the only time id see a multi battle being harmful to a blade is if one blade is hit by two others at exactly the same time. that is the only time that the force will be greater then if they acted in succession

This happens quite a lot and it just may be the reason for the breakages. Thanks for pointing this out.

the only time id see a multi battle being harmful to a blade is if one blade is hit by two others at exactly the same time. that is the only time that the force will be greater then if they acted in succession

This happens quite a lot and it just may be the reason for the breakages. Thanks for pointing this out.

I still don't think the added pressure, in most situations, would cause a significant increase in breakage. MAYBE 5%. I think it just makes "common sense" to us that they would break easier, and our perception is fooled.

I was just noting that it could attribute to the breakage.

And using round-numbered statistics it something that I'm not a fan of. You seem to have just pulled 5 out of your carp without anything to back it up. Doubling the force applied to a beyblade from a normal collision could have a large effect, or a minimal one. Any assumptions aren't of much help without anything to back it up.

I was just noting that it could attribute to the breakage.

And using round-numbered statistics it something that I'm not a fan of. You seem to have just pulled 5 out of your carp without anything to back it up. Doubling the force applied to a beyblade from a normal collision could have a large effect, or a minimal one. Any assumptions aren't of much help without anything to back it up.

Talk about unprovoked hostility!

Okay, where's your numbers? All you're saying is, "It might break a lot! I base this on my physics that have been proven incorrect." The number may be an assumption, but the theory is not. There are very few instances in which a 3-way battle would increase the likelihood of broken parts.

well the probability of 2 blades hitting each other at the exact same time is highly unlikely. and because both are spinning when the first collides the spinning will force the other blade away at an angle which would then change the angle which the other blade collides reducing the force applied

having a blade break from simultaneous collisions is still very unlikely though. even though a high amount of force is applied the structure of the plastic will be able to withstand a certain amount of stress. if the plastic can withstand that stress then the structure would remain unaffected. if it cant however then the structure may begin to weaken and warp. though plastic is very strong and it would take a pretty powerful hit to seriously weaken it. id say you have a better chance of breaking your blade from facing an HMS, or being stupid and launching it against hard objects, or treating the parts poorly

---

Engineers: If it wasn't for us there'd be no mechs for emo pilots to fly

Talk about unprovoked hostility!

Okay, where's your numbers? All you're saying is, "It might break a lot! I base this on my physics that have been proven incorrect." The number may be an assumption, but the theory is not. There are very few instances in which a 3-way battle would increase the likelihood of broken parts.

Haha, I wasn't being hostile at all. Nor was I saying that you are wrong and I am right. You've misunderstood me.

I never said that bey might break upon my physics that have been proven wrong. I'm just throwing out possible reasons. I've already said that I have very little knowledge of physics. It's also worth pointing out that you're no master either. You've yet to state any serious reasoning or evidence as to why there wouldn't be any more breakages.

The point I'm trying to make is that neither of us have any real credibility here, and I don't see why we can't drop this.

Talk about unprovoked hostility!

Okay, where's your numbers? All you're saying is, "It might break a lot! I base this on my physics that have been proven incorrect." The number may be an assumption, but the theory is not. There are very few instances in which a 3-way battle would increase the likelihood of broken parts.

Haha, I wasn't being hostile at all. Nor was I saying that you are wrong and I am right. You've misunderstood me.

I never said that bey might break upon my physics that have been proven wrong. I'm just throwing out possible reasons. I've already said that I have very little knowledge of physics. It's also worth pointing out that you're no master either. You've yet to state any serious reasoning or evidence as to why there wouldn't be any more breakages.

The point I'm trying to make is that neither of us have any real credibility here, and I don't see why we can't drop this.

i dont count?

---

Engineers: If it wasn't for us there'd be no mechs for emo pilots to fly

Talk about unprovoked hostility!

