Viewing all threads involving Maria
Hello! My name is Walter Beals. Jon asked me to introduce myself here. I've been juggling since 1993. For the past 10 years I've been performing with Forty Fingers & a Missing Tooth. Sadly Britt, after 10 years, has left for graduate school, so we are down 10 fingers. But the remaining 3 of us still perform. Since Britt had the missing tooth, I guess you can now call us Thirty Fingers and a Missing Missing Tooth!
We've been organizing a juggling festival every year for the last several years. This year is our 7th Annual Asheville Juggling Festival. The festival will be Sept 22-24th. More information can be found at: http://ashevillejugglingfestival.com
This is the second juggling festival I've been part of founding. I was the sole founder of The Humboldt Juggling Festival, going into its 18th year, and I helped create the Asheville Juggling Festival with the other members of FF&MT.
I hope you can make it!
Welcome to the Edge Walter & thanks for adding your event to the database. Seeing as you have apparently managed it twice, any secrets to successfully setting up a long running festival?
I was a huge fan of the Lodi Juggling Festival back in its day. I would say both the festivals I've organized/helped organize were loosely modeled on that festival (minus the camping.)
I organized the 1st Humboldt Festival by myself, but after the first year, other jugglers pitched in and started helping out. By the 4th festival, it was a smooth running machine. I would say the success of that festival was that the school has a well established juggling club that is able to keep the festival going, and has lots of resources from the school including space.
The Asheville Juggling Festival is going smoothly because I work well with my fellow "fingers" and we have been together for over 10 years, so it was easy to keep doing it each year. We've been lucky so far having a space to do the festival, but after this year, we will have to find a new space. :(
I love the Asheville fest, I've gone the last two years. I'm sorry to miss this year (I'm attending Flow Camp for the first time) but I will be back!
Today Milton Keynes Juggling Club sometimes known as Jugglers Anonymous and/or the juggley love club is 25 years old!
Which means I've spent half my life going to this club.
I'm curious to know how many clubs out there are older? I know there will be a few in the UK but elsewhere?
"My" club is younger, but it's 20 years this year. (Fritidsjonglörerna, Stockholm.) Maybe I should try to find out the date so we can celebrate. :)
The 25th annual Waterloo Festival happened earlier this year, so I think it's safe to say it's older. No idea how much older, though.
Congratulations on both feats!
#Altern8 in Bristol is older by a few years. http://www.jugglingedge.com/forum.php?ThreadID=2914&SmallID=21647#Small21647
Flying Teapot's the Uni of Sheffield circus society celebrated 30 years this year!
York Jugglers is also 25 years old this year (October to be more precise) but we don't have any members who have been going for all 25 years.
I first went to Cambridge Community Circus (then named Patchwork Circus) in 1992 so it's at least 25 years old, and rumor has it that there was a juggling club run by some of the same people in the late 80s.
Turns out TWJC will be 25 later this month!
The top 10 oldest active UK clubs with a known established date in the Edge database:
Nottingham Juggling Club (1980)
Flying Teapots (1985)
Glasgow Juggling Club (1990)
Imperial College Juggling Society (1990)
Camcircus, Milton Keynes, Tunbridge Wells, York Jugglers (1992)
Interesting because the BJC is 30 years old. I expected there to be more than 4 clubs (Balls up in Portsmouth was established in 1987 but is alas no more) to be active at the time to provide an audience to make a national event viable. I'm sure there were clubs that predate internet records. Or is it that annual juggling events produce local juggling clubs rather than the other way around?
The oldest club we have on record is Santelli, NL which has allegedly been going since 1962.
Hastings Juggling Club started in 1990. Russell Watson was the original motivator. Still going but monthly. It's been responsible for much - marriages, break ups, new careers, making people happy, an escape from the world we live in and more, just like the other juggling clubs around the world I'm sure.
Where would we be without a juggling club?
I hope HCC wasn't responsible for the break ups! Although come to think of it I did leave someone partly because she thought what my juggling friends & I did was 'silly'.
Over 40 years old, juggling 7 balls/beanbags...
Looking to gather together 40 somethings working on 7 balls/beanbags... would love to share some stories/thoughts/ideas. :)
I'll turn 48 next month and I can still juggle 7 balls, although I'll confess that about a year ago I stopped working on it daily. I can still do it when I try, but it's not as consistent as it was. I've never been great at 7, with my personal best being only 70 catches. I have qualified 8 balls and flashed 9, but I'm not really much of a ball juggler. I can still flash 7 clubs, which I think is pretty decent for an old fat guy with health issues. So, that's where I'm at. I'm still learning new stuff all the time, but it's just not stuff where I'm trying to keep up with the 16 year olds.
