UPSB v3
Naming Committee / [topic][5.22] Swivels
-
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 02:27:38QUOTE (Zombo @ Apr 6 2009, 08:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Project name : FPSB's laboratory
Project leader : lindor
I often think of posting some descriptions of tricks and concepts developed in FPSB's laboratory, but I do not have any time for that, so I think a simple topic with links and little descriptions of what we are doing (or what we were doing) in FPSB's laboratory could be useful.
First, I want to present swivels tricks. That is a project I developed months ago. This was a new notation to describe easily tricks with the pen passing from palm to backhand (or from backhand to palm), using one finger to pass. For example, during a twisted cobra bite, the pen go from the backhand to the palm and pass on the pinky.
A complete notation was developed, but it has not been translated in english for the moment. If some can read french, here is two links to understand this notation :
http://thefpsb.penspinning.fr/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=2006 , article written on FPSB
http://wiki.penspinning.fr/index.php5?title=Swivel , article in FPSB's wiki
Swivel tricks are really useful; a lot have been used during the WT (for example, at the end of eriror's combo, R4). Because of this new notation, others swivels were discovered. You can see some of them in this video I made 2 months ago :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI19-gmxHiM
quick question:
what is the difference from Swivel P4-12 and a Sonic P4-12?
swivels are strikingly similar to sonics IMO -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 02:44:23
uh.. they arent... at all...
here are three examples of swivels from me
i had another one with opposite rotation somewhere that i cant find
i cant really make any videos now to explain tho, sorry
uh dl this and slo mo to answer your question maybe (it's the same as the top vid but better quality) http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?wg4jm5wtqzt -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 04:20:51QUOTE (Jamie Enns @ Apr 8 2009, 07:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>quick question:
what is the difference from Swivel P4-12 and a Sonic P4-12?
swivels are strikingly similar to sonics IMO
Remember anti-gravity tricks? I know they don't exist anymore, I'm just using them for an example since swivels are anti-gravities. During an anti-gravity trick, your hand is palm-down, and the pen is being held in say 11, for example. You use hand motion to have the pen spin around your index and you catch it in 11.
Now, for swivels, You hold the pen in P4 or P234 or something along those lines. You hold it in the anti-gravity position. You use hand motion once again to make it spin but this time, instead having the pen spin around your whole hand and back into P234 like an anti-gravity, have it stop half-way at 12. Imo, a swivel can be broken down into a (palm-down) Fingerless Pinkyaround P4-12 0.5. Which is how I've always notated it before swivels came into being. Most people tend to do a fl ia rev after the swivel.
Oh, and doesn't the swivel reverse have 1.0 rotations? -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 04:36:17
@Shadow & Charlie: even in Shadows video, you do a 'trick' with 1.0 revs and a 0.5 around only has 0.5 revs
so, to make my case of swivel = sonic clear i made a video:
-
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 04:40:18QUOTE (Jamie Enns @ Apr 8 2009, 08:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>@Shadow & Charlie: even in Shadows video, you do a 'trick' with 1.0 revs and a 0.5 around only has 0.5 revs
so, to make my case of swivel = sonic clear i made a video:
There's no such thing as a FL sonic.
Can you do palm-down fl arounds? Try doing one at 11. Then try doing one at P234. Have it land back at P234. Now do a swivel from P234-12. You'll notice the similarity. -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 04:46:41
well in your video you talk about FL sonics = swivels, not sonic = swivel so...
-
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 04:56:09QUOTE (Charlie @ Apr 8 2009, 11:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>There's no such thing as a FL sonic.
Can you do palm-down fl arounds? Try doing one at 11. Then try doing one at P234. Have it land back at P234. Now do a swivel from P234-12. You'll notice the similarity.
Charlie, a swivel from P234-12 is not an around and i believe that a palmdown fl around P234-P234 is different from a swivel P234-12, and it does have a conic spin, not one like an around.
I believe these are FL sonics.
My proof is the similarities in feel, look, spin, and rotation count of sonic 34-12 and "swivel 4-12"
and where does it say sonics can not be fingerless?
http://www.upsb.info/wiki/index.php/Sonic_...dow_definitions
EDIT:
and Zombo...
