>A person with two feet on the ground will generally have a lot more ability to >dodge and weave than you on your unicycle.
This is a surprising statement from a many time world champion unicyclist. Does
it apply to all unicyclists? I’d guess that an expert unicyclist wouldn’t have
too much difficulty catching a person on foot, assuming a relatively flat
surface and not many obstacles. However, I could easily be wrong on this point.
Any comments?
I’ve been wondering that very issue. I’ve watched the finals of the basketball competition at Unicon, this summer. And I wondered: how would a non-professional hockeyteam on foot fare against the world champions on unicycles? I’m not so sure that the foot guys would win.
Uni hockey is quite a friendly sport. Regular hockey is not. My friends mum used to play semi-pro and she had her ankle broken by an opposing team twice…
The big word in the question is “always”. In answer to that, no. I’m much more agile on my uni than a morbidly obese person who can barely get out of their chair.
I guess a fairer question would be, Is a person a foot always more agile than a person of equal health, stature, skill on a unicycle.
With that question i’m still not sure. Whilst i would be more likely to fall over, i can pretty much turn instantly and swerve pretty fluidly. I’d say the person on foot has it their way in most situations, but the uni rider would probably be pretty close behind.
The original discussion was in reference to playing basketball. I’m sure the same would apply to hockey, though is hockey played on foot that much? I can’t speak to the comparison of unicycles to rollerskates or inlines.
But for basketball, or any other basic maneuverability between two feet and one tire, the feet are going to win, usually by a wide margin. Try it. For example, play tag with someone on foot.
On their feet? People on their feet would smack unicyclists upside the head at any team sport. Unicyclists can’t move laterally. If the hockey players were on rollerblades, you might have an interesting competition.
I beg to differ. I played hockey on rollerblades a while back, my team could probably beat any uni team. The reason I left my team was because we sucked…
You may be right, but I don’t see the huge advantage for blades over unicycles that I do for feet over unicycles (or blades). What are the big physical advantages that blades have over unicycles?
roller hockey players can play sideways - ie. moving sideways across the pitch with the ball in front. It’s hard to explain this, but it just isn’t something people can do on unicycles.
bladers can turn from front to back without losing momentum, and can keep speed better in any turn
blades are just faster than small unicycles. Having raced against skaters on my schlumpf, even an okay skater can go 14mph average for 5 miles on agressive / hockey skates, their maximum speeds even on a small rink are going to be way above unicycle hockey speeds.
Momentum is the big thing - if you watch unicycle hockey, you often get the ball caught up near the wall, whereas in roller hockey, if you held the ball near the wall someone would slam through there at 20 mph and have it off you.
I don’t think it’d be a complete wipeout, or that a rubbish skate team could beat a really good unicycle team, but for teams of roughly equal skill levels, I think people on inlines should win.
