Pls don’t ban drift, tournaments will suck without those top tier meta parts. The whole meta list will change and ima be mad if drift and bearing get banned then I might stop doing tournaments b/c that is so so sad. I do support getting rid of double drift and double bearing decks though. There should be only 1 of each driver ima deck as they are pratically the same rather than the lock.

---

Team leader of: TEAM TRIO FLAMES! Members: JCE_13, and TristanPortu!

Pls don’t ban drift, tournaments will suck without those top tier meta parts. The whole meta list will change and ima be mad if drift and bearing get banned then I might stop doing tournaments b/c that is so so sad. I do support getting rid of double drift and double bearing decks though. There should be only 1 of each driver ima deck as they are pratically the same rather than the lock.

Drift is at no risk of getting banned currently, and the same is true of Bearing. I still think bladers need to grow stronger and push through these sorts of decks instead of just giving up and declaring them too strong, but I've grown tired of repeating this by now.

---

Cincinnati-based Organizer, and owner of every single currently released TT Burst bey part in at least one color. Hard to think of anything I don't have from MFB either...

Pls don’t ban drift, tournaments will suck without those top tier meta parts. The whole meta list will change and ima be mad if drift and bearing get banned then I might stop doing tournaments b/c that is so so sad. I do support getting rid of double drift and double bearing decks though. There should be only 1 of each driver ima deck as they are pratically the same rather than the lock.

Drift is at no risk of getting banned currently, and the same is true of Bearing. I still think bladers need to grow stronger and push through these sorts of decks instead of just giving up and declaring them too strong, but I've grown tired of repeating this by now.

Phewww! I personally don’t use double of anything but I use bearing and drift on their own.

---

Team leader of: TEAM TRIO FLAMES! Members: JCE_13, and TristanPortu!

Drift is at no risk of getting banned currently, and the same is true of Bearing. I still think bladers need to grow stronger and push through these sorts of decks instead of just giving up and declaring them too strong, but I've grown tired of repeating this by now.

Phewww! I personally don’t use double of anything but I use bearing and drift on their own.

All of the threads have just been about weather or not double Drift or double Bearing should be allowed in formats with multiple beys. (3G, P3C1, WBO Deck, etc…) So you do not have to worry, no part is being looked at to be banned for the standard format.

---

Phewww! I personally don’t use double of anything but I use bearing and drift on their own.

All of the threads have just been about weather or not double Drift or double Bearing should be allowed in formats with multiple beys. (3G, P3C1, WBO Deck, etc…) So you do not have to worry, no part is being looked at to be banned for the standard format.

Ok, I was just worried because on an FGC tournament thread it said drift is not allowed til deck format. FGC isn’t standard though.

---

Team leader of: TEAM TRIO FLAMES! Members: JCE_13, and TristanPortu!

All of the threads have just been about weather or not double Drift or double Bearing should be allowed in formats with multiple beys. (3G, P3C1, WBO Deck, etc…) So you do not have to worry, no part is being looked at to be banned for the standard format.

Ok, I was just worried because on an FGC tournament thread it said drift is not allowed til deck format. FGC isn’t standard though.

The owner of the FGC events is still working out the kinks in his format. So nothing in the FGC is set in stone.

---

Okay, so now we have initial testing of HXt+', it appears to do well in opposite and same spin. It is easy enough to KO but it seems like we're ignoring KO as an option for handling this stuff as they aren't really an issue as it stands if that is a valid option for the argument. So, with the rule as it stands, and assuming the early testing is accurate, you can now still run a deck of good/great same spin and great/good opposite spin on every driver. And to make it worse, you are stuck with Jl' or Qc' on one of your attackers, reducing efficacy over an X'+MX type pairing - and given attack is going to be the best way to counter this, it does feel to me that we might have inadvertently made the problem worse...

Now, this is early testing, it is only indicative and we will be waiting a bit for HXt+' to show up in any real volume, but... Has the rule really helped what most advocates were concerned about? And if we believe running a deck of good/great same spin and great/good opposite spin on every driver is too powerful a strategy... What will we do here if br+dr+HXt+' does become an issue?

---

th!nkBlargh|H-Code Product List

All of the threads have just been about weather or not double Drift or double Bearing should be allowed in formats with multiple beys. (3G, P3C1, WBO Deck, etc…) So you do not have to worry, no part is being looked at to be banned for the standard format.

