Tricking/Parkour/Freerunning is ruining the correct perception of what a "flip" is

I sometimes wonder how useful Parkour could be in war.

I 'think I've read about it in history before, people training to leap over walls of moderate height. But I don't remember if such was a 'real reference or fictional. Certainly even modern militaries have climbing walls in lot of obstacle courses. Repel down helicopters.

Course, lot of modern soldiers gear can also be pretty heavy I think.

Lot of people 'climbed castles and walls I imagine, to spy or try for the gate.

I read about soldiers climbing up a toilet chute once, to take a castle. Siege of Château Gaillard.

Then there's that old line, they're in the trees.

. . .

Course, Parkour is a bit more 'active I think maybe.

. . . Seems to me it might have been more useful before firearms, but then, maybe there's something to be said for an elevated position, bypassing walls and buildings and corridors, even in modern war at times.

Yep. Such behaviour is a particularly youthful skill that requires lots of practice, and the ability to withstand lots of mistakes and lots of injuries.

Not sure that such behaviour has any worthwhile practical or social benefits other than as a niche entertainment enterprise.

Not yet an Olympic event.

I've heard of people using poles in the the Netherlands, to jump dykes, rather than walk all the way to a bridge.

Or shepherds in the Canary Islands, using poles to climb and drop off 'small cliffs and rocks, where there is no easy paths.

Course, I 'think one 'usually hears of Parkour more in cities. More cameras maybe.

. . . Also, maybe it wouldn't be Parkour if one uses a pole.

I think I've seen little palm claw gloves in a few different cultures, to grab surfaces better.

Shuko, for ninjas in Japan.

Course as you say, not all that 'useful for most people.

Cities having so many stairs and ladders. Cities are 'built for people, usually.

Suddenly I'm reminded of Disney's Aladdin though,

Parkour, societies police car chases, 'before cars.

Yep, humans can learn all sorts of unusual skills, especially if social circumstances dictate, such as gathering food and other resources.

Climbing palm trees to harvest coconuts, diving for sea food or vaulting dykes.

And for sure, parkour might be a useful means of escape on very rare occasions.

Well, Dying Light definitely taught me how useful parkour would be in a zombie situation.

I tagged you guys in case you're interested.

Tricking/Parkour/Freerunning is ruining the correct perception of what a "flip" is

Why Mention All Three?

The reason I mention all three of these disciplines is not because they are interchangeable, but because the popular understanding is to lump them together. So, those reading may be familiar with one or two or even all three but yet see them as basically the same. Although, tricking is less well known of a term and practice than the other two and thus does not get lumped with them as much. But yet, if an average person witnessed "tricking," they likely would consider it parkour or freerunning even if, necessarily, it is not or not having to do with the nature of either at all.

The above is part of a separate problem that I won't focus on as much, which is misunderstanding these three disciplines and wrongly lumping them together when each has fundamental differences. I am a practitioner and learner of all three and have experience with each, and I know how to describe them as well as their differences.

What I will mostly be talking about today is tricking, and, again, to reassert the previous point, the only reason I bring up parkour and freerunning is because they might be mislabeled as tricking or one of the other disciplines or vice versa to establish common ground with those unfamiliar.

Tricking

This is not a full explanation but rather a basic one. Tricking breaks the boundaries of "traditional flips" that come from gymnastics. Many flips are off-axis--not linear as you would see with front tuck or back tuck. Martial arts moves such as kicks and associated twists are implemented and have become standard movements for tricking. Tricking encourages moves to be "cheated" by not being so linear or complete in execution.

Take the back full for example from gymnastics. This involves doing a 360 degree twist while performing a back flip. The correct way is linear meaning the body stays on are very near the initial vertical axis of the body. But with tricking, the body's vertical axis can be leaning towards one side more, going over one shoulder more than straight backwards. This actually makes the back full easier to do because cleaving to the vertical axis requires more technique, power, and muscle control.

With a tricking full, you don't even need to do a full 360 degree twist. You could go 75% of the way doing 270 degrees, and this is acceptable. This is called a "cheated full" (as if doing a basic tricking full wasn't cheated enough lol) where u don't do a full 360 degrees which makes you landing faced sideways. This can be used as a transition to the next move whatever that may be, and the foot stance can be called "complete"--not "true complete"--or "hyper" depending on the situation and the tricker's intention.

Aspect of Tricking Culture

One can already start to notice how part of the nature of tricking is to be creative, push boundaries of conventional gymnastics tumbling, and make new variations of moves. One of the fundamentals of tricking is "flow." The goal is to seamlessly transition from each move to the next. This is why foot stance and landing position are so important to consider when contemplating the best way to flow through all tricks in a tricking combo.

Explaining the Claim

Why is tricking ruining the correct perception of what a "flip" is? I've already shown how tricking utilizes variations and unique moves to be creative and display aestheticism. The tricking culture is also a very hype, energetic, and fun-loving community. Sometimes just landing a new flip or trick, no matter how sloppy, can be widely appreciated especially with friends and younger practitioners. People are sometimes encouraged to progress quickly and, unfortunately, this can lead to forgetting about technique. Hype can place less focus on technique and control and more on progression.

This is a negative example of how conventional structure is waived because technique is very important. The problem I will be touching on is not the foregoing of technique exactly, but instead the foregoing of a previous definition of a term. In the context of what a flip is, I will show an example of foregoing the definition, why it is nonsense, and why the concept behind this is bad.

What Is a Flip?

A flip is an aerial rotation around the horizontal axis of the body. Requisites for a flip are: inversion of the body, hips are above shoulders in the air at some point, no hand support (which means front handspring is not a flip neither is a cartwheel), and usually full rotation of 360 degrees and landing on feet but not in all cases for these last two points.

