Bill Piche Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 This first picture is at 4:36 http://www.gripboard.com/index.php?act=mod...&cmd=si&img=325 Note the hand blocks the set. Next is at 4:49. Yes, that is .13 seconds later. http://www.gripboard.com/index.php?act=mod...&cmd=si&img=326 Looks like the handles are parallel? Next is at 4:56 Or, .07 seconds from the last picture. http://www.gripboard.com/index.php?act=mod...&cmd=si&img=327 Gripper shut. How is a witness THERE at the time going to be able to tell if the handles were closer than parallel?! Comments please. Thanks to Brian for the example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoDa Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 The video is shot low so hopefully the witness has a better view. The video does not give the proof that the handles were parallel but from the looks they seem to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Piche Posted April 10, 2004 Author Share Posted April 10, 2004 A better view? Read the times. How is the witness going to be able to see that the handles are parallel in less than .1 seconds? It's not physically possible IMO unless I am missing something. Technology has allowed us to stop it in less than 1/10's of seconds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoDa Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 A better view?Read the times. How is the witness going to be able to see that the handles are parallel in less than .1 seconds? It's not physically possible IMO unless I am missing something. Technology has allowed us to stop it in less than 1/10's of seconds. Maybe I should have put a wink! The video does show they were apart but it does not show how far. Parallel? Greater than parallel? Less than parallel? As far as what the human eye/mind can see it is about 50 msec. 130 msec is about 3X that so I do believe that if the witness was in correct position he could see the handles. Could he tell parallel might questionable but he could tell they were some reasonable distance apart. Also, you are making a big assumption that the witness is not in position to see the position because of the placement of the other hand. It really depends on the witness position. The problem with video is it is two dimensional not three! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Edgin Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 Explaining the same thing many times now is getting frustrating, so this will be my LAST comment on any of the "video v. witness" topics. I have a life to get back to. Video provides ONE angle. During the process of the set and squeeze, a closer may be moving around and the video will just see what is not obstructed. However, a witness can and SHOULD move around in order to get the best possible view. I cannot speak for everyone, but when I am watching someone try to close a tough gripper, sometimes I will step to the side or duck down to see the set and close. The point is that I am actively looking from different angles to make sure the set is within the rules and that the other hand is removed before finishing the close. Any judge/witness who takes their job seriously should make an extra effort to get right in there and see the set and close, not stand to the side, and not be afraid to say "I didn't see the proper set, can you do it again?" And if they cant' do it again, not be afraid to fail the certification. Take a page out of your history books here. When world class feats were performed in training, the feat becomes nothing more than a rumor. But when the feat is performed in front of credible, objective witnesses who know what they're looking at, then it becomes an undisputed fact. Video is just icing on the cake. The people who still dispute the fact are nothing but jealous, no-talent nitwits with more time on their hands than brain in their heads. I think there is too much emphasis on getting good video for these things. When it comes to something so trivial as squeezing a gripper, I will take a man's word that he saw someone close it. If he is lying to me, then I will have lost trust in that person but I will not lose any sleep because when you get down to it, we're just talking about grippers and these discussions are getting tiring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Vigeant Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 Explaining the same thing many times now is getting frustrating, so this will be my LAST comment on any of the "video v. witness" topics. I have a life to get back to.Video provides ONE angle. During the process of the set and squeeze, a closer may be moving around and the video will just see what is not obstructed. However, a witness can and SHOULD move around in order to get the best possible view. I cannot speak for everyone, but when I am watching someone try to close a tough gripper, sometimes I will step to the side or duck down to see the set and close. The point is that I am actively looking from different angles to make sure the set is within the rules and that the other hand is removed before finishing the close. Any judge/witness who takes their job seriously should make an extra effort to get right in there and see the set and close, not stand to the side, and not be afraid to say "I didn't see the proper set, can you do it again?" And if they cant' do it again, not be afraid to fail the certification. Take a page out of your history books here. When world class feats were performed in training, the feat becomes nothing more than a rumor. But when the feat is performed in front of credible, objective witnesses who know what they're looking at, then it becomes an undisputed fact. Video is just icing on the cake. The people who still dispute the fact are nothing but jealous, no-talent nitwits with more time on their hands than brain in their heads. I think there is too much emphasis on getting good video for these things. When it comes to something so trivial as squeezing a gripper, I will take a man's word that he saw someone close it. If he is lying to me, then I will have lost trust in that person but I will not lose any sleep because when you get down to it, we're just talking about grippers and these discussions are getting tiring I agree 100% and if the witness is lying ( which has been done) Then the guy certing is only fooling himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jedd Johnson Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 Who lied? -Jedd- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamidon Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 It is impossible to see the set if it occurs in .1 second. This is not about the honesty of the witness. This is more about the ability to determine the proper set was used. If the camera does not catch it, and it occurs this fast, how can it be verified? I think it would be easier to force the decision to the camera, you can replay it .1 second at a time. This assumes that the set it unblocked from view. The witness can use his own judgment about what he saw, and the “instant replay” to verify his original conclusion. I do not want to open another can of worms, but setting so close to parallel and then closing without pause, makes me wonder if the momentum of the set is helping the close. If the rules allow it fine, if I made the rules I would require the set, pause, remove setting hand and close ( I am not sure that the existing rules do not call for this in a much more subtle way). Hand size then is taken out of the equation (set allowed), the set is more visible, and no issues of momentum remain. This is just my opinion on the topic not a commentary on how I feel about anyone’s close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobsterone Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 If someone, trying to get a certificate that recognises a world class feat