Ok, I was just worried because on an FGC tournament thread it said drift is not allowed til deck format. FGC isn’t standard though.

That ruling has changed. The current rules are set now as The Circuit will begin soon. All events leading up to it helped me to finalize the rules. All is well now 😎

---

Okay, so now we have initial testing of HXt+', it appears to do well in opposite and same spin. It is easy enough to KO but it seems like we're ignoring KO as an option for handling this stuff as they aren't really an issue as it stands if that is a valid option for the argument. So, with the rule as it stands, and assuming the early testing is accurate, you can now still run a deck of good/great same spin and great/good opposite spin on every  driver. And to make it worse, you are stuck with Jl' or Qc' on one of your attackers, reducing efficacy over an X'+MX type pairing - and given attack is going to be the best way to counter this, it does feel to me that we might have inadvertently made the problem worse...

Now, this is early testing, it is only indicative and we will be waiting a bit for HXt+' to show up in any real volume, but... Has the rule really helped what most advocates were concerned about? And if we believe running a deck of good/great same spin and great/good opposite spin on every  driver is too powerful a strategy... What will we do here if br+dr+HXt+' does become an issue?

I think the goal wasn't too eliminate attack or having attack counters. It was to alleviate the dominance of some powerful stamina drivers. There is no doubt, in my mind anyway, that the meta is fully stamina. There is really no way around that. Whether in the standard and especially in the DB stadium, stamina is the way (in my Mandalorian voice 😎). Seriously though, I do see your argument but its just tough in ranked standard to rely solely on attack to carry the win. It's even tougher to allow decks with double drift, both in opposite spins or double bearing to be allowed. It'll make the game super boring and its horrible for the judges. The plus side is that layers like guilty and hopefully the new valkyrie are big and efficient enough to get those significant KO's even if they are on stamina drivers like zone'+z. Stationary attack is very beneficial I think

---

Owner of four-gaming.com, "Living What You Enjoy" Beyblade Retailer. @fourgaming_nc / YouTube Channel

Okay, so now we have initial testing of HXt+', it appears to do well in opposite and same spin. It is easy enough to KO but it seems like we're ignoring KO as an option for handling this stuff as they aren't really an issue as it stands if that is a valid option for the argument. So, with the rule as it stands, and assuming the early testing is accurate, you can now still run a deck of good/great same spin and great/good opposite spin on every  driver. And to make it worse, you are stuck with Jl' or Qc' on one of your attackers, reducing efficacy over an X'+MX type pairing - and given attack is going to be the best way to counter this, it does feel to me that we might have inadvertently made the problem worse...

Now, this is early testing, it is only indicative and we will be waiting a bit for HXt+' to show up in any real volume, but... Has the rule really helped what most advocates were concerned about? And if we believe running a deck of good/great same spin and great/good opposite spin on every  driver is too powerful a strategy... What will we do here if br+dr+HXt+' does become an issue?

I’m not trying to be rude here so please don’t take that way. But, I don’t see how this is relevant at all. The point of the rule is not to balance the game between the different Beyblade Types. It’s to stop people from using parts that are basically the same. This rule probably wouldn’t be needed if we played the WBBA 5G format. (I won’t say 3G because I saw how toxic it was first hand in that format.) In that format you have no clue what combinations your combinations will be going against as you don’t know your opponents combos nor their order. So essentially it’s going in blind just like single bey format. The idea of this rule has always been to make the WBO deck format itself balanced. Because in that format you can easily manipulate and force your opponent into positions where they are trapped into picking specific combos and then you easily counter them. All it takes is for you to get at least 1 point up on your opponent and then you can control the rest of the game. Thats why the rule was made. And like I said before it was probably done the way it was instead of just a list because it’s more future proof.

---

Okay, so now we have initial testing of HXt+', it appears to do well in opposite and same spin. It is easy enough to KO but it seems like we're ignoring KO as an option for handling this stuff as they aren't really an issue as it stands if that is a valid option for the argument. So, with the rule as it stands, and assuming the early testing is accurate, you can now still run a deck of good/great same spin and great/good opposite spin on every  driver. And to make it worse, you are stuck with Jl' or Qc' on one of your attackers, reducing efficacy over an X'+MX type pairing - and given attack is going to be the best way to counter this, it does feel to me that we might have inadvertently made the problem worse...

