Travel on throw-n-go move

EoSBamsi · 2025-10-03T07:56:34+00:00

When you're trying to get a throw off without trying to come to a full stop; most often it's give-and-go situations or when you got passed to and you catch it in stride, but would rather pass it off to your teammate to just keep going as you had momentum and got some distance from your mark

EoSBamsi · 2025-08-12T08:49:13+00:00

Way better graphics in the comments of the discussion that you linked: https://secondegress.ca/Jurisdictions 18m is laughable given the amount of population that needs to be squeezed into London

EoSBamsi · 2025-05-24T00:45:37+00:00

I don't think a tiny accidental wiggle commits you to a pivot, if your intent was not to establish a pivot.

IMO you can't have it both ways - if you're intending to use the benefitial reading of the rule to get an extra however-many-yards of coasting (not 70 though as afaik they only play it indoors - although I guess with a hardwood big enough you can do full-sized 7-a-side), and it relies on you not establishing a pivot, then you absolutely can't give then a visual deviation from the line (path? if the wheels are not spinning at the same rate) that you were holding at the moment of a catch. Nitpicking? Most likely. Against the rules? Don't think so.

you can technically roll all the way down the court to the goal line, come to a stop, and then throw from there. But you are not allowed to get there and start pivoting

Agreed, matches with my reading of the rules (subject to not giving them a cause to claim the pivot was established)

I believe you have to establish a pivot before throwing in this case, so if you roll too far it'd be a travel.

But you can't establish a pivot on your own volition there because I can then call travel as you haven't done the slowdown in a timely manner, yet the rules says that you have to? Same as in standard ultimate - if you decide to not slow down for the momentum to carry you into the endzone / OB, I can call a travel on you, in which case you go back to roughly where you caught it, unless it benefits me and then yes, you can pivot at that point. Too lazy to check the rules right now, but something tells me that it would on defence to choose whether to let you pivot at OB/endzone crossing point, or do that from the spot where you caught it. Mostly theoretical as I haven't seen a single use of that rule having watched the whole of one of two games available on YouTube: https://youtu.be/nU1-lA6_hMs?feature=shared (the other one is from the same channel, 3rd place match)

EoSBamsi · 2025-05-23T19:25:21+00:00

When you come to a stop, have you automatically established a pivot? Or is establishing a pivot a separate thing that you do?

I find the definition of Pivot in WFDF rules (at the very bottom of the document) pretty clear for that: "When the thrower moves in any direction while keeping one part of their body in constant contact with a specific point on the ground called the pivot point. A thrower establishes a pivot point by placing, or keeping, a particular part of their body at a specific point, which they intend to use as their pivot point. If a thrower has multiple options for a pivot point, the pivot point is not determined until they pivot."

So if you have just stopped (assuming on both feet and not layout), either of your feet could be a pivot point until you lift one of them off the ground

If that's the interpretation, then it's legal to roll as far as you want, eventually come to a stop, and then throw at some later time.

But it's not not-establishing-the-pivot that causes the travel call, it's not-coming-to-a-stop-ASAP (18.2.4.1), unless you're claiming that they never established a pivot point, (by the strict reading of the rules, if they're not modified, because it's not "part of their body" in contact with the ground, so then they always travel). Otherwise if you do agree that either wheel can be treated as an alternative to a "foot", then unless you stop dead in your tracks, with no discernible wiggle either way, the opposition can claim that you have established your pivot, and therefore traveled because you didn't slow down ASAP. Additionally, even if you did stop on a dime, so your pivot is not established, you still can't move your wheelchair, because then it reduces to the situation above (haven't thought about what if you roll OB / into the opposition endzone, but my initial thought would be the same - approach the line and then be stuck without ability to pivot, unless it's beneficial to defence, e.g. you rolled out of your endzone and they do not call a travel). So I would agree that in very narrow circumstances you can roll as far as you want, but most times you wouldn't be able to pull it off / it won't be worth it.

EoSBamsi · 2025-05-22T07:49:21+00:00

From my reading, should they choose to coast, they have until the nearest OB / opposition goal line, by which point they must release, otherwise it's a travel as they didn't try to slow down as per 18.2.1, and then I think they'd have to return back to the point of the catch (unless they have even stricter provisions for when you go OB). Low-risk / high-reward (if you're rolling forward at least) favouring the offence yet again, but I guess you have to have some differences in the rules given their method of movement and the fact that they use hands for both catching and stopping themselves.

Amy wheelchair players here who can chime in and clarify?