2 = 1+1
and
1+1 = 2
my point is that adding a new term is stupid, the variations of the 'swivel' this french guy had are NOT new, they are easy to break down hybrids, and giving them 2 names (eg pinky swivel reverse p-12 and pinkybak 4P-12 versus ONLY pinkybak 4P-12) -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 05:49:09
one, there is indeed a fingerless sonic ;]
two, it's a 0.5 around rev that ends hybrid into a shadow
in essence it's a fingerless shadow 4-12, but i dont think that makes much sense
but since it starts along the palm and ends up along the back, it does indeed do an around 0.5 before the shadow finish -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 05:53:27QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Apr 8 2009, 09:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>one, there is indeed a fingerless sonic ;]
two, it's a 0.5 around rev that ends hybrid into a shadow
in essence it's a fingerless shadow 4-12, but i dont think that makes much sense
but since it starts along the palm and ends up along the back, it does indeed do an around 0.5 before the shadow finish
my bad. sonics can be fl. just realized it. not a very practical trick though.
but still, swivels are not fl sonics. Did you even try what I suggested? :| -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 06:03:05
"it's a 0.5 around rev that ends hybrid into a shadow"
ok, WOW
I'm so right then....
1) take your pen in 23 with a distinguishable side away from your arm (color for me is blue)
2) turn your hand palm down
3) start a palm down middle around reverse
4) before you catch the pen, using the index finger, hit the distinguishable side of the pen making the pen do the last part of a shadow
5) catch in 12
whoa! your pen did a Conic rotation from 23-12!
it had 1.0 rotations
and it started with a 0.5 around rev and then it ended with a hybrid into a shadow
wait.... "it's a 0.5 around rev that ends hybrid into a shadow"......
thats what you did?
but that was strikingly similar to a sonic?!?!
AHHH!! did you do a Sonic 23-12???? or a 0.5 around rev that ends hybrid into a shadow????????
same thing!
ta da, no need for the name swivel
need a video, or do you get the point?
EDIT:
@ Charlie, try this, it makes more sense considering what you told me to do didn't help.
I will repeat,
"i believe that a palmdown fl around P234-P234 is different from a swivel P234-12"
why? because i tried it, and i discoved that:
-1:
--a.) fl around P234-P234 has a circular spin
--b.) 'swivel' P234-12 has a conic spin
-2:
--a.) fl around P234-P234 is one trick, an around
--b.) 'swivel' P234-12 is a hybrid of a FL 0.5 around rev that ends hybrid into a shadow (a FL sonic)
and lastly, you are incorrect when you say "sonics can be fl. just realized it. not a very practical trick though." because spinners have shown its practicality by doing these 'swivels'
sorry i'm grumpy, you people are just saying what i'm saying but refusing to believe -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 06:17:37
I wouldn't say it's a fl around rev into a shadow. it's just a fl around rev 0.5.
just because it has something like a conic motion does not make it a sonic. A sonic is a charge hybrid, and the most important part of the sonic is the two-fingered clip. A swivel has something like a conic motion but does not have the two-fingered clip at all. And most importantly, the trajectory of a FL Around Rev is (like I said before) that of an anti-gravity done midway.
EDIT
we don't believe each other. thats why we're having this debate -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 06:35:18
lol for one thing, i never said swivels were a necessary name, i dont agree with implimenting it at all, and i see no need for the cynical treatment
im aware we can use hybrid notation, i just choose a different one
sonic doesnt make sense to me, why? because there's no second finger to hold the pen, isnt that the essence of the sonic? -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 07:02:48
ok, with sonic 34-12, what are the two fingers? the farthest apart ones, 4 and 1.
do they touch?
okok, with said sonic P4-12, what are the two fingers? the farthest apart ones P and 1
do they touch?
so in the definition of sonic we get:
"The pen travels along the hand from between one pair of fingers to another."
coool, understood, P and 1
to me, this is like the pinky bak, its done from 34, just like a ring bak. why? no extra finger!
what do we do to compensate? more force
why have a new name for a trick that is already there?
i've made a video and will upload it in a sec -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 07:11:01
between implies that there are two fingers on the outsides
the pen is not between the pinky and index
besides what about full swivels or continuous -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 07:30:03
"between implies that there are two fingers on the outsides
the pen is not between the pinky and index"
ok, look at it like this: 1 and P are the outside "fingers" and 234 are between them. the pen goes over 234, and between P and 1
"besides what about full swivels or continuous"
what? -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 07:30:46QUOTE (Jamie Enns @ Apr 9 2009, 12:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>ok, with sonic 34-12, what are the two fingers? the farthest apart ones, 4 and 1.
do they touch?
okok, with said sonic P4-12, what are the two fingers? the farthest apart ones P and 1
do they touch?
so in the definition of sonic we get:
"The pen travels along the hand from between one pair of fingers to another."
coool, understood, P and 1
to me, this is like the pinky bak, its done from 34, just like a ring bak. why? no extra finger!
what do we do to compensate? more force
why have a new name for a trick that is already there?
i've made a video and will upload it in a sec
Well then, if sonic clip 14s are possible and swivels are sonics, I wanna see you post a video of a swivel clip.
