American Parkour Forum

Parkour and Freerunning => Parkour And Freerunning => Topic started by: Mark Toorock on February 12, 2006, 07:18:28 AM

Title: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 12, 2006, 07:18:28 AM
I made a post on PAWA asking for PAWA's opinion, but they seem reluctant or refuse to give an answer.

What they say is "this is a parkour website, why should we talk about freerunning".


I feel that they are different, and that people are going to continue to use freerunning as a term for Parkour, is it? Should it be?

Are the two related? If so how? If not, why not?


PAWA did not supply answers to these questions. I put it out for anyone who wants to discuss, so that we as a community can decide if there is or should be a distinction, as I feel this will help to preserve parkour instead of allowing it to be watered down with other activities.

This is NOT to say in any way that Parkour is better that Freerunning (or vice versa) it is simply to determine if there is a difference.


I have also emailed Sebastien Foucan, who is credited with creating Freerunning, to ask him if the term is meant to be a different activity than Parkour, or simply a different word to describe the same thing.

Please post thoughts ONLY if you plan to provide evidence (even if just logical evidence) to support what you are sying, in other words don't post "They're just different" ... unless you have somehting useful to add or discuss :)



Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Kipup on February 12, 2006, 08:19:43 AM
Well, I'll take a stab at it:

When we debated this topic a few months ago, it was my belief that Freerunning and Parkour were one and the same. I recall that almost everybody involved in the debate agreed that Sebastien Foucan invented the term Freerunning* in an attempt to better describe Parkour to an English speaking audience. The question was whether the term had evolved or not, and if we as a group wanted to accept this evolution?

At the time I argued that while there was no website defining the term Freerunning, when Sebastien said that Freerunning was Parkour – he implied a concrete definition. If we are to respect David Belle and PAWWA’ definition of Parkour (because it was endorsed by the term’s creator), then why should we not endorse Sebastien’s definition of the term he coined – Freerunning. What is the difference between the two situations, and why did we allow one term to remain unchanged, while the other term drastically evolved? To me, it seemed that out of respect for the term’s creator we should not use it for anything other than its original meaning.

While my logic is still the same, I have now come to accept the term Freerunning as having a different meaning than it was originally intended for. I now accept it to mean, “Parkour type movements, plus added flair (flips, spins, ext…) that do not fit into the traditional “A to B� definition�. While I do not necessarily agree with this evolution (or understand it), I go along with it because this is what languages do - they evolve according to popular use. It now seems a bit ignorant to me when people continue using the term Freerunning as a synonym for Parkour while so many portray it differently.

It seems to me that a community wide definition would be very beneficial to the discipline as a whole because it would prevent further contamination and confusion.

On the topic of the actions themselves: I do acknowledge that there are two major sects in the Parkour/Freerunning world, purist Parkour, and Parkour mixed with tricks/flair. I think that having two distinct terms to define two separate arts is the only way in the long term to prevent widespread confusion and to properly depict the arts to the public/media.

* Imagine there are quotes around the term Freerunning every time I use it because it has no definite meaning.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: ERI104 on February 12, 2006, 09:58:29 AM
Quote
it was my belief that Freerunning and Parkour were one and the same.

that was my belief too until people started using the term 'free-running' when they did tricks and flips... i remember one person who did a lot of tricks and labeled his video "Free-running" and argued that his video was not about parkour but free-running.

I would hate to see this word be associated with tricking and flipping. The reason is because i use this term often in place of the term parkour. People hear "parkour" and think its something stupid...but when i say its "free-running" they get a better idea... I of course tell them later on that parkour and free-running are the same, and explain the philosophy behind it all.

Is it possible that free-running has become to define the actual movements of parkour, while parkour is the entire philosophy behind it along with the movements?
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: SkyNative on February 12, 2006, 12:28:03 PM
Well, I don't have the time to go back through all the old threads, but I'd like to hear more about this line of reasoning that Faelcind seems to have brought up first. Also, this is a completely separate notion from the "evolution of the word."

This dialogue was taken from the topic "Has Parkour Lost meaning?" (pg3): http://www.americanparkour.com/smf/index.php?topic=265.0 (http://www.americanparkour.com/smf/index.php?topic=265.0)

Quote
"It's also not quite accurate to say that free running, is only defined as see: parkour. Free running is synonymous with  Sebastien foucan's definition of parkour which i do not think is the same as that described by David belle or apparently genereal practiced with in the french parkour community. Sebastien describes parkour thus "Parkour is move, adapt and feeling!!! Each person have is own way "my way is to be functional" "
So while his own practice is oriented towards the same goals as Davids he seems to to think that parkour/freerunning is open ended and defined by the each individuals practice. To me this to be exactly the idea of free running as it became accepted within the British parkour community before FRPK. I think other statements on his site(www.parkour.com) show a similar attitude." - Faelcind

Quote
"Becoming aware of the failings of art without context. He later chose to create his own path by developing the philosophy - His own method of learning based on autonomy, play and positive energy. Conveying to others his messages and philosophy has become Sébastien's quest. Sébastien has become a global ambassador of the Parkour / Free-Running discipline." - Parkour.com

Quote
"And with Sebs definition on parkour Vs. Davids. They may have two different ways of saying it, but that is two different ways of saying the same thing. You're not gonna point at Seb and say "oh hes a damn good at free running, He would be great if he practiced parkour though!" Seb does parkour, I'm not going to sit here and argue why I believe that, but don't just look at what he says, just watch him for 2 seconds. Two people that don't speak to eachother and did not collaborate on creating a definition are not going to come up with the same wording for it. But the goals are the same, and judging by the way seb moves, Id say that how you get there is the same thing too. If he has it worded to sound like something different, then i would play the language barrier card on that...
Then are you saying that Seb created a definition that is different (in meaning) than the one created by david? If so, what authority did seb have to do that? We certainly cant have two DIFFERENT meanings for parkour, one being synonymous with Free-running and one not. Then if you agree that Seb DOES have a definition that is completely illegitimate, does that mean we just scrap the name Freerunning to never hear it again?" - Skipper

Quote
"As for david versus seb's definition. I don't see how you can possible say that they're two different ways of describing the same thing. Maybe its the language barrier thing but from reading the site I don't get that impression, the genereal attitude on parkour.com is that parkour is the art of movement to be developed however you see fit, Sebastiens comments all fall in line with this. He says his way his utility, but thats not the same as David saying the way of parkour is utility. What right does Seb have to define parkour apparently no more then he has to call himself the co-founder of parkour, but he does just that on his site. Further evidence that Sebastien's see parkour differently then David can be found in his reference to David practicing the natural method of parkour.

What sebastien does looks like parkour as defined by DB to me, what he preaches and teaches sounds like something else. - Faelcind
(bold mine)"

Quote
"Instead of talking about "overcomming obstacles," he talks about being "fluid like water" which implies the overcomming of the obstacle, but also how it is overcome.
His site is attributed towards expanding on what parkour means to different people with different views on life. He Talks about parkour, and he doesn't give it a different definition, rather he talks about what your mind goes through while doing it. And think about it, if he practices what he preaches, saying "What Sebastien does looks like parkour as defined by DB to me" should pretty much sum up that his way and David's way are the same, its just what they are thinking while doing it that is different. David may think about getting to one place as quickly as possible, while Seb thinks about attaining as much positive energy... but Seb does that by getting to one place as quickly as possible. (not claiming to know what they think about while doing parkour)

Would you agree that actions speak louder than words? If so, I think they are very much the same, just different wording by two very different minded people. - Skipper"

So in summary the argument goes like this:
P. David Belle's and Sebastien Foucan's conception of Parkour are different.
(While David's is the common definition we all know and understand, at times when Seb is explaining it he seems to be explaining something quite different because of his emphasis on freedom of movement and individual creativity.)
P. Sebastien coined "Freerunning" as a synonym for Parkour.
____________________________
C. Thus, (ignoring evolution of language) Freerunning means the same things as Sebastien's conception of Parkour. (freedom of movement, Fluidity, individual creativity, etc..) Which is different from David Belle's conception.

-Now whether he has the authority to do so is another question, but at least it establishes the original meaning of freerunning. So I'd be interested to hear more thoughts on this. Currently I am a little more convinced by Faelcind's arguments than Skippers (nothing personal!) but that may change, I just thought I'd propose it and see what evidence/counter-evidence people can pull up. Thanks

PS. Kipup, I liked your post as well.  :)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Kipup on February 12, 2006, 12:45:49 PM
Nice post SKY, thanks for digging that up! That is exactly the thread I was thinking of, I just couldn't find it.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 12, 2006, 02:19:56 PM
Well, I have an answer from Sebastien himself.

Quote
Hi my friend!

 

First we created Freerun just to help the english community to understand  what is Parkour!

Now Freerun to me is still Parkour and means an attitude: travel, meet peoples share your experiences! FREE your mine, RUN over the world!

no argue, no revendication only a discipline: PARKOUR and THE WAY!

 

See you!

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Rafe on February 12, 2006, 02:27:59 PM
His answer no more clears up what he is saying then his previous statements on parkour/freerunning on his site. A better question would be does he accept david defination of parkour?
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Swizz on February 12, 2006, 02:42:08 PM
Here's the thing:

As far as Seabstien is concerned, freerunning and Parkour are one and the same.  But the problem is the world already has an idea of what "freerunning" is (similar to what MTV has supposedly dubbed "freestyle wlaking"), while Parkour is a completely new idea to most people.  And if we say Parkour is the same as freerunning to the public, they would misinterpret it.

Freerunning, to them, is doing tricks and fun things without the use of anything other than yourself.

Parkour, to us, is about fluidity of movement and overcoming obstacles.

As you can see, they are not the same.  But the average person would assume they were.

That's my two cents  :)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Rafe on February 12, 2006, 02:58:10 PM
I don't care for these arguments about accepting free running as different from parkour because of common defination. Its an argumentum ad populum falacy just causes everone beleives something does not make it true.  A year ago it seems to me the majority of the "parkour" community accepted parkour as what your saying the genereal public see's free running as, that didn't make it the correct defination and many people worked long and hard trying to correct that misinformation. You have to come up with better reasons then common acceptance or word evolution.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 12, 2006, 04:11:59 PM
Please, go on...


Thats the thing. People who seem to know something or two about parkour have avoided this like the plague. Thats what happened on  .net, everyone kept saying what you CANT do, and not what you CAN do. If you say " You have to come up with better reasons then common acceptance or word evolution"... then tell us some suggestions on what to come up with. M2 asked an INCREDIBLY reasonable question and everyone beat around the bush like it was their job.

So here we are. One person on .net said that you have to listen to the founder of the term. M2 did just that, we have our definition, its synonymous with parkour. No?

