UPSB v3
Advanced Tricks / Finger notation idea regarding rise, fall
-
Date: Sat, Dec 8 2007 21:06:23
Fall and Rise are accepted terms when both the start and end positions are changing.
-- What do you think of using (rise) or (fall) to describe the start or end position only, when the other is static?
Two examples:
1) a TA combo w/ a rising end-positon. http://www.upsb.info/forum/index.php?showtopic=2485
TA T-4 > TA T-3 > TA T-2 > TA T-1
could be written as:
TA T1-rise
2) Bak w/ falling start positions > handaround http://www.upsb.info/forum/index.php?s=&am...ost&p=28135
Bak1.5 > Bak1.5 12-T23 > Bak1.5 23-T34 > Bak1.5 34-T12 > Handaround
could be written as:
Bak1.5 fall-T1 > Handaround
This second example brings me to another naming issue, should 'P' be used for Palm to describe a Handaround simply as a Bak P4-T1
or to describe a Neobak1.5 12-handaround rev hybrid (Neobakhand1.5), simply as a Neobak1.5 12-P4?
-
Date: Sat, Dec 8 2007 21:14:34
I'm newb, but since this makes sense and since this is The Man
I agree
But why is the position switched?
T1-rise
fall-T1
or is it just mistake? -
Date: Sat, Dec 8 2007 21:22:00
No it shouldnt... a finger around fall/ rise would include the thumb, however it is physically impossible to to a "ta" rise or fall.... easier ones are inverse and reverse, every trick has an inverse and reverse....no matter what....
-
Date: Sat, Dec 8 2007 22:20:45QUOTE (raelz @ Dec 8 2007, 03:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>But why is the position switched?
T1-rise
fall-T1
or is it just mistake?
Not a mistake;
in the first example the end position is rising but the start position is static at T1.
in the second example the start position is falling while the end position is static at T1.
Sketching, or the naming committee (if there is still one) and everyone else here can decide if this construct is useful enough to implement or if its application is too specific.
-
Date: Sat, Dec 8 2007 22:29:01
i think you might be interested in joining the NC to deal such issues.
It will also give you access to the Research Department as a whole, so that you can take a look at other experimental projects. -
Date: Mon, Dec 10 2007 07:01:15QUOTE (Zombo @ Dec 8 2007, 04:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>i think you might be interested in joining the NC to deal such issues.
It will also give you access to the Research Department as a whole, so that you can take a look at other experimental projects.
I don't know about joining the naming committee, I have really bad time management skills and I'm pretty lazy.
But seriously, what do you think of the idea. -
Date: Mon, Dec 10 2007 14:40:45
I think it's just a shorthand notation, but it will never be as a clear as the real notation.
because there are some tricks where a fall has more tricks than others.
example: neobakfall has 3, bakfall has 4. -
Date: Mon, Dec 10 2007 17:30:42
Since we are trying to stop naming combos, coming up with an official naming system for Rises/Falls seems to go in the wrong direction.
There can be unofficial Rises/Falls as long as they make enough sense to everyone, but making any official Rise/Fall rules seems useless these days.QUOTE1) a TA combo w/ a rising end-positon. http://www.upsb.info/forum/index.php?showtopic=2485Both positions will have to change for this combo, since the finger notations (which do not follow current standards above) have to change for both the push and catch to use different fingers:
TA T-4 > TA T-3 > TA T-2 > TA T-1
could be written as:
TA T1-rise
Thumbaround Normal T4-T3 > Thumbaround T3-T2 > Thumbaround T2-T1 > Thumbaround T1-T1
The above combo has already been the de facto Thumbaround Normal Rise for quite some time. I don't see a need to need to make anything official since there has yet to be any real confusion. The same would go for Fall: as long as the direction of tricks is named, everyone should already understand the following by common sense...
