[HN Gopher] Skateboard Tricks and Topological Flips
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Skateboard Tricks and Topological Flips
        
       Author : user2994cb
       Score  : 109 points
       Date   : 2021-08-23 07:26 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arxiv.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arxiv.org)
        
       | RhysU wrote:
       | The end of the paper points to
       | https://github.com/holomorpheus/topological-flips
        
         | joncrane wrote:
         | I tried cloning it and running it but I'm missing a module;
         | there is no requirements.txt either. :(
        
           | adrian_b wrote:
           | Maybe you have to do
           | 
           | git clone --recursive
        
           | nathancahill wrote:
           | It needs a handful of libraries. I generated the animations
           | here: https://imgur.com/a/SJcAvHF
        
           | psychomugs wrote:
           | Generated a requirements.txt here: https://gist.github.com/ps
           | ychomugs/e0e298e1f82a271ef3e9eedbb...
        
       | joncrane wrote:
       | Correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole beginning of the article
       | implies that the skateboarder is "regular" in terms of foot
       | placement, meaning the right foot is on the tail and the left
       | foot is at the front.
       | 
       | The fact that each skater can reverse their stance (aka
       | switchstance), doesn't that double the possible number of flip
       | tricks?
        
         | dchuk wrote:
         | Not really, the flipping maneuver remains the same, the stance
         | is more of a modifier. A 360 flip and a switch 360 flip are
         | both still just 36 flips, you're just facing a different way in
         | each.
        
           | joncrane wrote:
           | They specifically talk about "left handed" rotation for a
           | kickflip and a heelflip being right handed.
           | 
           | However for a goofy skater, the opposite is true.
        
             | dchuk wrote:
             | The mechanism for a kick flip and a heel flip are
             | different, it's not about the spin of the board in relation
             | to the earth, it's the spin of the board in relation to the
             | skater.
             | 
             | A kick flip uses the front toe to rotate the board towards
             | the skater. A heel flip uses the front heel to rotate the
             | board away from the skater (you're basically pushing it
             | away from you by sliding your heel up and out off the edge
             | of the board).
        
         | btbuildem wrote:
         | Wouldn't symmetry cover that? In this context, regular and
         | switch are "mirror images" of each other.
        
           | joncrane wrote:
           | I suppose. Maybe I missed a part where they say they're using
           | a regular stance skater for the sake of simplicity.
           | 
           | Note that a goofy skater could also do the moves described in
           | the paper, but it would be a different trick because he's
           | doing it switchstance.
           | 
           | (Source: the rules of SKATE per Battle of the Berrics, the
           | skater has to declare his stance ahead of time for the
           | purposes of normal vs switch tricks, aka the "Skategoat"
           | (Leandre Sanders) rule)
        
         | eunoia wrote:
         | Essentially the same trick. Best metaphor for "switch" tricks
         | is basically doing something left handed (assuming you're right
         | handed and have always done the "thing" with your right).
         | 
         | It's the same trick but you essentially have to relearn it with
         | your other "hand". Tricks are then flagged with the "switch"
         | qualifier to indicate the rider wasn't in their normal stance.
         | Example: a regular (footed) skater skating right foot forward
         | (switch) doing a kickflip is simply doing a switch kickflip
         | (switch flip).
        
       | mrspeaker wrote:
       | Reminds me of this (less math-heavy!) analysis of "Skateboarding
       | Science" about Rodney Mullen:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFRPhi0jhGc
        
         | psychomugs wrote:
         | Rodney has a great TED Talk where he aptly compared the
         | skateboarding and open-source communities:
         | https://youtu.be/3GVO-MfIl1Q?t=741
        
       | nathancahill wrote:
       | Generated the animations from the repo linked in the paper:
       | https://imgur.com/a/SJcAvHF
       | 
       | The specific tricks with their matrices are here:
       | https://github.com/holomorpheus/topological-flips/blob/main/...
        
         | volta83 wrote:
         | Really interesting to see the hardflip animated vertically but
         | the inward heelflip isn't.
         | 
         | I always did hard flips as varial kickflips, but with fs-shuv
         | instead of bs-shuv.
        
           | rawling wrote:
           | And then the 360 hardflip goes back to not doing the vertical
           | bit.
        
         | fokinsean wrote:
         | Not sure why these are considered different in the images
         | 
         | 360 Pop Shove-it
         | 
         | 360 Shove-it
         | 
         | 360 Shuvit
        
           | alexanderdmitri wrote:
           | I always thought the difference is with a normal shove-it the
           | board pivots on the back trucks, whereas with a pop shove-it
           | all wheels are off the ground for the rotation. They seem to
           | be depicting only the latter in the animations.
        