You may not be a supposed 'freerunner,' but that doesnt mean you can decipher differences between it and parkour. for example, i was a springboard diver before, NOT a clown diver (yes, clown diving is REAL and widely used and practiced), yet i was able to explain the differences without stating contraversial information. Its really not as hard as people are making it out to be.  ;) Thanks for the help, but if people cant come up with reasons for us not to listen to Seb, then hell, Ill just listen to seb  ;)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Bachelarius on February 12, 2006, 04:50:20 PM
The only reason not to listen to Seb is that right from the word go, from when JL was aired and the term was created, what was described was not parkour. Right from the start, it showed him doing acro, doing inefficient movements, doing the spectacular but the parkour itself was sparse at best.

and it was all refered to as free run.

So parkour was misrepresented... Then given a different name. And it said that sebastien was the founder of free run. It seems that the pieces all make up a pretty clear picture...
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Erwan on February 12, 2006, 05:00:15 PM
Just like Sebastien Foucan reminded, "freerunning" was simply created as a "handy" word to have English speaking "audience" understand better what the discipline is since the word "parkour" in itself didn't express anything tangible. It was chosen then since there was a parkour DVD planned, and at a time the parkour community in the UK and even worldwide was extremely small. It was a very underground discipline, much more than now, that needed more exposition on the International scene. That was years ago.
Now, given the worldwide growth of the parkour community, given the much better understanding of the discipline, its techniques, its history, its roots and its purpose, I believe "freerun" now could easily be dropped. It was let's say maybe "convenient" in early times of parkour when it needed some more recognition abroad (out of France), now the word has already become part of history. It is no "taboo" or forbidden to use it sometimes, but everyone should know now that only parkour is the appropriate term.
Just like APK emphasizes on French parkour techniques terms as part of the educational role they wish to play in the parkour community, and I believe it is a good thing, it should also be spread that freerun should no longer be in use, since it WAS only a different word for parkour, not a different thing. However, just like some new English words were created to replace French ones, it is not a crime to sometimes use it, but it would be better and more genuine not to, that's all.

Now, some people might be interested in keeping it, stating it is a different thing than parkour, a related discipline but with an altered or modified purpose, so they could feel free to promote something that "looks like" parkour without being parkour, especially for commercial projects. That's what UF did with FRPK before they dropped it. Isn't it ?

So if anyone now was to state freerunning is something different than parkour, I don't see why PAWA should have to officially define a kind of hybrid commercial discipline they don't give a.....of.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Bachelarius on February 12, 2006, 05:25:00 PM
Hey, just to continue this here instead of .net, where people basically coudn't care less:

Quote from: me
How can we make a statement about something that we don't really know about? I mean the only resource out there about it is Jump London and to a lesser extent Jump Britain...

But even there it was meant to say Parkour and was simplified to freerun

The only way foward is if someone interviews sebastien about a word which was misrepresented from the start and lost him a lot of respect with a large community? Good luck to the person that that has that little chat...

Point is that we can't just step in and impose a definition. It's a lot easier to contrast parkour to say... 3run/StreetStunts. Less hastle, there is no bullshit surrounding it and the people behind it are more approachable.

If anyone other than seb makes any sort of statement about freerun (I'm guessing your refering to the media portrayal that it's had, rather than what seb's specifically said about it..), then you will always get ignorant idiots who say 'No it's the same thing as parkour' Nothing anyone says to them will change their mind...

Quote from: Mark
Bach, I find it very interesting tha you say "There is less bullshit and the people around it are more approachable" (or something like that) ...

What makes you think the people around freerunning aren't approachable? Why is there any bullshit?

I mean seriously, we can take that atttitude, or we can take the stance that this IS an issue, that people do confuse and mistake Parkour, and that if WE ALL don't work to fix it, then Parkour continues to get further from the source.



By approachable I meant they are simply easier to communicate with and are more aware of the global scene than Sebastien who has better things to do than to argue politics. It's a lot easier to hold a discussion about their art, one without any questions as to what they are about, than about free run which has a hell of a lot of different interpretations around it. That is the bull shit I talked about. The fact that no one can make their mind about it.

And the (very rough) quote 'free running is going your way. acrobatics are not part of my way, but if it is yours, great' contradicts the idea that freerun=parkour. It has at least two separate definitions, and those are both Seb's... Seeing yet why it's not a topic that people dont particularly want to dwell on?

And if we do give it a stable definition, then what? What will that achieve? Give another (for some people) art of the same thing as 3run? Or another name for parkour? It's just not needed. So yeah, I kinda do see what Jerome and andi meant by this being a waste of time...
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 12, 2006, 05:40:10 PM
Thank you Erwan!

The only reason we were so interested in getting PAWA's response is because it has some adverse effect on Parkour depending on what the final word was. We are not the creators of parkour, nor are we associated with, so figured it would be nice if we would initiate the conversation so parkour would be represented CORRECTLY and in COORDINANCE with the likings of PAWA.

Ive heard a million times "freerunning is like parkour, but without the mindset, leaving room for some added tricks.... blah blah blah"
I believe this is true, it is "like" parkour.... i know its not the same thing, but its surely "like" parkour. Now, the dilema is wheather or not to remove the word 'parkour' from the description of freerunning.

And its not necessarily only used to commercials and paying jobs, i know a bunch of guys that like doing it for fun. More power to them if they have fun. So i wouldnt just drop the term all together, but if what seb says is incorrect, and nobody else is qualified to fully define it... what are we left with?


EDIT: i posted this before bach.

@ Bach. If we start describing it as 3run, that would cause a bit more confustion because 3run describes what they do as street stunts, FREERUNNING, and wushu. I think the term is too far into the mix to just drop it, but thats just my 2 cents.

I'd also like to thank you guys for a nice discussion. Very well mannered and handled nicely. It wasnt very open-minded elsewhere  ;)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 12, 2006, 06:00:31 PM
Erwan, I agree with much of what ytou say, however you attach "commercial" to Freerun, could it not possiby be that there was no commerical intent, but simply to help spread information, and thus "educational" instead of "commercial"?

You also say that some people may wish to use it for that, what about all the people who do it because it is simply what they enjoy, people who do acrobatics, etc?

I agree that UF has done that for commercial projects, indeed David Belle has done commercial projects which show his abilities of what appears to be parkour combined with acrobatics!

As for why PAWA should have to make a statemnt on it, it is VERY clear that many people in the world DO have a misconception, this is what I started out saying, and I am still saying it. PAWA is the worldwide association for Parkour, wouldn't they want to clear up the single biggest misconception about Parkour?

I don't understand they wouldn't??




Bachelarius, in a separate stream of conversation:
"Right from the start, it showed him doing acro, doing inefficient movements, doing the spectacular but the parkour itself was sparse at best."

While i will not assign blame to David Belle, this is what many of his videos showed as well. No, he did not say "this is Parkour" .. and in fact in one video (at least) he says "this is not parkour" ... but for the most part, the founder of the art had many materials out with a representation of mixed arts without an explanation.

(Edit: Added ... I do agree with you that this is what the television shows Jump London and Jump Britain did. I feel the reason (not excuse, not correct) for this was to be ABLE to bring the movement to a bigger platform, primetime television. I think it is the same reaosn that things like "Rush Hour" had flips and other movements.)

I have to say that at best that helped to foster misinformation.

I know that I will probably be attacked and people will paraphrase to me saying "how can David misrepresent what he created" ... but I have just said how, so unless you back it with intelligent commentary, please don't bother telling me what I already know :)

Edit: written before I saw Skippers.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: ERI104 on February 12, 2006, 06:02:00 PM
I use the term "free-running" only to people completly oblivious to the art. Then i go on to use the term parkour for the rest of the conversation and i just tell them that parkour is the more formal word for free-running. I don't know if i should discontinue this because it kind of helps me make the message clearer and gives them a better perspective.... mainly because they hear "parkour" and think its something weird or stupid....but they hear free-running and they automaticall associate running plus something extra.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Erwan on February 12, 2006, 08:21:00 PM
PAWA is about parkour. Freerun is to them something else and you already know why. You KNOW the whole story. I think it is also up to you guys to decide whether you want to acknowledge PAWA's guidance or not. THAT is THE question. ;D
If yes, everybody knows freerun stands for nothing else than an inaccurate and illegitimate substitute name for parkour. To be buried, forgotten, or even denied, as simple as. Unless you enjoy that "freerunning energy drink" so much... ;D

If not, you want to feel free to use whatever name you like, ok, but know that this is exactly the same behavior as choosing to state flips are part of parkour, or that the purpose of parkour is "freedom of movement" and all these kind of misconceptions.
Personnaly, I don't need a statement from PAWA to know that. DO YOU ?!?  ::).............how.........weird.........

If some forumers on parkour.net were not that open-minded to such a topic, yes I agree that hostile reactions are not a good way to bring people together nor to educate people eager to learn or find relevant guidance, totally, but I think ought to you know why, why do you seem to be surprised ? I would even say that most of you guys knowing all the story, it is even a kind of provocation. Come on, talking about freerun on parkour.net ? Are you Mark a newbie on the parkour.net scene or what... It's like asking your dad if it's wrong to lie or steal when you're already a grown-up  ::). Non-sense. My opinion. ;)

So now if you want to still go on debating on (what is to me) a pointless issue, one that has long time been answered...do just as you wish of course !  :) ;)
And last thing, I'm not posting here to try to convince anyone ! It is simply respectfully expressing my opinion. So, I accept people might have different views. This is why, since I am NOT debating, I won't post anymore about this issue not matter reactions or additional questions could follow this note.

Best regards to all, train well, train hard, have fun  :)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Rafe on February 12, 2006, 11:15:38 PM
Skipper I have stated my thoughts before and didn't feel the need to extend on them in this thread they have allready been quoted. If I see a good new argument about the facts or a clear statement by Sebastien I might want to extend on or rescind my position but baring that they're allready in the thread why would I need to restate them.

The only thing that realy boggles me in this thread is Bach's 3run vs. free running thing. Bach I love your posts I follow I find you one of the most informative guys to read in the whole community but we have had this debate before. 3run is freerunning or at best a sub section of free running that refers specifically to three arts that team evolution chose to include in their freerunning.

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 13, 2006, 05:56:11 AM
Erwan, you may read this (I think you prorbably will) ...

The reason why I ask this on Parkour.net is because we DO look to them as an authortiy. With David Belle included in the group how could anyone reasonbly NOT see them as the authority on Parkour?

Now, you raise a good point ...
Quote
It's like asking your dad if it's wrong to lie or steal when you're already a grown-up  . Non-sense. My opinion.

The fact is, everyone, including the people on Parkour.net, as proven very recently in this thread, is STILL LYING or worse, doesnt even know what a LIE IS. (I'm using your anaolgy and wqill continue to)

I have been saying for two years that Seb originially created the term to mean the same as parkour. For two years I have put up with countless arguments and people telling me that's not true. It has come to the point where I was ready to accept Freerunning as "Parkour like movement plus acrobatics with a goal of having fun or showing style".


Now, I ask the question of PAWA, show me one person who had a good, decent, or correct answer?

I know you didn't answer until after I emailed Seb.

So, while everyone continues to have the misconceptions and "lies" I feel it is important to keep asking dad to tell everyone what is a lie and what is the truth. Dad is certainly going to tell them what Parkour is, he has been telling them what Parkour isn't for over a year now, but when I ask a question that is a very real world problem, and I voulunteer to be part of the solution, no bitching by me, no antogonizing, there is no answer.

