|
Post by Philip on Jul 18, 2012 14:10:15 GMT -5
I think they would add drops. But someone could have a serious injury if the obstacle fell off the tracks. DUDE did anyone tell you about not bumping old threads???
|
|
|
Post by RiderLeangle on Jul 18, 2012 14:20:03 GMT -5
I think they would add drops. But someone could have a serious injury if the obstacle fell off the tracks. DUDE did anyone tell you about not bumping old threads??? I don't think anyone did... it's not like we have the rules linked at the top of every forum here or anything...
|
|
|
Post by VenusHeadTrap on Jul 18, 2012 22:10:52 GMT -5
Why there should not be drops on the rolling escargot.
Short answer: It's retarded. The escargot is already 5 times harder than the rolling log.
|
|
|
Post by RiderLeangle on Jul 18, 2012 22:17:18 GMT -5
Why there should not be drops on the rolling escargot. Short answer: It's retarded. The escargot is already 5 times harder than the rolling log. That's also a good point... we should wait until we see 90% of competitors attempting it clearing before trying anything physics breaking...
|
|
|
Post by UnrealCanine on Jul 19, 2012 5:25:10 GMT -5
I looked up the old arguements for RE with drops. It wasn't pretty
|
|
|
Post by RiderLeangle on Jul 19, 2012 11:38:28 GMT -5
I looked up the old arguements for RE with drops. It wasn't pretty You expect it to be pretty with an idea that stupid? lol
|
|
|
Post by wrestlingfan55 on Jul 19, 2012 12:04:16 GMT -5
^ How is it a stupid idea. If you saw an RE with drops would you honestly complain?
|
|
|
Post by TCM on Jul 19, 2012 12:10:42 GMT -5
^This forum has complained about pettier things regarding obstacles.
If it turns out there's a practical, safe way for competitors to attempt and ultimately clear the obstacle, by all means, put it on the course. But IMO, I've seen too many armchair designs that people claim will work, but simply wouldn't logically translate to a real-life model. Then again, I'm someone who leaves the design of the course to the producers/design team. Your own obstacle course is one thing, it's another to say "The show would benefit from this, they should build it." That's getting off track, though.
|
|
|
Post by wrestlingfan55 on Jul 19, 2012 12:47:30 GMT -5
^ lol the course designers are demented. They CAN make it work if they want.
|
|
|
Post by RiderLeangle on Jul 19, 2012 12:55:56 GMT -5
^ How is it a stupid idea. If you saw an RE with drops would you honestly complain? Well considering it's making an obstacle unsafe since it's making it possible for a giant cable spool made even more heavy by the metal parts to fall off while a person who is only secured by their own power in little notches, and on top of that is an obstacle that was so difficult they had to tone down the difficulty mid day and still had to tone it down even more the next tournament, yeah I think plenty of people would complain when the 2nd/3rd obstacle of stage one has a 95% fail rate... And this is without considering how the thing is leaned back by default AND how it shakes like crazy (even more so in 27)
|
|
|
Post by TCM on Jul 19, 2012 13:35:17 GMT -5
^ lol the course designers are demented. They CAN make it work if they want. Demented, maybe. But they also can't have an obstacle that is a high risk of injury. It's why the Rope Glider lasted just one tournament. It's why people are saying the HPA landing was too dangerous because of Drew's injury (which IMO was a freak accident, not malicious) and Hidenori Nagasawa spilling into the water the way he did. There's natural risk of injury, and there's deathtraps. IMO, Rolling Escargot with drops falls into the latter category.
|
|
|
Post by RiderLeangle on Jul 19, 2012 14:18:34 GMT -5
And lets ignore the difficulty factor... the only way this could be safe would be if you put a second track on top to keep it from falling off... that would create friction, now this is already a slow moving obstacle on a track inclined back to keep it from falling off normally... putting another set of beams there would just make the thing even slower and likely to stop... look how much the Sandan Rolling Maruta ended up stopping when it had the cables over top of it to keep it from falling off (Which it still ended up doing but still), now imagine people getting stuck upside down in a spot very difficult to recover, much less hang on... this just isn't a practical idea...
Also why all this talk of drops on the escargot anyways... What happened to the good old days where custom courses were physically possible and people thought a 6 ledge cliffhanger was way too much... why are we trying to make obstacles that are already highly difficult into death traps and drawing 30 ledge cliffhangers...
|
|
|
Post by TCM on Jul 19, 2012 14:25:11 GMT -5
And lets ignore the difficulty factor... the only way this could be safe would be if you put a second track on top to keep it from falling off... that would create friction, now this is already a slow moving obstacle on a track inclined back to keep it from falling off normally... putting another set of beams there would just make the thing even slower and likely to stop... look how much the Sandan Rolling Maruta ended up stopping when it had the cables over top of it to keep it from falling off (Which it still ended up doing but still), now imagine people getting stuck upside down in a spot very difficult to recover, much less hang on... this just isn't a practical idea... Also why all this talk of drops on the escargot anyways... What happened to the good old days where custom courses were physically possible and people thought a 6 ledge cliffhanger was way too much... why are we trying to make obstacles that are already highly difficult into death traps and drawing 30 ledge cliffhangers... Because M9 ended up making that 6 ledge cliffhanger But seriously, I agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by RiderLeangle on Jul 19, 2012 14:40:33 GMT -5
And lets ignore the difficulty factor... the only way this could be safe would be if you put a second track on top to keep it from falling off... that would create friction, now this is already a slow moving obstacle on a track inclined back to keep it from falling off normally... putting another set of beams there would just make the thing even slower and likely to stop... look how much the Sandan Rolling Maruta ended up stopping when it had the cables over top of it to keep it from falling off (Which it still ended up doing but still), now imagine people getting stuck upside down in a spot very difficult to recover, much less hang on... this just isn't a practical idea... Also why all this talk of drops on the escargot anyways... What happened to the good old days where custom courses were physically possible and people thought a 6 ledge cliffhanger was way too much... why are we trying to make obstacles that are already highly difficult into death traps and drawing 30 ledge cliffhangers... Because M9 ended up making that 6 ledge cliffhanger But seriously, I agree with you. And I remember when people thought it was overkill and wanted less ledges... I preferred that to 30+ ledge CHs and Escargots with drops... The most overkill a stage 3 should be allowed to be is ANW4 Vegas Stage 3 lineup... (Yes I know you said you agreed )
|
|
|
Post by TCM on Jul 19, 2012 16:48:07 GMT -5
The most overkill a stage 3 should be allowed to be is ANW4 Vegas Stage 3 lineup... Minus that ugly Hang Climbing/Sending Climber. At least make it look cooler.
|
|
|
Post by RiderLeangle on Jul 19, 2012 17:48:08 GMT -5
The most overkill a stage 3 should be allowed to be is ANW4 Vegas Stage 3 lineup... Minus that ugly Hang Climbing/Sending Climber. At least make it look cooler. I never said anything about looks, I just said that's the highest difficulty Stage 3 should be And lets just call it Ascending Climb... G4 is going to call it that anyways
|
|