Joined: 19 Sep 2003 Posts: 1508 Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2003 3:46 pm Post subject: X dex
Firstly Eric Wulff's definition
Eric Wulff wrote:
I propose 4 modifications/updates to the add system to compensate for the
few weaknesses which seem to be becoming more significant as the level of
play elevates and variety of style grows. As far as I can tell, not a
single freestyle move loses adds based on these changes. Many moves gain
adds where desperately needed. Also, some moves gain adds where not so
desperately needed but I doubt anyone would consider it a crime… J. These
changes better allow the add system to grow with freestyle as the wielders
of blade slice ever deeper into the wounds of limit. And finally, these
changes can be easily understood because the moves with new add counts
resulting are almost assumed to be so already… i.e. atom smasher would be 4
instead of 3 adds.
Modifications/Updates to the add system as understood presently…
1. X-Dex - Any dex which, in theory, passes both over and under the bag
builds to be worth 2 adds each after the first is completed.
2. X-Spin - full spins build to be worth 2 adds each after the first is
completed.
3. The “in” of an in-spin is worth 1 add.
This is similar to the over dex in a “butterfly” or a “double over down”
being worth 1 add. This will only effect the add counts of full spins with
an “in” added to them. Why? because in-osis, osis, torque, etc. already
get a body add for the “half” type spin which may be understood as “in” and
similar to “over”.
4. The Paradox idea is included on the backside of spins. The side in which
the paradox dex occurs is reversed from a paradox without the spin. When
executing an in-spin the paradox is not reversed.
X-dexes…
Paradoxes are always x-dexes but x-dexes are not always paradox
Whirl is an x-dex (this is the only dex I can think of which there might be
confusion over)
Toe set>op dex>op toe=x-dex
Toe set drifter =x-dex (under-over-finish under)
Fairy set
Not X-Dexes…
Pixie set
Clip set drifter(over-finish under)
Butterfly
Step/blurry set
How add counts are affected…
Move add count break down
Atom Smasher 4 not 3 1,2,1 (x-dex, x-dex, delay)
Paradox Atom Smasher 5 not 4 2,2,1 (p-dex, x-dex, delay)
Pixie op mirage 3 1,1,1(dex, x-dex, delay)
Fairy op mirage 4 1,2,1(x-dex,x-dex,delay)
Smog(pixie-op dlo) 4 1,1,1,1(dex, x-dex, dex, delay)
Blur 4 1,2,1(dex, p-dex, delay)
Toe blur 4 not 3 1,2,1 (x-dex, x-dex, delay)
Toe blurriest 6 1,2,3 (x-dex, x-dex, butter-dex)
Double ATW 3 1,1,1 (x-dex, dex, delay)
Triple ATW 5 1,2,1,1 (x-dex, x-dex, dex, delay)
Clip set double mirage 3 1,1,1 (dex, x-dex, delay)
Toe set double mirage 4 1,2,1 ( x-dex, x-dex, delay)
Flurry 4 1,1,1,1 (dex, x-dex, dex, delay)
Fury 6 not 5 1,1,3,1 (x-dex, dex, p-x-dex, delay)
Blurry birage 5 1,2,1,1(dex, p-dex, dex, delay)
Toe set flurry 5 1,2,1,1 (x-dex, x-dex, dex, delay)
Paradox Mobius 6 not 5 1,2,3 (spin, p-dex, osis)
In Spinning Osis 5 not 4 1,1,3 (in, spin, osis)
Double spinning osis 6 not 5 1,2,3 (x-spin, x-spin, osis)
In Spinning Mobius 6 not 5.. same as mobius? 1,1,4 (in, spin, torque)
Atomic Whirl 5 not 4.. now same as blurry whirl 1,2,2 (x-dex, x-dex, clip)
RipWalk 4 1,3(dex, op butter)
Blurriest 5 1,1,3(dex, x-dex, butter)
Barfly 4 1,3(x-dex, butter)
Birage 3 1,1,1(x-dex, mirage-dex, delay)
Triage 5 1,2,2(x-dex, x-dex, mirage)
Reasoning for the proposed changes...