You of course come in with your normal, polite, well worded responses, but I'm afraid they don't contain any information either.

I've asked a very valid question, we all know people have confusion on this issue, and yet you continue to say that it doesn't deserve an answer.

I feel this is like saying "I will teach parkour to everyone who already understands, but for those who are confused, they should just know what it is already".


You've said you won't answer, you don't have to. What I will continue to try to do is find an answer to this issue which I feel continues to confuse people.


 
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Deft on February 13, 2006, 07:26:58 AM
A while back ago when I posted vids of the group I run with and we called our style Freestyle Parkour. Everyone posted in return and wanted us to not call our sport/art/discipline Freestyle Parkour. A lot of people were REALLY insistant that I call it Freerunning and that it was "definantly not Parkour."

I believe Seb. coined the term Freerunning to help a English speaking audience understand better but somewhere along the way it turned into the category of being parkour but with freestyle and flair (allowing flips, spins and such.) I feel this is the "accepted term for people who do parkour but with a flip or so every here and there.

I do feel that there is a difference between the two and that by calling what you do freerunning over parkour means that it is acceptable when you do a flip and that if you call it parkour then you will get flamed. (I also want to point out that I feel Freestyle Parkour and Freerunning are one in the same. I prefer the term Freestyle Parkour over the other even though it was coined by a sellout- it still best describes what I do since it IS PARKOUR. I feel that removing the term "parkour" from the title destroys a lot of the philosophy I hold so close to heart. I feel that if Seb. knew that by coining the phrase "freerunning" that flips and spins would be accepted he could have just as easily called it Freestyle PK or came up with something better that portrays the fact that the PARKOUR philosophy is still in the mind but a flip and spin can find it's way in there every so often.)

I feel that over 90% of the people here at least "train" Freerunning/freestyle parkour. MY proof is in all the media that gets shared here. It's just that most people only call it training and say it's not "real." I feel that if you take the time to actually TRAIN and LEARN these movements (flag stance, flips, spins, handstands, reverse vaults, and any and all of the other "non-efficient" moves then you are fueling the art of Freerunnung/Freestyle Parkour.

I don't want to point fingers but since the VA pakour scene with the merry men and it having APK on their videos and the Tribe and Dispersion vids. Sometimes they make a video with flip in it and then they flash a silly "flips are not parkour" text across the screen then (most of) the same peope make another video (to sell) and it has flips but yet is being sold as a parkour video and there was no silly "disclaimer."

I think it's cool they flip and such in it and that it is being sold. it is a GREAT piece of work. BUT I feel it has to be called Freerunning or Freestyle Parkour which I haven't seen them do (I may be wrong but don't think so. If I am someone show me.)
I think actions like that fuel the confusion on "is freerunning different than parkour."

(Before all you smite me for my post please remember that I am only trying to express my thoughts on this matter and I am not trying to me negative to anyone in any way. I am trying to share my thoughts on this in a clear and polite manner. I'm sure some people will not like seeing the word "freestyle" brought up agin but I felt it was necessary)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 13, 2006, 08:03:32 AM
Deft, I'm not going to smite you, and I don't think other's should either as you're making a very civilized post of your thoughts.

I will address a couple of points; where you say in all caps it "IS PARKOUR" ... this is the very heart of the problem. It IS NOT PARKOUR.

I will give you the simpliest definition of parkour that I can that I feel maintains accuracy.
Parkour is getting somewhere as fast as humanly possible.

Nowhere in there is there room for "Style", "Extra movement by choice", "Freedom", "Philosophy", "Tricks" or anything else, except moving quickly with a purpose of reaching a destination (for a more complete ans accurate definiton we must add using only the human body).

Until you understnad this basic premise of Parkour, the majority of people will not agree with you.

Now, you say that Dispersion is "called a parkour video so that it could be sold" ... so far, I've given away almost 2X as many as I've charged for, and on the ones I do charge, there is an average "profit" of about .20 out of the three dollars. My pont here is that the video IS NOT for SALE. It is available for free in two formats on this site. Only if someone wants it on a physical DVD sent to them in the MAIL do they have to PAY to COVER the COST of sending them a DVD. So please, stop saying that (yes, you've said it before now).

Secondly, it is stated as a video that contains "Mosty Parkour Movement" on Wikipedia, which is where more than 2,500 of the 4,000 people to download it have seen it.

The ONLY video which states it was done to show Parkour is "Timeless".

The other videos show people doing parkour and other things ... much like David Belle's videos where he is in a gym practicing acrobatics, martial arts, or even hitting a punching bag. These things are not Parkour, but they are in a video. That doesn't mean that David Belle does "Freestyle Parkour" ... it means that he makes videos with more than "just" parkour in them.

I agree that this could be misleading to some,but that's the way it is. So, you have to take the given definition of Parkour from PAWA, and then determine yourself when someone does something in a video that is outside of that.

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Deft on February 13, 2006, 09:15:32 AM
When I mentioned aboup Disp. being sold I was not putting a negative connotation on that.The reason I commented on that is becasue when people post vids on here in the pic and vid thread is primarily for a community of traceurs. We are in the KNOW (even if we disagree on some isues) We know what's up. When people make a professional grade film that can be bought by anyone, obviously considerably more eyes will view that than a video posted here till it expires and/or is shoved to the bottom of the line by time.

I feel when making a "little training video" there is little need to defend all of your actions, but if you are appealing to a larger audience (including a non-traceur audience) and making a buck or two that clarity MUST be maintained.
I don't know about Wikipedia and what it says. All I know is what I got from this site.
(I am not aginst you making money off promoting health and activity in a positive manner that doesn't hurt or steal from anyone. Keep it up! I know that in a matter of time you all wil be making more than chump change)

Quote M2-" will address a couple of points; where you say in all caps it "IS PARKOUR" ... this is the very heart of the problem. It IS NOT PARKOUR."

OK I can see your point. I feel Parkour and Freerunning/Freestyle Parkour are brothers (if not twins) and that because of the "dire efficiency" issue they are forced to sit in the opposite sides of the room and act like strangers. They are identical twins save for the fact of the dire efficiency issue. What I am getting at is that Freerunning/Freestyle PK is definantly a branch that came from the tree of Parkour. I feel that by calling it Freerunning or Freestyle you are denying ANY ties to Parkour.  I feel is Definantly the case which is also why I see so many people (especially those who bash Freestyle) doing the same movements. A while ago I came up with the phrase closet freestylists. I believe this came from my confusion from when I see people point their finger and say "flips are not parkour" and then there is a flip in THAT video (and there might be a slilly discalimer) then they do it again in another video without a disclaimer. I feel that is the essence of Closet Freestylism and that it shows how they are both alive and part of the parkour world.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Asa Liebmann on February 13, 2006, 09:39:48 AM
Quote
They are identical twins save for the fact of the dire efficiency issue

Just like you and I are identical twins save for the fact that we have different parents?

Sorry, but I think that calling two so fundamentaly different things identical is way off.

And as for this "closet freestyle" business, you are once again way off target. You are apparently under the mistaken assumption that traceurs profess to do nothing but parkour. Because a traceur does a flip, or goes on a date, or does the laundry, does this make him or her a closet gymnast, lover, or launderer?

When you understand what Parkour is, you will understand what Parkour isn't.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Deft on February 13, 2006, 10:19:29 AM
Asa- we have talked about this before. NOt everyone who does a flip is a closet freestylist. IF you flip on a regular basis then go to the boards and prech against them THEN you might be a closet freestylist. I restated this to shed light on possible concufions when people's voices are raised against Freetsyle/Freerunning but their actions are congruent with Freestyle. Where is it exactly that I am "way off target"

Asa- Again all you really did was claim that I don't know what parkour withouttelling me why. Youi didn't even hit on my points or throw out any of your own. M2 replied to my post and responded to what I mentioned. He was helping the situation, you are not. I would like to continue this with someone who is actually helpful. All you are doing is jumping in, saying I am wrong with a quick jab, then flee. If you think I am wrong, try to correct me not just  say "you are way off."

(for others- I feel Asa loves to attack my and my posts for some reason but he never really hits on my issues and usually ends by saying something like "you don't understand what parkour is" because my concept is not like his and then leave it at that which isn't helpful at all.)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 13, 2006, 10:59:42 AM
Deft,
Thanks for clearing up what you meant about "for sale, etc.".

I believe I see another area of contention ...
Quote
when people's voices are raised against Freestyle/Freerunning but their actions are congruent with Freestyle.

I think you possibly take two things the wrong way;
1. People "arguing" about Freerunning ... they are not necessarily against it!!
I discuss the differences all the time, but I fully support people that choose this activity!! Look at the major story on APK for the last week (and will be for the next two weeks) ... Freerunning tour!! nowhere does it say (or have to "not parkour") and nowhere does it say this is bad!! The only point that people keep trying to impress to you (and I impress this to everyone) is they there is a difference between the activity you are calling Freerunning and the activity that is Parkour.  Yes, many "purists" put some negative connotation on Freerunning. I disagree 100%. I think they feel negative BECAUSE of the misunderstandings and confusion between freerunning and Parkour, and they are being protective of Parkour.
2. People arguing about "Freestyle Parkour"  there, it is a different story, it is the very term that bothers us, I think my above definition of parkour helps you to see why it is simply an oxymoron, again, no part of Parkour is freedom, creativity, extra movement, there is choice, but only if that choice is what you feel is the fastest way to get somewhere.

So, in my opinion - Parkour - about moving somewhere quickly using only the human body
Freerunning - coined by Seb to originally mean the exact same as parkour, but no used by most people to describe an activity that is "Free Running", running with other movements, acrobatics, style, etc added to it whether it be for fun, training the body, or demonstration purposes.
Freestyle Parkour - meaningless oxymoron that displays a lack of understanding of Parkour

I agree with you that the first two have some relation, and that people who do one may have an affinity for the other. How they are linked is hard to say, and exactly the point of my post on PAWA and on here.

I think that your understanding of it is a perfect example of why we need clarification. PAWA doesn't seem to want to give that clarification, so I am hoping to use this conversation to do that.

I will also be hoefully speaking to Sebastien more. Frankly, his answer throws a wrench in the works as far as I'm concerned, it would be much easier if "Freerunning" could now mean what most people use it as,however his answer didn't really indicate that, and I feel it is fair that we give him the same respect / credit for Freerunning as we do to David Belle for Parkour.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 13, 2006, 11:30:49 AM
Going back to a very good post, someone said that Sebs definition is "an english word for parkour", but Seb explains parkour differently than david. I think Sebs intention matches our perception of Free-running, as it allows things like acrobatics thrown in the mix, but i dont think it can be simplified down to freerunning=parkour. Yes, i would talk to seb more, and im not comming to any conclusions just yet, but it sounds like Seb has other meanings for parkour as if he felt the need to 'expand' on the definition.

