I've said it before, I'll say it again (x infinity). Work that simple (i.e slams and spins) had BETTER be clean. Today's guards do slams and spins as a warm up. They're called "basics". (for a reason).
Perhaps this is where the argument comes from.... I know today's guard could do yesteryears shows...but could the old guard do today's shows?
Could it be that with some, the old v. new argument is based on insecurity...based on the inability to say "Wow, these kids today would kick my a##."
(Uh oh...I'm sure I've just ###### off alot of people......) :o)
Let me elaborate on one point. When people like GMichael say it's not a old v. new argument but a clean v. dirty argument, I can appreciate that.....because as a guard instructor, I agree with that. He points to some very good guards of today that are clean and spin w/ technique. He also made direct points about clarity, the readability of what the guard is doing, etc. I felt, from reading his post that he doesn't like dirty guards. Period. They're not dirty because they're spinning a sabre. They're not dirty because they're "dancing and rolling around on the ground"...they're dirty because their instructor couldn't be bothered to clean them. That's what I got out of his opinion. It's an opinion I can agree with and respect.
Just becuase a guard isn't wearing white boots and spinning 7 ft pole with a flag made out of heavy nylon doesn't automatically mean they suck. There are many "old school" that make that knee jerk assessment.
maaan, I'm cranky.... I need to go to bed!!!! :(