Fractured Axel

Over the winter I was running "Trickster" competitions for my own interest, with a view to turning these into National competitions in the future. Trickster has turned out to be less popular than I thought it could be, and it is difficult to judge effectively too.

In the summer STACK runs Trick-Out competitions, which are easy to understand, compete in and judge. However the elimination format is also slightly "unfriendly" for new flyers, many of whom did not expect to get beyond round one last year.

The purpose of this thread is trigger a debate. Could we run trick-out competitions all year round? Traditionally Trick-Outs need music (ie a sound system), is this mandatory or could we just stage head-to-head competitions on an open field anywhere?

There could be two or even three different "grades" of competition (ie. fun flyers and open competition). This is consistent with sports like Mountain Biking.

Also, rather than only one the eliminator format, the fun-flyer class could be based around all flyers competing against each other, round robin style. This might offset some of the concern about getting knocked out first round.

There you go, some interesting thoughts. Any comments?

I hate to confuse the issue - but what a lot of people (myself included) found most attractive about the trickster format was that you didn't need to be an amazing freestyle flier to compete - you just needed to be able to pull off 4 or 5 tricks.

I agree that the judging system was a bit complicated, as oppose to the "that guy's a better flier than that guy" approach to trickout.

My proposal would be a new hybrid, where two fliers compete head to head on 5 tricks (a la trickster) and the flier who pulls it off cleaner/better gets the point. This leads to a no hassle comparison of two fliers at a time (no complicated scoring needed) whilst retaining the accessibility and novice-friendly nature of the trickster.

I like the idea of a round robin approach for beginners, most of whom will have little if any comp experience, and therefore to get just one chance for your first few comps can be somewhat disheartening, and maybe even boring; after all the comp will improve your flying no end, more chance to compete means more motivation in my opinion. A league system over the year would also be good, as Jim says one to one, winner gets a point ior whatever, to go into a league Or maybe just give the winner a crate of beer, I for one will be at every round making sure I cut eveyone lines just before they enter the arena

aphelps wrote:

The purpose of this thread is trigger a debate. Could we run trick-out competitions all year round? Traditionally Trick-Outs need music (ie a sound system), is this mandatory or could we just stage head-to-head competitions on an open field anywhere?

There could be two or even three different "grades" of competition (ie. fun flyers and open competition). This is consistent with sports like Mountain Biking.

Also, rather than only one the eliminator format, the fun-flyer class could be based around all flyers competing against each other, round robin style. This might offset some of the concern about getting knocked out first round.

I'm all for this in principle. My only thoughts are would the extra time involved with extra rounds and grades make it practicable? Possibly not if it's at a festival with only one arena and limited space outside.

Music is good to fly to (and in the original concept of Trickout interpretation of the music was part of what you were meant to be judged on - it never seemed to happen though) and good for the audience, but not essential.

SteveR wrote:

I like the idea of a round robin approach for beginners, most of whom will have little if any comp experience, and therefore to get just one chance for your first few comps can be somewhat disheartening

You only get one chance in the Trickster format. In Trickout you get more than one chance. But if the competition was divided into two (or more) grades I don't think that argument applies, since you'd be up against flyers of the same ability.

since you'd be up against flyers of the same ability

Er no-one has my level of ability in the "novice who doesnt practice much" category

I still feel that the whole freestyle / interpretation of music thing is a little daunting for most novice fliers - I'd be much more likely to enter a competition knowing that everyone was going to be flying the same required tricks or same routine.

I don't see how you could have a "novice grade" trickout if the expectation is that you can fly in time with music and produce a "routine" of your own - that to me is by it's very nature an advanced level of flying.

You don't produce a routine in any planned sense of the word (although I believe that's what the French flyers do for their version of Trickster). Trickout's just about busking! You make it up as you go along.

Don't take the competition thing too seriously. It took me at least a year before I got past the first round in a Trickout. That didn't stop me enjoying it or taking pleasure in watching the preformances of the flyers who were better than me (and still are) once I'd been knocked out. Hell, I was knocked out in the first round of Trickout at Bristol last year by a guy flying a PhantomUL! He was awesome and went on to win.