Im gonna say for now, that free-running means what its always meant to most of us. On paper, Seb may not agree, but go out and train with seb, things might fall into place a little smoother. (but i cant be sure of that, unless i actually do go train with seb  ;) )
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Deft on February 13, 2006, 11:59:06 AM
M2- You always give me much to consider and I appreciate that.

I use the term Freestyle Parkour over Freerunning because I feel it best describes my actions. I realize that others see it as a contradiction or a oxymoron. I am not calling it Parkour With Whatever I Want. I admit it is not the same as "true" parkour but it holds true to prakour's teachings with a slight modification of flips and spins. (This modification is practised by most ((practically all)) but accepted by only a few) We have all seen the clip of Belle doing a backflip and say this is not parkour but he does not say what it is. If he gave it a perticular name I would call it such. BUt without that I am left with only what I can verify. That being Parkour and Parkour with the allance of Freedom of Style (not necessairly ANY movement in the world. Flow is still the focus) The best term I have found to label this is Freestyle Parkour. I'm sorry that it kills me that you want to take the Parkour out of my title. Parkour is why I go out and run. It is why I have learned to flip. It have taught me about flow and efficiency.  Parkour brought it to me and to eliminate that from my title I feel is to disrespect all that I have been picking up along THE WAY <--- capitols mean in reference to the parkour way.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Bachelarius on February 13, 2006, 12:34:06 PM
Well, I wouldn't say flow is the focus, more fluidity. I.e. you focus more on doing smooth, fluid motions right? You just don't see the need to go all out with the efficincy side of things.

What you fail to realise is the sheer amount of difference there is between an efficient and efficient run.

When we do parkour, we have no need to nominate a movement before we do it. That seems to be the toughest thing for people to understand because most people are so used to training on the normal urban architecture (geometric walls, low rails etc). But go out to a place with wierd architecture or go out to a forrest and then just run through there. Only then will you realise why parkour is the way it is. In that terrain you wont be able to use a technique on that obstacle because it's of such a wierd shape and it requires you to bend in a wierd direction to get past a certain point. And you can't even think of doing a trick because you're concentrating so much on that wierd shape.

You're just running and that's it. Is that really so similar to what you're describing? Do you think it feels the same as your art? Because to me the differences are huge and it surprises me that people can even concider them similar...

[edit] I think this post is very off topic though, Looking forward to seeing what you find out from Seb :) [/edit]
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 13, 2006, 12:42:44 PM
Bach, i know exactly what youre talking about. We had an awesome jam at a national park out here. We probably spent 2 hours on the rocks alone and i wasnt counting, but i figure i did about 2 or 3 named techniques (saut de chat, saut de bras, etc) but the rest was just improv. It really sets youre mind back and you might not be as good as you think you are after a jam like that, but it also gives you a real estimation of where you are at with parkour skills.

I did a write up about it, but i think its long gone by now. it talked about what you mentioned.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 13, 2006, 12:48:31 PM
Quote
it holds true to prakour's teachings with a slight modification of flips and spins

Again, herein lies the problem.

Take my above definiton of parkour, "to get somewhere as quickly as possible"

now, please Deft, explain to me how adding a flip to that "holds true to the teachings" at all?

you can't ad a spin to something defined by directness without changing the very basis of it!!

in a race, would you go purposely out of your way? Would you add additional movement?


If you can exaplin to me how and why you would, then maybe I can see your point.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: button on February 13, 2006, 12:49:09 PM
This is off topic, but I feel I have to say this - Deft, I find it really annoying that you say other people are 'closet freestylers' or whatever term you use. Fair enough you don't understand parkour enough to understand it's impossible to have a freestyle parkour, but why bring others down to your level? Perhaps they're just smart enough to realise they can do their own thing, without needing a name for it to give themselves 'validation'. Does it not occur to you that maybe you have -28 karma because you assume stuff about people you don't know, and tar them with the same brush as yourself?


EDIT: skipper & m2 posted while I was typing. my points still hold true though. http://www.t101.renditionsofreality.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=170 & scroll to the bottom for my thoughts on 'evolved parkour' and why spins & shit are fundamental change in the nature of the art, and why such a change cannot be instigated by newbies such as you, me, bach, skipper, m2, etc...
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Rafe on February 13, 2006, 12:52:36 PM
M2- You always give me much to consider and I appreciate that.

) We have all seen the clip of Belle doing a backflip and say this is not parkour but he does not say what it is. If he gave it a perticular name I would call it such. BUt without that I am left with only what I can verify. That being Parkour and Parkour with the allance of Freedom of Style (not necessairly ANY movement in the world. Flow is still the focus) The best term I have found to label this is Freestyle Parkour

If you want to call what you do by the name david uses, I'll give you two options. David calls the flipping tricking that he does acrobatics he trains with cryrill raffaelli who calls what he does street acrobatics.  He specifically asked if your just doing acrobatics in the street don't call it parkour.

He also offered a synonym for FRPK he called it street circus. I don't think anyone would have problem if you used that either.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: ERI104 on February 13, 2006, 01:02:25 PM
REPLY TO SKIPPS POST

Same thing happend with me when i went pking with gear, random, wolf, and akh in the mountians/river ...we spent 80% of the time pking on rocks and hanging out and stuff. it was alot of fun and it actually gave me insite to what IS and IS NOT parkour :D. Did you go to the same place?

REPLY TO FAELCINDS POST

haha when i wanted to start a pk crew i wanted to call it "city flow circus" i guess it would be appropriate considering at the time i wanted to do flips also lol.

I think we should make it offical that street acrobatics be called "street circusing"  ;)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 13, 2006, 01:10:41 PM
If we call it street circus, we would AGAIN have to answer to david belle as the creator! hahahha is there anything that man cant own?!??!
  ;)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 13, 2006, 01:17:22 PM
There's always the Beale Street Flippers ... those guys are awesome!!!

Now, I think Butto'ns statement is fair, Deft, you don't do yourself favors by talking about other people or by labelling them, for now, can we please just leave tat out of this? I think you'll find if you answer my points and we reach a resolution that alot of the other things won't be so important anymore.

As for Bach and Faelcinds discussion, I think the point is very pertinent to this conversation ... yes, it is called Acrobatics ... but is there any relation when acrobatics is mixed into Freerunning, between that activity and Parkour? which really is my original question.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Rafe on February 13, 2006, 01:25:16 PM
So your question is whether free running can be considered related to parkour m2? Haven't you allready stated that believe that it is so?

In any event, I will go ahead and agree and say yes free running is related to parkour, in the same way the tricking is related to martial arts. Just as tricking takes the movements of martial arts deletes its mindset increase the level of acrobatics in the MA movements and adds other acrobatic elements. So free running takes the movements utilized in parkour deletes parkours mindset and again adds increased acrobatic/aesthetic elements.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 13, 2006, 01:41:09 PM
Faelcind, I personally agree. I'm not sure if everyoe is ready to take your and my word for it though. This is why I wanted an answer from PAWA, but now am simply seeking a concensus among this community, which I feel is all I can do.

Now, we have Seb saying that this isn't what Freerunning is (or at least not really saying it) so I think I need to talk to him more, or else what you feel and what I feel is correct goes out the window, because the creator of the term says it's something different.
 
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Rafe on February 13, 2006, 02:00:37 PM
I allready new seb said that free running was no different then parkour, the issue is not whether he considered free running equivalent to parkour, its whether what he considers parkour is same thing described as parkour by David Belle, or rather the thing now commonly known as free running. From reading his site the later option is what appears to be true. Good luck in talking to him but I have my doubts about him offering clarity on the issue.

If Seb comes out and says that he accepts davids defination and that free running is simply a synonym for Parkour. Then I'll stop using it as to describe that other art. I'll call it street acro or yamakasi or L'art du deplacement there are plenty of names out there for it. Right now I feel that given the information out there free running is the most convenient and logical title for the art.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 13, 2006, 02:04:15 PM
A very fair point, Seb could be saying "Freerunning is just another word for Parkour, you know, flipsand spins and shit" :)

Hopefully I can talk with him and get an answers that does clarify some things for us.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 13, 2006, 02:07:28 PM
lol, isnt that what i said?

but i was just reviving what someone else said earlier.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Deft on February 13, 2006, 02:13:17 PM
Bachelarius- Your post is very confusing.

quote Bach-"What you fail to realise is the sheer amount of difference there is between an efficient and efficient run"
 HUH?

quote Bach-"Well, I wouldn't say flow is the focus, more fluidity. I.e. you focus more on doing smooth, fluid motions right? You just don't see the need to go all out with the efficiency side of things"
 I never said ALL the focus was on flow, but it is a key element. Flow Vs fluidity is just semantics. Fluidity will have flow and flow will have fluidity. As far as efficiency goes. THAT IS THE ENTIRE ISSUE!!!!!! If efficiency didn't have to be maintained then flips and spins would be common place in parkour. 

quote Bach-"You're just running and that's it. Is that really so similar to what you're describing? Do you think it feels the same as your art?
 I have no idea what you are saying or getting at.

quote Button-"Perhaps they're just smart enough to realise they can do their own thing, without needing a name for it to give themselves 'validation'."
  Seb. said that "action without philosophy has no meaning" I feel that my actions (that of Freestyle parkour/Freerunning)  ((right now I am having to defend my actions and their label.  I feel Seb's quote is the reason for my actions and my title. True, everyone can do their own thing but I want my actions to have a philosophy and to not be without meaning. If I just "did my own thing" as button puts it then I am only doing random nonsense. I am doing a modified version of parkour called either Freestyle Parkour or Freerunning. I choose the first. I see a lot of people doing this and call it goofing off. I take my actions seriously and I take my training seriously. There is a category for it and that is what I do. I will never just pass it off as nonsense.
(and my karma is sooo bad because for every 1 remark I make which some may not like I get 10 smites, and I think little clicks gang up and smite people. Kind of like now they rigged the POWs for a while. but that is all in the past)

m2- to get somewhere as fast as possible is parkour. to do EXACTLY that but with the extra challenge of a flip or so is what I call my art. I feel many people think FRPK is "to show off, or to do tricks" but just imagine this trying to flow as fast as possible and to throw in a spin or move that doesn't slow you down. (that is EXACTLY like in the Disp. video except there was multiple flips) That is the challenge of this art. IT is not to be flashy. If it were just that then it would only be tricking.


quote button-"Deft, I find it really annoying that you say other people are 'closet freestylers' or whatever term you use."
  I only point out Freestyle movement amongst "purists" not to point fingers but to show that they are doing exactly what they tell me is wrong and then say "that I don't know what pk is."  I am pointing out those instances to show you we train, play, practise, and all that the same but that you refuse to accept that when you flip in your run that it is not part of this modified parkour. Every time people flip and spin on a pk run they are fueling this modified parkour. Yes, I admit it is not the original pk created by Belle but Everyone who has ever done a flip or spin mid-run has a hand a creating this modified parkour. It's just that I choose to accept this change where as most people do it but not accept it and I can not sit back and just watch that occur without commenting on it.

this is my last post of the day because I am loosing the fire in the belly to continue this
bottom line is most of the people here will continue to do flips, spins, and other non-efficient moves and so will I. I will at least have the decency to call it something like Freestyle or Freerunning Which is direct offshoot of traditional pk, which I feel is better than doing flips, spins and such and just call it parkour which I feel is more of a bastardization of what Belle has created.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Tyson Cecka on February 13, 2006, 02:19:35 PM
Heh, sounds to me like Freerunning is whatever you want it to be ;););)

Quote
Now Freerun to me is still Parkour and means an attitude: travel, meet peoples share your experiences! FREE your mine, RUN over the world!


