#but quirkier

[shurple]

fuck zodiac signs if you were a cure what color would you be

[hunny-pp]

this is just another "i can draw whatever i want" power trip for me

[liquidstar]

this is not a comprehensive list

[tasticbastard]

i know there are other posts that are articulating this same thing but man i really feel like we don’t give ray enough credit for playing a huge part in mcr being so technically impressive. like yes gerard has the strong vision, charisma, and intuition that defines a large part of the ethos of mcr, but it all comes down to his creative relationship with ray toro. ray is able to go along with gerard’s direction so well and interpret it through his obsessive relationship with music. in lotms they literally refer to ray as “a man obsessed” where he’s constantly working on the production of the music. we see multiple clips of him sitting at his laptop meticulously mulling over tracks. the story about him obsessively listening to the black parade tracks in his car until it was perfect. him taking typing classes to improve his dexterity and his constant pursuit to mastering his instrument despite dedicating his life playing it for over twenty years. ray toro’s brilliant musicianship plays a HUGE part in what sets mcr apart from all the other emo bands.

[deusvervewrites]

Quirker: Invisible catgirl Hagakure that can fold people like chairs does sound pretty great.

Quirker + Hagakure for All: Since she would already have a strength quirk before getting ofa, the “i’m just naturally this strong” bit would also be (relatively) accurate here.

Absolutely shredded

[steakout-05]

saw this new image uploaded to the JJ wiki in the JJ2 Demo article and oh my god i love this character select screen i'm going to hug all of them

it's always great to see my two favourite boys get some new art of them, and Betty looks SO COOL with her angel wings!! look at her go!!!

[cant-get-enough-btr-forever]

[karmacat107]

this one goes out to my 14 year old self

[batsplat]

right, by popular demand (a request from @washerdryer), I'm following up this post and just giving a few more details for what you can watch out for to start distinguishing tennis players in your head. how to differentiate the hoards, basically - what makes each tennis player unique. so I've split this up in three basic levels: the numbers, the units, and the shapes

the numbers

so, let's just simplify tennis playstyles as much as it is possible to simplify them, and say we have two types of players: the offensive ones and the defensive ones. the bashers and the pushers. one wants to finish the points on their own racquet, the other one just wants to get the ball back often enough. winning a tennis point is about getting the ball into the court one more time than your opponent. what this means is you can win a point either by putting the ball into a position the opponent can't get it back from, or by waiting until your opponent makes a mistake

when tennis points are coded for purposes of generating stats, point finishes can fall into one of three basic categories:

winner: a ball you hit into the court that the opponent's racquet does not touch, to cleanly win you the point (also includes aces)

unforced errors: a ball you hit that does not make it to your opponent's court, when you could have been expected to make that ball (also includes double faults)

forced errors: a ball you hit that does not make it to your opponent's court, when you have been put under enough duress to 'force' the error

now, you may be wondering how we distinguish between unforced and forced errors, which... it's complicated... it's basically a question of time. if the player had time to reach the ball, if they were in a position on the court where they could hit that ball within a relatively comfortable hitting zone, if they were in a neutral or an offensive position rather than a defensive one, then it's unforced. obviously, this isn't an objective measure, and sometimes whoever is logging in the points is like... either WAY too harsh or far far too generous.... but as a general metric, it's not the worst place to start. now, typically we only get numbers of winners and unforced errors (unless it's a fan-charted match, which we'll get to in a sec), but obviously you can infer the number of forced errors at least. even these basic stats aren't a bad starting point. if someone is playing offensively and taking more risk, it would logically follow that their counts of winners and unforced errors are both higher than for someone playing defensively, right?

let's bring in two players I thought of off the top of my head, and luckily they did not disappoint me here. kasatkina on the left and ostapenko on the right at wimbledon 2021 (this is from flashscore btw):

in the end, penko won this three set match. she won somewhat more points than her opponents - and outperformed her opponent in both service points and return points. what else can these numbers tell us?

