Standardized performance rating numbers?

General Yo-Yo
1

Strap in and hang on this is a long one for me.

On this forum we talk a lot about the minor differences that make each yo-yo play or feel different from each other and or similar. Disc golf has evolved a number system to describe these differences between each model or shape which determine the flight pattern and characteristics of each disc. (Because you can’t/shouldn’t throw a disc 400’ inside a store.) Aka the innova flight rating system.

image
image1500×800 198 KB

Wouldn’t it be nice if we could get a system similar to that for yo-yos?

In disc golf on most modern discs there are 4 numbers. 1st is the speed/aerodynamics of that disc. 2nd is float or glide/lift. 3rd is stability or how straight it will fly. And 4th is fade which is the curve at the end of the flight that generally turn hard left as the rpm slows down.

So I’m proposing that we start a similar standardized performance rating system.
Just as in golf, disc golf has drivers, midrange, and putters. We have responsive, unresponsive, and styles of play that are numbered. But how about power/spin, float, weight, shape, etc.
So I thought if along with the standard specs we are used to seeing, maybe we could design a number system describing what each yo-yo is designed to play and or feel like?? Thoughts?

Imagine picking up a new yo-yo in the package. You can see the shape so you can imagine what it may feel like in your hand but you don’t know how it plays. If we adopt a similar rating system we can change that. and with a little basic understanding of the rating system, you can pick up that same yo-yo and have some understanding of how it was designed to feel and play.
So whatcha think?:thinking:

6 Likes
2

It’s just too subjective to classify yoyos like that. Those terms are also relative to other yoyos, and there’s no defined baseline.

I think a good example is how you described the Beater in the mail thread as feeling like a brick on the string, yet powerful. My opinion (emphasis on opinion) is that the Beater leans heavily towards floaty, and it doesn’t feel very powerful.

I don’t think either of us is right or wrong in this scenario, it’s just an opinion relative to our experience with other yoyos we’ve personally played. Just profile/cup pictures of the yoyo along with the specs are more than enough to get a general idea of how a yoyo will play.

6 Likes
3

The old school disc golfers said the same thing about discs before the system. :rofl:
I’m not saying that I should be the basis. It should be something determined by the “designer”. But we could do surveys and get a general consensus of how yo-yos play in relation to each other. From there you get ratings.
It can be done.

2 Likes
4

One big difference between yo-yos and disc golf throws are that there are a lot more variables to take into consideration with discs. Elevation, distance from the goal, wind speed, etc. There may be scenarios you encounter in disc golf where it’s necessary to differentiate and choose between a 4/0/6/7 and a 4/0/7/7, yet with yo-yos there wouldn’t be.

I’m not saying I don’t think a system like you propose is possible, I’m sure it could work and be a good aid for people choosing new throws. I don’t want to seem like I’m being negative or down on your idea!

Edit - also, I just pulled those disc numbers out of my rear end. I have no idea how disc numbering works. Just in case I offended any disc golf enthusiasts with my choices.

2 Likes
5

I don’t see how a set of measurements would do any better job at conveying what a yoyo would be like to play than reviewers with their “flavor notes” way of describing it. Which is to say it would probably be pretty useless.

3 Likes
7

Totally agree. It’s very subjective and based on the manufacturers opinion. One guy’s brick is another’s floater…

4 Likes
8

Instead of searching reviews. It can have that info on it. Sounds awful

1 Like
9

Yes every company is slightly different but you get the gist of it. And if you like innova or a particular company you get more familiar with what those numbers represent just the same as if you threw a lot of Latitude 64. But it works. It isn’t perfect but it’s a place to start.

1 Like
10

But wouldn’t you rather hear that from the manufacturer or random people that might have a different feel?

2 Likes
11

I really want this to be a thing.

I agree with these sentiments, but it’s a tough cookie to crack from my viewpoint.

We as a community would all have to come together and agree on what each term means or defines within a throw.

The fact that mable and you both have polar opposite opinions on the word choice to describe the Beater is why it’s hard to define such a system.

Your opinion or view on what defines “float” is in direct reference to whatever you own in your collection, your past throws, and what you throw on the regular. It’s all subjective to whatever your personal experience is and relative to what you’ve thrown. The Beater is floaty compared to ? The Beater feels like a brick compared to?

Mable refers to the Beater as Floaty probably because mable throws really heavy stuff with lots of rim weight. You’ve probably thrown a contact, grail, or abel before and think holy cow this beater is a brick compared to those. In my opinion, I wouldn’t label the Beater as Floaty or a Brick. It feels “dense” like a metal freehand with caps with more rim weight.

The fact that none of us agree with the definition of this yoyo is why no one tries to make a system.

To someone, Power and Stability could mean the same thing depending on context. To someone else, Power only means that it has lower RPM’s and plays slower, Stability refers to the actual yoyo being more or less prone to tilt.

This, to me is the entire issue.