Doesn't match: >50yo, going for 9b.
No, serious, ..
Hi emead, matches for me (serious for 7b at about 36yo, now daily practise).
I am 46 and can qualify 7 balls (pb=20-30 catches). I have (re-)started juggling 4 years ago, learning 4 ball tricks and siteswaps. After about half a year I have learned the 5 ball cascade. I mainly juggle self-made Russian balls. Progress with 7b is very slow compared with all other tricks. Now, I focus more on body throws, box variations, and passing (clubs).
43, will start working on 7 balls pretty soon. Solid 5, taking juggling class since last week. We all need challenges, right?
Wow! Good to hear there's more than a few of us. :)
I know one thing that has surprised me is that I never seem to get that "one day" where I best 30 catches and then the next day it's 40 and the next 70, etc. That happened for 5-balls, but 7-balls just seems to be one and a tenth step forward, one step back......
49, solid 5, occasional qualify of 6, 7 still eludes me. Mostly I juggle homemead Russians (90g)
Hi emead, welcome aboard. I'm (counts on fingers) 38 so not far off age wise. I'm regularly at around 20-30 catches, 7 balls is definitely a skill I'd like to keep into my 40s & beyond.
I'm 37 and haven't learned to juggle 5 balls yet... I will, though. Counting on having many years left to improve my juggling.
Awesome! Keep at it. It definitely takes more time than you expect (based on your history), but keep at it! Post your progress! Helps to have a sympathetic ear. ;)
Yeah, I think learning 5 balls will take a while, since I don't juggle balls very often. All the scheduled juggling practice is usually spent on clubs. I'm planning to learn 5 clubs, too, but that is difficult and there are many other things I want to learn, too, so I don't spend a lot of time on that either. Plus a full time job makes it difficult to find enough time for juggling at all.
Oh, and if there is such a thing as having the "talent" for juggling, I don't think I have it. You can get pretty far with determination and lots of work though. :)
Thanks for the encouragement. :)
I just recently joined the forum and I have few questions about record logging.
Hope you can help me :)
So the thing I'm confused with, is order of throws in siteswap notation.
Lets say I want to record 56 throws of 12345 (we all know this trick, and there is no questions that it is called 12345)
So I record 56 3b 12345.
My actual throws started with 3. Like 3451234512... So why do I record 12345 instead of 34512 then ?
12345 and 34512 considered different tricks by site engine, but they actually are the same one.
And how would I record this trick with additional 6 throw ? Is it 1234560 or 0123456 ?
Do we have any rules of resolving situations like this ?
Also, do you count 2 and 0 as a catch ?
And is there a way to tag people in posts ?
The convention among jugglers is to typically write down or say a siteswap starting with the highest value. Sure, you might get into the pattern with different throws, or start the loop at a different place, but for clear and easy communication, it's nice if everyone sticks to the same order for the same pattern.
This means 97531 is always easy to recognise, rather than each time the reader having to decode that 31975 and 19753 and 75319 are all the same pattern.
In your case, you are wrong that there is no question that your pattern is called 12345, as you yourself then explain. The convention is to call it 51234.
As for counting catches, with running a siteswap pattern it's often easier to count the cycles of the pattern. For example, here is a video of the b97531 record. Catches aren't mentioned, but "151 rounds" is:
I've never heard of this convention. 51234 sounds strange. Why not start a siteswap at its easiest point of entry? If it is a ground state siteswap, it's always obvious. 45123 makes much more sense to me than 51234. Obviously it's going to be 97531 and not 19753
Besides, how do you solve for siteswaps with recurring high numbers? 777171 could be written in 4 correct ways then?
I'm not an expert on states, but the excited state pattern 891 doesn't start with the highest number either. I believe that the easiest entry is 778, wheras the easiest entry for 918 is 7788?
"and there is no questions that it is called 12345" I think siteswap wise it should be called 45123, but 12345 is the obvious style choice. Which indeed makes counting tricky. You could link 45123 to the 12345 trick in the record section, claim that your version is the correct one and ask the current record holders for clarification of their counting method.