Okay, where's your numbers? All you're saying is, "It might break a lot! I base this on my physics that have been proven incorrect." The number may be an assumption, but the theory is not. There are very few instances in which a 3-way battle would increase the likelihood of broken parts.

Haha, I wasn't being hostile at all. Nor was I saying that you are wrong and I am right. You've misunderstood me.

I never said that bey might break upon my physics that have been proven wrong. I'm just throwing out possible reasons. I've already said that I have very little knowledge of physics. It's also worth pointing out that you're no master either. You've yet to state any serious reasoning or evidence as to why there wouldn't be any more breakages.

The point I'm trying to make is that neither of us have any real credibility here, and I don't see why we can't drop this.

i dont count?

Well you're making theories. There are a lot a factors that need to be included. Metal is harder than plastic, attack rings often hit weight disks. Angular momentum, spin velocitys, UCM, ect.

I suppose the fact that I've played thousands of Beyblade matches, many like the ones being described here, have hundreds of Beyblades, and haven't broken all that many doesn't add to my credibility at all either?

You don't seem to have much to back up your argument.

angular momentum, spin velocities, and everything else all add up to the amount of force being applied to an object. when an object hits another the total force applied is equal to all the forces (no matter the source) being applied in that direction as well as the components of forces being applied in that general direction (ie if you were to draw a line down a spinning blade and it was hitting another to the left of it. all forces in a direction on the same side of the line as the blade being hit would have a component force that acts in the same direction as where the point of contact is). as well as when both blades hit the forces of the receiving blade are applied to the attacking blade, and with all the action-reaction forces there is also reduction resulting in possibly a lower net force acting on the blade.

as well these blades do not weigh too much. all of these parts are measured in grams where as force is described as kg/m*s^2. so the actual forces are quite small. when you take into account how thick the plastic is, as well as the designs and supports intended to reduce stress and prevent compression/expansion of the plastic, as well as the thickness of the plastic it is still unlikely that they will break from simultaneous collisions. and even if the AR hits a WD the ones that stick out the most are the Wide which are extremely light which reduces any kinds of force created through collisions

edit

o and plastics can be VERY strong. plastics are used because they are cheap to produce yet are still able to do a job that metal could be used for. they are designed to be strong and can be just as strong as the thin metal used in the WD's

---

Engineers: If it wasn't for us there'd be no mechs for emo pilots to fly

I suppose the fact that I've played thousands of Beyblade matches, many like the ones being described here, have hundreds of Beyblades, and haven't broken all that many doesn't add to my credibility at all either?

You don't seem to have much to back up your argument.

So your creditability in this argument is the exact same thing that I am stating as mine. We have officially come to a point where any further logic becomes moot without physical evidence. Socrates ftw.

I'm going to go to bed now.

Except you're the only one who seems to think your point is correct.

Fleets, thanks for the very detailed post.

I suppose the fact that I've played thousands of Beyblade matches, many like the ones being described here, have hundreds of Beyblades, and haven't broken all that many doesn't add to my credibility at all either?

You don't seem to have much to back up your argument.

So your creditability in this argument is the exact same thing that I am stating as mine. We have officially come to a point where any further logic becomes moot without physical evidence. Socrates ftw.

I'm going to go to bed now.

logic can actually go quite far. did you know that Socrates would use logic to such an effective degree that people became unable to argue with him because his logic was sound? to sound, infact, for them to find counter points, and allow them to broaden their minds to new ways of thinking.

i have presented my information based on logical deduction. and logic never becomes "moot"

NP Brad

---

Engineers: If it wasn't for us there'd be no mechs for emo pilots to fly

logic can actually go quite far. did you know that Socrates would use logic to such an effective degree that people became unable to argue with him because his logic was sound? to sound, infact, for them to find counter points, and allow them to broaden their minds to new ways of thinking.

i have presented my information based on logical deduction. and logic never becomes "moot"

NP Brad

Socrates was known for proving other's logic to be wrong by making them fall into a trap of their own words. He would extract sound principles from others and use those agreed principles to prove the other person's logic as wrong.

