UPSB v3

Research Department Feedback / Moonwalk Sonic deprecation article released

  1. sketching
    Date: Fri, Jun 27 2008 04:37:37

    The Research Department has just released a small article on the wiki. You can view the article here: Moonwalk Sonic deprecation. The article suggests pen spinners no longer use the term "Moonwalk Sonic".

    Please give any comments/questions on the article in this thread.

  2. -JC-
    Date: Fri, Jun 27 2008 04:49:28

    with that concept in mind, would a pseudo sonic now be called a sonic still...? like a shadow still?
    or just sonic 23-23 as well...?
    or are you just gonna keep the name pseudo sonic =\

  3. sketching
    Date: Fri, Jun 27 2008 05:08:47

    If anything, it would be Sonic 0.5 23-12 ~ Sonic 0.5 12-23.

  4. Rarka
    Date: Fri, Jun 27 2008 10:54:22

    So do we have to use Sonic Normal Rise instead of Sonic Rise?

    edit: Thanks Mats, I understand.

  5. Mats
    Date: Fri, Jun 27 2008 11:17:12

    QUOTE (Rarka @ Jun 27 2008, 11:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    So do we have to use Sonic Normal Rise instead of Sonic Rise?


    ... Not if you don't want to:

    Sonic Rise = Sonic Normal 34-23 > Sonic Normal 23-12

    Sonic Reverse Rise = Sonic Reverse 34-23 > Sonic Reverse 23-12

    Sonic Fall = Sonic Reverse 12-23 > Sonic Reverse 23-34

    Sonic Normal Fall = Sonic Normal 12-23 > Sonic Normal 23-34

    I think it's best to use the trick breakdown that to try and name the combo anyway. That way no-one can be confused.

  6. Freeman
    Date: Fri, Jun 27 2008 13:41:03

    So do you also suggest not to use "Pseudo Sonic"?

  7. Shadowserpant
    Date: Sat, Jun 28 2008 02:40:12

    we need psuedo sonic i think, unless you wanna use sketching notation... because a 'sonic 23-23' could be two tricks. a psuedo sonic 23-23 or a psuedo sonic reverse 23-23

  8. LMnet
    Date: Sat, Jun 28 2008 19:05:42

    I think term "Pseudo" make only confusion in naming system

    QUOTE
    we need psuedo sonic i think, unless you wanna use sketching notation... because a 'sonic 23-23' could be two tricks. a psuedo sonic 23-23 or a psuedo sonic reverse 23-23

    Sonic's ending and starting position can't be the same, so there is no sonic 23-23

  9. Shadowserpant
    Date: Sat, Jun 28 2008 21:52:28

    well.. it can be.. an it would be a psuedo sonic. But i'm saying that you can't do that because you need psuedo sonic to cover both directions. If we don't use psuedo sonic, what do you suggest using?

  10. Freeman
    Date: Sat, Jun 28 2008 22:56:36

    QUOTE (sketching @ Jun 27 2008, 07:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    If anything, it would be Sonic 0.5 23-12 ~ Sonic 0.5 12-23.


    I thinks they suggest this.

  11. Stay&#39;n Alive
    Date: Sat, Jun 28 2008 23:28:11

    Oooof, newbies will always ask how the hell we can do a sonic normal 12-23...


    Anyway I should not eloborate on the bureaucracy of penspinning here...

  12. Shadowserpant
    Date: Sat, Jun 28 2008 23:39:02

    QUOTE (Freeman @ Jun 28 2008, 03:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    I thinks they suggest this.

    QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Jun 27 2008, 07:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    we need psuedo sonic i think, unless you wanna use sketching's notation...



  13. Mats
    Date: Sun, Jun 29 2008 00:54:13

    QUOTE (Stay'n Alive @ Jun 29 2008, 12:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    Oooof, newbies will always ask how the hell we can do a sonic normal 12-23...


    And if we kept the name "Moonwalk Sonic" , they would not ask how this was done? Since the name is 'moonwalk sonic' they would just, be able to do it naturally? I don't think so. Weak argument.

    I'm pretty sure we were discussing pseudo sonics somewhere or other in NC at some point, what went down with that? huh(1).gif

  14. 000zero0000
    Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 20:20:37

    would moonwalk sonic be considered a combo?

  15. Mats
    Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 20:23:02

    QUOTE (000zero0000 @ Jul 4 2008, 09:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    would moonwalk sonic be considered a combo?


    ... No.

  16. Shadowserpant
    Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 23:20:35

    why would it be?

    if you hold the pen in its regular position, as in parallel to the fingers, and then swing it so it's pointing up
    in other words, do a charge 0.5
    then you're in the sonic 12-23's started and ending positions

  17. sp3ctum
    Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 05:56:59

    I disagree with the usefulness of this.
    My argument is that it's inconvenient to distinguish 'normal' sonics, and the ex. moonwalk sonics in irl speech. sad.gif
    What do others think of this?

  18. Tialys
    Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 18:07:41

    I'm not sure what you mean. There will always be a crossover period whenever there is a change of terminology. The former name eventually becomes obsolete.

  19. Mats
    Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 18:11:35

    I think he means when chatting to someone, he would rather say:

    "Hey I was doing Moonwalk Sonics yesterday."

    Instead of saying:

    "Hey I was doing Sonic 12-23 yesterday."

    I don't think it really makes a difference... *shrug*

  20. sketching
    Date: Mon, Jul 14 2008 17:21:19

    When introducing "Moonwalk Sonic Normal 12-23" to someone, you have to explain that you are doing a Sonic Normal spin but traveling down the hand, like a Sonic Reverse. You'll end up saying the same thing when explaining "Sonic Normal 12-23".

    It shouldn't be any harder to explain to someone who knows Moonwalk Sonic already than it was explaining to someone that Shadow can now go up the hand instead of only going down or staying in the same slot. Maybe a few slip-ups in naming for a while, but it will soon be just as easy to say Sonic Nor 12-23 as it is to say Shadow Nor 23-12.

  21. Freeman
    Date: Mon, Jul 14 2008 18:19:16

    So is now Sonic 12-23 a fundamental?

  22. AyySoLo
    Date: Mon, Jul 14 2008 19:07:25

    i think this is good, it makes sense

  23. Mats
    Date: Mon, Jul 14 2008 23:39:20

    QUOTE (Freeman @ Jul 14 2008, 07:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    So is now Sonic 12-23 a fundamental?


    I think that Sonic 23-12 is really considered the fundamental sonic. Sonics in all the other slots (34-23, 34-12, 12-23 etc) are all more difficult.

  24. 000zero0000
    Date: Wed, Jul 16 2008 02:54:45

    oh wait, moonwalk is normal then reverse?

  25. Mats
    Date: Thu, Jul 17 2008 10:47:16

    QUOTE (000zero0000 @ Jul 16 2008, 03:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    oh wait, moonwalk is normal then reverse?


    wtf.gif are you on about?

  26. sketching
    Date: Thu, Jul 17 2008 15:43:56

    QUOTE (000zero0000 @ Jul 15 2008, 07:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    oh wait, moonwalk is normal then reverse?

    Moonwalk Sonic was never a combo, it's a single trick.

  27. pholord
    Date: Thu, Jul 24 2008 17:44:54

    Since warped sonic was basically a moonwalk twisted sonic does this mean we now use twisted sonic 12-23?

  28. sangara
    Date: Thu, Jul 24 2008 18:00:49

    QUOTE (pholord @ Jul 24 2008, 10:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    Since warped sonic was basically a moonwalk twisted sonic does this mean we now use twisted sonic 12-23?


    I wouldn't think so since its Charge 12 -> Pass 12-23 I would think it would have to
    be Charge 12 -> Pass Reverse 12-23

  29. pholord
    Date: Thu, Jul 24 2008 18:14:25

    so is twisted sonic 12-23 equal to inverse warped sonic12-23

    im just trying to clarify what names should be used for the different twisted sonic variations

  30. sangara
    Date: Thu, Jul 24 2008 18:24:56

    Was "Moonwalk" ever applied to Twisted Sonic?

  31. Tialys
    Date: Thu, Jul 24 2008 18:31:35

    QUOTE (000zero0000 @ Jul 15 2008, 10:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    oh wait, moonwalk is normal then reverse?

    No, they were talking about pseudo sonic being sonic 0.5 23-12 ~ sonic 0.5 12-23; both of which are normal tricks. Just because the pen moves down a slot (i.e. 12-23) doesn't mean the trick is automatically reverse. Reverse refers to the direction in which the pen spins. You have to indicate whether a sonic is reverse by using the reverse modifier. For normal tricks, normal is assumed if you leave "normal" out of the name.

    sonic 12-23 = sonic normal 12-23 = moonwalk sonic 12-23 = moonwalk sonic normal 12-23
    sonic (normal) 23-12 -> sonic reverse 12-23 = sonic harmonic

  32. pholord
    Date: Thu, Jul 24 2008 18:55:47

    QUOTE (sangara @ Jul 24 2008, 11:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    Was "Moonwalk" ever applied to Twisted Sonic?

    Ive seen it before in some breakdowns where warped sonics were named as moonwalk twisted sonics

  33. chrisphd
    Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 08:16:09

    QUOTE (sangara @ Jul 25 2008, 04:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    Was "Moonwalk" ever applied to Twisted Sonic?


    i assumed that moonwalk just comes out whenever you would normally be
    going in the opposite direction of the current charge motion.

    hence...mw tw sonic.