And what Faelcind has already posted:

Quote
As for david versus seb's definition. I don't see how you can possible say that they're two different ways of describing the same thing. Maybe its the language barrier thing but from reading the site I don't get that impression, the genereal attitude on parkour.com is that parkour is the art of movement to be developed however you see fit, Sebastiens comments all fall in line with this. He says his way his utility, but thats not the same as David saying the way of parkour is utility. What right does Seb have to define parkour apparently no more then he has to call himself the co-founder of parkour, but he does just that on his site. Further evidence that Sebastien's see parkour differently then David can be found in his reference to David practicing the natural method of parkour.

Kinda hits the root of the issue though right?  I think Freerunning is what a lot of people on UF wanted parkour to be so long ago, your own way, your own path, whatever you wanted it to be... And once that view kept using Parkour rather than Freerunning, David finally came out with a definition to set people straight. Seb never did, now just was it his intention to allow people to define Freerunning for themselves or just an English word for Parkour?

And Deft, stop caring so much about what's is in videos on the Internet, do you learn everything in life from videos on the internet? Do the people that made the videos want you to pick them apart and define things by them? Videos are a showcase of skill, unless possibly they are tutorials. When people train they train, when they do parkour they do parkour, when they make videos they are showing their skills... what are you still going on about this crap for?
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Rafe on February 13, 2006, 02:41:10 PM
As far as efficiency goes. THAT IS THE ENTIRE ISSUE!!!!!! If efficiency didn't have to be maintained then flips and spins would be common place in parkour. 

That like saying that if defeating your opponent wasn't an issue in MMA flips and spins would be common place. It misses the whole damn point. There is no parkour outside of efficiency and speed. Efficiency isn't a restriction its the core of the whole discipline if its not the goal of your practice what you do is not in any way parkour, its not modified parkour, its not parkour + its just something else entirely. As long as you fail to accept this simple fact your going to continue to misunderstand parkour, piss of people who practice parkour and collect smites left and right.

Nobody has any problem with you doing what you do flips, spin, splits vaults, musically fart whatever. Your free to do what you like, but if you call it parkour your spreading misunderstanding.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: button on February 13, 2006, 02:55:52 PM
Quote
STrue, everyone can do their own thing but I want my actions to have a philosophy and to not be without meaning. If I just "did my own thing" as button puts it then I am only doing random nonsense. I am doing a modified version of parkour called either Freestyle Parkour or Freerunning. I choose the first. I see a lot of people doing this and call it goofing off. I take my actions seriously and I take my training seriously. There is a category for it and that is what I do. I will never just pass it off as nonsense.

I never said that adding flips and parkour movements together was nonsense, and I didn't imply you didn't take it seriously. Re-read what I said. My point was that some people can simply accept parkour & acrobatics are two seperate things, but some people have trouble accepting this and need a blanket name for what they do.

Quote
I only point out Freestyle movement amongst "purists" not to point fingers but to show that they are doing exactly what they tell me is wrong and then say "that I don't know what pk is."  I am pointing out those instances to show you we train, play, practise, and all that the same but that you refuse to accept that when you flip in your run that it is not part of this modified parkour. Every time people flip and spin on a pk run they are fueling this modified parkour. Yes, I admit it is not the original pk created by Belle but Everyone who has ever done a flip or spin mid-run has a hand a creating this modified parkour. It's just that I choose to accept this change where as most people do it but not accept it and I can not sit back and just watch that occur without commenting on it

See, the thing is, there's no doubt about that someones taken parkour as an inspiration and used it to create something else - but it's not 'modified parkour'. It's taking parkour movements and adding something else to them, it's not taking parkour and adding something. This is why I object to the name 'freestle parkour', and why many people will tell you you don't understand parkour, because the term 'freestyle' is based upon a defintion via the physical movements, but parkour is defined by intent, not moves. It's defined by a certain intent, and you can't have 'freestyle movement within the mindset of escaping or reaching' really, can you?

So, I think it's fair enough if people want to take common parkour movements and add inefficient movements to them to create something else, but you can't take parkour and add inefficient stuff to it, because it's no longer parkour in any form.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 13, 2006, 03:04:45 PM
Quote
Efficiency isn't a restriction its the core of the whole discipline if its not the goal of your practice what you do is not in any way parkour, its not modified parkour, its not parkour + its just something else entirely. As long as you fail to accept this simple fact your going to continue to misunderstand parkour

Bang!! Right on the nose.

Deft, you failed to answer a question of mine before, I'm going to ask you now not to reply to other people in this thread, because frankly you are taking away the usefulnees and prupose of this thread. If you want to "defend" Freestyle Parkour, make your own thread for it :)

Now, if you were in a race, would you add an unnessecary movement?

This is a perfect embodiment of what Faelcind is saying, you can't add extra movement to a race and still have your pupose to be to get to the finish first. You can't add extra movmenet to Parkour and still have it be Parkour, Parkour is not "movements like this and that", parkour is getting their first.


Because by adding even a single flip or purposely adding an uneccesary movemnt, you are CHANGING the INTENT and parkour is defined by the intent of getting there fastest, PERIOD.

So, if you can add a flip or spin and tell me your intent is still to get there fastest, then I'll see your point, but you'd have a hard time logically proving to me that you're adding movement with the intent of getitng there fastest.

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: SkyNative on February 13, 2006, 03:40:45 PM
Very interesting stuff on here. Like others said I wait anxiously for word from Seb, because as the creator he has a right to define the term ("freerunning", although maybe not "parkour") Also I really like Faelcind's analogy..
Quote
That like saying that if defeating your opponent wasn't an issue in MMA flips and spins would be common place. It misses the whole damn point.

But Button's comment,
Quote
My point was that some people can simply accept parkour & acrobatics are two seperate things, but some people have trouble accepting this and need a blanket name for what they do.

While I agree there certainly needs to be a distinction and fully accept that, it would be very convenient, and save a world of time to have a term that means the combination of acrobatics and parkour movements, like "Freerunning." Otherwise whenever someone asks what you're doing you have to go over this entire debate again with all it's fine points to be clear and correct; explaining as Faelcind said it, that"...free running takes the movements utilized in parkour deletes parkours mindset and again adds increased acrobatic/aesthetic elements." I would prefer to describe what Im doing and not have to refer to Parkour, or Parkour movement at all. Unless of course I am doing parkour, then I would be grateful to explain it and spread the accurate word.

As for all this...

Quote
Going back to a very good post, someone said that Sebs definition is "an english word for parkour", but Seb explains parkour differently than david. I think Sebs intention matches our perception of Free-running, as it allows things like acrobatics thrown in the mix, but i dont think it can be simplified down to freerunning=parkour. Yes, i would talk to seb more, and im not comming to any conclusions just yet, but it sounds like Seb has other meanings for parkour as if he felt the need to 'expand' on the definition.

Im gonna say for now, that free-running means what its always meant to most of us. On paper, Seb may not agree, but go out and train with seb, things might fall into place a little smoother. (but i cant be sure of that, unless i actually do go train with seb  Wink )
- Skipper

Quote
I allready new seb said that free running was no different then parkour, the issue is not whether he considered free running equivalent to parkour, its whether what he considers parkour is same thing described as parkour by David Belle, or rather the thing now commonly known as free running. From reading his site the later option is what appears to be true. Good luck in talking to him but I have my doubts about him offering clarity on the issue.

If Seb comes out and says that he accepts davids defination and that free running is simply a synonym for Parkour. Then I'll stop using it as to describe that other art. I'll call it street acro or yamakasi or L'art du deplacement there are plenty of names out there for it. Right now I feel that given the information out there free running is the most convenient and logical title for the art.
- Faelcind

Quote
A very fair point, Seb could be saying "Freerunning is just another word for Parkour, you know, flipsand spins and shit"
- M2

Quote
lol, isnt that what i said?

but i was just reviving what someone else said earlier.
- Skipper

That's the line of reasoning I tried to describe in my first post. Anyways, I guess it's a stalemate until we get more info from Seb, not to kill the discussion or anything.  ;)
 
PS. I wont comment of Deft.
PPS. Is it technically "Freerunning" "Free-running" or "Free Running" ? Parkour.com uses both the second and third. I prefer the 1st though. Hey! Maybe that's how we can justify creating a new meaning for it!! lol. jk
PPPS. "Street Circus" Heelarious!!  ;D
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Gareth EE Field on February 13, 2006, 03:57:10 PM
Try looking at this as the classic debate: objectivism vs. relativism. Objectivists would say that freerunning is just a word for a concept, and it doesn't mean anything different just because people think it does. Relativists would say that people thinking that freerunning is different makes it something else by default.

I liked Derride, but I thought his arguements were a prank on ... well everyone. Objectivism just seems to win, in my mind.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 13, 2006, 04:09:28 PM
Twicthkid, next time, could you dumb it down for me a bit? :P


From Skynative:
Quote
While I agree there certainly needs to be a distinction and fully accept that, it would be very convenient, and save a world of time to have a term that means the combination of acrobatics and parkour movements, like "Freerunning." Otherwise whenever someone asks what you're doing you have to go over this entire debate again with all it's fine points to be clear and correct; explaining as Faelcind said it, that"...free running takes the movements utilized in parkour deletes parkours mindset and again adds increased acrobatic/aesthetic elements." I would prefer to describe what Im doing and not have to refer to Parkour, or Parkour movement at all. Unless of course I am doing parkour, then I would be grateful to explain it and spread the accurate word.

That's exactly why I want to clarify this. Just as I once asked for a definition of Parkour (which some people said was pointless and useless until DB and PAWA made a definiton, then it became a very good idea ;) )

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Deft on February 13, 2006, 04:30:16 PM
Ok. I just read everyone's post and past post about this isue and have been spinning my wheels a lot on this. I have come to the conclusion that there is truth coming from the most of you. I see how I am wrong (but still feel correct on some issues) but none the less, I am admiting defeat. I still feel that the majority of the people on this site and the people who practise parkour as a whole can constitantly train parkour and whatever they want. From now on I will abandon the term Freestyle Parkour. From now on I will just call it Parkour and assumse that when I flip or whatever non-efficient move I happen to do that you all will understand that what I am doing is parkour except for the few seconds of my freestylistic movements.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Tyson Cecka on February 13, 2006, 04:41:58 PM
Congrats Deft, but rather than convincing you with words, go outside keeping what M2 has said in mind (purpose, speed etc.) and do some parkour runs. Once you experience the difference you will be able to figure this out for yourself without the combined whole of APK trying to "defeat" you ;)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: button on February 13, 2006, 05:23:33 PM
Deft, that's just earned you +19 karma. Nice one for being mature about it.  ;D
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 13, 2006, 07:19:29 PM
Deft, you have been reborn. I have set your Karma to +1. I don't like to remove negative Karma, as I feel it should be hard to work off, but you have shown wilingness to listen and learn, and this is one of life's most valuable lessons.