Sensibility of Claim

In this video you will see a tricking competition between Zen and James. James is the taller man with a shirt, and Zen is the smaller shirtless Japanese man. https://youtu.be/aJCDDBzo8Qc?si=UsxGnASE6FQktNU2&t=1702

Each is an incredible globally competitive tricker at the top of his game--there is no question about the skill. However, one should draw their attention to James' combo (combo is a line of tricks) which starts a couple seconds after the 28:30 timestamp where the video starts. Pay specific attention to the final trick he does at 28:43. It is a variant of a "full-in." You even hear one of the narrators on the mic call it a full-in at 29:12. A full-in is a shorter name for the trick which is to do a back full and then do one--or two flips in this case--while still in the air before landing. James did a full and then two side flips after... according to trickers at that event.

The thing is, James didn't actually do a full. He did a very slightly off axis vertical twist upwards which is not a full. Remember, a full constitutes a flip with a 360 degree twist. There was no flip in that full. Let's look at the requisites for a flip that James did not fulfill.

Uh, James, cool trick but no cigar

One can immediately start to notice how his initial full in the last trick was not a full because there was hardly any rotation on the horizontal axis. Imagine the horizontal axis is a bar that goes through your hips sideways through your body. If one did a backflip, the horizontal axis rotates 360 degrees. James' horizontal axis went less than 35 degrees backward, hardly rotating at all in that vertical twist.

I call it a vertical twist because, self-explanatory, he rotates 360 degrees around his vertical axis which is the imaginary line going through the top of your head downwards. His "full" has the perception of flip because he starts tucking towards the end of it but that shape of tucking is not a requirement for doing a flip.

What else did James not fulfill? There was no inversion of the body, and his hips were not above shoulders in the air at some point before completing the 360 degrees of the trick. Thus James did not do a flip which means he did not do a full. He does do two side flips after the failed full, but those side flips are not part of the full. They are just part of the air combo that James performed.

Why Is This a Problem?

First off, the problem is that people are celebrating this amazing tricker's achievements, but yet there is not full sincerity of his skill. I am not saying this is James' fault but rather a fault in tricking culture. James may not even be aware of it. The insincerity lies in the fact that he is being congratulated on doing something that he didn't actually do. Now, aside from technically not doing a full, his combo was indeed very impressive. I applaud his skill as well. But, as we heard from the narrator, James supposedly did a full-in which is not true.

There were two narrators for the video. One of which is Kojo who is the owner of that YouTube channel the video is from, and he is a very prolific British tricker. He is very skilled and has gained much attention and respect in the tricking community. So since he called it a full-in, most others will automatically agree with him. Furthermore, if he thinks the trick was a full immediately after witnessing it, others at the event or watching the video are bound to think the same thing.

We have in this situation a spokesperson for the tricking community that is commending a man for doing something he didn't do which is not good. Doing an actual full for the trick would've been harder than James' vertical twist. James is rewarded for that which he did not do. It's deceitful, but again, hardly anyone who knows of the event is aware of this so I am not making them out to be bad guys.

The Bad Guy

What is the "bad guy" is the concept of going so far away from convention that one forgets or purposefully dismisses the definition of a term for the sake of creative exploration. And not just any term, but what a flip is. Flips are a cornerstone of tricking. Every tricker should know what a flip is. I easily applied the requirements of a flip to James' "full," and found he was lacking in the full. Others did not notice, and I find this concerning.

I am concerned for the sincerity of labeling tricks in the tricking community which also affects freerunning and parkour in some ways. How far will the culture go from the definition of one of its core movements? Does creative exploration and commending a person's skill for that which he did not truly do matter more than holding each other accountable to the legit definition of that which is intrinsic to tricking?

Lmk how I did on my introduction, explaining all aspects of the argument, and analyzing the problem. Thanks

Well, their incorrect lingo will never make it into the Olympics I imagine.

Though I 'think gymnastics and Olympics still use tilted flips?

Just don't call them 'full flips?

I am not sure what you mean by tilted flips. It is pretty hard to do a perfectly linear full. In gymnastics, there are probably tilts to one side in most fulls even if ever so slightly. A lot of tilt can look sloppy in gymnastics competition but is just fine in tricking as one of the goals is to twist as much as one can before landing. Tilt, to a certain degree, makes it easier to twist over more.

Just don't call them 'full flips?

In gymnastics "flip" is not an official term. Official term for flip is a "salto." But are you saying to call fulls something else or call James' incorrect full something else?

Hmmmm.

Just not a big issue for me skip.

It's just like trying to argue that bananas pineapples and mangos are all fruit, but all somewhat differently exhibiting an individual fruitiness.

A few people will be interested, but most people won't be.

I think I don't know much about gymnastics.

Still, if James movement wasn't a full, yeah, they ought call it something else.

I don't think your analogy really captures my point. There's a right way to do a full, and there's a wrong way to do it. James clearly didn't do a full, but important figures in tricking think otherwise. My conclusion is that tricking culture is too loose with its terminology to the point of completely disregarding what a term actually means.

Change of subject: were u a user on Dart? I'm not sure if I've talked with you before

My money says Zed.

Oh that would make sense. I can see it

Z Cars was a long running British TV series of the 1960's-70's.

Sergeant Lynch was a central character, played by James Ellis.

Zed Victor 4 was a call sign.

My money's on you being Lemming.

Zed Victor 4 to control.

For sure Skip, enjoy whatever it is that you flipping do.

I enjoy bananas, pineapples and mangos, though in a year I undoubtedly get through more bananas than pineapples or mangos.

All a part of a balanced diet, including a burger or two, but not one from a well known burger chain.

:(((((((

-FakeMcDonalds

Is that a flip?