Viewing all threads involving Mike Moore
Juggling Data Set.
I have created a juggling data set. It consists of several videos of different juggling patterns, graphs, and .csv (spreadsheet) files. Some of the data is visualized in this Youtube video: Juggling Pattern Waveforms.
To create the dataset, I first took video of myself juggling. Next, using computer vision, I recorded the locations of the juggling balls in a spreadsheet. Once the data is captured in a spreadsheet, it can be easily analyzed. For example, this is the data for the pattern 423:
Collecting the data (the positions of the balls) from the video and recording it in a spreadsheet requires specialization in computer vision, particularly object recognition and tracking. Now that the data has been taken from the video and put in a spreadsheet, it is much easier to analyze!
The data can also be analyzed using Python (with the help of packages Pandas and Matplotlib). This short Python script shows how to load and graph the data.
One of the applications of this dataset is to compare two different jugglers who are juggling the same pattern. But, for this, I need your help! I would like to include juggling from other jugglers in this data set. If you could supply me with a high-quality short video clip of juggling, I could track the locations of the balls and add it to the data set.
I don't quite see what result you trying to achieve here, but I'd really like to help.
I'll try to record something tomorrow.
I have several goals for the juggling data set:
"If you build it, they will come."
I don't know what people will do with this data set! Hopefully, this data will have some really cool applications in the field of machine learning.
I gave it another thought. You probably can find as many juggling videos as you want on you tube.
If you have any specific requirement for you soft to work, than you better list them.
I considered using videos from Youtube (This is the data from an 11 ball flash.).
There are a couple problems with using videos from Youtube:
I guess it's also obvious that the props should be visible all the time, so that for example claws hiding a ball are unapt for tracking ( or will the software just go on tracking where the ball appears again with data just not for only that hidden part of the balls trajectory, a hole in the rendered curve then ) ?
Yes, it is helpful if the props are visible. Sometimes the tracker will get lost if the ball is obscured, enters a different lighting condition, or changes direction rapidly. If the tracker gets lost, I can pause the program and reset the tracker to the appropriate position.
I can implement optical flow in Python, but I don't really understand it. Explaining how it works is way beyond me.
This video shows how optical flow works: https://youtu.be/-1ebo0YjQw8
Notice what happens when the ball passes in front of my face. The tracker is most likely to get lost there because the ball appears to be a blur on those frames.
What steps follow optical flow? I assume you're first segmenting the flow vectors to find the balls? Are you then using a predictive tracker that can predict the object's position when not detected, such as a Kalman filter? It must be possible for the tracker to know that the balls travel in parabolas when in the air, which would help tracking a lot.
The tracking program that I wrote is quite simple. It relies on the user to click on an object to be tracked, and then uses optical flow to track the object. There is no detection, that is done by the user. Segmenting flow vectors is not something that I had considered, but I will try to implement that.
I have considered using a Kalman filter, OpenCV has a Kalman filter class, and I am currently researching this. The use of a Kalman filter is probably the best tool to make juggling ball tracking software more robust.
Optical flow is more than adequate for tracking the balls when they are in the air. Most of the tracking problems I encounter are when the ball has a sudden change in velocity as it is caught or thrown.
Tracking juggling balls in highly optimized video is a fairly easy computer vision task, a heuristic approach to solving my tracking problems is to collect video in higher resolution. I am currently working with 1080p30fps video.
Any particular patterns you'd like me to film? I'll try and do this next week.
Yes, can you film 15 catches of 5 ball cascade (from launch to collect)? I have noticed that good jugglers tend to throw the first ball (or maybe two or three balls) a little higher than the average pattern height. Jugglers that are just learning the 5 ball cascade tend to throw the first few balls a little low and then struggle into the pattern.
I want to get video from several jugglers, all juggling the same pattern for the same amount of catches, so that I can compare things like average pattern height, dwell time, height of the first throw vs. the average height of the pattern, syncopation, etc...
