View Full Version : how harder are hyper snapu swipes compared to regular ones?
Boymano
Dec-18-08, 04:08 PM
topic title
pete_man_man
Dec-18-08, 04:10 PM
ask this guy
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=vYVMyKUcCYQ
pete_man_man
Dec-18-08, 04:11 PM
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=kqFIGmC8fug&feature=related
Boymano
Dec-18-08, 04:12 PM
oh dam that must have hurt omg i think he hurt himself cause his legs werent strong enough. if he would have done some leg curls or lunges his legs would be hella strong and he could do even more tricks
pete_man_man
Dec-18-08, 04:13 PM
oh dam that must have hurt omg i think he hurt himself cause his legs werent strong enough. if he would have done some leg curls or lunges his legs would be hella strong and he could do even more tricks
......lol
shengoikee
Dec-18-08, 04:18 PM
honestly, i don't think hyper snapu even looks cool. people will probably disagree.
worst idea to try one....
pete_man_man
Dec-18-08, 04:19 PM
if you could snapu, you would know how much harder it is to hyper it i guess
Skilzat85X
Dec-18-08, 04:19 PM
They really don't look that good actually haha. Hyper doubles and stuff look good, but Hyper Snapus...not so much. They're more impressive than regular Snapus regardless, of course.
It's not worth it man!
Megabuster
Dec-18-08, 04:20 PM
oh dam that must have hurt omg i think he hurt himself cause his legs werent strong enough. if he would have done some leg curls or lunges his legs would be hella strong and he could do even more tricks
^^I assume that makes you the man of steel? I'm pretty sure Scalco was well conditioned. Let's see if he happens to pop up in here.
shengoikee
Dec-18-08, 04:20 PM
if you could snapu your name would be steve terada because he's the only one who does legitimate ones lolololol
kidding. but seriously, his is way awesome.
Skilzat85X
Dec-18-08, 04:28 PM
Also on the subject of injury and such, yes Scalco was extremely well conditioned, that much is obvious.
But all the conditioning in the world doesn't mean crap when you land at awkward angles and force pressure onto joints or limbs in unnatural positions.
Just because a bridge can support all the traffic running over it for years on end doesn't mean a bomb can't blow it to bits haha. And in the same respect, just because a bomb can blow it the nigg up doesn't mean it wasn't structurally sound and strong to begin with.
BrandonLenz
Dec-18-08, 04:50 PM
Also on the subject of injury and such, yes Scalco was extremely well conditioned, that much is obvious.
But all the conditioning in the world doesn't mean crap when you land at awkward angles and force pressure onto joints or limbs in unnatural positions.
Just because a bridge can support all the traffic running over it for years on end doesn't mean a bomb can't blow it to bits haha. And in the same respect, just because a bomb can blow it the nigg up doesn't mean it wasn't structurally sound and strong to begin with.
Actually this is all about relativity. Relative to cars and humans and such, the bridge, in this case, was structurally sound. Relative to the power of a bomb, which the bridge was not meant to withstand, the bridge is not structurally sound.
Einstein hypothesized that if light is not moving it is non exhistant. He then wondered, if one was to ride on a beam of light, next to another, relative to you, the one next to you would not be moving, and thus is not there. This means that something exhists and does not exhist at the same time. To the person stnading still this beam of light exhists, to the person riding the other beam of light it does not. This is as perplexing as it is wonderful.
I often ponder things :punched:.
Tricking.
pete_man_man
Dec-18-08, 04:55 PM
Actually this is all about relativity. Relative to cars and humans and such, the bridge, in this case, was structurally sound. Relative to the power of a bomb, which the bridge was not meant to withstand, the bridge is not structurally sound.
Einstein hypothesized that if light is not moving it is non exhistant. He then wondered, if one was to ride on a beam of light, next to another, relative to you, the one next to you would not be moving, and thus is not there. This means that something exhists and does not exhist at the same time. To the person stnading still this beam of light exhists, to the person riding the other beam of light it does not. This is as perplexing as it is wonderful.
