|
The Original All Roller Talk Discussion Board Archive >
HOW DEEP IS 2.0 ?
HOW DEEP IS 2.0 ?
Page:
1
rollermanx0
381 posts
May 05, 2008
10:09 AM
|
DOES ANYBODY KNOW HOW DEEP A BIRD HAS TO BE TO BE CONSIDERED A 2.0 SPINNER??
----------
sTeVEn RUsSElL
ICRC/CSRA/WCS
|
LIL RIC
104 posts
May 05, 2008
10:20 AM
|
what;s up Lil Steve it was good seen you yesterday on the fly and thanks to the guys from SGVS for coming out on the fly the finals are in two weeks. good luck to all
LIL RIC
WEST SIDE ROLLER LOFT
|
elopez
1247 posts
May 05, 2008
10:22 AM
|
Whats up Lil (Big) Ric. Nice chatting with you yesterday. Tell Alonzo I said good luck in the finals.
----------
Efren Lopez
SGVS
|
silver tail
261 posts
May 05, 2008
10:44 AM
|
I'm with Smoke 60+ and a kit of birds to avrege 60+ is going to take some work.
|
smoke747
1033 posts
May 05, 2008
7:04 PM
|
thanks for the chart jim
smoke747----------
Keith London
ICRC
|
kcfirl
421 posts
May 05, 2008
9:09 PM
|
Depth points are not awarded to individual birds but to an average of the birds in a kit counted in scoreable breaks. If I saw a kit of pigeons that averaged 40 feet, I would give the kit a 2.0 for depth.
I don't believe I will ever see a kit of birds AVERAGING 60 ft.
Sincerely,
Ken Firl
|
Mount Airy Lofts
721 posts
May 05, 2008
11:11 PM
|
Yeah... a Champion! A complete 60 foot blur would be a 2.0 in my books. Very RARE in deed!!
Thor
----------
It's all about the friends we make :)
|
Mount Airy Lofts
734 posts
May 10, 2008
1:37 PM
|
Steve,
I know this has little to do with your question but some what is related. Here is some thing I dug up while looking for another thing for some one else. I found it funny after seeing it again - in a good way.
Enjoy,
Thor
<< There has been talk lately of awarding quality multipliers, and what some deem as scoreable or not. A few years ago I spent one afternoon trying to come up with a chart whereas I could explain how I was about to award quality multipliers using the new 1 2 3 scoring system. To be honest, I scribbled it down on a pad while flying to SLC Utah to judge the first NBRC Fall Fly finalist in 1996 on my way to Guil Rand's place. During my judging assignment I showed the chart to Steve Clayton, who later printed this chart on the WC score pads, so if it looks familiar that is where some of you may have seen it before.
1.0 Axle wing, wings clearly sticking out to the side, acceptable velocity, viewed from the side gives the appearance of a solid ball.
1.1 Axle wing, wings tips barely sticking out to the sides, very good to great velocity, gives the appearance of a cleanly rolling ball from the side.
1.2 X wing, gives the appearance of a rather large X, acceptable velocity, ragged from the side.
1.3 High X wing, very narrow X, very good to great velocity. (Very common) Ragged from the side, but not as much as the 1.2 quality roller.
1.4 A frame, self explanatory. Rollers with this style have to be rolling with very good velocity to show this style. Gives the appearance as a fairly smooth rolling ball from the side, may show some slight raggedness.
1.5 Open H style, must be rolling with good velocity to show this style, capable of showing a hole from the side when viewed from the right angle. (In years past these were called champions)
1.6 Narrow H style, wings held in closer to the body than the open H style, must possess great velocity to exhibit this style. Gives the appearance of a ball slightly larger than a softball when viewed from the side, capable of showing the hole when viewed from the right angle.
1.7 ( ) Wings bowed in style, obviously the velocity must be there to show this style. Capable of showing a hole from the side when viewed from the right angle, roll very clean when viewed from the side, not ragged.
1.8 () Closed in Style, wings give the appearance of being held very close to the body, more so than the 1.7 Q spinner. Gives the appearance of a smoothly rolling softball when viewed from the side, some will show a hole when viewed from the side, but not as small as the 1.9 spinner. Nearing the ideal.
1.9 Solid ball, about the size of a softball, inestimable speed, exhibits a small hole when viewed from the side.
2.0 Solid ball, about the size of a baseball, inestimable speed, gives the appearance of a blurring ball when viewed from all angles.
This is just a rough draft guys, if I had to put this on a chart I would have went in to more detail, I will leave that for some of you to discuss.
Rick Mee >>
----------
It's all about the friends we make :)
|
silver tail
356 posts
May 10, 2008
4:48 PM
|
This is a very nice chart
|
Post a Message
|
|
|