Please don't see it as defeat. Consider that you may have been right, or you may have been wrong, but either way, by being open to the opinions of others, you have won, not lost.

As the others said, try a run for the purpose of getting somewhere in a hurry, or as I do (sometimes), try a run for no reason other than to run, have no thought when you come to a rail, see what happens. In this there is a learning experience.

Then, when you decide to do flips or tricks, enjoy it! Have fun! Go big! But realize that you are doing this by choice, and that your main goal is other than parkour at those times.

Now back to our regularly scheduled arguing :P

I have emailed both Sebastien and Joss, asking both for some clarification that may help put some finality on what  Freerunning  is.



Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 13, 2006, 07:44:51 PM
it would be funny if Joss were to happily explain it in full detail. Whereas everyone on .net said its not their business and you shouldnt ask pawa to so such a thing because it has nothing to do with parkour. Maybe they just didnt see the real question, who knows, but hopefully we get some good answers so we arent stepping on anyone's toes in the future.

and deft, congrats. youve earned all that karma. now invest it properly  ;)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Sam Slater on February 14, 2006, 09:35:11 AM
I just went through this entire topic and I have read and re-read these definitions that are presented and I wanted to pose a question.

I agree that there must be a certain mindset that is had by persons who practice Parkour.  This I do not deny.  I do not however see this mindset in the definitions of Parkour.  Parkour seems to constantly be defined as performing a series of motions that will quickly maneuver the individual from A to B.

Sebastian's definition of Freerunning seems to be an attempt to define a mindset or a discipline that has it's foundations in the practice of Parkour.  When he says "Free your mind, Run over the world", I interpret that as saying that by practicing Parkour, you can reinvent the way you view your surroundings.

I am in no way saying that this is how the term is commonly used.  I am simply attempting to use the response that he has already given M2 to attempt to understand his logic. 

As a result, I find that this is almost how I use the term Freerunning.  I see it as a mindset that uses Parkour as a means to express said mindset, by unconventionally move from point to point through an environment that would otherwise have you move in a less direct manner.  It would seem that in order to further the notion of personal expression and freedom of thought, that the inclusion of acrobatics into this practice must be seen as conducive in some manner.  So yes, I see Freerun as Parkour with acrobatics, however as I am inclined to follow definitions from the person credited to have coined the phrase, I also include the mindset behind that practice. (Subsequently I think that this is what Deft is looking for, as it defines a mindset, however it does not restrict the practitioner to simply Parkour)

I would however like to see some quote from Belle defining parkour as not just physical actions.  The definition that he has created is very unappealing, in my opinion, as it does not, so far as I can tell.  I have hear and read that the practice of Parkour carries over into other areas of your life so that you are always looking to overcome obstacles in your way, however that is a result of the physical and not part of the definition.  (I suppose my martial arts background has me looking for him to create a system similar to what Foucan has where Parkour is either redefined as a means to an end, or where is part of a specific "way" that one is striving for.  Yes, I know that this "way" is there, however if he does not define it then situations such as this can and do arise)

Aside
This is me simply finding the need to type my thoughts on some notions brought up in this thread.  I have to warn those who dare to read on that there will more than likely be no resolution to this discussion found in the following.  You have been warned

In a response to the "is there a difference ..." question, I have to agree that common necessity of a word that combines the practice of acrobatics and Parkour have changed Freerunning to mean just that.  Now I know that people may say that simply changing the meaning of something in common language does not make what you have done is correct.  This logic is true with statements or notions, however with language it is the case that it is almost impossible to keep meanings from changing.  Languages are used to convey notions or describe things.  What seems to be the problem here is that the community cannot agree on a common language (which I am sure is M2's reason for this topic).  So how do we come to the concensus on what means what.  I can see three options:

1:  Defer judgment and definition to a higher authority - This seems to have been M2's initial attempt.  The problem that exists is that the current authority is ignorant of the scope of their judgement and wishes to take the path of rejecting the notion that there is an issue that needs to be resolved. 

2:  Consensus of the masses -  This very democratic approach seems to be where this thread is heading.  If a majority seems to use a term a certain way, then that is the way the term shall be used.  The problem that I am sure will arise with this is that people, despite the fact that they live in a system of government that is run this way, are so wrapped up in personal freedom that they will reject any attempt at creating definitions that are not the same as their own despite the will of the majority.

3:  Abandon new terminology - It is always an option to revert to more formal use of a common language to describe actions in more detail to avoid confusion.  For example, instead of using the term "Parkour" simply say that you are practicing a method of moving through an environment to quickly traverse a set distance from point to point.  The problem with this is that we are always in search of a way of communicating more efficiently, and as such spouting definitions for everything would be tedious.

Where does that leave the debate?  As of now, nowhere.  As most of us did when the "what is parkour" debate first erupted over on UF, we will have to wait and hope that this higher authority will save us from our dilemma.  I hope that you receive a productive response from Sebastian M2, as it would seem that without clarification from him, this topic could be for naught.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: LockDown on February 14, 2006, 12:45:21 PM
This debate is very interesting...
from my point of view, parkour is already defined by PAWA in a mindset type way. by saying that parkour is getting from A to B in the fastest way with the human body only... free-running, meant as a synonym for parkour but not, is different to me because Sebastian the one credited with making the term explains parkour in a separate way. making the term, free-running, a different discipline. one that is more open allowing acrobatics and going back on yourself and anything else up to the practitioner.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Matthew Lee Willis on February 14, 2006, 12:53:56 PM
I will be touching on things that have or might have already been said or announced but since I am just now reading this whole thread for the first time I am going to go ahead and give my opinion.  After hearing about how free running was something that was suppost to just help Americanize the sport I have a few views on the term.

First of all.  Even though it might have originally made since as just something to explain parkour it has become its own term.  Independent of what parkour originally started as.  I even thought that there was a break away from Seb and David because of the definition of these terms.  I might have been wrong in this but it is what I have seen from much of my research.

On another note the fact that Deft and I have been talking about this non conformity that has been happening with the community is ridiculous. When I first started the rant about Freestyle parkour back in who knows when...one of my original thoughts was the fact that I thought that FREESTYLE could not be taken out of the community.  Well, I was wrong.  I don't hear the term any more and I see everyone moving toward a Utopian consideration of the true meaning of parkour.

A while back Deft and I had both argued about this hypocrisy of terms when "training."  We did not like the way that you could move back and forth from efficiency to non efficiency.  So this is why we stuck to our guns.  One day only following the basic movements of David Bell and its philosophy and the other days moving with this freestyle aspect.  We both very much understood what parkour had represented and it effect on what we had kept up with. (the demoralization of its name)

Unknown to some of you our little (62 members) group here in Texas has been getting stronger and stronger.  With the news of interviews from many different television stations and the possibility of a nation wide chain actually contacting me on putting together a tutorial about parkour and its philosophies.  Deft and I have decided to move back from this term that we so HEART-LY debated to try and be more centralized with where the true movement of parkour was going.  So today too I will be stepping away from this term that has such negative connotations from its formation.

I appreciate all that who have been pointed enough to argue with us and discuss and to shove us around even a little and tell us that this term was never going to survive.  So with us this word will die.  And to use someone Else's terms...we will be reborn again to do true parkour and to do training.  With all of our emphases on parkour and its philosophy.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 14, 2006, 01:45:20 PM
MLW, I have DOUBLED your smites for just being a copycat of Deft.


Just kidding, I'll "reboot" you as well.

I'm happy you two have come to this decision, I hope it is because of true understandning and not conformity. Understanding is great, conformity sucks :)

Disciple: Holy Book!! Now I know what is going to put me to sleep tonight :) Will read & respond later :)


Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Rafe on February 14, 2006, 02:12:09 PM
Congrats to MLW and deft for coming over from the dark side  :P . Seriously though I thought this debate was one of those that would never see resolution simply the hardening of sentiment on both sides. Regardless of won or lost, I think respect is in order for being able to be open minded and see a different veiwpoint. Thats an applaud for both of you. I hope that dedicating your practice to the core ideals of parkour will impart as much meaning to your practice as it has to mine.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 14, 2006, 02:21:36 PM
Quote
MLW, I have DOUBLED your smites for just being a copycat of Deft.


HAHAHAHAHAHAH!

I hope you two will begin to gain all the knowledge possible now that the ears are open! welcome  ;D
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Gareth EE Field on February 14, 2006, 02:37:10 PM
I still like Rob's (DJ Hangman's) idea of what to do with the situation.

We may not be actually capable of coming up what parkour IS, so let's come up with parkour IS NOT. As in: eating a sandwich is not parkour. Stabbing myself with a fork is not parkour. Tripping on acid is not parkour.





JK, this was supposed to be humorous, please don't say that this is just another flips are not parkour thing ...
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 14, 2006, 04:23:43 PM
Tripping on Acid will give you more imaginative creatures to run from... so in a way... it could be?

lol
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Matthew Lee Willis on February 15, 2006, 11:49:51 AM
lol Twitchkidd How I love it when people put two D's in kid.  At anyrate.  This is a sense of conformity in a way.  I am conforming to the truth.  I am still do not like some of the aspects that come from just base of parkour. 

I truly hate to say this but until some group comes up with rules and regulations on this philosophy we will never get a 100% accuracy of its true worth.  I would burn the office to the ground of course if this happends because a lot of parkour represents is in the heart.  Poets have been trying to write their feelings and thoughts on paper forever now and we have never been able to explain anything.  Everyone will have their own view.  I am happy to try and follow as closely as I can to what David belle has lyricized.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Flippusmn on February 15, 2006, 01:01:32 PM
For once I agree with you Matthew, there aren't really any true rules or regulations unless we are talking VOCABULARY. You can't just call something Parkour, Parkour is Parkour. For this we must go to the inventor, the philosophisers and practitioner, even some may say leader. Maybe it is about time David Belle or Seb specifies things a bit more to the point where the debating over such isn't so harsh and confusing. Or we could go with what we think ourselves and put all to debate about aside and call Parkour something it is not. Maybe it is about time Parkour is in the dictionary. ;)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 15, 2006, 01:50:21 PM
Hmmm ... I'm not tryign to be a jerk here, but Parkour is not poetic. It is not philosphy, it is not opinion, and it is not subject to the interpreter. Parkour in fact isn't flow, or even fluidity. As Skipper has said many times, these things are byproducts of moving with a set goal in mind and improving the way you move.

I think we all pretty much agreee that Freerunning suits those things, but Parkour IS defined, it is defined by a prupose, an intent. True, only the practitioner can say what their intent is, but if it doesn't match the intent of Parkour, then it just aint Parkour :)

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: ERI104 on February 15, 2006, 05:39:59 PM
parkour: getting from point A to point B as best as possible

free-running: the byproducts of moving with a set goal in mind and improving the way you move....
-- according to M2


what i said earlier was:  Parkour is the idea + the movements, while free-running is the movements alone....