           | psychomugs wrote:
           | Popping, i.e. hitting end of the board on the ground, to get
           | height is the difference.
           | 
           | A pop shuvit will be higher while a non-popped shuvit may
           | barely leave the ground. Popping can actually make it easier
           | to keep the axis of rotation closer to the center of the
           | board.
        
             | fokinsean wrote:
             | Right, I know the difference between pop/non-pop in action,
             | but the animations look the same.
             | 
             | Also "shuvit" distinction is just a synonym
        
               | psychomugs wrote:
               | The transformations are only rotations; the vertical
               | translation in the animations is just hardcoded as a
               | half-period of a sine wave.
               | 
               | Setting the `vertical` flag to `False` in
               | skateAnimation.py:generate_frames removes the pop.
        
       | nerdponx wrote:
       | I really like the phrase "quaternionic varial kickflip".
        
         | nathancahill wrote:
         | Like something from Snow Crash.
        
       | joncrane wrote:
       | So what are the 4 tricks?
       | 
       | Kickflip, heelflip, flip + shove it in the "natural direction"
       | (e.g. varial kickflip, 360 kickflip), and flip + shove it in the
       | unnatural direction (e.g. hard flip)?
        
         | fokinsean wrote:
         | I'm guessing it's kickflip, heelflip, bs shuv, and fs shuv.
         | 
         | Your definition leaves out varial heels and inward heels.
         | 
         | Edit: On second thought I'm still not sure, I saw this in the
         | paper, and I'm guessing they're classifying both direction
         | shuvs as the same, and kick/heelflip as the same
         | 
         | Below we list these four tricks with their corresponding
         | residue class in Z/4Z.
         | 
         | 0 - Ollie
         | 
         | 1 - 180 Shove-it
         | 
         | 2 - 360 Shove-it
         | 
         | 3 - 540 Shove-it
         | 
         | Another interesting choice of representatives is given by a
         | combination of the shove-it and the kickflip.
         | 
         | 0 - Ollie
         | 
         | 1 - 180 Shove-it
         | 
         | 2 - Kickflip
         | 
         | 3 - Varial Kickflip
        
           | cj_f wrote:
           | How is a 360 shove it not equal to an ollie? and a 540 shuv
           | it equivalent to a 180 shove it?
        
           | kevinventullo wrote:
           | The main result of the paper seems to be saying that
           | kickflips and heelflips are homotopic, and therefore
           | equivalent. Fs shove it is just the inverse of a pop shove
           | it.
        
           | joncrane wrote:
           | Maybe the four tricks are:
           | 
           | Ollie
           | 
           | Any Shove it/varial with no flip
           | 
           | Any Flip with no shove it
           | 
           | Any flip + shove it combo
           | 
           | ?
        
       | fokinsean wrote:
       | Here's a fun one to debate with your skate friends, nollie and
       | fakie tricks are "swapped".
       | 
       | For example:
       | 
       | - nollie fs 180 and fakie fs 180 (fs half cab) are two different
       | directions: nollie fs 180 is in front of you and fakie fs 180 is
       | behind you going blind
       | 
       | - nollie 5-0 and fakie 5-0 (fakie switch nosegrind) lean
       | differently on the grind: nollie 5-0 you pop off your nose and
       | land on your back truck, fakie 5-0 you pop off your tail and land
       | on your front truck
       | 
       | - nollie noseslide and fakie noseslide are different motions to
       | get into the slide: nollie nose you pop off nose and land on the
       | nose in the ledge, fakie nose you pop off tail and land on the
       | nose but you do a sort of half cab
       | 
       | The key distinction in the argument is that in fakie, your tail
       | is always considered your "tail". Therefore you treat any derived
       | tricks as being "backwards". In the 5-0 and noseslide examples,
       | you're still popping off the front of your board, but you
       | classify it as nose or tail based on if it's nollie or fakie.
       | 
       | There are caveats though such as "fakie crook" where if you kept
       | the rule it should be "fakie suski", which no one says.
       | 
       | There's a million arbitrary and nonsensical rules in
       | skateboarding which is part of the reason to love it, especially
       | for something that "has no rules".
       | 
       | And remember, never carry your board by your truck :)
        
         | rbrtdrmpc- wrote:
         | never push mongo too
        
           | fokinsean wrote:
           | *Unless it's switch mongo and you're Koston, Rodrigo TX, or
           | Stevie Williams
        
             | rbrtdrmpc- wrote:
             | i see you're a man/woman of culture as well
        
             | 5cott0 wrote:
             | *swongo
        
         | 5cott0 wrote:
         | therefore by induction a nollie fs 180 is not a half cab[?]
        