Interesting points already. Whilst I like the idea of agreed tricks for the novice competition, it would be difficult to judge. Speaking as someone that tried to judge 4 Trickster competitions, it was soooo difficult to ascribe a score to a trick, any trick. You have to judge the person's flying as a whole.

This is why the Trick-Out format works so much better for judging and scoring.

On the "you have to be an amazing flyer to compete", this is not true. The fun flyer category should consist of flyers that do it for fun, and therefore the skill level should be lower and the range of tricks lower. The problem for is the likes of Andy S and CBH. They are fun flyers who are better than some of the master flyers.

Therefore I think that there will have to be three categories; fun-novice; fun-serious and open.

Must fly. More later.

ok then - another couple of questions - who chooses the music, what style does it tend to be mostly, and do all competitors fly to the same track in each round (ie first round match to one tune, second round matches to another and so on) or is it a different tune for each match?

ALso, what is the scoring based on - is it purely subjective, or are there any guidlines as to what judges expect/would like to see.

Are there any penalties for crashing out? If so, how do judges make the distinction between a gentle crash and a hurried landing?

aphelps wrote:

it was soooo difficult to ascribe a score to a trick, any trick.

This was why I made the suggestion above - by having two people flying at once, all you'd have to do is say "that guy did the best axel - he gets the axel point, the other guy did the best 540 - he gets that point. First guy did the best flic-flac - he wins overall."

No subjective scores involved AT ALL (beyond the subjectivity of deciding who did the best trick, that is)

jimothy wrote:

ok then - another couple of questions - who chooses the music, what style does it tend to be mostly, and do all competitors fly to the same track in each round (ie first round match to one tune, second round matches to another and so on) or is it a different tune for each match?

It's a different piece of music for each match. It's a (pseudo) random choice from a selection given to whoever is running the PA on the day. The music can be anything from 'Fly Me to the Moon' to hardcore dance music, although it tends to be something fairly popular with an up-tempo beat.

jimothy wrote:

ALso, what is the scoring based on - is it purely subjective, or are there any guidlines as to what judges expect/would like to see.

Purely subjective. At different events, the scoring has been:

• audience applause
• ABW's opinion (when he's organised it and is the only judge)
• the other competitors informal vote

jimothy wrote:

Are there any penalties for crashing out? If so, how do judges make the distinction between a gentle crash and a hurried landing?

There are no penalties for crashing. You just lose time. Obviously if it's an ugly crash that would not do much for the overall feel.

And usually everyone takes turns in crewing for everyone else.

Right - you're on - next event I'm at with a Trickout I'll give it a bash in the novice class - what's the chances of there being one at the big FA fly-in in Swindon?

RoyReed wrote:

And usually everyone takes turns in crewing for everyone else.

Good thing I'm not judging then - If can't recover your own mistakes then get out of the arena!

Ok, time to butt in...

As someone who doesn't trick but who has watched the trickouts all last summer, I think that this is a great format for the audience, it also allows the flier some comfort to know that the public are not all watching him/her, there is someone else in the ring.

I agree with the problem that sometimes a grest flier loses out early by being matched with the likes of Sasha, Robin or Chris (etc Roy) but surely we can put in some kind of wildcard best loser option.

The running commentry we've been getting from Barry and others is also good for the public, showing that what was just flown was deliberate!

As a precision flier I know how deadly boring anything but the Ballet can seem so the trickout is a breath of fresh, fast and furious air. Let's see more of it.

If we are having trouble attracting novices to the arena then why not try running a novice only trickout early in the day, even outside the arena where appropriate, with the prize being a bye in to the second round of the main comp?

Just some thoughts from a confirmed precisionist...

Keith

Keithgrif wrote:

confirmed precisionist

Not so fast matey!

After you forced me and the boys to do all that team flying malarky, next time I see you I'm gonna teach you how to do a Jacob's Ladder at the very least....

RoyReed wrote:

There are no penalties for crashing. You just lose time.

Oh yeah - I meant to ask - how long d'you have - the length of a song?