I’m really curious about this topic regarding the use of larger size yoyo specs versus smaller yoyo specs if judges are taking this into account in their scoring.
Yoyo spec/dimensions aren’t taken into account when judging/scoring
If someone hits an insane routine on an undersized yoyo, that’s up to them - they’re being judged on tricks, not what yoyo they use. That’d be more of a flex to the audience/those who know, if anything.
5 Likes
they should give a point multiplier to shorter basketball players
2 Likes
would be interesting if the yoyo specs added a difficulty multiplier or similar, but nope. if two people executed the exact same routine without errors and one of them used a shutter wide angle and the other used a stainless shutter, i’d score the stainless shutter higher, because of the yoyos size. probably need to start your own competition and write your own rules to do this kind of scoring.
1 Like
I never really thought much about whether judges gave considerations good degree of difficulty in executing certain tricks or routines during a freestyle based on specifications of the yo-yo?
But to me that brings up an interesting curiosity.
Once in a while, I will stay an extreme parallel to consider in the process of pulling things back into the normal range of reality and logic.
So you’re talking… What do you think?
Two yo-yo players are considered by almost everyone to be the top candidates to win the world yo-yo contest 4A division.
Out of the 20 competitors in that particular division, these two competitors, neck and neck, yo-yo playing abilities, just happen to be the two last to perform.
The first player does a three minute routine of incredible mind, bending tricks, without a single move that could even be considered close to an error. The player uses a large well balanced, V shaped yo-yo considered by most players to be the best choice for competitive 4A.
The second player takes the stage and also does a three minute incredibly difficult and flawlessly performed freestyle that to most would only be possible in their dreams.
But this player performs his incredible freestyle using a Yoyofactory Mighty Flea YoYo, launching it into the air with a string off one of his tennis shoes.
So here is the dilemma. Even though it’s not written into the rules to consider the specifications of the yo-yo… Does anybody that might be reading it, think that the judges may personally give some extra consideration to the person doing such an equally incredibly difficult routine as a competitor before him, yet using an impossibly small yo-yo that obviously made his performance that much more challenging and difficult?
I mean, even though it’s not an accepted and understood factor in contest judging, I would think using another example that if two guys competed head to head in the 1A division , and did an identically perfect error free routine, but one use a yo-yo factory, miracle, and the other one used a raider, should there should definitely be considerations for degree of difficulty, you think?
Sometimes reality and hypotheticals cross paths.
Personally, if I were judging a Contest, I would not factor in degree of difficulty based on the yo-yo a competitor uses. That is not a known or accepted factor in judging criteria for yo-yo contests.
Presenting a hypothetical should not be identified as a suggestion in recommending the possibility or probability of being implemented into the judging criteria
Simply food for thought.
1 Like
In “combat” sports (boxing, judo, etc.) there are weight classes in order to keep the playing field even.
In motorsports, there are “spec” regulations limiting what the cars can and can’t have.
In most stick and ball sports, the equipment is carefully regulated so that everyone is playing with the same gear and nobody gets an advantage by selecting their own specs.
If yoyoing wanted to present contests as contests of skill only, independent of the yoyo itself, then it would create a “spec” yoyo each year for each division, select a single manufacturer to produce that model, and require the use of only that model, unmodified, in competition.
If yoyoing wanted to present two contests, one for the player and one for the yoyo, they could, kind of like you have with F1 where there is a driver’s champion and a constructor’s champion. Of course, even then, constructors must abide by the strict “formula” for each season. Yoyoing could do the same by issuing a “spec” and allowing players to select any yoyo that meets that spec.
I see both approaches as perfectly valid. I’ve never really been all that keen on the current arrangement where the meta for each year only applies to tricks but not the yoyos used.
1 Like
The idea of yo-yo specs having any influence on competition scoring is quite ridiculous and antithetical to the goal of competitive yo-yoing imo.
We can throw around hypotheticals like “oh what if two people did the same/equally as impressive routine but one used a worse yo-yo” but the actual more likely scenario if you were to apply some kind of “yo-yo goodness” modifier is that someone who performs a worse routine (the thing that we’re all watching for) may beat someone who had a better routine just because the yo-yo they used was “worse”.
What we all want to see are amazing performances with boundary pushing tricks. Penalising players who use more performant yo-yos seems to run directly against that goal and to prioritise something other than the tricks and performance itself. Competitors should be free to use whatever they are most comfortable with and best able to perform with as that will result in the best performances for us to enjoy.
2 Likes
Why would you? If you miss a trick with what is supposed to be comfortable, then you miss the trick. Get good or don’t. Just because you can hit a cold fusion on a tiny yoyo doesn’t mean the trick isn’t basic af.
Also, wide yoyos don’t make you good at yoyoing, nor are small yoyos making what you’re doing that much more impressive unless it’s a zoning combo. Even then, the rules are rules and you shouldn’t get bonus points for practicing the same mechanics as someone else in the same trick.
1 Like