         | eunoia wrote:
         | Ah don't forget the same variation of foolery that comes around
         | if you 180 into a grind.
         | 
         | What most people would call a nose grind or 5-0 is inverted if
         | you 180'd into it.
         | 
         | > And remember, never carry your board by your truck :)
         | 
         | I miss skateboarding :). My ankles don't though.
        
           | fokinsean wrote:
           | Ah yes! and
           | 
           | One of my other favorites:
           | 
           | On circle rails there is "no such thing" as fs overcrook,
           | just fs nosegrind, and there is no such thing as bs
           | nosegrind, but there is bs overcrook.
           | 
           | At least that's how magazines seem to classify it.
        
             | rbrtdrmpc- wrote:
             | that invalidates my deep faith for the suski grind, this is
             | unacceptable _Lemongrab screaming_
        
               | fokinsean wrote:
               | Haha Suskis are still valid. They've grown on me over the
               | years, especially when pinched on a ledge.
        
             | jwilber wrote:
             | And these are just for street! Transition has its own set
             | of weird names (losi, andrecht, g-pivot, etc.), including
             | some slight street overlaps (varial, pivot, etc.).
             | 
             | I have a little passion project where we log pro's tricks
             | and interview them called 4ply[0]. The naming convention is
             | something we always have to get right to make the logged
             | data at all useable. I actually grew up skating with Erick
             | Winkowski but can't do an article on him because he does so
             | esoteric transition tricks and we can't name them all (or
             | find someone who can).
             | 
             | [0] http://4plymag.com/
        
               | fokinsean wrote:
               | That's awesome! The site seems down for now but I'll
               | check again later.
               | 
               | Also I'll go ahead and plug the site I'm helping rebuild.
               | 
               | https://skatevideo.site
        
               | axegon_ wrote:
               | Holy!!! That site still exists??!?!?!?!?!! I remember
               | when this was filled with videos which were mostly hosted
               | on what were google videos back in the day(and a small
               | number on vimeo). Must have been 2006-7-8-ish...
        
               | jwilber wrote:
               | Yo! That's awesome you're working o skatevideosite! O
               | just read your guys interview on Jenkem [0]. I used your
               | old data years back for an article for The Pudding [1]
               | years ago - invaluable resource. Growing up I would spend
               | so much time on the site just finding music and skaters.
               | If there's an issue board or something please plug it,
               | would love to contribute!
               | 
               | [0] https://www.jenkemmag.com/home/2021/08/16/meet-minds-
               | behind-... [1] https://pudding.cool/2018/06/skate-music/
        
               | fokinsean wrote:
               | Woah! That's so random, I recently came across your
               | article a few months ago. Great work and small world :)
               | 
               | I have a private discord and github for the project I can
               | add you too. I eventually plan to open up the discord for
               | anyone once we get a little further in the rebuild.
               | 
               | Wish there was a good way to DM on HN, I can send you a
               | discord invite. Or if you happen to be on slap let me
               | know.
        
               | magicink81 wrote:
               | Thanks for the link... Read about Skate After School and
               | made a donation. Great interview! http://4plymag.com/SAS/
        
           | scudd wrote:
           | I always thought names like "180 nosegrind" made no sense.
           | Why not "180 switch 5-0"? That seems so much more intuitive.
           | 
           | It made so much more sense when I learned a lot of these
           | tricks were first invented in the 1980's, when most boards
           | had an obvious nose versus tail difference. Like this one:
           | 
           | https://i.etsystatic.com/6865693/r/il/f51835/361296329/il_15.
           | ..
           | 
           | So even though you we're grinding in a switch 5-0 looking
           | position, you would be clearly grinding on the nose, hence
           | "180 nosegrind".
        
         | psychomugs wrote:
         | Mall grabs are okay as long as you just tried something huge:
         | https://youtu.be/THcnby6b6sY?t=88
        
           | scudd wrote:
           | Kinda like how benihanas are lame, unless you're shaved-head
           | Jamie Thomas taking it down a gap:
           | 
           | https://i0.heartyhosting.com/skateboarding.transworld.net/wp.
           | ..
           | 
           | From this Transworld Article:
           | 
           | https://skateboarding.transworld.net/photos/tws-10-most-
           | memo...
        
         | axegon_ wrote:
         | > - nollie fs 180 and fakie fs 180 (fs half cab) are two
         | different directions: nollie fs 180 is in front of you and
         | fakie fs 180 is behind you going blind
         | 
         | That is till this day(12 years since I last set foot on a
         | skateboard) the most illogical thing. Especially when combined
         | with board slides which were also not apparent from the
         | start(for years on I called front side board slide back side)
         | and from a logical perspective the lip slide names made a lot
         | more sense. That said, I never figured out how to classify
         | nollie/fakie board and lip slides front or back. As far as
         | experience I also never understood why were hard flips called
         | hard(I learned how to do them in less than 15 minutes after I
         | first decided to give them a go).
        
           | jwilber wrote:
           | The rail tricks are simple if you just think of whether it's
           | your toes (fs) or heel (bs) facing the obstacle and ignore
           | any body turn motion.
        
           | fokinsean wrote:
           | Well, the "logic" for fakie is that your tail remains the
           | reference even though you are popping backwards. Therefore
           | you would spin the same direction for fakie fs 180 as you
           | would for regular fs 180.
           | 
           | > I never figured out how to classify nollie/fakie board and
           | lip slides front or back
           | 
           | Yep this one still trips me up to and is great argument over
           | some beers. Especially when you introduce flip tricks into
           | them as well :p
        
       | fokinsean wrote:
       | I was hoping they would come up with a mathematical way to
       | distinguish an impossible from a 360 shuv :)
        
         | joncrane wrote:
         | I wonder if they have somehow mathematically proven that they
         | are the same trick?
         | 
         | In which case I reject mathematics.
        
         | jbottigliero wrote:
         | I was curious about this as well and gave modeling the
         | Impossible a try... the foot drag seemed to be best mimicked by
         | a half-kickflip, followed by a 360 shuvit, then a half-
         | heelflip.
        
         | eunoia wrote:
         | I don't know about mathematical, but I've always thought of it
         | as a vertical vs horizontal motion with the front foot used as
         | as kind of rotation axis for an impossible...
         | 
         | "I know it when I see it" (maybe)
        
           | fokinsean wrote:
           | Yeah for sure, the way the foot wraps with the board is the
           | visual cue. It has led me and friends to some fun debates in
           | a game of skate i.e. "that wasn't an impossible", so I was
           | hoping to be able to point to some ridiculous mathematical
           | definition the next time it comes up.
        
             | eunoia wrote:
             | Somewhere out there Rodney Mullen smiles quietly :)
        
       | rawling wrote:
       | > As a last example we will describe the hardflip. This is a
       | simultaneous half kickflip (a 180 degree rotation about the axis
       | joining the tail to the nose of the skateboard) and a 180 degree
       | rotation about the x-axis in the right-hand orientation.
       | 
       | Is it? Isn't a hardflip just a mirror of the varial kickflip they
       | describe, and rotation around their x-axis something else
       | entirely?
        
         | throwawaypqr123 wrote:
         | It both is and isn't. Technically the rotation is just the
         | inverse of the varial kickflip (a frontside varial kickflip as
         | opposed to the "normal" backside varial kickflip").
         | 
         | The problem comes around that your front foot is very much in
         | the way of the board if it is only doing an "inverse varial".
         | The vertical (end over end) rotation comes out of necessity to
         | get the front foot out of the way.
         | 
         | Plus it looks really cool.
        
           | rawling wrote:
           | Hah, ok. I'll go find some videos and brush up!
        
         | ndnxmsm wrote:
         | The biggest difference in hardflip a is where your back foot is
         | in relation to the board during the flip.
        
         | psychomugs wrote:
         | Varial kickflip = 180 backside shuvit + kickflip
         | 
         | Hardflip = 180 frontside shuvit + kickflip
         | 
         | The hardflip is unique in that it has two main variations. One
         | is the end-over-end style that I think they're describing,
         | where the board only does half a kickflip. The other is
         | "flatter," and explicitly a 180 shuvit with a complete
         | kickflip. In practice the end-over-end style is much more
         | common, easier to perform, and nicer looking.
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNlKad9vzng
        
           | fokinsean wrote:
           | You can also steez fs flips like this as well, aka the Muska
           | flip
        
       | kevinventullo wrote:
       | So if I understand correctly, letting "~" denote homotopy
       | equivalence,                 Kickflip ~ 360 shove it
       | Ollie ~ 720 shove it ~ double kickflip
       | 
       | I may have missed it in the paper, but does anyone have intuition
       | about how to visualize these homotopies? I don't get how to
       | continuously deform a 720 shove it into an Ollie.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-08-24 23:02 UTC)