Thank you for you interest in the juggling data set.
Sorry for the delay. I was going to film outside just now and then realized my balls are in the gym. Just letting you know I still plan on doing it :)
No rush! The juggling data set is a long term project for me.
A couple notes about uploading video:
Of course I read this post while it was already uploading to youtube >.<, so I'll post it here anyway for those interested. It's also on it's way to your email inbox. You can use this video in any way you like, including but not limited to using it in your data set.
Sorry for the terrible terrible quality! I hadn't tried 60fps mode before, at least now I know it is completely useless. If you prefer I can film it again in 30fps, which should be sharp 1080p.
I have a super wide lens and the camera allows me to zoom, probably some kind of digital zoom which made the sharpness even worse, but the lines of the building still don't seem exactly straight. I hope this doesn't skew the data too much.
Anyway, if you have wishes, let me know and I'll film it and send the raw stuff straight to you.
Thank you for sending me your video! Even though the resolution was not great, the contrast between the balls and the rest of the frame was amazing! The balls were very easy to track.
I have used my tracking software to extract the data, here are the results:
Now that I have data from another juggler, I can work on methods to compare your juggling to mine.
I'm watching this project with interest.
I'm wondering if professionals working on a synchronised routine would be interested in your software to analyse a video of their routine to easily identify areas where they are out of synch?
Most of the time it is easy to see for the professionals themselves when they are out of synch, no software needed. Perhaps for really precise things, such as isolations, this could be an application. But this software is not for that..
Excellent, both the juggling and the tracking. I particularly value seeing the start which inspires me to clean up my start to include the whole trough of the curves before the first releases.
I was surprised to find that the act of juggling started quite a while before the first ball was thrown. I'd like to collect data from multiple jugglers to see if everyone does two fake throws before launching the first ball.
I often do several (more than 2) fake throws when starting 5, but launch in to a lot of patterns with 3 straight away.
I tend to do the fake throws for 5 until I "feel" like I have the right rhythm and spacing.
Now for the stuff I'd be curious about:
In long runs, how stable are my throws? Like could you give my pattern a score based on how much the throws diverge from the average of all throws?
In what way do my L and R hand differ? Do they both throw equally high and wide, or how big is the difference?
In the shorter runs, it is completely fine for me if every ball behaves different. Here I don't want to compare throw by throw, but rather run by run. I gave 3 samples of 15 catches, I'd be curious to know if ball 1 of attempt 1 is similar to ball 1 of attempt 2 and 3. etc.
In the future it could be interesting to compare jugglers and their styles too. Average height, dwell time, width, etc.
In all of the scores above I'd like to bring to 0 difference of course, and if there was a tangible number it would be fun to keep track over the years and try to become as much robot like as possible.
Anyway, those are some ideas of what to do with the data :). I hope you find some uses for this. And since seemingly I'm only the second juggler you've got on video: Guys, record some 5b 15 catches! Super easy stuff, right?
I have been working on determining dwell time and throw height. I do eventually want to create some metric that can describe how far a juggling pattern is from perfection. This is an interesting question though, because I don't really know what perfection is in terms of juggling.
I wouldn't steer towards the question of what a perfect throw would be, that can be answered by others over time. You could however determine how far a throw is from your own average, or how far it is from the throws of this one juggler who you think throws pretty perfect.
My thoughts about a perfect throw/pattern can be found here:
Since throws would be perfect parabolas (are they?), can't we visualize most of the data when we'd just have the starting point, the highest point and the catching point of each throw? Would diminishing the data like that make it easier to analyze, possibly easier to visualize? Is it hard to acquire these 3 points from the data?
In the absence of wind the center of mass free flight paths are perfect parabolas to pixel resolution but the parabola may not be in the plane the camera is digitizing. There is also a little uncertainity about the end points. If you look at the velocity and acceleration plots you can see the noise. You can also see that, for the example shown, less than half is for free flight.