I'm not saying logic is useless, I'm saying it won't further a discussion of this matter any further. For example;

My logic is that a beyblade breaks through collisions. I certainly hope we can agree on this point. The more beyblade present in a match, the more collisions that will occur. The more collisions, the higher the chance of there being a breakage. This is sound logic and I see no reason why you both seem to keep hounding me over it. I made a point in a passive nature. You are both the aggressors in this situation. You don't have to agree with my point, but I would appreciate it if you don't try and crucify me over it.

We're not trying to crucify you, stop being so dramatic; you're the one who brought friggin' Socrates into a discussion about Beyblade.

We're trying to tell you that your point is without much merit. At the very most, the chances of a part breaking are the chances of a part breaking in the span of two matches. Also, Beyblade parts don't magically break after a certain amount of battles; some will break quickly, some may never break. This is reliant on both the design of the part and luck.

Avoiding three-ways because you part has a higher chance of breaking makes about as much sense as avoiding ALL matches for this same reason.

We're obligated to explain why you're wrong so that only real information is accepted by people reading this post. Your logic is false. Your truth ends at "Beyblades [can] break through collisions."

We're not trying to crucify you, stop being so dramatic; you're the one who brought friggin' Socrates into a discussion about Beyblade.

We're trying to tell you that your point is without much merit. At the very most, the chances of a part breaking are the chances of a part breaking in the span of two matches. Also, Beyblade parts don't magically break after a certain amount of battles; some will break quickly, some may never break. This is reliant on both the design of the part and luck.

Avoiding three-ways because you part has a higher chance of breaking makes about as much sense as avoiding ALL matches for this same reason.

We're obligated to explain why you're wrong so that only real information is accepted by people reading this post. Your logic is false. Your truth ends at "Beyblades [can] break through collisions."

I'll agree to disagree if you'll stop this.

I thought it was already agreed that we disagreed. Please don't accuse me of "continuing" this; you were doing it just as much as I was.

yes things break through collisions but it is not necessarily true they break because there are more collisions. facing against two blades at the same time would be like facing them separately

---

Engineers: If it wasn't for us there'd be no mechs for emo pilots to fly

yes things break through collisions but it is not necessarily true they break because there are more collisions. facing against two blades at the same time would be like facing them separately

This is exactly what I mean. I should leave it to you to make my points for me from now on.

yes things break through collisions but it is not necessarily true they break because there are more collisions. facing against two blades at the same time would be like facing them separately

So if you were to have 5 matches against two bey and 5 matches against a single bey, there would be a higher chance of breakage vs. the two bey as opposed to the one. That is what I am stating.

Every time there is a collision, there is a chance something will break. The more the collisions, the more the chances.

there is only a chance something will break if the stress on the object exceeds the amount it can take. if it doesn't pass that point then nothing will happen to the object no matter the number of collisions impacting it. it doesn't matter on the number of collisions but the strength of each one

---

Engineers: If it wasn't for us there'd be no mechs for emo pilots to fly

there is only a chance something will break if the stress on the object exceeds the amount it can take. if it doesn't pass that point then nothing will happen to the object no matter the number of collisions impacting it. it doesn't matter on the number of collisions but the strength of each one

And since the strengths of the various impacts are equally varied in both situations, the situation with more chances for powerful collisions(3+ bey) is the one with the higher chance of a break.

5 matches against 2 blades would have the same probability of strong/weak collisions that 10 single matches would have

---

Engineers: If it wasn't for us there'd be no mechs for emo pilots to fly

5 matches against 2 blades would have the same probability of strong/weak collisions that 10 single matches would have

But not the same as 5 single matches, which is my point.

5 single matches would only equal to half the number of total collisions experienced in 5 3ways and therefore incomparable.

the number of collisions in 5 3ways is equal to the same number as if you were to face each blade seperately 5 times

---

Engineers: If it wasn't for us there'd be no mechs for emo pilots to fly