-
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 08:16:52
That is an odd argument because:
a 'swivel' is a FL Sonic, so your question implies a FL Sonic Clip is possible. If you think that your argument is valid, then you must believe it is possible to post a video of FL sonic clip 23-12. So you can prove me wrong if any Sonic Clip can be done fingerlessly.
and how about the fact the the ability to clip does not define what a Sonic is in ANYWAY? well it's true.
So my conclusion is that you can't 'clip' with FL Sonics, ANY WHERE, the concept of a fingerless charge between two fingers at all seems impossible. And even if it was, it wouldn't prove me wrong in any way.
But since we have agreed upon the existence of a FL Sonic, one could ask, what would a FL Sonic P4-12 look like?
go for it, its a 'swivel' -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 14:45:20
Hi everybody, I just want to explain something :
I think every swivels could be breakdowned as others tricks, like FL arounds, FL sonics, shadows... I know that, and I breakdowned every swivels I created.
So, why have I created this family ? That is for two reason :
-1) swivels can all be breakdowned, but all as differents tricks : some are arounds-like, others are FL sonic-like... But they represent a familiy : They all are tricks with the pen going from backhand to palm (or the contrary), using a finger as a swivel. To create a family for all these kind of tricks allow us to see relations between these trick. When someone use just "normal" breakdown, it is not possible. And with relations, it is possible to imagin every variation...
-2) Every breakdown you could give could be good, but it will not mean the reversal of the hand - and this reversal is what make these tricks so different...
Also, this reversal add 1/2 rotation => swivel P4-12 has 1.5 rotation, because the hand has to make 0.5 rotation to throw the pen. The breakdown of swivel tricks with a "simple" notation can't describe this 0.5 rotation.
(The last argument, which is'nt really one, is that swivel simplify all notations for these tricks. When you see a swivel in a video, you cas say "ow, a swivel P4-12"; without swivel, you would say "ow, a trick-using-a-reversal-of-the-hand-which-is-probably-hard-to-breakdown". Using swivels is useful ^^) -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 16:04:00QUOTE (lindor @ Apr 9 2009, 09:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>-1) swivels can all be breakdowned, but all as differents tricks : some are arounds-like, others are FL sonic-like... But they represent a familiy : They all are tricks with the pen going from backhand to palm (or the contrary), using a finger as a swivel. To create a family for all these kind of tricks allow us to see relations between these trick. When someone use just "normal" breakdown, it is not possible. And with relations, it is possible to imagin every variation...
-2) Every breakdown you could give could be good, but it will not mean the reversal of the hand - and this reversal is what make these tricks so different...
Also, this reversal add 1/2 rotation => swivel P4-12 has 1.5 rotation, because the hand has to make 0.5 rotation to throw the pen. The breakdown of swivel tricks with a "simple" notation can't describe this 0.5 rotation.
(The last argument, which is'nt really one, is that swivel simplify all notations for these tricks. When you see a swivel in a video, you cas say "ow, a swivel P4-12"; without swivel, you would say "ow, a trick-using-a-reversal-of-the-hand-which-is-probably-hard-to-breakdown". Using swivels is useful ^^)
-1) by creating this family you are giving double names. Pinky Bak P4-34, whether its with or without the hand turning, is still a Pinky Bak P4-34. and the concept of the wrist turning over does not completely solve the problem you think there is. In my videos, i do not turn my wrist from palm up the palm down. is it a swivel?
-2) I can solve your problem of breaking down this reversals extra 0.5 spins like this: Palm Spin 2.0 P-P234 > FL Sonic P234-12.
Wait? Why didn't I change anything? because the trick before is clearly palm up and and the FL Sonic P234-12 always lands palm down. There is an implied turn of the wrist.
(The last argument, which is'nt really one, is that FL Sonics simplify all notations for these tricks. When you see a FL Sonic in a video, you cas say "ow, a FL Sonic P4-12"; without FL Sonic, you would say "ow, a trick-that-has-so-many-different-names-which-is-probably-confusing-to-read". Using FL Sonics is useful ^^) -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 17:04:56
And so ? There is plenty of names for a lot of tricks.
Why should I say sonic 23-12, that is just an hybrid, I could say charge 23~charge 13~charge 12...
Why should I say indexaround 12-12, that is just an hybrid, I could say pass reverse 12-T1~ pass reverse T1-12
So, giving double name cannot be a problem because a lot of tricks have two or more names.
In your video, this is a sonic. Not a swivel. Swiel describe the reversal of the hand.
Palm Spin 2.0 P-P234 > FL Sonic P234-12 can be done palm up =) So, you did not solve any problem. Sonics can be made palm up, down or side, as you want.
and for the last argument => And what about hybrids ? Tricks like "dragonaround" and bonkura's reversal of the hand can be breakdowned, but that is hard, this breakdown cannot describe the movment of the hand, and this breakdown would be totally theoric, reading it do not means that you'll understand how to do the trick he describe...