Tracking the ball during throws and catches is difficult for three reasons:
The easiest solution is to record video in a higher frame rate; 120fps is sufficient for most 5 ball juggling. Another solution is to use smoothing techniques on the data to reduce noise. I have applied smoothing techniques to Daniel's data, and these are the results (quite an improvement):
Right now I am focused on collecting good data, by working to make my tracking program more accurate.
I have identified five critical points that I would like to find: toss, crossing point traverse, zenith, catch, and toss onset. These critical points can be found in the data by using statistical techniques.
I think that your data request is not specific enough. If you want to compare the same pattern for different jugglers then you should specify exactly what data you want. I think you'd have a lot more response for that. I may be interested in filming something if you have a specific request. I have a nice plain wall outside and some bright balls.
For the purposes of comparing one juggler to another, it would be best to eliminate as many variables as possible:
It would be easiest to do this at a juggling convention, with one camera setup and an 'x' on the floor for the juggler to stand over.
Until then, if you (or anyone else) would like to have a short clip of juggling tracked and recorded in a spreadsheet, I am more than willing to help.
Come do this next year at the Dutch juggling championships. Plenty of ball jugglers who all believe they have the best 5b cascade, you can help them (dis)proove it and collect data at the same time!
I made sure to get explicit consent before including you in the Juggling Dataset to avoid future conflict if the analysis proved that your juggling is bad. Looking at my own data, and comparing it to yours I can see that you juggle much better.*
For jugglers that spend more than an hour a day with props in the air, juggling can become part of who they are. Finding out that they are not good at juggling (by some however arbitrary measure) can be a hard pill to swallow.
*I blame it on the balls.
Indeed, sadly, it's just an arbitrary measure... I'm not convinced that my stable juggling is any good until I get close to your 7b records ;)
Do I see correctly that this graph only displays the height of the balls over time? Variation in width of a throw and horizontal spacing would also be important to determine if your juggling is "clean".
Our graphs look very different. I assume the horizontal scale is based on the amount of frames? It wouldn't be too hard to adjust for actual time, no?
From the video with the overlay it seems like my two hands have opposite problems:
My right hand makes throws from a consistent horizontal location, but the throws vary in width. My left hand makes throws from different locations, but somehow manages to correct the width in such a way that the balls all land at exactly the same spot! I could have never noticed this without the visual aid. Can you check if this is also true in the longer runs? Can you think of a way of graphing out the data of the x axis in a way that this would be readable?
Of course, the same kind of graph but downwards, that could work...
(if only I could edit posts to include the thoughts I have seconds after posting, this thread wouldn't need to become a mess)
Also, the color coding is different in the graph and in the video. Sticking to one consistent order would make it easier to analize.
Sorry for the overkill of input, I'm just excited and curious to study more of my juggling this way :D
Yes, these graphs plot height on the Y-axis and time on the X-axis. I would like to include the horizontal position of the balls, but that would mean graphing in three dimensions, which I have only a little experience with (I'll try it in Matplotlib for Python, but if anyone has suggestions...).
The graph of your pattern is more stretched out because yours if filmed in 60fps and mine is filmed in 30fps. I am working on a way to normalize the data so that different frame rates can be compared.
I see that you have replied to your own comment several times! Glad to see you are excited about this. I am excited about this too, but as this is a long term project for me, I am going to take my time and try to produce high quality data and avoid publishing things only to have to retract them later.
Hello Stephen, I've been following this thread closely, it's a great project. I'll try to get some footage of myself juggling soon and send it to you.
I haven't got round to using Matplotlib yet because I've had access to Matlab while I am a student. I have done a fair amount of plotting, animating and other stuff. If you're willing to send me an example csv file of some juggling, maybe a column for each ball and each row being a discrete time step then I'd love to have a go at plotting some stuff. I can just send whatever I come up with to you, the Matlab code won't be directly useful because I suspect the syntax might be a bit different but it should be a nice little prototype.