Was what i said correct? i think it is but maybe it needs to be refined a bit...
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 15, 2006, 06:39:47 PM
by "byproducts" I only meant the "flow and fluidity" ... the other things aren't even byproducts.

I think what you say has value, but isn't completely correct / true / whatever we want to call it.

Parkour must have the intent of reaching somewhere as quickly as possible using the human body. Saying "+ movements" makes it sound like "specific" movements make up parkour, when they really don't. There are movements that will turn out to be useful more often than not, but in any situation what is useful can and will change, but the intent is the same.

As for Freerunning, it's not reaslly "the movements" since as I explained above, there is no "the movements"

That's the way I see it anyway.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Matthew Lee Willis on February 17, 2006, 10:49:10 AM
ask people from pawa.  They would not describe parkour as an A to B action.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 17, 2006, 11:15:29 AM
right, dont think of it just as A to B. Dont think in terms of start and finish because if you were being chased, youre gonna run until you get away, not until you get to the next lamp post.

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Deft on February 17, 2006, 11:28:04 AM
Wouldn't be the same thing as point A to point B except for that you don't know exactly where point B is until you are there. Point B could be past the next lamp post, or as soon as you get behind a locked door, or away and out of harms way. Even if you don't know where you are going or how long it will take, there is still a start and a stop to it all.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 17, 2006, 11:56:53 AM
But when you say point B, that implies that there is a physical 'point' that you are seeking. this is where the confusion comes in and thats why most have abandonned the description as "A to B".

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Deft on February 17, 2006, 12:12:59 PM
I see what you're saying but I feel every run has a start and stop(you have to start somewhere and you have to stop somewhere) and usually when I am practising alone I just try to "GO" and I stop when I have to. So my "end point" or "point B" is ususally unknown to me until I am there.


"Know matter where you go, there you are."- From Pig Killer in Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: ERI104 on February 17, 2006, 01:16:51 PM
i think i'll have to agree with deft on this one....well atleast we share the same opinion on this single item in the vast ocean of controversial topics within the parkour community.

parkour is getting from point A to point B no matter where point B is. where ever you stop can be that second point it doesn't have to be a pre-determined area.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 17, 2006, 02:17:19 PM
But Point B in your application (and in every parkour application) is not actually a known point. Im not saying that you cant describe it as A to B, im saying that saying A to B is among the misconceptions and easily confused statements in parkour, thats why most of us dont use it anymore, because when you explain to a newbie that parkour is just "A to B," they will immediatley plot out their runs saying "ok that wall is point B and if i get there then i have done parkour".... thats NOT the mindset that I am trying to advertise.

Again, thats just an easy to confuse definition, and i feel that its not such a huge loss if I just stopped saying and used one of the other 100 correct interpretations we have for parkour.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Tyson Cecka on February 17, 2006, 04:12:47 PM
Most of the time the misconceptions about these things arise from people trying the take examples or guidance too literally. Examples like chase scenarios, "A to B", absolute efficiency, etc. Were all created to help people understand Parkour, not give them a concrete definition they twist and confuse themselves with. You have to go and learn what Parkour is truly about by going out and moving with the correct mindset (or by developing the midset after a lot of experimentation and action like most of us did), takes time and can't be boxed into little definitions or analogies.

here's a helpful post I saved:

Quote
I'm sure many of us have heard of the old "Draw a straight line from A to B on a map" quote right? And that's where most of you got hung up on Parkour being boring because of the straight line thing? Well, f#ck the straight line thing. That quote was originally intended to help describe efficiency but people starting taking this quote (as well as many others) waaay too literally.

Instead, think of it this way - Make up a path of you're own. You don't really have to have a destination goal and it most certainly doesn't have to be a straight line. In this path you will use movements that are efficient/ swift/ easier performed to YOU. Not anyone else. Parkour is not a game of numbers. It is not, choose an ending point and calculating THE most absolute, efficient techniques and number of steps and path to used to get there.

Parkour is here to be used. David's intention for Parkour was for it to be taken up and therefore making the people who practice it usefull. Usefull in that through practicing Parkour you gain ability to get places fast. Faster than most people. However, not everyone who practices Parkour, is the best traceur in the world and can overcome every obstacle or challenge. Like Skipper said, diffrent people will take diffrent paths. Some vault, some vault, some underbar. Whatever is comfortable and effiencent.

anyone remember who it was from, forgot to write that. One of the few helpful people on UF from a long time ago most likely, Sov? M2? Dan?
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: ERI104 on February 17, 2006, 04:33:29 PM
i really like that quote you have there undaunted. That definition (or whatever you want to call it) is a lot better than the point A to point B stuff. and now i understand why you guys don't use it! ahh life is so much sweeter when understood....or more bitter....okay moving on....
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: CabPettit on February 17, 2006, 05:02:42 PM
Ok, so I'm new to the boards..so please don't like flame me all at once or something. I just spent a half hour reading all this to catch up haha. I haven't really been a Traceur, I've just been a free-runner in a different sense than I think you all think of, in fact most Parkour is new to me.

As a free runner in my definition I can tell you that free running to me is really just a thrill seekers area. It's a "sport" that the free runner picks up not to get somewhere in particular but instead just to become content enough with thrill for the day. I know that sometimes I look at things and figure out ways to get passed them, not the quickest but the one that would be the most fun. And as I look at all the Parkour it seems that the Traceurs run they run with intent to get somewhere. Or at least they make it seem like that
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 17, 2006, 05:56:27 PM
Hey man, welcome!
Nobody cares if youre a traceur, freerunner, circus performer, etc. As long as we can have intelligent conversations, and you just educate yourself, everyone can play nice.

I get what youre saying. its a fun thrill at times. I used to just go nuts with everything i did, but for the sake of my joints, I settled down on seeing how high i can drop from. lol.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: ERI104 on February 17, 2006, 06:05:01 PM
Quote
circus performer
  WOW thats what i do!!!
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: CabPettit on February 17, 2006, 06:59:19 PM
Psst....secretly I want to be a circus ninja pirate......


Yeah I can see where you would eventually get cautious about the joints. I'm not worried about it yet, but I will probably be eventually. I guess I'll just have to enjoy good knees while I still can.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 17, 2006, 10:53:20 PM
CabPettit, you're the perfect example of how things become over complicated ...

being "Brand new" you've come up with a very simple and dead-on description of the difference.

See, it's really not so hard :)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Kipup on February 17, 2006, 11:11:47 PM
Quote
free running to me is really just a thrill seekers area

CabPettit -
 Ã‚   That's an interesting way to look at the activity, but to many, Freerunning is more than just a physical activity. Even if we can't all agree on a concrete definition, most people will tell you the this type of "thrill seeking" does not fall into even the MOST liberal definition of Freerunning. To define freerunning as you have, is to deny any and all roots in Parkour, something which few on these boards are willing to do. Your definition of freerunning is actually a perception that many of the members of these boards work hard to eradicate. Personally I believe that both Freerunning and Parkour are much more than simple "thrill seeking".

I reccomend you read the "What Parkour is" and "What Parkour is Not" summaries found on the home page. These articles will give you a good idea of the beliefs of most people on these boards.
http://www.americanparkour.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=221&Itemid=1
http://www.americanparkour.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=223&Itemid=1

Quote
I guess I'll just have to enjoy good knees while I still can.
- I strongly advise you to start caring about your joints IMEADIATELY. The more care you show your body now, the longer it will last you.

M2 - You would be fine accepting a new definition of Freerunning that denounces all roots in Parkour??
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 17, 2006, 11:37:54 PM
Freerunning has no roots in parkour, parkour has roots in freerunning. When you were a child, did you ever try and gain maximum efficiency while over comming obstacles, or did you just jump off shit with no purpose? Hah, dont take that comment super serious, its just something to think about, not comment on.

Some people say parkour is a mindset, if you dont have the mindset, what are you left with?

What kind of roots connect parkour and freerunning? you might do some of the same movements, but what can you say? "freerunning is like parkour without the mindset".... kinda like saying some new sport is like basketball without the ball.

Thats the thing with freerunning, What rules or definition say it cant be just thrill seeking? I swear to god I will shoot myself in the liver if i ever have to moderate a thread saying "Flips arent freerunning!" Parkour is set in stone, we know what it is, no mystery and its not what you want it to be. Freerunning on the other hand, is exactly what it says it is, its running with freedom. Do a flip, do a spin, jump off of something, whatever, can you say thats not freerunning? Hell, i even get a thrill from doing parkour, let alone freerunning.

The links you gave him do well with describing what parkour is and isnt, it says nothing about freerunning though. So those dont account for everyone on these boards. For all I care, he can have no idea what parkour is, and only know about freerunning. I would like everyone to know about everything just in case they were trying to argue a point, correct info always helps, but if he just wanted to talk about freerunning (and avoid pointless pk threads, we all have seen them haha), then by all means.

I would like to see people educate themselves about the human body and nutrition and proper care, be careful about joints and such, and take what they do seriously and have it become their life.... but ill be damned if i ever yell at someone for not taking parkour or freerunning serious enough. We do parkour because its fun, its up to the individual to decide how weaved into their life it will become.  :)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 18, 2006, 07:35:31 AM
Kipup, I think you are mixing terms here. Parkour and Freerunning are related in a very vague and ambiguous way, not a very direct way. Freerunning (as we currently use the term) ISN'T related to parkur in the sense of philosophy and purpose, only in a physical sense, and the physical sense, while certainly present in Parkour, is not nearly the defining part of it, the physical is just what happens when you do the mental.

One thing that people are going to see is a slight change from me, we've all (Im the most guilty) gotten into this bickering over little shit on the internet mode, and I think we should work to fix it (at least I will)

So when I tell someone I think they have the right idea, please don't read every word, read the intention, the broad strokes. Also take into consideration what that person's views are.

If a new person show a bit of understanding, it should be complimented and fostered, not squashed with Parkour Nazi precision.

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 18, 2006, 07:39:16 AM
internet sucks!
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Kipup on February 18, 2006, 08:13:24 AM
Skipper - Thanks for your thoughts on Parkour being rooted in Freerunning. I've never thought of that before and will have to take it into consideration.
Quote
For all I care, he can have no idea what parkour is, and only know about freerunning.
As far as this goes, I know that he is a Freerunner, and that as such he doesn't have to know what Parkour is. But he seems new, and considering that many on these boards practice Parkour, I thought that a little more information might not hurt. As you guys have consistently said "Our goal [at APK] is to educate the people about Parkour and Freerunning and let them make the decision as to which is better for them"

M2 - I recognize what you are trying to do and respect it.

I was NOT trying to force my views on to CabPettit, rather give a new member of the community more information about the discipline I love: in hopes that he will do whatever he wants to with that newly acquired info.