Name a yoyo that fits a “standard” or a yoyo you would use as a “standard” or “baseline” for modern throws. To me, that yoyo is the Shutter. I always, ALWAYS throw it before getting a new throw. It helps to reset my mind on what a “standard” yoyo feels like. Is the Beater Floaty compared to a Shutter? No. Is it a Brick compared to the Shutter? No, but leaning to it, but it has a unique feel because of the severe undercut in the hub that creates the second inner rim. This gives it the “dense” feel I experience.

But there lies an even deeper issue. Make a new thread where you ask everyone to define float. I guarantee no one will agree at the end of that thread, just like all the past threads that have come up on that topic. The actual terms we use aren’t properly defined to begin with.

Define an Organic?

To me, Organic is a Freehand. Once you add a step, it’s no longer “organic.” but now leaning towards an H shape or “modern” organic. Even the shapes themselves aren’t properly defined anymore. I think One Drop completely gave up trying to release Benchmarks because it’s so hard to define now.

Personally, I’d rather see specifications within sizes and weight classes rather than shapes. Like how we know what an SUV, Truck, Sedan, or 18 wheeler is. I’d like for Oversized, Undersized, Micro, Standard, Slimline, etc to all be defined. I am not sure what constitutes a slimline if someone else says a Joyride is a slimline.

7 Likes
12

The various manufacturers are random people that might have a different feel. It’s all relative and subjective. Yes diameter, width, weight are known parameters. Weight distribution is similar but still subject to interpretation. Factors involving response systems, bearings and string affect performance characteristics as well and are very subjective. All of the above taken as a whole make it subjective.

4 Likes
13

I bet we could find the floatiest yo-yo through a poll. Find the opposite through a poll . Then you have the frame work. Everything else fits in between.
What we need is a big company on board and to develop a number system for all their products and everyone else would be forced to follow. That’s the way innova took over the market.
Just saying. Good marketing.

1 Like
14

I think we could make a poll like that, but then again that’s where the subjective to what you’ve thrown comes into play. If you’ve never thrown a grail before, you’re likely not going to vote for it. And the same concept of us 3 having differing opinions on what the Beater felt like, but no one is actually right or wrong. It’s all experience based.

So I wonder what floaty actually describes. Is it light? is it light in play? is it agility? is it nimbleness? Is it an even weight distribution? I don’t quite know, but to me floaty is the Any-yo Freerider and nothing comes close. But again, my definition or understanding of “float” is subjective to my experience and ideology of what that term defines because of how something feels to me because there’s no definition written down. It’s always going to be subjective without someone at the helm saying “this is the definition for float.”

Personally, I would rather the godfathers of modern Yo-Yo all get together, have a meeting and say “this is the way” and everyone follows because you can’t argue with the Avengers team of Doc Pop, Andre, and whom ever else.

1 Like
15

I agree. I’m definitely not the best judge. But there are people I would trust to decide what is floaty.

2 Likes
16

It’s why I find reviewing yoyos hard. I would like to write reviews or my thoughts about yoyos and their feel or play, but my definitions may not align with others. I could say something is “floaty” then someone goes out and buys the yoyo, and says “it’s not floaty!” based on their own definition.

I personally don’t have a large collection either, so I feel it’s a bit unjustified to review things without much diversity to pull from.

3 Likes
17

In a similar vein, car tires have a rating system based on tire class, tire width, aspect ratio, construction type, diameter, load index, speed rating, tread wear, traction and temperature, all defined by the federal government and agreed to by the manufacturers. Yet tire performance is all over the place and can be very subjective. How can it be any better for yoyos that have no cohesive defining or regulating body in place?

2 Likes
18

The issue for me is the lack of objective scale.

4 Likes
19

I know more about disc golf than almost everyone I know. :slight_smile:

A yo-yo rating system sounds like an interesting concept.

The big difference between disc golf and yo-yos are that the disc manufacturers plan to make multiple disc model runs which are widely available over many years. Yo-yos not so much.

Why create numbers for something you likely can’t buy new? or may never be manufactured again?

Still a fun discussion.

2 Likes
21

Ironically I bag some golf discs no longer produced. Discmania GM (Gremlin) for example. Luckily I have inventory.

22

I like @suspense idea. We’ve all thrown a shutter (probably). Using that as a reference point could help point us in a direction.

Is yoyo X floatier or heavier than a shutter? Is it more or less powerful than a shutter? More or less stable etc.

I tend to look at a lot of reviews before I buy a new throw to try and get a sense of how it plays. Then I try to compare those reviews to reviews of similar yoyos to try and find out which one fits my preferences best. However, it seems like more and more reviews have kinda been saying the same thing on every yoyo. Yes, yoyo X is powerful and stable but not too stable. It’s floaty but not too floaty. Yoyo X just does what you want it to do and so on. It’s kinda hard to determine how it plays when they’re all described the same way.

2 Likes