The data for my pattern can be found here:
@Stephen: Until a 3d graphic is readable, 2 separate 2d graphics would also help to analize the juggling
Sorry Daniel, I wasn't paying attention to who-is-who there so my previous message was directed to you. Thanks for a link to the data, I've had a quick play around with it.
My working folder: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9vCeC0EU8QLWHNiUE03aVFmZDA
My first quick test plot: http://i.imgur.com/t6CSrXk.png
Don't worry, this is Stephens data file anyway (of my pattern)
Looks interesting, I guess I'd have to view it in 3d to be able to see if it is analisable...
Nice graph! Did you smooth the data?
I made a .gif of the same graph using Python and Matplotlib, here's a link: Small: 3mb, Medium: 5mb, Large: 9mb.
You can find the code used to generate these (and lots more) in the Python Tutorials folder of the Juggling Dataset.
I didn't smooth the data but I did choose thick lines which can have a similar effect.
If your gif is animated then my phone isn't showing it properly, I'll check tomorrow on a desktop. Hopefully I'll make the switch to Python soon so I can use your stuff and my work won't be tied up in proprietary, expensive software... it's just so convenient though!
I'd like to do some animating of the data. It would also be interesting to seperate each 'cycle' to see how consistent the throws are. This steps into statistics and is a bit outside my territory but it would be a fun project to learn more with.
I made a few more animated graphs and uploaded them to Imgur for viewing on mobile:
These graphs are also available in the graphs folder in the Juggling Data set.
I have learned a lot about statistics and computer vision working on this project. You can find the codes that I used in the Python Tutorials folder (they aren't pretty).
It would be interesting to see how this relates to what Joost Dessing was doing at EJC2014 (a brief description was in Scott Seltzer's general review of EJC2014).
Thank you for that interesting link, I look forward to reading his publications. It seems that Dr. Joost Dressing and I have different aims for the data that we collect.
My goal for the Juggling Dataset is to create a dataset that others (who are so statistically inclined) can use to study juggling. I want the data to be as accessible as possible, similar to how the creators of Kaggle have made the Titanic Dataset accessible; by hosting the data online with a thorough description and several tutorials in multiple programming languages.
I assume Dr. Dressing collects data to prove or disprove a hypothesis and then publishes those results for academic prestige.
Early on in the creation of this data set I realized that creating a data set is difficult. There are several steps, and each of which requires specialized knowledge, software, and equipment to do well: juggling, video recording of juggling, computer vision analysis of juggling video, formatting data and hosting it online, writing tutorials and descriptions for the data...all of this has to happen before a hypothesis can be tested.
Fields like machine learning and data science are really starting to take off! By creating the Juggling Data set, I hope to leverage the machine learning practitioners and data scientists skills to advance the knowledge of juggling. They are nothing without data, but likely lack the ability to collect it. There are a lot of data addicts, but few data set creators.
Top tip: don't try continuous back crosses near a dish of oil and balsamic vinegar! I now have one very messy juggling ball :(
Alternatively, you've got a healthy, tasty snack! Maybe a little chewy, but plenty of fibre...
Let me tell you a short story...
I was a recipient of a medium sized parcel, one containing some brand-spanking new juggling props, which included a lovely set of white juggling balls (uglies). My excitement was through the roof, and I couldn't wait any longer than the few seconds it took me to remove them from their individual wrappers until I started their maiden 5b cascade. Within moments they were happily flying through the air from hand to hand. Until... I made a rookie error, I got too excited, I was enjoying them a little bit too much, which inevitably caused a rogue throw... As I chased the ball through the air with my eyes, I knew I had no hope in catching this ball, it was doomed to hit the floor. But not in my case...
Well, to cut a short story long. My hot beverage of the day tasted a little like juggling ball, and I now have an off-white ball which now smells of coffee.
Ooo, I like what this thread is turning into.
My tip: when you a ball rolls away, and you find it covered in cobwebs...check for the spider.
