Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Due to a bizarre code interdependency in Super Smash Bros. Melee, specific combinations of opponents and stages exist that let Luigi start the match with his Luigi Cyclone move fully charged. Knowledge of the full matchup table can be used by sly players to gain an advantage.

159,093 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Luigi Mangione was Rich. Brian Thompson, the United Healthcare CEO whom Luigi shot in the back, came from modest means. He attended public schools. So do his kids. He went to a Iowa State, a state college. The tuition at Iowa State was about $2800/year for Brian. Brian worked his way up to becoming a CEO. Everything was given to Luigi. His all-boys elite prep school cost about $40k a year. His Ivy League college cost about $75K per year. I am not begrudging Luigi anything. His grandfather worked hard to build his fortune, and Luigi is the benefactor. That's great. It's the hypocrisy that's hard to stomach. These protesters marched over the sidewalk where Brian was shot dead in the back by Luigi. The movement seems to be shifting from Healthcare to killing CEOs to killing the Rich. What an oxymoron this is. Where does it end? Luigi has hired a top dollar, Rich attorney. And Luigi should because he can afford it. But as I said before, if Luigi truly believed his rhetoric, he would have gone with the public defender. These protestors are fighting for a hypocrite, not a hero. Recall that Luigi didn't even have United Healthcare. He didn't lose a family member due to a claim being denied. He received extensive medical treatment on his back and never seemed to want for anything as he traveled the World, post back surgery. Luigi is no revolutionary for a cause. He is a spoiled rich kid who idolizes Ted Kaczynski, has an inflated ego, and who has completely lost his moral compass. #LuigiMangione #UnitedHealthcare #CEOAssassination

Jennifer Coffindaffer

108,133 просмотров • 1 год назад

Hexagons and Octagons Those who follow football and coaching will be well aware that there are trends that emerge and become the great break through in coaching, only to vanish quite quickly. A few stick around and become a staple. Such as the rondo, or the 4v4+4 Guardiola rondo variation. One that did not stick around in the coaching collective consciousness that possible should have was Thomas Tuchel’s use of hexagonal and octagonal playing areas in training sessions. Tuchel explained that cutting off the corners and angling the pitch forced “sharp diagonal” passes that would help break the press. The positioning of players outside the hexagon/octagon or players close to the edges will be manipulated into an open body shape by the angles of the pitch. Players are impacted by environmental constraints and embodied cognition, where the geography of the playing area influences their actions. This influence spreads to the creation of triangles and diamonds within the playing area due to the “funnel” like nature of the playing area. We can use the cut outside angles by placing bounce or target players on the exterior, influencing the movement and organisation internally. The inside players will not have to move wide as those areas are occupied. The internal players will seek to create passing angles using the positioning of the outside players and their internal team mates. The diamonds and triangles will appear. If we leave the spaces on the outside empty players can move to fill the spaces. These act as free spaces to receive from the goalkeeper or open spaces for attackers to overlap into, encouraging attacking combination play and crosses. A different way of using the space is to remove goals and goalkeepers from the ends and place bounce/target players on the outside. Players now can combine with the outside players, when they do so they are then free to finish into the outside goals. The condition can be extended to combining with the target player in the opposite side of the pitch before scoring, adding an element of switching play. The hexagon and octagon are versatile spaces that help to replicate aspects of the game. By funneling the spaces we impact players body shape, ability to play forward quickly, team shape (or small group shapes), players cutting in, defending centrally, the types of combination used and the angles of line breaking pass (diagonals). The angles are hugely significant for teams that value combinations and possession football, Straight passes and receiving angles are much easier to intercept and carry high risks for being counter attacked. Short diagonals can bypass players and attacking shapes, creating angled connections. If an angles pass is given away there is still a risk of being counter attacked but there is more chance of having players around the ball to regain possession. To counter press. The question that emerges is should we then be using hexagons and octagons more? If they are of greater benefit than squares and rectangles, why use them? Should all pitches, including those of a small sided nature be hexagonal? Can the rondo square be replaced by the rondo octagon?

TheBeardedCoach

13,461 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад