Bak on ma MURDER, 1. Comment Only
Posted on: 2014-04-26 13:09:39

It's that bully shit. Comment Only
Posted on: 2014-04-26 14:37:18

ACs Comment Only
Posted on: 2014-04-26 15:08:55

I felt one had a good verse with all the ingredients to kill most on here though there was one point where I was like wtf with the rhyming. My winner picled up on this and used it to his advantage as well as throwing in some nice punches that hit harder due to the high volume of personals. The abba rhyme scheme near the beginning spoiled the flow a little at the beginning for me though. Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-26 18:42:32

This came down to who was more polished conceptually. Their set-ups were clearer and more established. Grizz: Opener was very Grizz-esque. Perhaps a slightly awkward wordplay with the "nip'll/nipple". The set-ups leading up to the next punch were on point - very good use of schemework: The reference and then the punch made the buildup fall off a little, I didn't really like the concept. There was a lot of filler to follow that, but I liked the scheme you used. Coming up to "GUY BE IMPORT'IN" punch - it wasn't clear nor was it a concept that I would consider hard hitting. Next scheme - a bit awkward and forced. Out of all the Pistorius references I've read recently, yours was more original, but that comes with the risk of being unclear. I liked the complexity of the closer, again, very Grizz-esque but I feel you may need to push the clarity so that it is boldly obvious enough to get to a haymaker level. Overall, I liked the verse. Your style is well established and always an interesting read, I just thought that you were lacking clarity for certain lines, a few iffy concepts and a few forced rhymes. It was a good verse. Lock, throughout, you used simple schemes but I felt you didn't utilise more interesting scheme possibilities throughout the verse. The opener was half-decent: A little unclear and the schemework was very basic. I see how you're a fan of the AABBA rhyming technique - personally, I only use that for singular punches in order for it to remain distinguished as a certain structure, otherwise it becomes irritating to read. After that, you went with the same AABBA structure - at this point, its quality ebbed away. It's admirable to see fully rhyming set-ups, but it restricts you to a certain amount of references. It means that you have to have a filler scheme (dropping your camp later) to fit with the set-up (anand was your translator). Even so, those two multis don't even rhyme properly, so what's the point in using the structure? Confused me. The jab in that bar was okay, not quite connecting hard. I liked the personal after that; Grizz and votes has always been a theme here. You didn't use the AABBA structure here and that was nice; it's fresher to be dynamic with your structures. Scheme after that though? I hated it. It was awkward and it didn't fit perfectly in places and for that, the flow suffered. No punch came of that bar seeing as there was no conceptual set-up to the COOL STORY multi. Scott Evil reference was subpar, although there was a bit of comic value to it: You needed to bulk up that bar with at least a wordplay for it to be a punch. The closer: Again, a forced scheme that was uncomfortable to read. I liked the subtlety at this point and how the concept was assumed rather than stated but otherwise, there was no real punch. You need to work on real concepts that create real punches, perhaps that means sharpening your set-ups and adding in wordplays and double entendres. I don't see any punches at the moment, just jabs with comic value and attitude. Tidy up your schemework as well, a lot of it is forced. The winner was more polished with clearer punches and better, more dynamic scheme work. Vitty's vote's in. Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-26 22:41:26

Good shit guys. Comment Only
Posted on: 2014-04-27 00:14:41

GUIDE BE IMPORTANT* Comment Only
Posted on: 2014-04-27 01:54:36

winner was creative,loser had better wording but he lacked some concepts also found 2 broken multi strings in his verse which actually fucked up the cadence and had me reading from the start again. Winner needs to fix his structure and work on his presentation. other than that,I noticed some really good concepts..some of them were a bit of a reach but did the job. fair is in. Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-27 06:07:57

Also a very important thing which might help you in the future,dont just put in references of the main punchline in the setup,make them connect properly and effortlessly. Dropping references with no proper relevance to that particular line will make it look forced. See Daddio's first scheme vs Mad Angler for example. Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-27 06:10:26

DROPPING YOUR CAMP LATER=6 Syllables ANAND WAS YOUR TRANSLATOR= 7 Syllables Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-27 08:36:25

DROPPING YOUR CAMP LATER and ANAND WAS YOUR TRANSLATOR also aren't rhyming multis. DROPPING YOUR CAMP LATER could rhyme with, for example, DROPS ARE A TAD GREATER - you have to have the same amount of syllables (6) and (at least) the emphasised syllables should rhyme perfectly or at least para-rhyme: In this case, it's the first, fourth and last two syllables that definitely need to rhyme to keep the cadence and the rhyming scheme consistent. Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-27 09:38:08

Same thing he said^^^ Fv homies gb Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-27 09:41:35

My bad I thought I was under sass lmfao Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-27 09:42:17

No Homo for you children's!^ Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-27 09:46:28

Yeah i agree with Vitty here.. DROPPING YOUR CAMP LATER/a-NAND WAS YOUR TRANSLATOR...the first 3 syllables are a bit shaky.. NAND WAS/DROPPING doesn't work in my opinion. Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-27 10:49:50

wulp, atleast it looks like we have alotta votes. : Comment Only
Posted on: 2014-04-27 10:51:23

No its not the accents, NAND WAS/Dropping seems forced. http://www.macmillan dictionary.com/pronu nciation/british/was Check the pronunciation. So unless you meant to have Was as an unstressed syllable there, it seems forced when you read it out loud. Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-27 11:02:06

Good close battle. Both had some punches that fell short with a few forced setups and multis here and there. I felt one had a bit more filler, and could have tightened up his set ups and multi punches a bit more for impact and speed of delivery. This was a toss up, and I felt it came down to a slightly cleaner verse, that had a bit better delivery of personal punches... but its a hard choice to make. RESPECT 2 both as always, FV in. Rematch requested, because I have seen much better from both (of course no hate). Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-27 14:02:56

^^ This really could go either way. Both verses have different strengths and weaknesses, and both deserve the W for different reasons. Really was a hard one to vote on. Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-27 14:09:58

7-6 vote deleted upon request due to a past comment by voter that was construed as hate... Comment Only
Posted on: 2014-04-27 22:00:39

I actually missed the anand line being a bit of a broken one but the vote still stands for me due to the amount of personals. Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-28 11:13:20

Great Battle Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-28 13:49:14

MURDA!! Comment Only
Posted on: 2014-04-28 16:27:50

ive actually read both a few times over the course of a couple days. IMO its probably as close as ive seen recently. i feel ones verse flowed awkwardly, dude to the way he structured his verse. it didnt affect how i scored his punches and concepts tho. feel the other had concepts to match his opponents, although feel the build ups for the punches couldve been a tad shorter. everything was pretty equal in this one IMO. Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-28 19:09:56

Imo killed it.. Both went ham all around but i felt like winner was more consistent! Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-29 02:05:11

Ones punches carried more weight w/ better setups and a stronger impact despite some amateur wordplay. The other's verse was personally relevant to their opponent w/ a more complex structure that when utilized properly can make for some hard hitting punches, however i felt the setups/concepts were lackluster & tht took a lot away from their verse. Overall the harder-hitting drop took this one but ive seen better from both of u. Low/High. FVs in Voted: GRizzEAT /
Posted on: 2014-04-29 12:53:30