Top tip #2: if you want catch a mouse, leave your uglies in the floor. They love them.
How much do you a c c e p t h e l p, hints or helpful feedback for improving? (no matter wherefrom, video tutorial, or person to person, shown or told or written, ororor)
I voted 4, I'll try most things suggested by better jugglers, but I don't keep working on it if it's too boring (for example, I have not learned 4c fountain on singles, even though I have been told it could help improve my 4c fountain on doubles). I don't really come up with many ideas by myself, either. I mean, I can come up with a new combination of throws, but I don't really invent anything completely new.
As a club passer who usually passes with someone better than me, option 5 would not have been wrong either.
...and I have not learned 5 ball cascade, even though I'm trying to learn 5 clubs.
I'm somewhere in the 3.5 camp. If I can be particular about the phrasing "when the hint is good and applies" to be "[...] as interpreted by some all-knowing being," then I'm comfortable with it. Sometimes I don't realize the hint is good until a while after it was given.
Hmhm, I see; maybe we can meet on "if a hint gets you thinking or rumors around in your mind not knowing what rhyme to make of it", then it can still either puzzle and irritate you beyond threshold, or else, you can be ``happy´´ on there being a new way waiting to be discovered some given time later. Or even else, it's stored somewhere in the unconscious until it pops up again at a given moment or remains there forever until the ``hard disk´´ (=memory) is cleaned and overwritten. ( Which still leaves the decision "happy or not about such an unclear hint" to you :o] ) .. but, yeah, if an all-knowing being knows before, read as: "If a hint will apply, later (and I will be happy about it, later)."
.. or just read "3." and "4." as:
3. Happy for help "under condition". (not "any and all the help you can get" unrestrictedly)
4. "Give it all over to me, I'll sort it out." = Any and all the help there might be is welcome. (without any restriction)
Basically the scale goes from 1. "no input whatsoever" over 2. "little help accepted", 3. ``Some´´ or ``a good deal´´ or "under condition" help accepted, 4. All, every, any help (more than) welcome, upto 5. "only with help, can't do without".
btw i'm not sure what to vote myself .. been through like all of the options 1. to 4. before, i think, and now it seems to "depend" on which pattern, which ajuggling (few ball stuff, e.g. Kraken, or else numbers techniques). Even 6., "I don't get info on what exactly is going in the brain and focus and where attention lays in distinct milliseconds." is partly true.
Guess I'll land on 3. or 4. too, as there's yet so much to discover (clubs, 5b s'swaps, selfthrows and fountains, more body range e.g. bbb, for me), .. why not spare time and effort by getting all and any help I can get to get where I want sooner.
This poll has now ended. The results are:
Juggler - The Video
I'm reading some old JUGGLE magazines, and in the July/Aug 1998 the making of a documentary on who jugglers are is discussed. in the 1999 magazines, it is advertised. The advertisement reads:
JUGGLER THE VIDEO
A show and tell from the best in the world...Past and Present.
Does this video exist online? Googling hasn't worked for me.
..or who produced it? There was one by Strider productions earlier in the 90s called, I think, "Juggler" or something similar. I'd guess it was that one, but not sure if you're saying it was "upcoming" in '98.
The ad says, "To order, call Sportco"
And "Presented by Eagle Entertainment Group, INC"
Steve Brown, Hovey Burgess, Dave Finnegan, Varry Friedman, Forest Hobbs, Daniel Holzman, Sergei Ignatov, Katerina Ignatov,
Edward Jackman, and a handful of others.
Knew I'd seen it recently when you listed Hovey Burgess
How much of you, your time, being sportive, self-chosen active, (no matter if overall a lot or just a little), goes into juggling?
Not counting ``necessary´´ activities like work, travelling, footwalks or so, only leisure.
I'll leave it upto you, if biking to the baker or having to do like school sports, or fitness prescribed by your doctor, pumpin' up stairs instead takin' the elevator or so is ``necessary´´, unavoidable (would then not count) or ``self-chosen´´ or ``leisure´´ (then would count as ``self-chosen sportive activity´´).