Finaly, you have not said anything about the possibility of finding others tricks when swivels tricks are looked as a family of tricks... -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 17:14:30
More Names = More Confusion
thats why there is a Naming comity.
do you really need the reversal of the hand in the break down though? there is an implied meaning given the context of the trick and we have been doing it this way forever. Its like inverse shadow 12-12 > bak 12-12, its implied.
why double name if it is just a sonic? it is not a 'swivel' if i start with a pen in 23, palm up, then turn my hand over and do a palm down sonic 23-12. IT IS JUST A SONIC!
Its already in a family, the Conic one.
The Dragon Around is a COMBO, not a trick
The FPSB always does stupid naming conventions, remember sonic impulse? this is the same thing! there is no need! IT IS JUST A SONIC!!!!!! -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 17:25:11
Pyralux does cont swivels a t00:39. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_EfahBMFPc
Any I'm sure that fl sonic clips are possible, but it's such a redundant trick, I won't want to bother learning it.
You can try it out yourself though. Do a neobak 12-34, but intercept it with your pinky as you would a sonic. That, I believe, would be a fingerless sonic 12-34. I'm sure you could get it to clip too.
@Lindor
I believe your swivel rev has 1.0 rotations and a swivel normal has 0.5 rotations. Is still the same trick?
@Jamie Enns
Reallly now, calm down. It's a debate. Such anger is unneeded. Although I do agree that too much names does lead to confusion. But, maybe a name such as swivels would be a good idea. People have been calling it weird things. Such as, wrist around, handaround, dragonaround, etc. -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 17:39:01
JE : stay calm please... I created this notation because I think it simplify everything, and this notation is often used on FPSB because it simplify really the breakdowns... But I never posted it in the NC. You don't want it to be official ? Ok, stop crying, no problems, stay cool =)
You say "the FPSB always does stupid naming conventions", that was stupid. You did not know anything about FPSB. Why are you speaking when you do not know what you are speaking about ? A lot of very good things was made on FPSB...
I still think swivels are a good idea, but I repeat, I just posted the video here because it present some tricks useful and allows spinners to find others tricks like that...
The dragon around i an hybrid, not a combo =)
Charlie : swivels rev and normal have the same number of rotation... the reason why you do not see the same number could be because of something like an half charge or something else... -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 18:36:20
as always,
the general policy is that:
1) we want to stop the spread of new naming for hybrids, even though old tricks can now be divided thanks to interrupted notation, we want to minimize the creation of new names.
2) the NC respects the creation of names for popular hybrids at a lowel level of formalism and will sometimes releases articles treating with hybrid names and explain their formal equivalent. The NC will never enforce or restrict people to adopt certain notation, it will only suggest and clarify.
@JE: I do not like this tone at all and you will have to clean up your act if you want to stay in this RD. -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 20:53:28
I'm so very sorry everyone for the anger. Obviously I am not understood and I have been approaching this with the wrong tone and with the attitude "I'm Right, You are Wrong". As you can see, I was up late last night (3:16 am was the last post before bed) and trust me, it was to do a Lab Report for Biology Lab, not debate which is which. I have just handed it in and did the exam, so stress is down. The use of capitals was the wrong way to convey a simple idea. I also have no right too mock the FPSB being the young spinner I am. And looking back, I never meant to get so caught up. It's just that I do not agree with the name swivel. though I apologize for my rudeness and anger, I will not disregard what I said about the trick.
I will sum up what i believe in a few points and then let others decide:
- the trick 'Swivel' is a Fl Sonic
- it is not a hybrid
- it is one thing to give a name to a hybrid, but I believe that giving a new name for a single fundamental trick only adds to the problem
- there is essentially no problem of the "reversal" of the hand
- the term 'Swivel' does not solve any false problems of the "reversal" of the hand
- it doubles names
- it is not it's own family
- it is in the Conic Family
- it is a trick with many possibilities
so I am sorry, but please do not disregard what I have said.
but because I got mad, I think i've already lost and you won't want to listen, that is my fault.
sorry
- Jamie -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 21:20:29
anyway
fact of the matter is,
the swivel notation was never submitted to the NC in the first place, so discussing its official status is not even in consideration here. it's just something that got adopted unofficially by whoever wants to use it. -
Date: Thu, Apr 9 2009 22:30:36
as i've said, i dont want to implement swivels
but jamie, you're assuming all swivels end the same way
they can end just as easily in a shadow, around, or sonic
therefore i disagree that it is in the conic family
in fact, since the essence of it is in the pinkyaround 0.5, i consider it in the around family
and we arent disregarding your arguments, it's a simple debate, i just feel that you're oversimplifying this in assuming all swivels are sonics