemthing where it's all neatly spread out. why make my life more miserable when there's a better option for those type of situations.
why would I want to learn a translation system when I can get access to the real thing.
and all the examples i given so far are fairly simple. there are some complex situations where you really need notation that is explicit (perharps you like this word better than formal?) so that you are absolutely clear in what you are doing.
how about a combo transformation where I apply exactly one modifer to every finger. then I check if a combo satisfies this property by checking if there is exactly one symbol after every finger.
what if I start programming some of these things? why complicate my code and add a bunch of conditionals analyzing fingers and whether they're in Y5678 to know its handedness, when I can say parse * as off-hand.
the applications are numerous. NOT COMMON USE I agree, but it still calls for a formal system.QUOTEThe reason I don't like informal vs. informal is because it suggests that formal is the proper, correct way, whereas informal is the sloppy slang version, and I don't feel that's an accurate depiction.
formal never EVER meant BETTER!!!
1 a: belonging to or constituting the form or essence of a thingb: relating to or involving the outward form, structure, relationships, or arrangement of elements rather than content
its all about structure and consistency. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:19:52
So what we're headed towards is a dual system? I'm fine with that but I still dont like formal vs. informal, it makes ours sound less correct.
I know that it doesnt mean that, but informal does have a negative connotation to it in my opinion... -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:22:33
I could accept a dual system, but as shadow said informal has a negative connotation.
-
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:22:34QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Mar 15 2009, 10:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>So what we're headed towards is a dual system? I'm fine with that but I still dont like formal vs. informal, it makes ours sound less correct.
I know that it doesnt mean that, but informal does have a negative connotation to it in my opinion...
ok that to me seems more like a pride thing. informal does not mean bad, it sounds like you're just upset that I call your system informal and that it has nothing to do with the systems themselves. RD is a collaborative effort anyway, you can't claim sole credits for this system
so it's not like you can show off a new trick by naming it after you.
you cal call it "Y5678: a practical notation for 1p2h". -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:30:45
...what? I'm not claiming sole credit, Awesome agrees with me too, when we hear informal, it sounds like a less correct method
you said semantics means nothing to you, so why not change it? We could offer both systems, finger oriented and hand oriented -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:34:30
thats right, i dont care, call it whatever you want. finger oriented and hand oriented is good as well.
but i'll tell you why it's informal.
suppose we release both * and Y5678 out:
- if Y5678 is more popular: then cool, Y5678 becomes the practical, go-to, notation for common use. Modifiers still has its own use because of the seperation of hand/finger informaation.
- if * becomes more popular: if * becomes more popular than Y5678 even for common use, then I don't see any reason why Y5678 should continue to exist. I don't see any situation where it would be better to have embedded information when you can use a combination of hand/finger information. To me the sole reason Y5678 exists is for practical purpose. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:37:38
We could release Y5678 first, and wait until that becomes accepted before releasing the * system, but releasing both and seeing which one catches seems fair.
-
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:40:13
finger-oriented vs hand-oriented makes a lot of sense
you can present both notations tell ppl to use depending on whether they think its more important to have the hand information explicit or not. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:40:40QUOTE (Zombo @ Mar 15 2009, 09:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>thats right, i dont care, call it whatever you want. finger oriented and hand oriented is good as well.
but i'll tell you why it's informal.
suppose we release both * and Y5678 out:
- if Y5678 is more popular: then cool, Y5678 becomes the practical, go-to, notation for common use. Modifiers still has its own use because of the seperation of hand/finger informaation.
- if * becomes more popular: if * becomes more popular than Y5678 even for common use, then I don't see any reason why Y5678 should continue to exist. I don't see any situation where it would be better to have embedded information when you can use a combination of hand/finger information. To me the sole reason Y5678 exists is for practical purpose.
Then I think we could end this discussion by simply releasing a poll to discover which is more popular. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:42:12
well * still needs some touching up to do.
namely:
- what symbol/letter to use
- how the bracket system will function.
those are important decisions that will influence how practical it is. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:42:35
Well now we're considering using both, and what to call them, hard to do so with a poll.
Okay...
I'm all for releasing both notations as finger oriented and hand oriented.
If everyone else is, there's no need for a poll. What do you think?
oh, right, we need to decide on a symbol
and could you sum up the brackets for me again? cos i didn't get it at all -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:44:13
yea i dont think its a big deal to decide right now on an official position
thats because if one phases out, we can officiall discontinue its usage later. -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:44:31
Alright lets touch up the * system then do it
I like ` because I dont have to shift and unshift all the time, but it isnt as distinct -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:48:56
im actually fine with shifting since i do it all the time, and i can reach shift and 8 with one hand pretty easily.