The adds system, by design, was created as a basis for measuring the
difficulty of all footbag freestyle moves. The original system defines 5
component categories (dexterity, delay, body, x-body, unusual). The idea
behind “additions” is that the difficulty of any move is dependent on the
raw number of components one can execute after set and through the next
contact/set of the footbag… How many “additional things” can you do and
still set the bag and demonstrate control? The relative difference in
difficulty between components is not considered significant and therefore
each component is worth the same value or score… 1 point or “add”. However,
in recent years the players have realized a level of play which suggests
certain components are significantly more difficult when executed in
combination due to where they are in combination. Two examples...
a. Because of the rules regarding paradox, more and more moves are worth 1
more add when set from a x-body compared to their counterpart set from a
toe. I.e. – blur 4(clip>op in>op in>op toe) vs. toe blur 3?(toe>op in>op
in>op toe) Take almost any blurry/stepping style move containing a
paradox and set it from a toe and it loses an add. Yet, a stepping/blurry
style set from toe is arguably at least as hard, if not more difficult, than
from a x-body. Especially when you get into moves with more than 3
components. I.e. blurriest.
b. The deeper you get into a move the harder it is to “add” a component and
yet the less this component effects the difficulty score. I.e. – toe
delay=1 add for 1 component, atw=2 adds.. 1 more component0% more
points, datw=3 adds.. 1 more compP% more points than 2, tatw=4 adds??.. 1
more comp than a double but only 33% more score than a double when arguably
this move is significantly more than 33% more difficult.
Joined: 19 Sep 2003 Posts: 1508 Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2003 3:54 pm Post subject:
Now some questions.
1). Is the x dex - as defined here now accepted by the WFA or whoever it is that governs these things (who is that by the way?)?
2). Was the x dex used at this years worlds for the shred 30 scores?
3). Accoding to this definition, moves that have two full dexes on one leg get an x dex. Is this the case?
4). According to this definition, moves like toe blurriest and fusion get an x-dex, making them 6 adds - is this the case?
5). What is a birage? Going by the add description, I would say it sounds like a barrage. Blurry Birage apparantly does not get an x dex.
6).Triple atw gets an x dex. Does clipper set same side triple pickup also get one?
7). Does Triple over down get an x dex - the footbag passes infront of the leg twice and behind three times?
8). Does Fairy Parradon get an x-dex - the footbag passes infront twice and behind three times?
9). Does Pixie Parradon get an x-dex infront once, behind three times?
10). Does Fear (fairy mirage) get an x-dex - the footbag passes behind twice and infront twice?
12). Does Whirr get an x-dex?
13). Does a move get two x dexes for having three full dexes. For example, is atomic symp toe blur a 7 add (3 dex, 2 x dex, 1 bod, 1 del)?
14). Does Atomic Pickup get an x-dex - the footbag passes behind twice and infront twice?
15). Does sabotage (tapping barrage) get an x-dex? I personally think this move is more than 33% harder than tap, yet the footbag only passes infront of the dexing leg once?
I know some of these questions seem stupid and are easily answerable by reading the definition. However I have also noticed at this thread at flipsider:
http://www.flipsider.com/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1435
that a number of players whome I would assume know what gets x-dex and what doesn't, while including moves that clearly do get an x-dex, did not include moves that I am sure they have hit, which I have never heard of getting an x-dex but which would as defined in Eric's definition. The most obvious move is Fusion. I have also heard much confusing discussion of this topic.
Joined: 01 Oct 2003 Posts: 45 Location: Evans City, PA, USA
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2003 11:57 pm Post subject:
IMO the following are true:
First of generally, you cannot look at how many times the plane of a bag is broken to determine XDEX, instead, you must look at each individual dexterity and determine if it is a "full dex" or not. Hopefully this will clear up (what seems to be) some of your general confusion.
As to more specifically defining a "full dex" to further clear up confusion, here: A full dex breaks the plane of the bag twice, like you repeatedly say, passing both in front of and behind. Mirage is a full dex, you must come in behind the bag, then move over in front of the bag. However, while it may seem so, legover is not a full dexterity. It passes in front of the bag, but as it comes behind for the catch, it doesn't actually "break" the plane of the bag, instead it simply stops at that plane.
Now:
1) I have no idea.
2) I have no idea.
3) Yes, but having two full dexes on one leg is fairly difficult.
4) With XDEX, yes, to my knowledge Toe Blurriest is called Plasma, and Fusion, both get XDEX and are 6 add moves.