For myself I would also count cycles, not catches, but I understand that in the record section that doesn't work... I'm sure someone who uses the record section actively can comment on this?
The convention is actually to write the siteswap in numerical order. So 777171 would be the only correct way to write it. I assume that the reason is that it was convenient for early siteswap generators to write them in that format without having to work out the states. Writing them with highest values first is most likely to result in a low state start, unless you work out the states.
Well, Peter already answered this. It's the highest numerical value if converted into a single number. 777171 starts with 777 which is higher than 771, 717, 171 or 717.
As for this: "I'm not an expert on states, but the excited state pattern 891 doesn't start with the highest number either. I believe that the easiest entry is 778, wheras the easiest entry for 918 is 7788?"
Let's write those down.
Into 891 is 778? So that's 778891891891...
Into 918 is 7788? So that's 778891891891...
Yeah, you've just come up with the same thing!
Of course they're both the same thing! But that still doesn't tell you whether you should write 891 or 918, right? And my generator & jugglewiki do call it 891, not 918...
I've never heard of that convention either. I've only ever heard 12345 called 12345. Searching for 12345 vs the other permutations on rec.juggling & the Edge (both the forum & the records section), 12345 is by far the most prevalent.
If two siteswap records are entered into the Edge records system that are a rotation of each other & provided you have built up enough 'experience' by entering records you will have the option to merge those two tricks together. Once merged you can enter the trick whichever way you like but they will be listed & compared together.
At present no-one has entered a permutation of 12345 to link to.
I have heard of that convention, and I would certainly write any 4-handed siteswaps that way (I believe that most of the passers do that).
When logging my juggling practice, however, I usually write ground-state siteswaps in the order I do them, so 51234 would be written as 45123, since that way I can say that I did 4 rounds and back to cascade or something like that. (While if I wrote it as 12345 or 51234, the same number of actual throws and catches would only contain 3 rounds and the first and last throws would count as transition throws...).
I don't log siteswap records so it doesn't matter in that case, but if I did, I'd feel that doing for example ...3333345123451234512333333.... would be 15 catches of 45123, but only 13 catches of 12345. (If I do active 2s, otherwise I would not count them.)
Someone might also have noticed that I sometimes log both 55050 and 50505 in the same practice session... Or 552 and 525. In that case, it's just different starts and has little to do with how to write siteswaps and more to do with me wanting to see in my log entry that I actually did two different starts, but being too lazy to use a lot of words. (55050 would be starting with one club in one hand and two in the other, and throwing from the hand with one club first. 50505 would be starting with 3 in the same hand.)
Same here .. heard of that convention and use it for logging records, but in a given context write them as then makes more sense.
I've heard of that convention and yet also commonly heard patterns referred to in ascending order, eg 12345. (Also the convention for writing multiplex throws also follows the "highest possible number" convention. eg , not . I learned that from Sean Gandini.)
In the single case of the pattern 12345, yes, that order is the most common by far. It feels like the natural way of saying it. However, it's in a class of patterns where throw values increase by one until it drops to the first number again, and in most other cases, the higher number is said first. Examples:
423 not 234
534 not 345
645 not 456
It's only because it feels natural to say the number 1 first that people do so! And it *is* so satisfying to say it that way! In conversation, I've no problem with saying 12345. I think it's more important to have clear communication between two people than to follow strict rules.
But in the case of making a list or database entry, I think it's best to stick with the convention. And if there's any confusion, explain the convention, not make exceptions for something that just happens to scratch a weird cognitive itch.
What if others (like me) find it easier to start it with the 3 ? i.e. 34512
There are many patterns that people don't start the same way, so the easy way for you isn't necessarily the easy way for others, hence the need for the convention as discussed by Peter and Luke to help everyone recognise a given siteswap from all it's possible cycles.
Yes, this is the whole point. When ordering lists, the person reading it should know where to look, and also not think they are missing anything, and also not worrying that two things in different places are duplicates. This is why bookshops and libraries have settled on (within sections) ordering books by the author's second name, and then the first name, and then by book title/series title and number. If you went into a bookshop, and some books were ordered by the title, and some by the author name, and some by the colour of the spine, everyone would be super annoyed.
In the case of siteswaps in a list, or in a database like the records section, the obvious thing to do is order them by A: object number and then by B: numerical value.
This is important because, just looking at the siteswap out of context, it's impossible for most people to know the state of the pattern, or how they would transition into it from the cascade or fountain, or any number of other things.