I often ponder things :punched:.
Tricking.
is that the entire theory of relativity??
if it is... that's fuckin simple!!
Skilzat85X
Dec-18-08, 04:57 PM
Actually this is all about relativity. Relative to cars and humans and such, the bridge, in this case, was structurally sound. Relative to the power of a bomb, which the bridge was not meant to withstand, the bridge is not structurally sound.
Ummm yes I know, hehe, and this was the exact point my illustration was making. :swashy:
EDIT: And that isn't the entire Theory of Relativity btw (Pete).
pete_man_man
Dec-18-08, 05:00 PM
Ummm yes I know, hehe, and this was the exact point my illustration was making. :swashy:
EDIT: And that isn't the entire Theory of Relativity btw (Pete).
BLAST!!!!!!!!!!!
BrandonLenz
Dec-18-08, 05:03 PM
is that the entire theory of relativity??
if it is... that's fuckin simple!!
no of course not. it just one little part
BrandonLenz
Dec-18-08, 05:04 PM
Ummm yes I know, hehe, and this was the exact point my illustration was making. :swashy:
EDIT: And that isn't the entire Theory of Relativity btw (Pete).
I had hoped that you would appreciate that my entire post there was drenched in sarcasm :wink:
pete_man_man
Dec-18-08, 05:04 PM
no of course not. it just one little part
bllllleeeeuuuurrrggghhhhh!!!!!!!!
Hyourinmaru
Dec-18-08, 05:06 PM
not worth going there, just fucks up your knees...
pete_man_man
Dec-18-08, 05:07 PM
on topic... i want to never try hypersnapus!!
Siphin
Dec-18-08, 05:22 PM
if u can snapu be happy then maybe try to round it or swing it thru hyper = death
Origional
Dec-18-08, 08:31 PM
Personally, I think they are super sexy and the fact that they are so fucking hard and cause injuries make the landed ones better. I am the minority.
TKD_Andy
Dec-19-08, 02:50 AM
its a cool trick, however its death for your knees.
and lol@thread starter for saying scalco has weak legs
eddy wang
Dec-19-08, 03:04 AM
I think if he it was possible to him get more height he possibily would land it correctly, with less pressure on the knees.
However, its so damn hard to perform snapus, that i can't even think about hyper so easly.
Snapuswipeknife!
If somebody lands one it'll probably be the last trick they do, since they'll be on crutches for the rest of their life or something, haha.
eddy wang
Dec-19-08, 03:22 AM
Snapuswipeknife!
If somebody lands one it'll probably be the last trick they do, since they'll be on crutches for the rest of their life or something, haha.
Yeah, there was a time i though it would be possible, now i just don't have so sure, someone might fuck himself up.
pete_man_man
Dec-31-08, 03:43 PM
i love you eddy warng
Snapu compared to hyper snapu is considerably easier.
if you are thinking about trying it...don't. It has almost ruined the tricking "career" of 3 tricksters. If you are dumb enough to really train for it then be my guest and try it. But when you blow your knee to fuck don't come to us.
peterh
Dec-31-08, 08:44 PM
GAAAAAAAAAAAH
no fuck hyper snapus!
i was there when scalco did that, and fuck no no no no no.
that shit is nothing but a knee wrecker.
fuck you
hyper snapu
you bastard
Shaolin.dk
Dec-31-08, 09:11 PM
is hyper cheat 7 twist as risky as hyper snapu for ur knee?
TKDtrickster
Dec-31-08, 09:40 PM
honestly, i don't think hyper snapu even looks cool. people will probably disagree.
worst idea to try one....
agreed. needs a hook off it.
honestly, i don't think hyper snapu even looks cool. people will probably disagree.
worst idea to try one....
I really agree. It seems like the best way to break your knee in half, and it doesn't even look any cooler than a normal snapuswipe.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.