Now, this is early testing, it is only indicative and we will be waiting a bit for HXt+' to show up in any real volume, but... Has the rule really helped what most advocates were concerned about? And if we believe running a deck of good/great same spin and great/good opposite spin on every  driver is too powerful a strategy... What will we do here if br+dr+HXt+' does become an issue?

I’m not trying to be rude here so please don’t take that way. But, I don’t see how this is relevant at all. The point of the rule is not to balance the game between the different Beyblade Types. It’s to stop people from using parts that are basically the same. This rule probably wouldn’t be needed if we played the WBBA 5G format. (I won’t say 3G because I saw how toxic it was first hand in that format.) In that format you have no clue what combinations your combinations will be going against as you don’t know your opponents combos nor their order. So essentially it’s going in blind just like single bey format. The idea of this rule has always been to make the WBO deck format itself balanced. Because in that format you can easily manipulate and force your opponent into positions where they are trapped into picking specific combos and then you easily counter them. All it takes is for you to get at least 1 point up on your opponent and then you can control the rest of the game. Thats why the rule was made. And like I said before it was probably done the way it was instead of just a list because it’s more future proof.

I won't, don't worry - I'm not hypocritical enough to be easily offended given how I have posted some times - we cool  
My point is that a lot of people were concerned about people running 3 drivers with great opposite and good same spin or similar, and that is now possible regardless of the rule. Basically, I don't see how the rule helps the issues you are describing it being an answer to even in this post, nor those others have raised, when you can just use differently named parts to the same extent (and for the type people seem to complain about most). And if the rule wasn't made to balance types then... Well, I would argue it's kinda harmful to the balance regardless of intent and thus probably kinda bad? Does that make sense in a way?

---

I think the goal wasn't too eliminate attack or having attack counters. It was to alleviate the dominance of some powerful stamina drivers. There is no doubt, in my mind anyway, that the meta is fully stamina. There is really no way around that. Whether in the standard and especially in the DB stadium, stamina is the way (in my Mandalorian voice 😎). Seriously though, I do see your argument but its just tough in ranked standard to rely solely on attack to carry the win. It's even tougher to allow decks with double drift, both in opposite spins or double bearing to be allowed. It'll make the game super boring and its horrible for the judges. The plus side is that layers like guilty and hopefully the new valkyrie are big and efficient enough to get those significant KO's even if they are on stamina drivers like zone'+z. Stationary attack is very beneficial I think

Oh I know it wasn't to eliminate attack - I think that is an unintended side-effect, I'm pointing out it is now ineffectual at dealing with the LAD problem as of the latest release where early testing indicates you can now run 3 combos with solid same and opposite spin regardless of the new rule - so even if running two strong attack types isn't the answer (and it probably isn't in DB stadium, but I've already made my thoughts on that stadium clear), it's a shame the rule hurts them without seeming to actually address other issues... I don't see a great reason for it to be there ya know?

---

th!nkBlargh|H-Code Product List

I’m not trying to be rude here so please don’t take that way. But, I don’t see how this is relevant at all. The point of the rule is not to balance the game between the different Beyblade Types. It’s to stop people from using parts that are basically the same. This rule probably wouldn’t be needed if we played the WBBA 5G format. (I won’t say 3G because I saw how toxic it was first hand in that format.) In that format you have no clue what combinations your combinations will be going against as you don’t know your opponents combos nor their order. So essentially it’s going in blind just like single bey format. The idea of this rule has always been to make the WBO deck format itself balanced. Because in that format you can easily manipulate and force your opponent into positions where they are trapped into picking specific combos and then you easily counter them. All it takes is for you to get at least 1 point up on your opponent and then you can control the rest of the game. Thats why the rule was made. And like I said before it was probably done the way it was instead of just a list because it’s more future proof.

I won't, don't worry - I'm not hypocritical enough to be easily offended given how I have posted some times - we cool  
My point is that a lot of people were concerned about people running 3 drivers with great opposite and good same spin or similar, and that is now possible regardless of the rule. Basically, I don't see how the rule helps the issues you are describing it being an answer to even in this post, nor those others have raised, when you can just use differently named parts to the same extent (and for the type people seem to complain about most). And if the rule wasn't made to balance types then... Well, I would argue it's kinda harmful to the balance regardless of intent and thus probably kinda bad? Does that make sense in a way?