Hope, it's somewhat logically consistent - it's not about "how much" you juggle, and also not about "how sportive" or "how active" you are, but w h i c h p a r t juggling takes a m o n g any of your other sportive activities taken together. Thx 4 voting! :o)
I'd guess about 80%. A normal week has 7-8 hours juggling, and 1-2 hours other "sport activities" (going to a gym, a BodyBalance class, a long walk or something like that). I didn't count walking to and from work, though I could choose to go by bus or car instead but it's just 15-20 minutes walk.
During summer a normal week has less juggling (no scheduled practice), but then there are juggling conventions, where I don't do any sports but juggling.
I used to go for walks to relax or just get some physical activity, but most of those volontary walks have been replaced by juggling during the last years.
Haha, okay, "How much of your arty activities or any activity at all goes into juggling?".
Hard one to judge. My two other main hobbies, (dancing & roller hockey) are much higher in intensity so they feel like they make up a much higher percentage of my active time than they probably do.
I also want to count hand balancing as juggling but that shouldn't be the case.
Funny you should say that, as I have been playing tennis for 10 years but I still find juggling a far, far more intensive activity.
With juggling the better I get the less effort is required. With the other two the better I get the more energy I can put in without catastrophic failure.
With dancing being in control allows me to be more exuberant & exciting which is more fun for me & more fun for most of my partners. With hockey being in control allows me to be faster which is an obvious performance advantage. The same could be true of my juggling, but when I juggle I just want to be in control, aside from playing combat I feel there is no incentive to apply unnecessary energy to my juggling.
The same could be true of my juggling, but when I juggle I just want to be in control, aside from playing combat I feel there is no incentive to apply unnecessary energy to my juggling. Humh, is that,, you're ``done with improving´´ and you're happy with what you have under control. Or else, is that exactly your way to best improve fromout controlled ajuggling, even without ``pushing´´ any?
That makes sense, but for me the better I get the longer runs I do and the harder and more energy intensive tricks I do. I've never been one for getting easier tricks totally solid really. I don't think I'll ever reach a point where I feel good enough, because I'll never be the best so it's just a matter of being as good as I can be.
Yeah, please feel free to vote by "time invested" OR by "intensity" (or effort or zeal or dediction) put into the juggling part in compare to all other activity.
The poll should find out, what I think is interesting, if juggling is among if any or among all other your most prominent ado or activity or physical exercise or moving artistically or getting one's bottom up from the couch at all. Its priority, its importance, its significance among ``being in motion in one's free time´´.
I like to count any kind of balance - unless most focus goes into strength and balancing is the least challenging, a negligible part of the act - .. count it as very much a juggling exercise. After all, a well juggled higher pattern is always also well balanced in your airspace and relative to one's body axes.
I myself used to wander, and upto the day bike like daily (thinking of quitting that, even I think it's very healthy), sometimes for leisure swim a bit, give a nice frisbee or so, and for a while jog 5 km or run 800 m almost daily (many years ago). Now, apart from just a few minutes doing some gym, stretching, bending, or from time to time maybe doing pushups or pull ups or situps for general form and flexibility, I try to not waiste any energy that I can save for juggling. = clearly "1".
Aside from 2 annual juggling conventions and 1 music festival that I go to for the juggling booth, I spend approximately 0 hours/week juggling. Oh, I may get 10 juggling shows/year these days, but that's insignificant (though I do break a good sweat). I spend about 10 hours/week doing sports (tennis, running, biking). I spend around 10 hours/week with online juggling adventures.
What he said (but with less time playing sport during the week and a lot more walking - minimum of 10Km a day)
I should pull my finger out and start running again, or get back down the gym. My middle age is spreading
A big reason that I do other exercise in my life is that I find it so substantially improves my juggling. When I'm practicing hard, it's about a 50-50 split between juggling and other sporty activities. When I'm being lazy, juggling makes up ~70 % of my sporty activities (despite other activities and juggling both decreasing in time).