of strength, thinks a fraction of a second of a close after a near closed set is worthy then they need their bumps felt. Pick up gripper, set it just so the little finger is over, slowly and powerfully shut the gripper, hold it closed and then slowly open it. For example watch Joe Kinney's tape. Nuff said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Piche Posted April 10, 2004 Author Share Posted April 10, 2004 The purpose of my post it to make things clear going forward and get any kinks out now. And, the engineer in me to analyze things. My point was that it's likey impossible for the witness right there standing over the guy to have the physical ability with the fast set to tell if the parallel handle rule was met. He might as well be a cheerleader during the set. Here's the full video. Now, based on the rules and viewing the video only (without having the STOP frame pictures I made), would you pass this if you were a judge for the MMG2? http://www.cyberpump.com/gallery/album164 Here's the scenario I want to nip in the bud going forward. Guy closes MMG2. Video is posted. People view the video. People start gossiping and such that the close was invalid. Such as: The rules are being bent for so and so. The guy judging it was too close to them and allowed them to skirt the rules. The judge was out of position as seen by the video They cheated the set and got credit. BLAH BLAH BLAH! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FbaLLPlaya_53 Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 After watching the video more than enough times, I noticed it is set at paralell. Once you watch it enough you will notice that. I would give this a pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danegarreau Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 Personally i would not pass it. You can't clearly see when the offhand stops helping the closing hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Vigeant Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 Personally i would not pass it. You can't clearly see when the offhand stops helping the closing hand. Thats why you need a witness that doesn't have his head up his %$#. Most videos will come out like shit. Even the big boys when they(grippers) get harder they won't be able to pause then crush it (they'll lose the set) Unless they have 9'' hands ... I can't wait to fail Robbie on....... i don't know mm4-5? and then send the video and it gets the O.K. ......Video will only show so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Browne Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 What caught my eye, was the frame I was able to capture that clearly showed the gripping hand fingers in a near closed position with the setting hand still aiding or on the handles. I would have judged this to be past parallel Using a sequence of a 1/4 inch movement on a gripper and noting the plane position where the fingers are being bent or closing the finger handle, I noted each position of the closing fingers as they rolled through the move. Comparing this to the vid, I would have disqualified this attempt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Piche Posted April 10, 2004 Author Share Posted April 10, 2004 Thats why you need a witness that doesn't have his head up his %$#. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sybersnott Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 Next is at4:56 Or, .07 seconds from the last picture. http://www.gripboard.com/index.php?act=mod...&cmd=si&img=327 Gripper shut. That last picture the gripper is NOT closed. Anybody can see that. Why?... because there is a dark spot between the hand and the gripper (which shouldn't be there if the gripper were closed). Also you can see the bottom of the handle by itself when it should be up against the other handle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Hansford Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 I would have failed this attempt as well, for the same reason that you cant tell when the set is completed and the closing starts. I think the person shooting the video should be responsible for saying they didnt get a good clean shot as well, cause when videos like this turn up it only starts contraversy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sybersnott Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 I would have failed this attempt as well, for the same reason that you cant tell when the set is completed and the closing starts. Going by the pics alone; still shots taken from video... you get a different perspective. Still shots can reveal things you just might miss watching a video. That being said, IMHO I think the gripper was TOO FAR AWAY from the shot - it needs to be much, MUCH closer. When I do gripper closes on my camcorder, I have to stick the gripper right up against the camera. That way you can see EVERYTHING and there is no doubt whatsoever about the close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoDa Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 Personally i would not pass it. You can't clearly see when the offhand stops helping the closing hand. I agree with you Dane. Just by the video itself I would not pass it either! Good thing we have witnesses. I agree with Snott that the video camera needs to be in closer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMunger Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 That last picture the gripper is NOT closed. Anybody can see that. Why?... because there is a dark spot between the hand and the gripper (which shouldn't be there if the gripper were closed). Also you can see the bottom of the handle by itself when it should be up against the other handle. That's a shadow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Browne Posted April 10, 2004 Share Posted April 10, 2004 Just what is the meat of this thread? To determine if the gripper is closed or not?...or bite the bullet and be aware that your attempts could be determined passed or DQ`d by a good or sloppy video? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Piche Posted April 11, 2004 Author Share Posted April 11, 2004 Just what is the meat of this thread? To determine if the gripper isclosed or not?...or bite the bullet and be aware that your attempts could be determined passed or DQ`d by a good or sloppy video? Read the posts about controversy. You can see it in the responses with this example. Bottom line: set it properly and in proper view in the video without the hand blocking the view of the set. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gripmaster316 Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 Bottom line: set it properly and in proper view in the video without the hand blocking the view of the set. Could not have said it better myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king crusher Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 imo i think the gripper was not closed, at the end you could clearly see him keep trying to close the gripper, and it was not fully closed...also imo i dont think the other hand should ever touch the gripping hand. just my .02 cents Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle102887 Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 From my pause and play pressing while watching the video with the windows media player. I can say that the only problem I can see is that the helping hand does not move out of the view of the camera in enough time to get a good shot. But as far as i can tell the hand was off the gripper before he closed it from parallel. Also if the witness was directly over top of the gripping hand or at an angle that was almost over top then this would have been clearly visible. And kingkrusher he did close the gripper, he was not fighting to close it he was fighting to keep it closed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.