My thought was to have spin time as one metric and base a 10 as spin time of a good bi metal and 0 as will not sleep. The numbers get filled in with comparison.
Then have power as another metric. This I going define as the ability to spin with layers and while moving or doing tricks. More weight or bimetal designs will be tops I’m guessing.
All of this should be based on comparison by a skilled player (not me).
Id ideally have pros and designers playing then ranking each yo-yo in order for each metric. And base it off those numbers.
The idea isn’t to give exact performance specs but to give a new user an idea of how it was designed to play based on comparison of others.
Think of it as ranking each yo-yo in specific areas for others comparison.
Doesn’t spin time vary significantly depending on the bearing, wether it’s lubed or dry, concave or flat, ceramic or steel, dirty or clean, etc…?
The same yoyo would play differently based on how worn the pads are. On how thick the string is. On how clean the bearing is. Discs don’t have parts that need cleaned or go bad, they are more consistent.
This is a respectable idea, but I’m not sure if it’s entirely practical for yoyos. Just my 2 cents, which is worth far less than that…
This idea is show the way it was intended to play when new. If you damage the yo-yo or don’t maintain the bearing the same way it was intended, then course it wouldn’t play the same.
I think it would be great to see information like this alongside the other specs. That way you would basically have a review from the company.
If that was the case you could look and see what’s the “floatiest” throw. Or what’s the next best performance based yo-yo from one to another. Whatever attributes the vendor would tell you about if you knew what to ask.
I think the most objective way to sort things would be to use the specs table with two additional specifications: Weight distribution from the axis outwards in percentage, and weight distribution from the string plane outwards in percentage. Split each into say, four zones for simplicity.
For instance, a yoyo with a lot of rim weight might have a spec of 20/10/10/70 in the former category. This would mean that twenty percent of the yoyo’s weight was near the hub, seventy percent was in or near the rims and the remaining twenty percent was evenly spread in the sidewalls.
The same concept would apply to the latter category of course.
I’m not saying that it’s realistically feasible, but a big part of why I choose my next throw is how it’s specs match up to other throws I know and love. Weight is important, but weight distribution is equally critical in determining how a yoyo feels and behaves.
Naturally there are other factors but most of them, like shape nuances, can’t realistically be quantified. Even weight distribution would be more difficult to determine than the other specs but it’s the only thing that I think could really offer us a concrete improvement.
Trying to set up a number system based on feel seems impossibly subjective to me, I think the best way to guess at that is to watch as many reviews as possible by reviewers whose taste you’re familiar with.
And finally, if we ever did settle on a system for determining exactly how a yoyo will behave in our hands, we will only ever buy exactly what we want. And where will that leave the BST threads?
Ivan
A lot of things in yoyoing are hard to measure objectively. But…
I think it would be a big step forward if manufacturers listed the “moment of inertia” of their throws (which is basically the rotational equivalent of “mass”), and it probably captures a lot of what people mean by “power”. Alongside weight (“mass”) and physical size, MoI is an objective, physical characteristic that really affects play. I think that if it were regularly labelled, then people would start to understand exactly what it is and how it affects play, and would therefore start to move away from words like “speed” and “float” which I think are really tangled up combinations of weight/size/MoI.
Eg when a throw feel heavy on the throw but light in play (or powerful but fast) it’s probably because it has a high MoI compared to other yoyos of a similar weight.
I need to take a physics refresher course but I do like a scientific approach. still think its so interesting that the yoyo is spinning faster on its outer edge than its center at the bearing. i think adding mass and MOI and similar measurable/calculated values to the spec list would be helpful.
for example this makes me think of the shutter vs ss shutter. mass has a relationship with material density and object size where weight does not truly describe all of the difference since the ss shutter is much smaller than the shutter, but only weights 2 grams less on my scale.
Then noting the different aluminum alloys for yoyos that are shaped almost exactly the same like panorama and diorama would have more supporting numbers to consider.