And it's really important not to have 777171, 771717, 717177, 171777, 717771 an 177717 ALL listed in different places, or else the list would be unmanageable! You'd also have to have 441, 414 and 144 listed. And every other iteration of every other pattern, just in case another juggler liked starting on a different beat or had a different transition into the patter,
If someone is confused, it's much better to explain the convention to that person (eg. "in the book shop we order by author surname") than it is to accommodate their preference at the expense of making the system more complicated and confusing for everyone else.
With regards to counting numbers. Don't count 0s, & only count 2s if they are active (thrown); if you are just holding the prop don't count it as a catch.
There currently isn't a way to tag people in a post, I don't think traffic is really high enough to warrant the feature? If you just type someone's name in all capitals I'm sure they'll get the message.
Thank you, Orinoco.
Not counting 0 makes and passive 2's makes sense. I just realized than I counted number of cycles and multiplied it by number of digits in siteswap. But it turned out to be wrong.
Taging people look nice. As I see it. Just Highlighted name makes it clear to random reader that message has direct recipient. It also would allow to send emails to tagged people if they want it, for example. I don't think everyone read forum from end to end. But it is minor.
I'm much more interested in resolving my siteswap issue.
You mentioned an option to merge two tricks together. I have not found info about it anywhere, could you please comment on it ?
If there is a possibility to merge tricks and make two different entries behave like one trick would really solve it.
But also may be i't is possible to pre process siteswaps programmatically to make all versions of one trick recorded with same string. (like if you enter 315 it is still shows up as 531)
I'm not sure if it is a right way.
Go to any trick in the records section and look at the bottom of the page for "Is this trick the same as another? Link them together". However, based on what Orin said earlier it may not be available unless you've added a lot of records.
...& that link will appear if you've logged more than 10 records. This is just an arbitrary threshold so that linking is only handled by people who are at least a little familiar with the records system. I couldn't remember what the threshold was when I posted earlier so just had to look up the code!
I have come to the conclusion, I'm not a choreographer.
I have been juggling for quite some time now... But I would consider myself as a sports juggler. I feel that it's time to take my skill, make it into something more entertaining and engaging for myself and others.
Long story short... I want to be more of a performer.
So, this is where I stand
3b Many tricks very smooth and consistent, including: Box, 3up 360 pirouette, Factory, Mill's-Mess, and eyes closed.
4b Many tricks smooth and consistent, including: Full Shower, Wide Columns, 534 and 7531.
5b Few tricks smooth and consistent, including: 1up-4up, (6x,4)*, 3up 360 pirouette, and Half Shower
6b Fountain consistent 24+ catches
3c Few tricks smooth and consistent, including: Mill's-Mess, Flats, Flair with both hands, and Kick-up into 4c
4c Few tricks smooth and consistent, including: 53, 534, Sync, A-Sync, Singles and Tripples.
I juggle to music every time I practice, I have the feel of what tricks I can do and when I should do them depending on the song that's playing... But I find I just improvise every time. If I drop, I leave the song play on, then I join in with the music when I feel like it. There is absolutely no structure with what I do.
So, the thing is that I have a song that I wish to perform to, it has a changing tempo, is just over three minutes long, and it's very catchy... But I am hopeless at choreographing what I want to do. I write down the tricks that I think I should include. I try to perform what I have written, execute the first trick then immediately forget the list and start improvising again. I then take a glance at my list, and then realise that almost half of the song has passed already, and I'm flapping around like a chicken.
The other thing is, I believe that I should include a few little breaks in the middle of the act to either give the audience a time to reflect and appreciate what I have just completed, or give me time to change props, but I have no idea when I should have them: After a big trick? After a series of little tricks? A different fancy finish every time?
So basically, I'm asking for any advice from you performers out there. How can I develop my routine, how can I make a show out of what I can do?
Much love to you all,
Who do you want to be performing for? That will affect what direction you need to go in. If you are performing for other jugglers your approach needs to be very different to if you are performing for non-jugglers.
I've seen every trick you've listed before & can do most of them myself. What makes you unique? What can you do that makes your 3b box different from everybody else's 3b box? If the answer's nothing then I'm probably not going to be interested. The only one trick that jumps out at me on your list is 4b wide columns. How wide? If it's more than 'one step' I'm interested!