5) Yes, Birage is Barrage, some people can't spell or maybe just spell it differently, give him a break. No Blurry Barrage does not get XDEX. The Blurry set is not a full dex, and only one of the Barrage dexes is a full dex. Only one full dex? No XDEX.
6) Yes, it would.
7) Yes, although your description is inaccurate. It is not the number of times the foot passes the front/back of the bag, but instead, the first 2 dexes are full dexes (granting XDEX) but the third is only a half dex.
If Fairy was accepted as an XDEX set, which from my understanding was the spot of some controversy (mostly due to pulled sets that shouldnt be counted as full), then yes.
9) No, the Pixie set is not a full dex, and only one of the Paradon dexes are full, therefore, no XDEX.
10) If Fairy was accepted, yes.
11) Interesting, you skipped 11.
12) Yes.
13) I think it should, Atomic Symp Toe Blur is pretty damn hard. I personally have asked several times and never got a response (on Flipsider).
14) No, the Atomic set is a full dex, the pickup is not. (Consider this, for the Pickup, the leg breaks the front plane of the bag, but not really the back plane. Instead, is stops AT the back plane instead of passing through it.
15) Funny, I've always heard Sabotage as Toe Flurry. However, neither would recieve XDEX, regardless of how much harder it would really be.
16) No. As I stated at the beginning, you must look at each individual dexterity. The Pixie set is NOT a full dex, and while it may seem like it due to the necessity to come inside for the Whirl, really, this motion of bringing the leg in is instead the beginning of the Whirl dexterity, and not part of the Pixie.
17) As with above, the Stepping set is not a full dex, and what seems to make it so that it would be is really a part of the Whirl, so no.
That was fun, heh. Hope i helped clear up some confusion. Again, I am officially unofficial, and this is all just my understanding of the concept. I've asked similar questions and never got an answer, so I've formulated my own ideas, and thats them. Maybe someone can FINALLY clear up some of my ideas?
Joined: 19 Sep 2003 Posts: 1508 Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2003 1:44 am Post subject:
yeah thanks Michael. I should say that I think I've got about the same understanding of x-dex as you do, and your responces are basically what I would have said. However everytime people debate x-dex, eventually somebody mentions eric's original proposal, and so really what I want to know is if it's been accepted or not, and how much of it has been accepted. Under his proposal, I realised last night, down double down would get an x-dex (behind twice, in front twice). I personally do not think this is two full dexes. Then I got to wondering - what about barfly. It to passes behind twice and infront twice. Admitadly one of the "in front"s is infront of a planted foot that does not actually dex the footbag. Barroque is similar. And what about Rasmus - alpine atomsmasher - The footbag never passes infront of either leg. Obviously I see a fatal flaw in all this questioning - I'm trying to find consistancy in something that isn't really consistant. But I think it's important to know what gets x-dex and what doesn't, if only for the judging of shred 30.
Also: Toe barrage has two full dexes so gets x-dex. Surely toe flurry (toe barraging switch, pdx barrage and blurry barrage must also have two full dexes (on the barraging foot).
Joined: 23 Sep 2003 Posts: 7 Location: Burlington, VT, USA
Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2003 3:11 am Post subject:
you guys are definitely right on. concerning the last post, i don't really see the problem with down double down getting an x-dex, it seems to fit right in.
rather than considering the planes one's leg needs to cross to be 'in front' and 'in back', i think of the planes as being defined by a vertical axis that your leg would meet when it is directly above and directly below the bag. this means that barfly would have no hope of getting an x-dex, and neither would barroque. after the clipper set in barfly, your leg goes 1.)over, 2.)under, 3.)over -- that's not enough. barroque: leg goes 1.)over, 2.)under, 3.)over, 4.)the body starts spinning and no more dex's (even partial dex's) are needed, although some people, i'm sure, incorporate them.
btw, i'm also curious about whether this is, or will be used in competition. it seems pretty reasonable.
Joined: 20 Sep 2003 Posts: 150 Location: Waterloo, IA, USA / Claremont, CA, USA
Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2003 4:33 am Post subject:
As for #13, Eric says "Any dex which, in theory, passes both over and under the bag builds to be worth 2 adds each after the first is completed". This implies that every x-dex after the first x-dex is worth 2 adds instead of one.