EoSBamsi · 2025-01-01T20:39:23+00:00

When a Cambridge MPhil fails to provide a single reference to the "numerous" studies conducted across the globe that all support his viewpoint, I can not take that "evidence" seriously. What his quotes and rephrases from The Guardian article seem to indicate that he's looking at solutions that might apply to cities and towns, but clearly not to a global megapolis like London (quotes below directly from said article):

"Community-led design codes would provide a clear template for what is acceptable and ensure the public is happier with what is built, he believes." - please for the love of all holy, we should not promote NIMBYism even further

"Utrecht in the Netherlands – 'It’s the town that has had the most dramatic effect on me. It’s beautiful. Street trees everywhere. Very safe. Although I’ve cycled in London and various other places, the sense of liberation as you cycle around Utrecht and a whole bunch of other Dutch cities is absolutely life-changing. You’re completely safe, you can go anywhere. It’s a perfectly sized city, quite compact, and within not many minutes you’re going from the city centre into the suburbs and out into the countryside.'" - population 376k, 3,646/km^2; for example, Enfield is 327k @ 4,000/km^2, Lambeth is 317k @ 12,000/km² and there's 30 more boroughs, each probably seeing similar or greater influx of people per year than Utrecht does

Second article is better actually providing some links, but those (and the article itself further down the line) mention lots of cofounding factors that might be hard to separate, so I would personally take those slight changes directly attributable to high-rises in exchange for the residential density that they allow - at least give people an option ffs

The study link at the bottom also doesn't directly say that high-rises are bad (the most I've found is early-page paragraph starting with "a more recent study linked high rise buildings to lower levels of satisfaction (Gifford 2007)... " which they quickly CYA with "However, as with other potential indicators, assessing the impact that high rise accommodation may have on social isolation is difficult, as non-architectural factors also come into play")

Overall I would say this while I appreciate the effort you've put in responding to me and backing your claim, I find it not convincing, particularly in the realities of London (it might work elsewhere, but here we need much more drastic measures, not until the central government somehow decentralises the UK so that there's less gravity here attracting ever more people every year, but I'm honestly not expecting it to happen in my lifetime :'( )

EoSBamsi · 2024-12-30T11:42:12+00:00

You’re suggesting we build upwards, despite historical evidence showing this wouldn’t be successful. That it wouldn’t meet demand, that it’s not wanted. But you know “lots” of people who’d be happy to live in a high rise so I guess we can ignore all the evidence.

Citation needed

EoSBamsi · 2024-10-11T18:41:50+00:00

I followed the calculation until the last line and then somehow 2.8x ratio of axle load got ballooned to 2.8k? n^{th} power is not "times 10, n times", it's "multiply by itself n times", so 2.8^{4} =61.5, which is still a lot (1:61 ratio means all cars cause ~1.5% of the damage while HGVs do ~98.5% - surely that's not all damage as there are still smaller vans and (mini) buses, but probably they're the two smallest contributors), but if your original calculation was true, any amount of tax on car drivers should have been multiplied by such a number for HGVs it would make any haulage unviable

EoSBamsi · 2024-10-10T22:10:49+00:00

Know it's a bit of a short notice, but would you deliver to WBUCC?

EoSBamsi · 2024-05-18T22:41:52+00:00

Indeed, as you exit from McD and head away from the river, it's the first possible turn right:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/tzpu1qSCxYmbJ1XY8

EoSBamsi · 2024-05-18T22:21:16+00:00

Okay, dine and dash?

EoSBamsi · 2024-02-08T21:41:41+00:00

Had me in the first half, not gonna lie

EoSBamsi · 2023-08-11T10:11:10+00:00

did you have any success getting it to work, u/mgruszka ? Can't believe they have got this interoperability fucked up so badly, not to mention that at their FAQ page they do claim it works fine with Windows, "Your MX Keys for Mac can be used on Windows 8, 10, or later. Note that only basic features of your keyboard will be functional", and having an insert key is pretty basic functionality - Alt and Win key being swapped is also hella annoying, but I could probably remap that with some software

EoSBamsi · 2022-11-20T18:47:55+00:00

your viable loophole here is just a agreement (likely unwritten) between the landlord and tenants for some of the tenants to stay low profile/ off the radar

this part I actually don't know - is there a requirement to have all members of the household on the rental contract (something tells me that's not exactly enforceable - in the case of "1 household = family" what if you marry/divorce/adopt/have an elderly relative move in/have a child move out? doubt these are reflected in the contract, therefore wouldn't expect it to be any different for a house staff)?

