Backflip

As a person who do a lot of backflips,(not on ice) It is very unlikely you would land in anyway on your neck. If one mess up, your more like going to land on knees, butt, or arms. If one's edge somehow catches then you might have a serious problem.

There was that one case of the RUssian skater (I forget his name--he wasn't a big name, but he finished somewhere around 6th in his nationals--not an easy feat, since he competed when Alexei, Ilia Klimkin, and Plushenko were all out there) who fell during a practice for an ice show on a backflip, and sustained bad head injuries.

julietvalcouer said:

Moot. Not mute. (Sorry, this gaffe drives me up a wall.) Moot is invalidated, mute is unable to speak.

Click to expand...

Thank you!:agree:

Joe, I hope it is not I that you feel can not joke around, it might be more of a miss-understanding where I had no Idea you were joking to began with.

I maybe wrong now, but are you joking about the Backflip being moot? Being as you brought up the thread as about "backflips" - yet were saying it was just an example to prove something else as being "not appropriate" for FS - and now you are saying the backflip is moot, well... that sounds like a pretty funny joke to me. ????

julietvalcouer said:

Moot. Not mute. (Sorry, this gaffe drives me up a wall.) Moot is invalidated, mute is unable to speak.

Click to expand...

I've never though of moot as meaning in validated...to me it means a hypothetical debate - one where the answer is not the end point, but the disucssion or journey is the important part.

Ant

Joesitz said:

Oh my English. But it's still understood.
Apparently there has never been an accident in Singles regardless of the reports of coaches while the young gals and boys fall and are mamed for life.

There was no way Marin could have saved his partner in Pittsburgh. It is dangerous. There was also that Pairs partner a few years back who still hasn't healed. Yes it is chancy.

However, if we put in the BIG IF, I agree a fall from a back flip, would more than likely leave someone cripple. But how chancy is it when no one has fallen out of a back flip compared with Singles and Pairs?

Joe

Click to expand...

It might just be a numbers game for now - the backflip is illegal so how many people actualyl practice them? Every pair skater from entry level to elite does throw jumps and undoubtedly fall on them. The number of people trying backflips just isn't up there enough to compare.

Its scary enough being on patch ice with low level pairs skater practising throw single and double jumps, imagine being on the same ice with singles skaters trying backflips? I'll take my luck with the inexperienced pairs skaters.

As for danger...i agree with you Jo - most of the stuff the pairs do are extremely dangerous and i'm not sure its nay less dangerous than a backflip. Devastating accidents on the "simplest" of things can occur, just ask Elena Berezhnaya.

Ant

SeaniBu said:

Thank you!:agree:

Joe, I hope it is not I that you feel can not joke around, it might be more of a miss-understanding where I had no Idea you were joking to began with.

I maybe wrong now, but are you joking about the Backflip being moot? Being as you brought up the thread as about "backflips" - yet were saying it was just an example to prove something else as being "not appropriate" for FS - and now you are saying the backflip is moot, well... that sounds like a pretty funny joke to me. ????

Click to expand...

Seanibut - I was born into a world of phonetics and spelling suffered. No problem. It's only if I give the wrong intent that I could kick myself.

antmanb said:

I've never though of moot as meaning invalidated...to me it means a hypothetical debate - one where the answer is not the end point, but the disucssion or journey is the important part.

Click to expand...

Ant, I think that the definition that you gave is the original one and still current in Britain.

This word “moot” is pretty cool. It was originally a verb meaning to bring up a subject for debate. Students training for the law in England would have “moots,” where they argued hypothetical cases for practice (recall the Entmoot in the Lord of the Rings, LOL.)

Gradually the “hypothetical” part of the exercises came (liguistically) to the fore, rather than the “debating” part. Now in United States jurisprudence I think the word (as an adjective) is applied mainly to a case in law that is dropped because changing circumstances have made the decision, one way or the other, of no legal or practical value.

Like for instance the case in Bleak House, where a dispute over an inheritance was eventually declared moot because the money had all been used up in legal fees.

I think Julietvalcour's rendering of "invalidated" is OK, too (in the U.S.), in the situation for instance where an issue is being contested in a district court and in the meantime the Supreme Court comes out with a ruling that makes the deliberations of the lower court "moot."

Joesitz said:

Seanibut - I was born into a world of phonetics and spelling suffered. No problem. It's only if I give the wrong intent that I could kick myself.

Click to expand...

The U.S. educational system produced a whole generation of bad spellers.

