Frankly I have been there done that before. None of the issues that comprise the latest rumor fodder are new ones and since my opinions haven't changed I am taking the noble slacker's path in responding to any and every query as to what I think of this latest brouhaha.
Consider the links to be like menu options.
What does Baca think of shifting ROF? See Inside Merger Talk & Rumorology. (2011)
Why does Baca hold the ROF opinion he holds? See Movement vs ROF. (2010)
When it comes to minimizing sideline coaching on the Pro field(s) I don't much care one way or the other. I don't find it to be the bane of our existence nor do I think it's an indispensable feature. It will in some circumstances force teams to rethink how they intend to protect their snake leads.
And while there is no indication that restricted paint is of any concern a rumor or two mentioned the subject so here is what Baca thinks of restricted paint. See The raehl Solution. (2012)
If those aren't sufficient I have some numbers for you to consider.
A gun shooting 12.5 bps empties a 180 round loader in 14.4 seconds.
A gun shooting 10 bps empties a 180 round loader in 18 seconds.
At 300 fps it takes a paintball approximately .5 seconds to travel the length of a Race To field end-to-end.
At 300 fps a gun shooting 12.5 bps will have a gap of 24 feet between shots.
At 300 fps a gun shooting 10 bps will have a gap of 30 feet between shots.
On the dead sprint a player capable of running a 5 second forty yard dash moves 2.4 feet every tenth of a second.
On the dead sprint a player capable of running a 6 second forty yard dash moves 2 feet every tenth of a second.
On the dead sprint a player capable of running a 7 second forty yard dash moves 1.7 feet every tenth of a second.
Keep in mind that 40 yd. dash times tend to be inherently unreliable methodologically. Practical experience with pro team tryouts suggests the average tends to be between 6 and 7 seconds. (On grass, wearing cleats and pack while carrying a gun.)
Do these numbers seem to confirm your opinion or press you to reconsider?
Saturday, December 14, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
I like how you brought the math into this…
Assume 6 second forty runner needs to cover a 20 foot gap. That should take according to the values provided, 1 second. (20 feet/2 feet = 10, 10*.1 =1)
Now lets say the guy holding the lane picks a spot and shoots only that spot during the entire run. At 10 bps it's 1 ball every .1 seconds and at 12.5 bps it's 1 ball every 0.08 seconds. If I start shooting the end of the 20 foot gap at the moment Baca (6 second 40) takes off, depending on how far away I am…oh wait this is getting complicated!
Point? 10 bps is still going to kill people, but less likely then 12.5 bps at long ranges…i.e. off the break. Kind of ties in nicely to the lack of a back center bunker concept the PSP followed this year. The league removes back center bunkers, which I argue provide a spot for the back players of old to lane and kill. It's easier to lane someone OTB from a back center bunker then when I have to run 15 feet sideways and do it (all other things equal).
Now we take away another asset the laner has at long range…accuracy by volume. I think once games get settled in, people can still hold lanes at 10 bps and it could in theory create a slow point.
I see where you are heading with the math, but I think this will only matter more off the break then in mid-game when players are closer to each other.
All that two cents being provided…why this urge to have fast games? Why not have a 20 minute match race to…most points after 20 minutes? I agree with those who say the format slows the game down because teams will be fearful of dropping too many points or later in the game doing something "crazy" because that would mean the other team get's the match point. What spurred this? It's the best way to have action? Is that what we want action? Is that what viewers want…action? I mean honestly - what's the real problem we're trying to solve here????
So yes, more people will be alive off the break and the 5 on 5 paintball that ensues will be slower, ha!
How does football address the issue of boredom from two teams basically punting back and forth via the rules? They don't right? Basically teams slog it out back and forth u til someone eventually scores. But why doesn't this lead in a lot of ties or low scoring games?
Because they have different ways to score points.
What should the x all equivalent of a field goal, extra point, touch down and 2pt conversion be?
Yes, I dismiss your "Paintball I'd not like xyz" out of hand. We'd be foolish not to consider options and get creative applying different concepts.
Football should be unbearably boring. Huge guys basically pushing into each other from the snap. Yet it works because they have distinctive plays and multiple ways to score (and even deal with the fact that you can't score without giving the other team a free touchdown... Ie we throw in the towel and they punt, which isn't even close to just handing out a free point).
Some thoughts I was considering... Paintball needs to get more creative. Think outside the box. Not tinker with the rules in front of us as if that will make the big difference in the game.
To the above poster's point...and to where I was leading...change the objective of the match to alter tactics. If Dynasty can do what they did at MAO well shit - you're the ones that said you can win 1-0. We should do a FMEA on the psp race to format!
Sigh. The definition of laning is *not* the ability to point your gun at one spot across the field and kill anyone that runs near it...
Well, that depends on the field layout... sometimes you only have one spot to shoot, because the rest of the run is blocked out.
But yes, as a matter of principle, you are right... the best laners out there hit a corner runner so much that he stops running halfway there, if the entire run is clear of obstacles blocking you out.
Post a Comment