I know what you mean. I’ll agree that no matter what the LAD part of the game is really out of control. But ultimately what I’m trying to say is if you rank the drivers in this order for opposite spin LAD, Drift: S rank, Bearing: A rank, and HXt+’ B rank. You get a deck with the S, A, and B ranked drivers. But say this rule isn’t in play. You can make a deck with an S, S, and A rank driver. It might not seem like much of a difference. But all of a sudden your worst combo just jumped up to being even with your best. (These are just examples. I have no clue how these drivers would actually be ranked to someone.)

---

In all sincerity I think the only plausible solution may be to start looking into 5G. I know that may sound out of the blue and it can get dicey, but maybe Japan has already run into all the issues we are having now or they foresaw it. I know the drivers and stadiums they are building are focused around their format. 5G stretches things out and similar to single bey it makes things random so you won't have the heavy issue or mirror matchups consistently.

I don't know...I just know the stamina game has really been an issue lately. I can't think of a true solution to the problem.

---

Owner of four-gaming.com, "Living What You Enjoy" Beyblade Retailer. @fourgaming_nc / YouTube Channel

In all sincerity I think the only plausible solution may be to start looking into 5G. I know that may sound out of the blue and it can get dicey, but maybe Japan has already run into all the issues we are having now or they foresaw it. I know the drivers and stadiums they are building are focused around their format. 5G stretches things out and similar to single bey it makes things random so you won't have the heavy issue or mirror matchups consistently.

I don't know...I just know the stamina game has really been an issue lately. I can't think of a true solution to the problem.

Oddly enough though it doesn’t seem like stamina is an issue over in the WBBA. So that might just be a western thing?

---

I won't, don't worry - I'm not hypocritical enough to be easily offended given how I have posted some times - we cool  
My point is that a lot of people were concerned about people running 3 drivers with great opposite and good same spin or similar, and that is now possible regardless of the rule. Basically, I don't see how the rule helps the issues you are describing it being an answer to even in this post, nor those others have raised, when you can just use differently named parts to the same extent (and for the type people seem to complain about most). And if the rule wasn't made to balance types then... Well, I would argue it's kinda harmful to the balance regardless of intent and thus probably kinda bad? Does that make sense in a way?

I know what you mean. I’ll agree that no matter what the LAD part of the game is really out of control. But ultimately what I’m trying to say is if you rank the drivers in this order for opposite spin LAD, Drift: S rank, Bearing: A rank, and HXt+’ B rank. You get a deck with the S, A, and B ranked drivers. But say this rule isn’t in play. You can make a deck with an S, S, and A rank driver. It might not seem like much of a difference. But all of a sudden your worst combo just jumped up to being even with your best. (These are just examples. I have no clue how these drivers would actually be ranked to someone.)

HXt+' is looking way more than B rank unfortunately, it is right up there with Br/Dr. I mean, even before this Wh.Xt+ can actually hold up against them on the right setup, though I mostly have a setup using it to handle Zn'+Z. Like, I honestly think we do now have S/S/A or S/A/A at least - as in we're in a situation that is functionally the same as having the doubles allowed. Again, early testing is the caveat. Basically I actually think from initial testing we're in the same overall power situation as Dr+MDr+Br' or Br+Br'+Dr with HXt+' around... HXt+' is easy to KO though, but if we're not using attack a lot it's a concern. 

Re 5G... 
I actually worry TT are working towards being able to run a full 5G deck of it too - I mean, it's actually nearly there right now - you'd run what.. Gg.Dr, Ov.HXt+', Tp.Br', Wh.Xt+*... We're like one disc away and I mean you could get away with Kr.MDr maybe. Maybe we're already there, though obviously your layers get stretched thinner there is Dynamite+F, Vanish, Roar, Prominence, Astral/World. 
*this still works solidly on certain setups - Dangerous+F+L does very well on it, spicy as it sounds it's something I would honestly use.

So... Even that could end up not being safe. Not that I think in 5 bey anyone would run all LAD, but then I'm also surprised that people would do that in 3 bey outside of DB Stadium. Tbf, the current rule would prevent it in 5G. The other issue is 5G is it disadvantages people without the ability to buy the latest competitive stuff even more, which sucks pretty hard imo. But, this isn't really a debate about 5G's merits haha.

