Wolborg 2 Rewrite (Updated 10th February, 2012)

Comments/Major Edits (Click to View)

Anyway, here is my longwinded explanation. It's actually pretty important in the grand scheme of beyblade so yeah (Click to View)

As for Upper Attack, I think the separation of Upper and Smash isnâ€™t actually quite as large as some think.
Getting an opponent airborne is great and all, it allows OSâ€™s. But thatâ€™s not really attack, itâ€™s not getting Knockouts. The upper attack article makes this clear, itâ€™s capitalising on that loss of resistance that gives upper attack beyblades their KO power.
Go look at the popular upper ARs (or AR+SP in the case of Driger V2). They all have some form of protrusion following the slopes, or a change in angle (meaning temporary loss of or change in contact). This means the beyblades are separated for a moment, before another part of the AR hits them, or just that another part of the AR interrupts their travel along the slope. Better slopes get opponents airborne long enough for the smash point to make contact. Of course, if youâ€™re moving, your whole beyblade does push them some effect, but with same spin beyblades, itâ€™s not that important, as hitting them from behind just nudges them along. I know, you hit low-movement opponents, but any beyblade with any amount of traction is still moving in a small circle, and yes, you do enlarge their movement circles if they are not as large as your own, and yes, this can get KOâ€™s, but itâ€™s not a primary method of doing so, the other smash points are. The reason high rotation is needed is because it gives them less time to escape the slope before they get hit out. This is also why higher rotation helps if your opponent is using the opposite spin direction. However, this combo goes about things a little differently.

This sounds like smash attack, and it is, however the smash generally only becomes effective or relevant after the opponent loses contact with the surface. Proper Smash attack does not rely at all on loss of friction, it hits purely horizontally, not needing the loss of friction to do so. Upward smash is closer, however it still smashes before lifting, the loss of friction does not aid the smash in any way.

Now, this particular combo has a lot of traits of smash attack, both the external weight distribution and resulting movement speed are smash traits. However, as I just pointed out, Upper Attack still uses smash, and this particular combination makes more effective use of this.

We all know that same spin means your beybladeâ€™s â€œwingsâ€are the contact points, whereas in left spin, as you move around the stadium in the opposite direction, your entire beyblade becomes a contact point. Again, this is smash, but Iâ€™ve already explained why thatâ€™s irrelevant.

Now, we do know that lifting power is limited if youâ€™re in opposite spin, generally, you canâ€™t get an opponent airborne long enough or high enough to get good contact while they have no defense. This means that you rely wholly on the force from your own slopes during the initial contact to hit them, which weâ€™ve established is generally quite weak if youâ€™re using a traditional upper attacker.

But as I said, this combination makes far better use of that force than traditional upper attacker. It is designed to maximise that force. It generally doesnâ€™t KO before the opponent loses contact with the surface, but the moment it does, the required force is there. It lifts before the smash is used. The same way upward smash is still smash because it hits before the lift is relevant, this is still upper because it lifts before the hit is relevant.

Yeah, itâ€™s a fine line between upward smash and whatever this is (Smashing Upper?) but thereâ€™s one final point to make as to why this simply isnâ€™t upward smash. If you watch the video, notice that 10bBistool is hugely destabilised. Angled hits are good and all, they do produce some destabilisation but not to a large degree, as they simply donâ€™t force the opponent to a sharp enough angle that they are significantly off balance. The only combos that produce that level of destabilisation are those that exert upper attack.

Slope length is still important because you do need to get under the opponent to get them off the ground, and you still need slopes that can get them off the ground. G Upper canâ€™t exert decent enough upper because it doesnâ€™t get under beyblades as easily as other options and when it does, it doesnâ€™t lift them off the ground properly. However, it still knocks them off balance severely, and as I said, Iâ€™ve watched as 10bBistool went up the slope and was so hugely imbalanced the base almost spun itself out of the ring in the opposite direction to its normal movement, resulting in a huge loss of stamina. It still exerts this to some degree, but it simply isnâ€™t good enough to pull it off.

Mc Frown prefers Upper Dragoon in left spin, and Wide Defense on Upper Attackers, and that again is enhancing this effect. The slopes are steeper and shorter, but they are still low enough to get under attackers, and the steep height only increases the smash when they get high enough. That said, I do prefer the longer slopes of Triangle Wing nonetheless.

So yeah, this is basically the upper attack equivalent of smashâ€™s upwards smash.

If you consider Upper Attack to only be the lifting, and not the actual KO, basically, Upper Attack is ONLY the vertical movement, then things are dicier. Yes, it still has some upper, but no it is not as effective at this definition of upper as same spin. It does still exert some, as it does lift opponents, but the reason it gets it's KOs is the optimisation of the smash portion (which you would consider a separate entity). That said, it still exerts upper, and while there is not as much upper (agian in this sense) it uses that upper attack more efficiently.