This poll has now ended. The results are:
I've been trying out a new practice round tonight and I'd be interested to see what people think.
I'm working on my five ball cascade and can manage a fairly consistent 20 catches. Tonight I tried this:
If I got 20 successful catches I'd move up to 25. If, after 3 attempts I'd failed to do 25 catches I'd go back to 20. Assuming I got 20 again I'd go back up to 25, then 30, 35 etc. Every time I failed three times I'd move down a number before moving back up.
It seems to work for me; I've gone from not being able to break 40 to breaking 55 a few times and fairly consistently beating 40.
What do you all think?
Do you understand my ramblings?
I understand, and I like these kinds of games. Another kind of thing I'll do when working on consistency is:
Until I drop. Do about 5-10 sets of this and I'm done.
When I get a lot of early fails because my launches or patterns are bad, or I'm not doing fresh, or or or anything, I'd go back to "going to early collect" (before a ball drops), no matter how far I got in a run. I'd usually try that without a lot of effort, and often on speedier lower pattern, until I get better patterns, better flow. I'd also (try and) find out why and what exactly went wrong, or what, which way I might do differently trying to get it better. Then I'd go for as long as can again.
Your method .. well, if you get longer runs and better patterns and feel - isn't that great.
How do you ask go about counting catches when numbers juggling? I use a different coloured last ball and count how many times I catch that, then multiply by the number of balls.
What other ways to people use?
I think it's easiest to count every catch from one hand and then double it.
When I'm doing short runs, I count every catch by sound. When I can do longer runs, I count in groups of 8 or 16 by sound.
Hi, I count sets of 8 throws by pairs of throws emphasizing stronghand's throws ("hep--hep--hep--one--hep--hep--hep--two--.. a.s.o.").
Also cf. http://www.jugglingedge.com/forum.php?ThreadID=116&SmallID=651#Small651 and http://www.jugglingedge.com/forum.php?ThreadID=2044&SmallID=14476#Small14476 (similar topic)
Is a four ball cascade possible?
If you can answer this in under 20 minutes, you probably aren't thinking about it hard enough.
I enjoyed that! For me a cascade will always be a 2 handed pattern, but I accept your 3 handed variant is the closest match to a 4 ball cascade.
I have put in another 20 minutes of thought though & I've come up with a small nitpick which has led me to something that I'm struggling to visualise.
From your video the rules for a cascade are:
1. There is only one orbit to the pattern
2. All throws are made to an even rhythm
3. Each ball is thrown to the same height
4. No placements, holds, stalls, multiplexes, double bounces etc.
5. Each ball is thrown to the 'other' hand
My issue is with the phrasing of the last rule (which was one of the first rules covered in the video), which for me is not adequate. If left as is then a cascade must be juggled with exactly 2 hands, discounting your 3 handed pattern.
In a 3 hand pattern there are two 'other' hands, if the hands are labelled 1, 2 & 3 you could juggle a 'cascade' with the throwing sequence 12131213...
So to achieve true anal retentive accuracy rule 5 needs to be replaced with 2 rules:
5a. An N ball cascade must be juggled with N-1 hands
5b. An N ball cascade must be juggled with a number of hands (H) where N > H and (N % H) = 1
6. The hands must throw in a circular sequence eg 123...H123...H
If we use 5a then this limits us to non-numbers juggling, a cascade will always be a single 2-ball exchange flowing around a circle of hands like a wave.
Obviously the 5 ball cascade exists though which discounts rule 5a. 5b is the best replacement I've been able to come up with, but I'm having a very hard time visualising if it is correct. If N <= H then we are just holding N balls, if N % H = 0 then we have a fountain like pattern, if N % H > 1 then I'm not sure what we get.