With the WBBA not having issues with tonnes of LAD though, maybe we actually are just doing something "wrong" in a sense?

---

th!nkBlargh|H-Code Product List

In all sincerity I think the only plausible solution may be to start looking into 5G. I know that may sound out of the blue and it can get dicey, but maybe Japan has already run into all the issues we are having now or they foresaw it. I know the drivers and stadiums they are building are focused around their format. 5G stretches things out and similar to single bey it makes things random so you won't have the heavy issue or mirror matchups consistently.

I don't know...I just know the stamina game has really been an issue lately. I can't think of a true solution to the problem.

Oddly enough though it doesn’t seem like stamina is an issue over in the WBBA. So that might just be a western thing?

I would say the WBBA burst meta revolves heavily around stamina and LAD.  They just don’t see it as a problem the way we do.  Also, their rules don’t really allow for as many draws.  They do still get draws, but their definition of “spinning” is different from ours and produce less draws.  WBBA play 5G in the DB stadium… that means they play stamina meta at this point in time.

Oddly enough though it doesn’t seem like stamina is an issue over in the WBBA. So that might just be a western thing?

I would say the WBBA burst meta revolves heavily around stamina and LAD.  They just don’t see it as a problem the way we do.  Also, their rules don’t really allow for as many draws.  They do still get draws, but their definition of “spinning” is different from ours and produce less draws.  WBBA play 5G in the DB stadium… that means they play stamina meta at this point in time.

What is their definition of spinning? And I’m saying I don’t see it as heavy over there because I’ve noticed almost all the players over there give full strength launches most of the time. Probably why you see more KOs over there than here. Granted KOs are a viable strategy over there with them being worth 2 points over 1.

---

I would say the WBBA burst meta revolves heavily around stamina and LAD.  They just don’t see it as a problem the way we do.  Also, their rules don’t really allow for as many draws.  They do still get draws, but their definition of “spinning” is different from ours and produce less draws.  WBBA play 5G in the DB stadium… that means they play stamina meta at this point in time.

What is their definition of spinning? And I’m saying I don’t see it as heavy over there because I’ve noticed almost all the players over there give full strength launches most of the time. Probably why you see more KOs over there than here. Granted KOs are a viable strategy over there with them being worth 2 points over 1.

Officially:



In practice, what this really means is practically any type of movement that isn’t going backwards (opposite spin direction) or flat out stopping is still consider “spinning”.  That is what I have seen for years anyway.

What is their definition of spinning? And I’m saying I don’t see it as heavy over there because I’ve noticed almost all the players over there give full strength launches most of the time. Probably why you see more KOs over there than here. Granted KOs are a viable strategy over there with them being worth 2 points over 1.

Officially:



In practice, what this really means is practically any type of movement that isn’t going backwards (opposite spin direction) or flat out stopping is still consider “spinning”.  That is what I have seen for years anyway.

This is honestly a simpler and easier definition of spinning to use, and still sits on the same logic of "if it's spinning backwards it must've stopped at some point". I don't know why our own definition of "spinning" is so complicated.

---

Cincinnati-based Organizer, and owner of every single currently released TT Burst bey part in at least one color. Hard to think of anything I don't have from MFB either...

Officially:



In practice, what this really means is practically any type of movement that isn’t going backwards (opposite spin direction) or flat out stopping is still consider “spinning”.  That is what I have seen for years anyway.

This is honestly a simpler and easier definition of spinning to use, and still sits on the same logic of "if it's spinning backwards it must've stopped at some point". I don't know why our own definition of "spinning" is so complicated.

I personally like our own def. Like what if a bey stops spinning, the other bey stops, then the bey that stops first is falling down and is still moving. The 2nd bey that stops will still be the winner. Stuff like that is something I personally don’t like to think of as “spinning”

---

Blader for 8+years, CA Organizer, hoping to improve at the game and meet more people along the way. Let It Rip!

What is their definition of spinning? And I’m saying I don’t see it as heavy over there because I’ve noticed almost all the players over there give full strength launches most of the time. Probably why you see more KOs over there than here. Granted KOs are a viable strategy over there with them being worth 2 points over 1.

Officially:



In practice, what this really means is practically any type of movement that isn’t going backwards (opposite spin direction) or flat out stopping is still consider “spinning”.  That is what I have seen for years anyway.