Thumbaround Normal Rise:- Thumbaround Normal T4-T3 > Thumbaround Normal T3-T2 > Thumbaround Normal T2-T1 > Thumbaround Normal T1-T1
Thumbaround Normal Fall:- Thumbaround Normal T1-T2 > Thumbaround Normal T2-T3 > Thumbaround Normal T3-T4 > Thumbaround Normal T4-T4
Thumbaround Reverse Rise:- Thumbaround Reverse T4-T3 > Thumbaround Reverse T3-T2 > Thumbaround Reverse T2-T1 > Thumbaround Reverse T1-T1
Thumbaround Reverse Fall:- Thumbaround Reverse T1-T2 > Thumbaround Reverse T2-T3 > Thumbaround Reverse T3-T4 > Thumbaround Reverse T4-T4
QUOTE2) Bak w/ falling start positions > handaround http://www.upsb.info/forum/index.php?s=&am...ost&p=28135Again, both positions do change. In the case of Backaround, it just depends on whether the default Backaround should go through the T1 slot. If so, then Backaround 1.5 Fall would obviously be:
Bak1.5 > Bak1.5 12-T23 > Bak1.5 23-T34 > Bak1.5 34-T12 > Handaround
could be written as:
Bak1.5 fall-T1 > Handaround
Backaround 1.5 12-T1-23 > Backaround 1.5 23-T1-34 > Backaround 1.5 34-T1(-P4 > Handaround)
If Bakfall should only include Backarounds, then the Handaround can be excluded. The extra notation of the T1 slot would not need to be included either if Backarounds would be assumed to go through the T1 slot by default. Any Bak that does not go through the T1 slot would just be a variation of Fingerless Fingeraround Reverse that goes over the back of the hand (Middlebackaround = Backaround 23-12-23, pen travels around the base knuckle of the middle finger).
If Bakfall should mimick what is currently known as Backaround Fall, then it should be something like:
Backaround 12-T1-23 > Backaround 23-12-34 > Backaround 34-23-34
This again leaves out the Handaround as Backaround Fall should only stick to Backarounds. That is why the current Backaround Fall (besides not using any actual Backarounds) would be incorrect as it uses Fingerless Passes / Fingerless Passarounds in the combo.
So, instead of deciding am official shorthand for Rise/Fall combos, there should instead be clarification on the paths of all tricks and any unofficial Rise/Fall combos should follow the most sensible paths of the pen through each finger slot. Rises/Falls should also only contain the tricks in the named combo, no additional tricks should be added for smoothness' sake (current Backaround Fall & Neobackaround Fall combos come to mind).QUOTEThis second example brings me to another naming issue, should 'P' be used for Palm to describe a Handaround simply as a Bak P4-T1
or to describe a Neobak1.5 12-handaround rev hybrid (Neobakhand1.5), simply as a Neobak1.5 12-P4?
This was brought up in the Naming Committee and was agreed that it makes sense to use P for palm. Nothing has been published yet but we may as well just go with that since nothing else should use "P". -
Date: Mon, Dec 10 2007 20:35:40
tsk tsk David, you've angered the beast and see what happened..
I agree though, we've been trying to stop naming combos for a long time b/c it's easy to misinterpret them, also gonna make it harder for people from other communities to understand us.. -
Date: Wed, Dec 12 2007 02:43:22QUOTE (sketching @ Dec 10 2007, 11:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Since we are trying to stop naming combos, coming up with an official naming system for Rises/Falls seems to go in the wrong direction.
I wouldn't consider it naming combos since it can be applied to a multitude of combos where only the start or end position is rising or falling.QUOTE (sketching @ Dec 10 2007, 11:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>There can be unofficial Rises/Falls as long as they make enough sense to everyone, but making any official Rise/Fall rules seems useless these days.
I see your point, I think most ppl would understand what 'Bak 1.5 T1-fall' means without an official rule.
But I think the flexibility of using rise or fall to describe only the start or end position is a reasonable reflection of the increased complexity of combos now. But then again, maybe no one else is doing combos like this and it doesn't have much universal appeal.QUOTE (sketching @ Dec 10 2007, 11:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Again, both positions do change. In the case of Backaround, it just depends on whether the default Backaround should go through the T1 slot. If so, then Backaround 1.5 Fall would obviously be:
Backaround 1.5 12-T1-23 > Backaround 1.5 23-T1-34 > Backaround 1.5 34-T1(-P4 > Handaround)
To fully and exactly define the end position, you need to include the last two digits as you did above,
but given the start position of the next trick isn't it redundant?
Backaround 1.5 12-T1-23 > Backaround 1.5 23-T1-34 > Backaround 1.5 34-T1-P4 > Handaround
?= Backaround 1.5 12-T1 > Backaround 1.5 23-T1 > Backaround 1.5 34-T1 > Handaround
?= Backaround 1.5 fall-T1 > Handaround
Alright, I'm done.