I don’t really see myself playing UWPS phrases but I do see myself playing two-way pickslanting. Do I necessarily have to get as good doing UWPS as I am with DWPS?
No, it will help, but there is a lot of lax to play with.
I’m naturally usx, This video isn’t great but you can see me do dbx along with usx slant.
You dont HAVE to switch pick angles to do usx or dsx, it just helps, a lot…
And if you’re going to call it two way pick slanting… then you need to switch slants?
I think people call two-way pickslanting mixed escape nowadays. My bad.
So, I don’t need to switch angles to play with mixed escape? How would that work? What do I have to change?
Can you post a video of what you’re trying to do?
I will have to do that later but just the usual Michael Angelo Batio and Paul Gilbert stuff
I think there may be a bit of a common misconception with this. The phrase in itself doesn’t really belong to either category; it can be done with either, it’s just that you may see the phrase arranged in a specific way that might be easier to play for someone who gravitates more stringently towards either escape.
Not necessarily. If you know for sure you strictly have a downward escape and it works for you, skate/swipe. It’s a perfectly valid thing to do. If you want to work on a mixed approach you can do that as well, but but working on a mixed approach doesn’t require equal proficiency in the completely opposite escape, you just have to be strategic.
That’s relieving. Thanks for answering, mate! I’m new to the Antigravity seminar and I think I bit more than I can chew. It’s gonna take me a while to digest it all.
Honestly, I don’t really know what it consists of and what I’m about to say in no way reflects on the seminar, because I’m sure it is fantastic! But I think when you are dealing with this kind of subject matter (and many many others) there can be a tendency for a viewer to overthink certain aspects or to adopt other ones too stringently, which at best can lead to confusion, or at worst form convictions and lead to some misplaced dogma that may end up becoming counterproductive in the long term.
I also don’t think it’s likely something that’s intended to be a one time watch and likely more designed to be reference material you can keep on going back to and taking bits from at a time. Anything that is very information packed is going to need multiple revisiting.
Having the goal is the first step, the second is realizing there are likely many avenues to achieve it even if it isn’t exactly done the way you might have initially envisioned it had to be.
1 Like