So i've been playing for a bit now and i can do spinners borderline pass, however when i spin it goes everywhere and this is the problem. i want to learn how to spin in small circles but i'm not improving at it.
I want to play as well as someone like Elysion or Happystick but im not getting there just by wanting itXGuiltySinX wrote:
i want to learn how to spin in small circles but i'm not improving at it.
Sure it's better to try making circles as round as possible, but in the end even that doesn't matter, the only thing that does is the number below the spinner, and some people can reach 470 by doing ovals... so yeacheezstik wrote:
Technique > speed, when you can consistently spin circles as perfectly round as possible, and not ovals / hexagons / squares / diamonds / triangles or whatever, then you can build up speed and maintain it.
Objectively speaking, a perfectly round circle is the most efficient shape to spin, as it is even and the exactly the same distribution all the way throughout, making it cover the least possible area. Those people could probably spin faster if they span in actual circles, but then again what's the point if you can already spin 470 I guess, but for us mere mortal non 470 spinners, circles are the way to go.GoldenWolf wrote:
Sure it's better to try making circles as round as possible, but in the end even that doesn't matter, the only thing that does is the number below the spinner, and some people can reach 470 by doing ovals... so yeacheezstik wrote:
Technique > speed, when you can consistently spin circles as perfectly round as possible, and not ovals / hexagons / squares / diamonds / triangles or whatever, then you can build up speed and maintain it.
What's the average you reckon? Cos I spin 350-400 (probably around 350~370 stable) and still get rekt in multiplayer when SS'ing.Blanky wrote:
And here I am spinning a max of 360 rpm.
Turns out 360 rpm isn't below average.
Not even true. There is no "most efficient" shape. Just because a circle has the least perimeter to radius ratio doesn't mean that it's the fastest possible way to spin. What shape you are) most efficient at depends on what grip you use, whether you use your fingers, wrist or a combination of both etc. I imagine that your fingers can retract/extend at a much higher speed than your wrist can move horizontally which would result in an oval shape.cheezstik wrote:
Objectively speaking, a perfectly round circle is the most efficient shape to spin, as it is even and the exactly the same distribution all the way throughout, making it cover the least possible area. Those people could probably spin faster if they span in actual circles, but then again what's the point if you can already spin 470 I guess, but for us mere mortal non 470 spinners, circles are the way to go.
If you had to run across a field as fast as possible, would it be faster to go in a completely straight line, or go in zig zags? You might have some fucked up leg problem and for some reason run faster in zig zags than you could in a straight line, but if you could theoretically run both in a straight line and in zig zags at infinite miles per hour, you would clear the field faster running in a straight line.Saphirshroom wrote:
Not even true. There is no "most efficient" shape. Just because a circle has the least perimeter to radius ratio doesn't mean that it's the fastest possible way to spin. What shape you are) most efficient at depends on what grip you use, whether you use your fingers, wrist or a combination of both etc. I imagine that your fingers can retract/extend at a much higher speed than your wrist can move horizontally which would result in an oval shape.cheezstik wrote:
Objectively speaking, a perfectly round circle is the most efficient shape to spin, as it is even and the exactly the same distribution all the way throughout, making it cover the least possible area. Those people could probably spin faster if they span in actual circles, but then again what's the point if you can already spin 470 I guess, but for us mere mortal non 470 spinners, circles are the way to go.
Circle is probably the best for being able to hit notes after the spinner but most of the time you're really close to the center anyway so you shouldn't miss.
The point I was making is that either the horizontal or the vertical movement of your pen/mouse is faster due to human anatomy which you can't change. The circle requires both to be equally fast and therefore either the vertical or the horizontal has the potential to be faster. Of course the rpm of both circle and oval is the same but there's just no point going for a perfect circle - except that a perfect circle looks (and is) a whole lot more skillful, in my opinion.cheezstik wrote:
Saphirshroom wrote:
If you had to run across a field as fast as possible, would it be faster to go in a completely straight line, or go in zig zags? You might have some fucked up leg problem and for some reason run faster in zig zags than you could in a straight line, but if you could theoretically run both in a straight line and in zig zags at infinite miles per hour, you would clear the field faster running in a straight line.
Huehue, you got me there, let's just say you could run at exactly 10 miles per hour then, or any unit larger than 0 and smaller than infinite, you would clear the field faster running straight.Saphirshroom wrote:
The point I was making is that either the horizontal or the vertical movement of your pen/mouse is faster due to human anatomy which you can't change. The circle requires both to be equally fast and therefore either the vertical or the horizontal has the potential to be faster. Of course the rpm of both circle and oval is the same but there's just no point going for a perfect circle - except that a perfect circle looks (and is) a whole lot more skillful, in my opinion.
Also, it will take you no time at all to run across a field at infinite miles per hour, no matter whether you walk straight, zig zags or to and fro.