If you are performing to non-jugglers any one of those tricks (even just a 3-ball cascade) could be something they have never seen before making you the most unique juggler they've ever seen. That certainly doesn't mean performing for non-jugglers is easier. Jugglers are quite happy to watch juggling. Non-jugglers want to see entertainment which is not the same thing.
I'm going to try to explain why you should choreograph your routine which is not going to help you to break out of the improvising habit, but might help encourage you to put in the effort required to do so.
If you are improvising & doing something different each time, you have no real way to identify what an audience appreciates. Was it the pattern, the transition into or out of the trick that got that gasp? Think of it like designing a science experiment. Your routine should be almost identical, just make one change at a time. If that change consistently gets a better reaction keep it in.
If you watch a seasoned street performer. That witty one-liner that they used to put down a heckle? The timing, the phrasing, the intonation will almost certainly have been crafted to perfection through many years of repetition. The build up to, the execution, the reaction after that finale trick will have gone through thousands of iterations in front of audience.
You have a list of tricks. Well done, that's more of a start than most people ever make. Memorise it without juggling it, then practise juggling it. Then find an audience & perform it, pay attention to their reactions - did someone try to applaud a trick but gave up because there was no pause in the action? Those audience reactions are the hints that tell you what changes to make.
All that said though, improvisation is a useful skill to have there will always be a situation that you can't account for or something you haven't thought of.
Oh, & a quick note about choreographing to music. One of my first performances was a diabolo routine at a TWJC Christmas show. I had started with some music & a list of tricks just like you have. After the show a chap named Phil came up to me & asked, "How did you choreograph all those tricks to be in time with the music?" I hadn't. Any connection between the timing of my tricks & the music was entirely coincidental but his perception that I had was what mattered!
Thank you very much for the advice!
Yes, I suppose I didn't specify who I was going to be performing for and where. I want to perform mainly for non jugglers, more of a busking role. I have multiple costume ideas, multiple song genres, and multiple prop styles.
So, my next step is going to be reform the list I have drafted up, and I'll memorise the order of the tricks. But what I'll also start to draft up a list of the styles I could use... Whether it is skipping around the stage, over emphasising a "big" trick, or flashing a cheeky wink at someone in the audience.
I understand that patter and wit will take years to master, and I am more than willing to accept that my first performance isn't going to be perfect, but I'm dying to find out.
Drop the music, bin it completely. Busking is all about making a connection with the individuals in the crowd, making them gasp/laugh/react in any way other than walking off. Doing that without talking is *harder* than doing it with words.
Go watch a load of street shows, try not to copy whole bits, but pay attention to and copy the show structure. There are phases to a street show, gathering a crowd, building, filling, final trick, hatting. The structure is there because it works.
That structure makes choreography easier, because it gives you bones to hang the tricks off.
You will suck
Performance is a skill in itself, it has to be learned and practiced. Unfortunately that has to be done infrint of an audience.
You will suck, but every show will have a glimmer of not sucking in it - take that, fan it into a flame, fan that flame into an inferno and you're golden :)
Furthermore busking may not be your thing. It requires a particular mindset to be a busker. You have to build a show around continuously asking for money, to be successful. You can't just have one hat line unless you want to starve. There is a ton of information on the internet about this http://www.buskercentral.com/how_to.php being a good start but there are a load of sites.
There are many other outlets for performing jugglers but very few require just your juggling skills. Professional jugglers are business people first and finding the niche that earns you money is an ongoing task.
Good luck busking! Out of all the performance styles/venues that are available, busking is the one for which actual juggling skills are the least important. It all comes to your ability to sell those 3 tricks that you're going to do. This challenge would teach you to perform for sure
If you do want to juggle, but want to be on the street, I can recommend traffic lights. A clean sequence of tricks works fine here, and as a bonus it is not a requirement to consider sound and costume etc ;)
Someone tried traffic lights in Sweden and got told off by the police, who apparently had never heard of anyone performing at traffic lights before. (It was in the newspaper.)
Is there really time to both perform and collect money before the lights turn green? I think that was the main issue with the one who tried it "here", that he was still collecting money and thus slowing down the cars when it was green.
When I did it, I had a traffic light with a 1.5 minute cycle. I would perform for about 30 seconds, collect for 30 seconds, and then the cars would drive for 30 seconds. However, often I would still be stuck on the road while people started driving, and then someone would have to slow down for me in order for me to make it to the shoulder. That would happen like one out of 5 times or so.