Anyone (like me) who went to elementary school in the 1950s was subjected to then-experiemental techniques for learning to read based on the "look-say" method of word recognition. The upshot was that children memorized a small list of words that they knew how to spell and otherwise were left to try to sound it out as best they could. Spelling per se was pushed to the back burner. (So it's all my first grade teacher's fault why I can't spell worth a lick. )

MM

PS. Speaking of spelling, the "t" at the end of "SeaniBut" is silent, like in "debut," right.

Mathman said:

Ant, I think that the definition that you gave is the original one and still current in Britain.

This word “moot” is pretty cool. It was originally a verb meaning to bring up a subject for debate. Students training for the law in England would have “moots,” where they argued hypothetical cases for practice (recall the Entmoot in the Lord of the Rings, LOL.)

Gradually the “hypothetical” part of the exercises came (liguistically) to the fore, rather than the “debating” part. Now in United States jurisprudence I think the word (as an adjective) is applied mainly to a case in law that is dropped because changing circumstances have made the decision, one way or the other, of no legal or practical value.

Like for instance the case in Bleak House, where a dispute over an inheritance was eventually declared moot because the money had all been used up in legal fees.

I think Julietvalcour's redering of "invalidated" is OK, too (in the U.S.), in the situation for instance where an issue is being contested in a district court and in the meantime the Supreme Court comes out with a ruling that makes the deliberations of the lower court "moot."

Click to expand...

That' where myknowledge of thw word comes from - UK law departments still have mooting competitions which everyone takes part in!

We have the same concept in English law when you apeal things up through the senior judiciary up to the highest court in the land (the House of Lords). BUt while the cases decided int he lower courts migh be moot (as in hypothetical deabte now that the house of Lords has overruled) they are not invalidated, since cases still turn on their facts. Many house of Lords decisions have been dubious at best and never followed again with cases in the Court of Apeal (the one down from the House of Lords) had a more sound basis in law and been followed, the house of lords case often being left to turn on the facts (whcih are never seen to be similar again to warrant ahving the same decision!)

Ant

Mathman said:

The U.S. educational system produced a whole generation of bad spellers.

PS. Speaking of spelling, the "t" at the end of "SeaniBut" is silent, like in "debut," right.

Click to expand...

And I am one of them!

Yah, Joe, what,s with the "Seanibut" At least it doesn't have 2 "t"s:agree:

It seems this conversation of "moot" is becoming such. In JVC point, she was pointing out how that was her choice to correct the wrong word for ending his sentence. Due to moot and mute being similar words I think she correctly choose the right word and meant it in a somewhat helpful way. There are not many words that don't have 2 or 3 meanings. If you look carefully at the words meaning, you can see the both (meanings) could be used for ending Joe's sentence. JVC's notion of which was used I believe is correct. Now how is that for "moot."

I still recall Joey from the show Friends comment, " it is a "moo" point. It's like a cow's opinion, it just doesn't matter." Or should he have said it "utterly" doesn't matter?

BTW, Joe I was referring to the "joke" that was not taken by "some" members potently meaning me. And in a round about way trying to apologize for taking a "joke" seriously. Whether I knew it was a joke or not. But I can see the sentiment is Moot.

FYI - anyone curious.
moot1? [moot]
–adjective
1. open to discussion or debate; debatable; doubtful: a moot point.
2. of little or no practical value or meaning; purely academic.
3. Chiefly Law. not actual; theoretical; hypothetical.
–verb (used with object)
4. to present or introduce (any point, subject, project, etc.) for discussion.
5. to reduce or remove the practical significance of; make purely theoretical or academic.
6. Archaic. to argue (a case), esp. in a mock court.
–noun
7. an assembly of the people in early England exercising political, administrative, and judicial powers.
8. an argument or discussion, esp. of a hypothetical legal case.
9. Obsolete. a debate, argument, or discussion.

That's the only meaning I know for moot - open to discussion. However, I'm not against learning more.

Mute to me is pronounced Mi ute. But what can you say about a guy's spelling having been brought up in Brooklyn.

Sorry Sean if I put a but at the end of your name. I was probably thinking in french which I shouldn't because I don't know enough french.

Joe

I just went to read where I received that info from and it is a "personal review i.e. Blog, so..... And it was on a 2005 COI. This search I received different results for the blog was linked on the 3rd page of Google. The first time it was the 4 hit.???

Anyway how true??? You have got me wondering, also the other reviews that came up today make no mention of it, so likely I was mislead.

And Wiki says nothing either, likely I am to blame.

Maybe they were head over heals for her and misplaced the action.??