well, first of all, penko managed to hit 48 winners vs dasha's *pinches nose* 11. so she tended to play more offensively, or was certainly more effective in doing so. on the flip side, penko hit 48 unforced errors to dasha's 24 - her high risk style inevitably generated more errors than dasha's low risk approach. obviously, in this case that approach took her to victory, despite finishing on double the amount of unforced errors as her opponent. sometimes, the difference between winners and unforced errors is treated as some kind of brute force measure of a match's 'quality' which... I don't love, but of course it's generally a good thing if you're clocking in more winners than unforced errors. dasha ends on (-13) and penko ends on (0), and penko ended up winning the match

what else can we take from this? well, penko came to the net more - and tended to have a very good success rate there. this is a super super rough metric, but I generally feel you want about two thirds success at the net at least, since more often than not you're approaching the net when you're on the offensive and should be winning points. so, y'know, 13 isn't a crazy amount of total net points but it's still fundamentally a job well done. some players don't approach the net at all - and of course it's also reflective of the fact dasha generally wasn't getting herself into positions during the match where she could get to the net. given penko's playstyle, most points will have be conducted on her racquet, where either she bullies around dasha to make an error or she makes an error herself. she's not giving dasha the time to construct rallies in a way that would let dasha gradually navigate herself to the net

and then, of course, there's the most glaring numbers of them all: the serve/return numbers. *pinches nose again* okay. so obviously, the serve is supposed to be a weapon, and especially on grass it is common enough to see 80%, 90% of service points won (if more so on the men's side). these two icons don't believe in that kind of thing, and have even managed to win more points on return than on serve on the most serve-friendly surface. given dasha's impressive returning and her very not impressive serving, I'm guessing this was mainly her fault. there's also a lot of people who will conflate a lot of breaks of serve with a match being 'bad', but those people lack taste. nobody likes a servebot

now, we can add more numbers into the equation. and yes, this is a lot of numbers, but it's all actually quite straightforward, don't run away, we're not going through all of them. this is from ryba vs krej, the wimbledon semi we just had, and is submitted as part of the volunteer-driven match charting project at tennis abstract. what you're seeing are elena's shot types:

so. what you're seeing here is every single shot rybakina hit in that match, and what the result of each and every single one of them was. rybakina hit 257 total shots - of them, 32% ended the point in some way. of those 32%, you get a further breakdown between winners, 11%, forced errors, 8%, and unforced errors, 15%. she hits 133 on the forehand side, and 124 on the backhand - and she was more likely to finish a point on the forehand side than on the backhand side. this is what we would EXPECT to see: for 99% of players, the forehand is a bigger weapon than the backhand. that doesn't mean the forehand is better, and it is often more liable to generating errors, but you can hit the ball harder on that side. the numbers here beyond that are actually a bit quirky... unsurprisingly, rybs was hitting more forehand winners than backhand winners, but in terms of errors the big disparity was in the forced errors tally. now, honestly I don't remember this match enough so this may be bullshit - but just looking at the numbers, my initial guess is that rybs was being forced to run into the forehand corner a lot and krej was extracting errors that way

there's a lot of other details you CAN look at here, but also ryba makes it easy for us by conducting most of her shots from the baseline. 'gs' here stands for 'groundstrokes' so... literally any shot that hits the ground first. she barely went to the net, she wasn't doing much slicing or dropshotting. (I notice the coder made one of her forehand dropshots a forced error, which... I can kinda see how that happens, but to me almost all dropshots are unforced.) some normal volleys, some 'swinging' volleys - also called topspin volleys, which basically looks like your normal groundstroke but without the bit where it touches the ground first

let's quickly bring in what krej was doing:

so, only 23% of shots are point ending, which is what you'd broadly expect - ryba is one of the players with the biggest firepower so she will generally be doing more point ending on her racquet. similarly to ryba, krej has a slight skew to the forehand side, and also has a strong skew towards staying at the baseline. the main thing I'm a teensy bit curious about is how krej ended up with 9 lobs and ryba with only one smash because like?? rybakina is very tall?? but also krej is the prime moonballer on tour, so if that was correctly coded then well done to her lol. the only other thing I wanted to point out is the kind of quirk you can spot through these numbers - krej is one of the big users of the forehand slice in the game, which tends to be an extremely uncommon shot, but she uses 24 times. ryba's 12 also actually feels quite high, but it's also more common to slice when you're getting a slice so that MAY be part of it

tennis has many more numbers that tells you many more things about the matches you're watching - like for instance serve efficacy and how your win % compares on the first serve to the second serve, how often you're getting your first serve in, how often it's an ace, an unreturned serve, a double fault... you'll build up a bit of a frame of reference over time for what counts as 'good' or 'bad' numbers. but, yeah, if one player is hitting a lot of winners and unforced errors and the other one isn't, you can draw some basic conclusions about what kind of player you're watching

the units

okay, so you've got the numbers, which you can also check during matches and will be provided on screen between sets. now we get to the bit where you're actually watching tennis. you basically what to figure out what units, what bits a player's game is composed of. everyone has a serve, everyone has a return, everyone has a forehand and a backhand - but what are they doing with them? how are they using them? where do they tend to win points and where do they tend to lose them? again, part of this will just be about paying attention to what the commentators tell you and try to see if you can spot it for yourself. here are like, some of the basic questions you can watch out for... many you don't need to immediately just spot, but just so you know this is something that is possible to notice:

are they a good server? very tall? good at 'hitting their spots'? do they double fault a lot? can they mix up the spins of their serve - the kick serve (literally kicks up) or slice (slides away from the opponent)? how's their ace rate? how good are they at 'disguising' their serve direction? is it easy to attack their second serve?

how about their return? is there something funky about their return position, are they standing too close or too far away? (most players will be a little bit behind the baseline.) do they change their position depending on whether they're returning first or second serve (typically but not always you'll be closer for the second)? do they get a lot of returns into play? can they attack the second serve? how good are they at 'reading' the opponent's serve?

are they more of an attacking player who attempts to generate their own offence and dominate the point, or a defensive player who is responding to what the opponent is doing and are trying to force them into a mistake? are they a counterpuncher (aka a player who can turn defence into offence)? are they 'aggressive' with their court positioning by standing further forwards? or are they retreating, buying themselves time?

where are they looking to finish points? are they a baseliner and are operating from the back of the court? are they an all courter? are they looking to come in and attack at the net? how's their forecourt game? how are their volleys? do they ever serve and volley (aka immediately follow in the serve to hit the first ball from the net)?

how are their two wings - the forehand and the backhand? how good are they at generating offence from either side? how good are they at defending from either side? is there one side where they're good at hitting 'on the run' shots but not the other? is there one side (typically the forehand) where they can generate more pace but are also more likely to make errors? can they rally consistently from both wins?

what about their variety? now, variety is a bit of a catch all term that describes how many dimensions their game has - but a lot of times it does kinda just mean 'can they slice and volley'. a slice has a different type of spin from your basic ground strokes - especially on the backhand side, it's an important defensive tool, not least to slow the ball down, but can also used offensively. are all the balls they're hitting kinda similar in terms of speed and height and spin? or can they hit their shots flatter, can they change up the spin with slices... can they get forwards and sprinkle in volleys, can they integrate different shots like the dropshot into their game? can they hit high moonballs and find short angles? or is it all just 'see ball bash ball'

how good a mover are they? both in terms of outright speed, up the court and side to side, but also how their balance is, how good they are at anticipating where the opponent will hit the ball, and do on... how flexible are they, can they reach even the unlikeliest balls? how's their endurance? can they defend point after point game after game, or do they eventually falter?

what are they like mentally? do they fold every time they're facing break point? can they actually convert their chances? what are they like at crunch time - late in sets, in tiebreaks, in deciding sets? do they choke away leads? are they clutch under pressure? can they serve out sets and matches?

how do they think they're going to win this match? what's their approach, what's the strategy, what tactics are they deploying, can they adjust these to the match situation? are you watching a player who's thinking their way through rallies, who's following a game plan, or are they just doing whatever?

these aren't questions you need to be engaging with every time you watch a tennis match but, again, they're questions you can ask yourself. not as tricky as it looks!!

the shapes

okay. you get the numbers, you know how the match quite literally is playing out. you've watched the points and can spot what they're actually doing to generate those numbers. now let's go one step further: how are these 'units' being produced? why is it that some serves are better than others? what makes different forehands produce different effects? what makes someone a good mover?

now, obviously, this is like. a massive topic, and I'm not going to give an intro to tennis technique here. but what you really want to do, especially at the start, is spot variance. the photos I included at the top of this post are all from players with techniques that immediately jump out at you for being WEIRD. snigur's forehand looks weird (it's like she's swinging a pan). delbonis' serve looks weird (bizarrely high ball toss). norrie's backhand looks weird (like he's trying to stab someone). obviously, to some extent you can only do this through brute force watching tennis to give yourself a kind of internal, instinctual understanding of what the 'average' shot looks like... but you can also kickstart this process

the thing is, right, you can say that all technique is very complicated, but at the end of the day what it boils down to is you have the bit that happens before they hit the ball, the bit where they're hitting the ball, and the bit after they're hitting the ball. usually, what tennis viewers are responding to when they're watching the sport is some kind of flash aesthetic judgement of that racquet motion. is it a 'short' or a 'long' motion? you can be super concise and compressed with your motion, and only quickly slash at the ball in a direct path, or you can draw a massive loop with your arm like you're simulating a windmill where, after yanking it in a bunch of directions, eventually you make contact with the ball... where is the racquet at the point of contact? generally speaking it should be in front of the body, though how close or far it is can vary quite a lot. and where does the racquet go afterwards?