That is a lot simpler than our rules on spinning. But I’m a way less accurate. I think if the WBO adopted this rule it could definitely help with the LAD problem we are currently faced with.

---

Officially:



In practice, what this really means is practically any type of movement that isn’t going backwards (opposite spin direction) or flat out stopping is still consider “spinning”.  That is what I have seen for years anyway.

That is a lot simpler than our rules on spinning. But I’m a way less accurate. I think if the WBO adopted this rule it could definitely help with the LAD problem we are currently faced with.

Now I'm wondering, what if we adopted this rule for a few test tournaments (or even just tested some popular combos with this rule), similar to how we've tested rule changes in the past? I'm curious to see how things like match time, # of draws, etc would be affected. Even if it turns out to not be favorable, whether by making high-LAD drivers even more potent or simply being incompatable with the WBO ruleset, it'd still be nice to know how it changes things compared to our current rule.

Personally I think the spinning definition we use is overcomplicated and I'm not sure how to compare speed of movement and speed of rotation... I'm not sure why rolling matters that much. Imo if you're still rotating around the beyblades axis in the original direction... You're spinning. If you stop doing that... You're not spinning, you've stopped.

---

th!nkBlargh|H-Code Product List

Personally I think the spinning definition we use is overcomplicated and I'm not sure how to compare speed of movement and speed of rotation... I'm not sure why rolling matters that much. Imo if you're still rotating around the beyblades axis in the original direction... You're spinning. If you stop doing that... You're not spinning, you've stopped.

I think the biggest controversy is “turning” vs “Spinning”. It’s hard to explain what I mean without a video or something to explain it. There are times when the Beyblade falls onto its side and it stops spinning on the axis that goes straight through the center of the Chip, Layer, Disk, and Driver. Instead it starts spinning on the axis that would essentially be going through one side of the Disk and coming out the other side of the Disk. In WBO that is turning and not spinning. Yet in WBBA that would still be considered spinning or rotating.

---

Personally I think the spinning definition we use is overcomplicated and I'm not sure how to compare speed of movement and speed of rotation... I'm not sure why rolling matters that much. Imo if you're still rotating around the beyblades axis in the original direction... You're spinning. If you stop doing that... You're not spinning, you've stopped.

I think the biggest controversy is “turning” vs “Spinning”. It’s hard to explain what I mean without a video or something to explain it. There are times when the Beyblade falls onto its side and it stops spinning on the axis that goes straight through the center of the Chip, Layer, Disk, and Driver. Instead it starts spinning on the axis that would essentially be going through one side of the Disk and coming out the other side of the Disk. In WBO that is turning and not spinning. Yet in WBBA that would still be considered spinning or rotating.

 Yeah I'd need a video. Even then it's also probably easier to go with the WBBA rule right?

---

th!nkBlargh|H-Code Product List

Personally I think the spinning definition we use is overcomplicated and I'm not sure how to compare speed of movement and speed of rotation... I'm not sure why rolling matters that much. Imo if you're still rotating around the beyblades axis in the original direction... You're spinning. If you stop doing that... You're not spinning, you've stopped.

I think the biggest controversy is “turning” vs “Spinning”. It’s hard to explain what I mean without a video or something to explain it. There are times when the Beyblade falls onto its side and it stops spinning on the axis that goes straight through the center of the Chip, Layer, Disk, and Driver. Instead it starts spinning on the axis that would essentially be going through one side of the Disk and coming out the other side of the Disk. In WBO that is turning and not spinning. Yet in WBBA that would still be considered spinning or rotating.

The biggest problem I see in the spinning section of the WBO rule is the use of the word “rolling.”  A launch like the dread vertical is legal (https://youtu.be/CovIEcPoLzs), which in my mind is “rolling” like a tire rolling down the street.  So this dread vertical type “rolling” is legally “spinning,” but “Rotation along the stadium floor alone is considered ‘rolling’ and is therefore no longer considered to be spinning.” is not legally spinning.  This is very confusing to me.

Definition of spin in the dictionary:
“to revolve or rotate rapidly, as the earth or a top”

Definition of roll in the dictionary:
“to move along a surface by revolving or turning over and over, as a ball or a wheel.”

I read these definitions and I get more confused about the rule while knowing dread vertical is legal. It has always been explained to me that dread vertical is legal and considered “spinning,” but to me dread vertical is also definitely “rolling.”