By the way, has anyone hit atomic symp toe blur? One example that I can come up with and have actually seen is Chris Pinkus's warp. It is a symp eggbeating mirage / symp atomic atom smasher / etc. It contains three x-dexes ("illusion","illusion", "mirage"). Thus, each of the final two x-dexes are worth two adds apiece, making it a 7 add move (which I think it deserves).
Joined: 19 Sep 2003 Posts: 1508 Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2003 12:40 pm Post subject:
Lots of people have hit atomic symp toe blur (Well, I don't know about lots, but some have). I have a problem with down double down getting an x-dex, but only because I have this vague idea that adds should somehow represent diffilculty. That's a dream and a half.
Joined: 19 Sep 2003 Posts: 1508 Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2003 1:14 pm Post subject:
Of course I know what it stands for, but there are (or used to be) two main footbag bodies - The World Footbag Association (WFA) and the International Footbag Players Association (IFPA). I don't know if they are still seperate or if they've merged or what the story is. But if they are still seperate organisations, than it seems more appropriate that the WFA and not the IFPA would decide the rules governing the sport. As I said though, I don't know what the story is - that's why I asked.
Joined: 01 Oct 2003 Posts: 45 Location: Evans City, PA, USA
Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2003 2:10 am Post subject:
double over down does NOT recieve XDEX just like Double Around The World does NOT recieve XDEX. Like I said, think about each dex. First dex, complete, second dex, not. as for Rasmus, you're incorrect. Think about it. The bag passes in front of the set leg before the duck on the way up, the bag then passes in front of the mirage leg after the duck on the way down. THerefore, it does receive XDEX.
Really guys, Eric's original post has NOTHING to do with "number of times the plane of the bag is broken" because that would be REALLY HARD. With 6 possible planes (left, right, front, back, up, down) every move would be up for debate! The concept is TWO FULL DEXES, meaning you must look at EACH DEX and determine if it is FULL OR NOT. You can't just count breaking of planes with front or back, and besides, you have to destinguish between breaking the plane and ending on the plane (difference between fairy and around the world in its simplest form).
Joined: 19 Sep 2003 Posts: 330 Location: Oakland, CA, USA
Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2003 8:20 am Post subject:
but how can you possibly be right, when you are blatantly contradicting Wulff's post?
he says fairy can receive x-dex, but you say id doesnt.
and DBL around the world IS 2 full dexes. nothing is fuller, except Rob.
how could dbl around the world not be 2 dexes?
Joined: 23 Sep 2003 Posts: 77 Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2003 11:03 am Post subject:
the only reason i can think of is cause datw ends on a legover type dex. if datw gets xdex, then eggbeater/dlo would too, but they dont. anyone wanna bring my add/contact ratio up by one, and give egg/dlo xdex?
Joined: 19 Sep 2003 Posts: 1508 Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2003 2:25 pm Post subject:
As far as I know Michael is right. I would never contemplate giving those moves an x dex. However I think he may have missed the point of the posts entirely. What I am looking for is some consistancy in the x-dex, or at least some conformation from someone involved in the actual rule making about its usage. Perhaps Steve or Eric even could comment. - Examples of the lack of consitancy in the x-dex. Whirr gets an x dex (clip>op in>same in>op clip) Stepping whirl does not (Clip>op in>same in>op clip). The only difference is a plant. Down double down (clip>op out>same out>op clip) does not get one even though the foot circles the footbag exactly the same amount as a whirr. At least that's what I've been lead to believe. According to Eric's definition they all would get an x dex.
Joined: 01 Oct 2003 Posts: 45 Location: Evans City, PA, USA
Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2003 12:29 am Post subject:
I thought I was clearing up the posts, but I guess not. And yeah, I'm no one official I know. To Merkin: this is my understanding from a post I read that quoted what Sunil said about full dexes and why Double ATW does not recieve XDEX. Take a move that DOES recieve XDEX, Atom Smasher: both dexes are full, completely breaking the plane of the bag twice, front and behind, with each dexterity. Double ATW on the other hand, has one full dex, which fully breaks the front and back plane of the bag, and one incomplete dexterity, that does not completely break the back plane of the bag, instead it "stops" there. Therefore, the second dexterity is not a "full dex" and the move does not recieve XDEX. To contradict your point of not being possible to get more full than DATW, Double Fairy holds two fuller dexes than DATW.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
If Fairy was accepted as an XDEX set, which from my understanding was the spot of some controversy (mostly due to pulled sets that shouldnt be counted as full), then yes.