let's bring in a straightforward example, and check out the forehand techniques of the two most recent women's slam champs - krej on the left and iga on the right

at point of contact, krej has her arm completely extended, while iga's elbow is bent. both are entirely acceptable way of hitting your forehand!! it obviously means both need to move differently to the ball to make sure it's at their preferred distance

if you look at iga's arm, you may also notice all the... bits are kinda pointing in different ways? what you might notice if you watch her a bit is that she draws quite the loop with her forehand, and that a lot of her arm seems to be moving a lot during the stroke. the underlying 'reason' for that is she has quite an extreme forehand grip (called the 'western' grip) which means that the way she holds her racquet essentially requires her to twist around her wrist to make contact with it. so, what's the benefit? why are you doing weird shit with your wrist while hitting the ball? well, iga's forehand also has a lot of topspin - the sharp wrist movement applies an intensive amount of spin to the ball that makes it fly high over the net and bounce high on the other side of the court. it's a very spin-intensive forehand grip - she WHIPS the racquet up to make that ball rotate a shit ton

now, obviously you don't need to get all that just looking at a clip of a player hitting a shot. it's more just... stuff to start paying attention to. how much they're using their arms. how much they're bending their knees. where their racquet is in relation to their body when they hit it. how big the steps they're taking are to get across the court

in conclusion

in conclusion. have fun watching the matches!!

[altra]

Have been losing a week reading @naffeclipse s fic cryptid sightings.

An absolutely stunning fic about fnaf sun and moon as a cryptid that follows a cryptid hunter! Reader around.

I started reading it and when I looked up from my phone the week was over.

And now I fantasies about it and like. What if it was the other way around and reader was the cryptid?

Eldritch horror style creature reader taking on human form and starting at Freddy fazbears for some reason or another.

When there is suddenly something way quirkier at night at fazbears than the Animatronics :'D

[szemiesza]

@radiatorchains

The night was very warm, which only added to Melchior's overall bad mood. It was January, for god's sake, it should be freezing. At least the form of an owl going over 50kph ensured him some cool breeze under the wings.

He landed on a tree on the side of the tracks, which led through a mostly green terrain with a few houses here and there and a small road crossing them, leading back into town. He turned back into his regular form, although with the makeshift snake-legs he had a few nights back and made himself comfortable on the branch. And then he waited.

After a short while, he saw the lights of the approaching train in the distance. He jumped down, walked up to the tracks, and right when the train was passing him, beginning to slow down to stop at the nearby station, he pressed a button on a small metal device and didn't let go until he saw the effects.

Initially, he wasn't sure if this would work; it couldn't have had a very wide area of working. But when he saw big electric sparks come off the wires and the lights inside flicker and die, he knew he was successful.

He watched the train come to a screeching halt before it was supposed to, making ungodly noises that could only signify damage. There was even a smell of something burning. He smirked and let out a chuckle, then broke a window and went inside.

[alligaytorswamp]

finished bg3, here's my cringefail guy to commemorate that

[tony-andonuts]

I thought my current phone didn't have a name (I always name it Uncle Fungus) so I went to go name it but I beat myself to it i guess

[even-michael]

random character design thing that doesn’t make sense:

when characters with braces have straight teeth

throwing zero shade at them since most are some of my favorite characters

[deusvervewrites]

Quirkier: hagakure's primary quirk is actually a strength enhancer! the invisibility is a secondary mutation. everyone is confused

Oh hey that's cool of you Tumblr to completely hide this ask from me for over seven months yeah that's cool that's cool I have had multiple ask games since then I'm fine this is fine.

This ask was sent December 25, 2023. It has only just now appeared in my askbox. Luckily I have timestamps enabled so I can see that this was sent after the previous ask about Hagakure and also this is hilarious. I am down to declare that Hagakure has a strength Quirk that also unrelatedly makes her an invisible catgirl or something.

[hillbilly---man]

I did always think it was kind of funny how the progression of school mascots I had from high school til I graduated from college sounds like someone's political career

Patriots (high school)

Senators (community college)

Governors (university)

If I ever go to grad school I need to find a school whose team is the Presidents or something