  34. kazeikan
    Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 10:37:11

    moonwalk was MJ walking backwards so it was intended to be the reverse motion of a trick hence the nade moonwalk sonic. i think thats rite, rite??
    so moonwalk tw sonic = charge rev 0.5 12> reverse pass 0.5 12-23>reverse pass 0.5 23 rite??

    in short moonwalk = reverse of a trick

  35. Outsmash
    Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 12:28:45

    QUOTE (kazeikan @ Nov 24 2008, 04:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    moonwalk was MJ walking backwards so it was intended to be the reverse motion of a trick hence the nade moonwalk sonic. i think thats rite, rite??
    so moonwalk tw sonic = charge rev 0.5 12> reverse pass 0.5 12-23>reverse pass 0.5 23 rite??

    in short moonwalk = reverse of a trick


    NOO!!! Moonwalk = reverse but look like forward motion

    So a moonwalk TW Sonic 23-34 would be: Charge23 (nor TW Sonic) --> Pass 23-23 (rev TW Sonic)

    SO: Moonwalk TW Sonic = Warped Sonic...

    It's confusing.. I know..

  36. Mats
    Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 14:37:02

    QUOTE
    It's confusing.. I know..


    And this is why "moonwalk" was depreciated...

  37. Outsmash
    Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 14:46:59

    QUOTE (Mats @ Nov 24 2008, 08:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    And this is why "moonwalk" was depreciated...


    lol.. would a moonwalk TA = Counter TA because it does like half of each??

  38. Mats
    Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 14:54:30

    QUOTE (Outsmash @ Nov 24 2008, 02:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    lol.. would a moonwalk TA = Counter TA because it does like half of each??


    You can't really apply the "moonwalk" concept to a ThumbAround...

    The "moonwalk" sonic travelled down the hand while spinning the normal way. This gave the 'moonwalk' look. The ThumbAround does not travel up or down the hand, but rather, around a digit and so we cannot apply this same concept.

    Was "counter" depreciated yet? unsure.gif

  39. Outsmash
    Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 15:43:56

    QUOTE (Mats @ Nov 24 2008, 09:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    You can't really apply the "moonwalk" concept to a ThumbAround...

    The "moonwalk" sonic travelled down the hand while spinning the normal way. This gave the 'moonwalk' look. The ThumbAround does not travel up or down the hand, but rather, around a digit and so we cannot apply this same concept.

    Was "counter" depreciated yet? unsure.gif


    laugh.gif no.. And I dont think it should..

  40. kazeikan
    Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 21:47:46

    for the tw sonic its wrong. tw sonic is only 0.25 charge 12> pass 12-23 1.0>charge 0.25 23 so theres only a .5 rotations of charge. so tw sonic can never be related to warped sonic as warped sonic is charge 0.75 12 > pass 0.5 12-23 is really different from one another

    tw sonic rev ≠ warped sonic

  41. Mr.Squekers
    Date: Tue, Nov 25 2008 01:05:17

    Ok it passes through the fingers like a regular sonic, but the motion of the pen is going the motion of a reverse sonic.

  42. pholord
    Date: Tue, Nov 25 2008 02:06:15

    QUOTE (kazeikan @ Nov 24 2008, 01:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    for the tw sonic its wrong. tw sonic is only 0.25 charge 12> pass 12-23 1.0>charge 0.25 23 so theres only a .5 rotations of charge. so tw sonic can never be related to warped sonic as warped sonic is charge 0.75 12 > pass 0.5 12-23 is really different from one another

    tw sonic rev ≠ warped sonic

    what the hell are you talking about? Of course tw sonic rev is not the same as warped sonic. However in some breakdowns you may see moonwalk twisted sonic which really should be warped sonic. Though moonwalk should not be applied to tw sonics and is now obsolete, if you think about it, the description is correct.

  43. Eric
    Date: Tue, Nov 25 2008 03:12:54

    Moonwalk Sonic was the perfect name for this mini-combo though. sad.gif

  44. Shadowserpant
    Date: Tue, Nov 25 2008 03:53:01

    the whole point of this is that there is no more moonwalk
    so how about everyone stop talking about moonwalk stuff

  45. Outsmash
    Date: Tue, Nov 25 2008 10:52:45

    QUOTE (kazeikan @ Nov 25 2008, 03:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    for the tw sonic its wrong. tw sonic is only 0.25 charge 12> pass 12-23 1.0>charge 0.25 23 so theres only a .5 rotations of charge. so tw sonic can never be related to warped sonic as warped sonic is charge 0.75 12 > pass 0.5 12-23 is really different from one another

    tw sonic rev ≠ warped sonic


    umm Dude I wasn't even talkin about Twisted Sonic Nor or Rev. It is:
    "Moonwalk" Twisted Sonic = Warped Sonic.