Does anyone else remember a flash based siteswap simulator that appeared online ~10 years ago which could animate patterns for any number of hands that featured little one-eyed, one-handed aliens or am I just making that up?
I don't like to consider these things "rules" or make a hard and fast list. They are features or elements of a cascade. The canonical three ball cascade can fulfill all of them, no problem. However, it's possible to miss one and the pattern still be a three ball cascade. For example, the cascade between one hand and the back of the other hand. Both manipulators are unique, but everything else is cascade enough that nobody would be able to say it isn't a cascade.
So bringing this over to four balls, it comes down to which element of the three ball cascade you are most comfortable with changing. I like the idea of not having to stick with bilateral symmetry and allowing rotational symmetry. Others are fine with hands crossing and props changing side in the pattern, but not changing hands.
I want to avoid defining "cascade" so strictly because in the end you aren't giving a word meaning, you are just describing what comes out of a set of rules. The word is just a shorthand for the rules. But then it isn't helpful for communication unless the person you are talking to already knows and agrees with that set of rules!
5. each ball is thrown to some other hand i.e. not the hand that threw it
or something better worded, but in that vein
there's no mention about orbits crossing though, is that a signature element of the cascade ?
a 55550 could meet the "rules" originally posted (unless that was covered by the "etc" in #4)
just thinking out loud ....
if the balls were bouncy enough, 2 hands and one knee (or foot or head or floor ...) gives you 3 "hands"
By defining the floor as a hand, it would allow something that looks like (but isn't) a 5b3. I think that would be just as valid as defining an elbow/whatnot as a hand, and it still excludes the 5bb3b example.
Slightly related: 5bb3b was a great idea, I quite liked how convincing that looked.
3. Each ball is thrown to the same height should be replaced with 3b: Each ball spends an equal amount of time in the air and is thrown to the same height. Otherwise, you can reach early for catching and warp non-cascade looking patterns into Cascades. Even if 4. Included equal dwell time, it wouldn't prevent moving some balls during that time more or less than others.
Why not be rigid with the Cascade definition and change the rules of geometry instead? There are surely infinite variations in which Cascades are possible for even and odd numbers?
Does that suggest you switch to a different ball for 12 and 13? What and why?
No, I just haven't tried 12 or 13 with them, or any other ball recently. I would probably want something a bit lighter for 12 or 13.
Out of interest, do you know what weight/type of ball Alex used for 14? Because the strength required with any normal ball is beyond my comprehension.
Bag lady Rag bags I assume. Around 72g. They're pretty heavy for such high numbers.
"They're pretty heavy for such high numbers."
Since (if your assumption is correct) Alex just flashed 14 of them, I think there's a pretty strong evidence-based case for saying "No, they're not". :-)
I've heard a similar argument in favour of pinkies, but they didn't seem to juggle themselves as advertised =(
Do you like \ not like to t e a c h (not just give a hint, but take the time and get involved, and real life person to person) ?
Thanks for voting!
[ #teaching ]
Voted depends: I usually try to spend about 20 minutes at club practice focusing and getting some really good practice in. During that time, I don't want to teach, talk, listen, etc.
Other than that, I'm normally happy to teach.
The last one. I like it, but I don't want to spend my precious juggling time doing something else than juggling (at least not too often). And regular juggling club meetings is usually the only place where someone is interesting in letting me teach them some juggling, so... I don't really teach much.
I should try to give some workshops on juggling conventions, though. I can't juggle all the time there anyway, and I tried it as a co-teacher in a passing workshop at the last BJC and really liked that. Now I just need to find something that I think I can actually teach well enough for a workshop.
Ah, yeah, I like to teach non-juggling things, too... As long as the person/people learning wants to learn, not if I'm trying to teach a whole class where some people would rather not be there at all. Though I usually don't have time or opportunities for that, either.
This poll has now ended. The results are:
View older threads
Subscribe to this forum via RSS
1 article per branch
1 article per post
Green Eggs reports