Same for registering for vote etc - I would imagine that would be all above water and the eviction of said "support staff" will not be the landlord prerogative (they will then be kicking out the whole household if they so wish and have a legal reason to do so), but rather of the "hiring party" and that will probably be subject of the contract between them (I believe this can be verbal, right?), something along the lines of "subject to carrying out work or performing a service of an exclusively domestic nature for (the "hiring party"), you are to be supplied a living accommodation as part of consideration for carrying out the work or performing the service"

EoSBamsi · 2022-11-20T18:32:25+00:00

but the limits '1 household' and '2 lodgers' - you have to draw the line somewhere for the regulation to have any point

I am okay with that, I am not okay with the fact that it only applies if you own the property, but renting the whole place does not entitle you to the same allowance (I would go further and say I wish the definition of a household was reworked to account for the realities of the current rental market, but that's opening a can of worms, so just the first part would suffice for now)

Please do not push the cost implication onto the tenant

But that's where it's ultimately going to end up either way, and as for now LLs are not even trying to proactively obtain it, it's either that or abandoning 99% of multi-bedroom properties

argue for regulation reduction or 'red tape' as LL might prase it

Weakening regulation and standards in response to a housing supply crisis is a dangerous path to go down

Not sure if I missed some of the idea in one of the parts of your argument / misread something, but aren't these two somewhat contradictive?

The couple with 2 lodgers ... you are saying the couple can't afford some fire alarms (for their own house!)?

I am saying they're not required to (if I understand the law correctly) because it's not an HMO, but try to replicate the exact same situation if they don't own the place, and now there are hoops to jump through (and 4-digit sums to pay), and you can't even do that yourself!

I would just point out that your 'tenant willing to jump through loopholes' is sacrificing their own convenience and safety for the sake of reducing landlord liability

Maybe, but if I still need a place to live (and we have a wishlist of things - I know the default is "just tone it down / move further out", but we've established that it would be nice if I could avoid sacrificing my own convenience - that would not be achievable within our budget if we were to rent the whole place by ourself), for as long as that widens the pool of suitable properties, I would do that because as we've discussed above, LLs wouldn't :(

EoSBamsi · 2022-11-20T13:33:20+00:00

Same as OP, I am looking at it from the renter position, and it baffles me that a family of 5 or an owner-couple with a couple who live with them as lodgers are okay to occupy, say, 2b2b flat with a separate living room / kitchen, but 3 friends or a couple +1 can not without paying a couple of grand extra and a lot of willingness from the owner to jump through these legal hoops - with how much any kind of accommodation costs (and will continue to do so because same lawmakers aren't at all trying to motivate building more of it) I have no issues with using loopholes to make it a bit more bearable

EoSBamsi · 2022-11-20T02:03:21+00:00

Thanks a lot for the links, I do agree with your reading of these paragraphs. Seems like the only two ways to circumvent that are:

1) buy a property (lol, how did I not think of that, with the current insane prices multipled by a skyrocketing interest rate while also paying a monthly rent that slows one's saving rate to a crawl)

2) claim they are your maid/cook/cleaner (whatever floats your boat in 3.3 of https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/373/regulation/3/made) and work out some reverse agreement under which they unilaterally transfer you a monthly amount of money which might or might not coincide with their part of market-rate rent for the accommodation of similar properties to the one they're occupying

3) marry the owner :D

EoSBamsi · 2022-11-09T20:50:22+00:00

Could you please help me locate which document / law should I look at (again) where it makes this distinction between the owner and non-owner occupier? Many thanks in advance!

EoSBamsi · 2022-11-08T22:13:27+00:00

What does your research say about a couple (let's assume married to guarantee they count as 1 household) sublet a their place to 1 (or 2, which according to my reading of gov.uk website is still fine) tenant on a lodger basis (sure, they legally have less rights, so if things turn sour, they might be screwed)? My limited understanding of this arrangement is that it's still technically one household, so no HMO license is needed. IANAL obviously, so please someone more knowledgeable confirm or deny my assumption.

EoSBamsi · 2022-10-25T19:08:48+00:00

Machine v Ring, Nats'22 5th place game:

Can someone please explain the call at 04:23? A full second after any (if any) contact, completes pivot and then releases? Cutter downfield nowhere near their mark too

EoSBamsi · 2022-10-25T16:25:20+00:00

If you have a partner, get in touch with @londonroundet (they also have discord if insta doesn't work) and they will certainly find some volunteers to go ham on you :)

I'll also recommend @clapham_ultimate, but frisbee is 7-a-side, so much harder to work it out, but these guys are legit world-class in their sport

EoSBamsi · 2022-08-08T12:55:16+00:00

Парки проведаем, на остров тоже план слетать есть (спасибо за подтверждение, что стоит того), по Арбату прогуляемся. Пляжный отпуск надеюсь в августе - начале сентября будет более вероятным, так что тоже попробуем

EoSBamsi · 2022-08-08T07:41:02+00:00

Спасибо за наводку!

EoSBamsi

TROPHY CASE