1*2*-11*?
looks sort of strange... -
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:51:03
I am fine with shifting I just dont like hitting shift for a chacter and unhitting it for the next I end up getting 1*@* and have to back space XD
-
Date: Mon, Mar 16 2009 02:51:55
use other topic plz
http://www.upsb.info/forum/index.php?showtopic=18454 -
Date: Wed, Mar 18 2009 04:32:09
i was thinking, since we're developing the * to work as a modifier system, and we're working on other modifiers, maybe we should release Y5678 now, and at the same time tentatively release the * system, until we develop the spinners modifier and anything else we come up with
-
Date: Wed, Mar 18 2009 04:48:25
uh thats what we said all along?
-
Date: Wed, Mar 18 2009 05:38:11
well i meant like, now now
i thought we were going to decide on a symbol and stuff and finalize the modifier one first?
or can we release this one now? -
Date: Wed, Mar 18 2009 17:18:22
well you can start writing the article for Y5678 now if you want.
needs to be converted in wiki format also. -
Date: Mon, Apr 27 2009 14:23:10
Well, I told that to Zombo before, but the LR system could work, if we want to describe which hand executes the tricks, apart from the handedness modifier.
In this system, L stands for Left and R for Right.
Fingerslots for the Left hand would be: LT, L1, L2..., and for the Right hand: RT, R1, R2...
Examples I gave to Zombo:
Two Finger Twirl L1R2
Tw Sonic Rev L12-L23 > Pass L23-R23 > Tw Sonic R23-R12
So as I said that does not show the handedness, and the spinner may write if he is left or right-handed before the breakdown; but you know which hand is using is every moment.
A similar thing occurs with the handedness modifier: you know which part of the combo is executed with his good hand, but not if that hand is his left or his right.
LR system could be useful in certain moments, and the handedness modifier also, but for other cases. -
Date: Wed, Apr 29 2009 21:35:25
i don't like LR, because it is not hand-neutral
to be able to read a LR breakdown, you need to know if the person who wrote it is left-handed or not.
if the person who wrote it is the same handedness as you, then you can treat his breakdown the same way
if the person is the opposite handedness as you, you need to reverse his notation.
it is the same problem as video/picture tutorial for left/right spinners, except that in our notation we can actually make it neutral, so why not do it. it's easy -
Date: Wed, Apr 29 2009 23:16:02
yeah... damn i need to write this thing >>
-
Date: Sat, May 2 2009 23:04:37
I havn't read the thread yet, but a friend, KIRGO, has written this a week ago :
Hi everybody!
I would like to suggest you a notation that permits to breakdown tricks using interaction between the two hands. That is to say transfers, but also “surrender tricks†that Alucard (GPC) began to develop, with the “surrender sonicâ€: http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiMGJD-xwy8
So the surrender concept consists in beginning a trick with a hand, and to continue it with both hands. The problem was to describe the relative position of the hands, and to find a light notation for the slots.
The hands can be, in a 3D space, either parallel or perpendicular.
> If they are parallel, they can be side to side (//), or in opposition (><).
Side to side: http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/4049/dsc01703ok0.jpg
In opposition: http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/7931/dsc01702mn2.jpg
> If they are perpendicular, there are two possibilities: the fingers of the right hand are perpendicular to the palm of the left hand (|-). Or the fingers of the left hand are perpendicular to the palm of the right hand (-|).
And in each configuration, the two hands can be in Palm Up, Palm Side, Palm down, or Back side (the inverse of the palm side).
Here is the synthesis of all the possible positions for the hands; the position of the left hand is at the left of the symbol, and the position of the right hand is at the right of the symbol (quite logical, isn’t it?).
http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/3751/notation.pdf
Then for the slots, it’s very easy. The finger of the starting hand are written as usual (T 1 2 3 4), and the finger of the other hand have just an “L†or an “R†before.
For example, both hands are side to side in palm down, and we do an inverse sonic starting from 12 and using the index of the other hand to do an inverse sonic. The arriving slot is written 1L1, and the entire trick is written: [PD//PD] inverse sonic 12-2L1-1L1 (or simply 12-1L1).
For a transfer, we can use brackets to be clearer:
[PD//PD] Backaround 12-L(12)
And we can imagine:
[PU>
Or [PU//PU] triangle pass T1L1…
The surrender sonic would be breakdowned like this:
[PS>
That's it! I'm waiting for your critics.
I post it for him =) I agree with zombo, ' is better than L and R, but the rest stay good.