CabPettit - I hope I didn't come off as a conformist "Nazi". That is not the first impression of the community I want you to be left with.
Let me start again up by saying: Welcome to the community! Read up on PK (it is some interesting stuff) if you want to, if not just keep on doing your thing!
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 18, 2006, 08:39:05 AM
Right, It just sounded like you were giving freerunning the same background, philosophy and reputation as parkour at the time. "its more than just a thril, etc." implies that both parkour and freerunning have that deep mindset, whereas, we havent quite figured out a definition for freerunning, but its definately more physical than mental.

no harm no foul though, thanks for the input kip!
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 18, 2006, 09:27:00 AM
Kipup, the "Nazi" comment was definitely not aimed at you, I hope you didn't take it that way. I am talking about the general feel of many of the internet boards for Parkour, not even necessarily APK, but I don't want APK to ever get like that :)
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: CabPettit on February 18, 2006, 11:06:48 AM
Thanks for all the input. It took me awhile to read(slow reader), but it makes sense.

Kipup-I dont take offense that easy (besides the only real way to get me mad is to mess with my shoes). However, you are right though I did come here to read up on Parkour with an interest. I am starting to think though however that a word defined meaning is useless unless you experience it. And that's where the confusion is I think, because if I wanna go out and practice Parkour, how do I know that I'm not just free running still?


I don't add that question to add a lot of complication, even though I know it will most likely get a lot of people thinking about it and cause a longer conversation here. So, there are actually obvious distinctions between free running and parkour, or to at least what some people define it is as. But how can you tell the difference when things get way similiar? Is it really how you think about what you are doing or is it what you are doing?

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Kipup on February 18, 2006, 11:42:52 AM
Quote
I am starting to think though however that a word defined meaning is useless unless you experience it
\
Cab - That's a pretty deep insight, especially for someone new to the Parkour/Freerunning world - nomatter what we say online, you should just do what you enjoy the most.

Quote
wanna go out and practice Parkour, how do I know that I'm not just free running still?
Very simply, if you define freerunning as just the actions, then you know you are doing Parkour when your intention is either to escape something or to reach a certain (physical or mental) goal. If we use these modern definitions, freerunning is when you are just messing around training - looking for that thrill, while Parkour is when you are moving in a manner that will speedily/eficiently get you from point "A to B".
For exapmle: if you are in front of your school which consists of railings, stairs, pillars, dividing walls, ext... and you pick a spot on the other side of the building, your goal goal being to get there as quickly as possible using your environment to your advantage - your run to that spot is considered Parkour.
Does that make sense?

More useful Pk info...
Now, because no two environments are exactly the same, the movements you use to traverse this space are always unique. This is why there is no set "trick list" of movements to master, because Parkour can consist of any concievable movement of the human body. The "basics" consist of various vaults and other techniques that can frequently be used in many different situations. It is reccomended that you train these basics early on so that when you confront a new situation, you have a large arsenal of movements to negotiate your environment with. The more experienced a Traceur comes, the more easily he is able to negotiate a complex environment.

...Just some thoughts I wish had been presented to me when I first started. I hope I didn't get carried away - just trying to help educate
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 22, 2006, 07:56:53 AM
I have an answer from Joss now. I believe from his response that he has also spoken with David, but that is not necessarily true. THis is also posted on the homepage, I feel it will be a very important step in ending many of the arguemnts over what is / isn't parkour or freerunning. The other piece to this is Sebastien's answer, since Freerunning is really Sebastien's term. I feel that this answer is fairly consistent with the way that most people use the term "Freerunning" today, albeit I think people do it for fun as well as exercise and self improvement, where the PAWA statement takes more of a stance of "showing off".


From Joss:
Free Running ? A kind of demonstration mixing parkour technics, and acrobatics to be more spectacular and serve the medias and marketing, but also a sport. The term Parkour has been invented by David Belle and Hubert Koundé in 1998 and the word Free Running has been created much later by Sebasten Foucan for the purpose of spreading Parkour in a marketing fashion (they thought the word "parkour" wasn't international enough and Sebastien Foucan proposed them this word).
The problem is that they fully mixed acrobatics to impress people. This is where Freerunning becomes different from Parkour.

To make a comparison, Free Running is like artistic katas in martial arts, the goal is only to be spectacular.

So it is related to parkour but doesn't answer to the same philosophy. I mean, when you pratice to show how spectacular your jump is gonna be, people aren't focused anymore on the difficulty, on the obstacle but on you. This showing off attutude isn't the parkour philosophy which preaches for humility. In this, Free Running and Parkour are fundamentally opposite even if the first one is related to the second one. Like the traditional way and the freestyle way.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Skipper on February 22, 2006, 08:03:05 AM
thats seems to be a pretty expected answer  ;) glad joss could help us out! say thanks to him for me  ;D
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Brian Belida on February 22, 2006, 09:18:21 AM
Groovy, it's good to have something said from Joss about it.
It's also a nice show as to how close and awesome the entire parkour community is!

Then again maybe I'm a big sap :p
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: SkyNative on February 22, 2006, 09:42:02 AM
I posted this comment under the news item but it can be deleted as it's more appropriate here...

"...the goal is only to be spectacular."
"This showing off attutude..."
 
If that's what freerunning is about then I don't do freerunning. But I disagree that that is the only goal, or even a primary goal. While it may be for some freerunners, personally my main goals are to have fun, advance my skills, and stay in shape. It's still very creative, so it's more an art than a sport. I would even propose that freerunning allows for even more creativity than parkour. 
 
I await Sebs call, since it's his word he seems to be the #1 authority on it. hmmm :?
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Gearsighted on February 22, 2006, 10:23:14 AM
I also posted this on the main-page...I think they both belong in both places:

I would say that this is where the difference lies. Parkour is much less about being creative in the standard sense of the term. The creativity comes from your use of basic tools to overcome increasingly complex environments rather than using increasingly complex tools that don't necessarily get the job done any better.
 
In Parkour, you are creative in your choice of paths through any given environment (which is a direct correlation to your mastery of basic skills through many various possible obstacles). In freerunning you are creative in your choice of movements for their own sake, independent of the environment, in a sense.

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Sam Slater on February 22, 2006, 10:50:12 AM
Also posted under news article.  Slight editing done after review.

I will not repeat what I said in the thread on this topic (referring to previous posts). I would like to ask if this "parkour philosophy" is needed to Parkour. Using a physical discipline as a vessel for a philosophical one does not create necessity in the other opposite direction. I am not stating that I feel that Parkour should be done without this philosophy intertwined within it, I am simply stating that the comparison or debate on these two activities seems to move more into comparing the philosophy that is behind these activities at times, and seems to me that it is possible to have the underlying philosophy without the specifically defined actions, or vice versa. If it were placed in a definition that the actions were dependent upon the philosophy then that would be different, however most definitions that I have read define Parkour as the method of escaping or reaching (or something along those lines), and not as "the method of escaping or reaching that is done in the pursuit of the following virtues/mindset/etc."

Not that the follwing statement is in any way a positive contribution, but I like Gear's comparison.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Deft on February 22, 2006, 10:56:04 AM
Seb. Foucan- "Action without philosophy has no meaning."
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Sam Slater on February 23, 2006, 09:05:17 AM
Yes, action without philosophy has no meaning.  My point was that a specific philosophy and these specific actions have not been tied together in definition.  Due to this it is possible to perform these actions without the philosophy that has been implied, but with a different philosophy.  I have not been attempting to state that there is not a philosophy that people should or should not follow, I have simply been attempting to illustrate the point that in an attempt to define these actions, people have alluded to the philosophy behind them, and then arguments/discussions have taken place on these philosophies and from what I have been reading, some people have begun to confuse the definitions of these actions with the philosophies behind the actions. 

Short response:  Yes, physical needs mental, but physical is not mental.

**Note: I do realize that the "short response" can be disputed by individuals who do not have a world view that is based upon duality of the individual, however I stated that response in that manner as I felt that it would be generally easier to understand.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: SkyNative on February 24, 2006, 09:40:36 PM
Well since there hasn't been much discussion on this since the new Seb post Ill start off, here's the original...

Quote
M2: Do you think the PAWA definition of Parkour is "The" defintion, or only "a" definition?

Seb: I don't know what is the Pawa Definition sorry! But Parkour is Parkour but each person can do his own Parkour, This is Free...Running attitude, Who has the truth? For me "the Way" is the truth!

M2: Do you think parkour includes movements like a flip or a wall spin?

Seb: Parkour is for everyone and it's includes what you'd like to include! but Argue isn't and will never be PARKOUR!

M2: Can Freerunning contain these things, a flip or a wall spin? What is the main purpose of Freerunning?

Seb: Freerunning or Parkour it's the same! It's absolutely Free . I prefer definitely the functionality, Parkour is basically efficient!!! People should never forget the basic! Also the positive attitude!!! ;)
(bold mine)

Although, as M2 said, this is still somewhat vague, it seem to me that our hypothesis was correct; That although Seb believes that Freerunning=Parkour, he has a different definition, or understanding of what parkour actually is than the generally accepted Belle/PAWA definition. It's certainly arguable that he doesn't have the right/authority to redefine "parkour" however he does have free reign over "freerunning." So I think it's ok to accept his definition of "freerunning" while not accepting his idea of "parkour" even though, to him, they are one in the same. I bolded some particular parts that make me believe his idea of "parkour" is more in line with our accepted idea of "freerunning"

So what do yall think. I am confident enough now to use the term freerunning as an inclusive style that can involve many different types of movement including flips, spins, etc.  without concern of misrepresenting it.

PS, Im still wondering about the prefence of a. "Freerunning" b. "Free Running" or c. "Free-Running"
"Freerunning" seems to be the most commonly used in his message.
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Mark Toorock on February 25, 2006, 06:17:01 AM
I agree sKynative, I think that this verifies the way we have been using "Freerunning". It won't change my mind that David Belle's definition of Parkour is "The" definition.

I also feel this works very well for the community, we now have two different activities, neither of which needs to conflict with the other. I don't feel either one is good, bad, or better, just different. I feel they are loosely related in that many people who enjoy one may enjoy the other and that for the most part they'll be similar types of people who enjoy both.

My biggest hope for this is now when people talk about one or the other, they don't feel a need to be condescending or anything towards the other one.

Two separate activities, two separate goals or reasons, zero need to argue.

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Rafe on February 25, 2006, 02:13:27 PM
Whose our Skynative. I remember at the begginning of this site when I argued this line of thought many people argued that free running was just a snynonym for parkour. In any event glad to see everone coming to similar understanding  ;D. Clear definations defineatly foster healthy dialogue.

Free Running = The discipline described by Foucan

Parkour = The discipline described by Belle

Art Du Deplacement = Overall term covering both

Yamakasi = Same thing as free running named years earlier.

Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: klaymen on February 25, 2006, 06:57:10 PM
*ahem* 100th reply
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Exo on February 25, 2006, 09:50:08 PM
yes
Title: Re: Is Freerunning Different than Parkour?
Post by: Brian Belida on February 25, 2006, 10:25:54 PM
Oh Exo, you so cryptic :]