Also, every now and then I would be really lucky and there would be many cars trying to give me money, if those cars were willing to slow down the traffic behind them, yes you'd slow down traffic. But often these cars weren't willing, so if you would reach them too late they would drive anyway.
But sure, you're on the road where you're not supposed to be, you're standing in relatively dangerous positions... If I were a cop and had never seen this practise, I would tell people off too...
The best places to start doing this are places that are already used to beggars or window washers. They have come to "accept" people walking along the traffic light, but then being the juggler you are the fun and original version, not the annoying one. Everybody happy.
I haven't dared to try here in the Netherlands. In Rotterdam I know of one spot where a beggar walks, but I'm still convinced that people would be too baffled to get out money in time. Plus, I find it scarier to pretend I'm the quirky guy when I'm not a non-native/traveler. Being outside your own country gives you some bonus points.
Busking is a good way to learn a lot about performing very fast, but having done it, I'd recommend against anyone spending much time on it, aiming to do it long term or even put the effort into getting good at it. I have never met a more miserable crowd than a group of long time street performing jugglers. It's a creatively deadening form of entertainment mixed with cut-throat competition for pitches, material, and promotion. Know what you are getting yourself in to!
Thank you all, for all of the advice you have been able to provide me.
An additional note:
I am not looking to make juggling a reliable source of income, nor am I looking to make it a full-time major commitment. I am in a position where I work away on a ship for 4 months (With plenty of juggle practice time), then it's followed by 3 months paid leave, so I wouldnt need it to be a great money-maker.
In my three months paid leave I love to travel, I find myself in cities, on beaches, and in places where I barely know the language. So what I am actually looking to do is just create an eye-catching routine that brings smiles to the people around me. I wouldn't need anything in return, I would be doing it purely for the entertainment of others (and myself of course).
Sounds like a good life! I love the idea of not having to do stuff for money, and then not having to follow the normal rules or guidelines in that direction.
If you just want to juggle some nice routines, but aren't asking for money or even perform in a traditional sense, why not just learn the routine of someone else? In doing so you'll learn a lot about choreography from inside someone else's head.
It's a good life for a 23 year old with no family commitments, but it's not for everyone.
I thought the number one unwritten rule of a performer was never to use someone else's performance routine? Or have I got this completely wrong?
i don't mean you should perform someone else's routine, but learn the choreography. Once you get a feel of what kind of things flow together by copying the masters, you'll know much better what you can develop yourself.
Welcome to the world of performing :).
Keep in mind that any (juggling) performance is more than a list of tricks being executed! Other things to consider choreographing:
Position and movement on stage, movement and position of body, music, acting, costume, props, colors, events, jokes, etc.
I've seen enough juggling to not care for a routine of common tricks. But if you have a good/fun/untested idea for one of the things mentioned above, and let that influence your juggling (for example, put on 30 t-shirts as your costume and see what you can still do, or skip around in circles on stage and bring that movement in harmony with your juggling), and you've got yourself an interesting performance.
Now, if you've never performed much, those things may seem hard and it sounds much easier to "hide" behind the juggling you already know... But if you're serious about learnig performing you'll have to accept that the juggling you do in training might not directly be interesting on stage.
Once you've got this extra thing in your act that makes your performance interesting, the tricks will hopefully soon fall into place and order.
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:
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:
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:
We're on our way already (staying overnight just outside Birmingham) and we're already compiling a list of stuff we forgot to pack...
I'm currently sat on the grass, in the sunshine on car park duty... no sign of any cars yet as it's a bit early #bjcvolunteering
I have packed most of the things I was planning to bring, now I'm considering switching to my largest suitcase to have room for a set of new clubs on my way home (not planning to throw away the old ones). :) There might be enough room anyway if I stop adding stuff now but I am not sure.
For me, Anni, Emma & Guillaume were the standout acts in the gala show. I liked Rosie's compèring, especially ducks/kids.
This post of Voids appears to be in the wrong place.
I also liked the duck/kid routine and also Mark Watsons play with it later.
You are a judge for a 3 ball competition where competitors are allowed an entry of a maximum 90 seconds. Points for difficulty, creativity, and choreography. Two questions:
1 - What would you want to see in a winning entry?
2 - How would another entry beat that?
Looking forward to hearing what y'all have to say.
Live, or on video?
Errr, didn't you just set the criteria as "difficulty, creativity, and choreography"?
1: difficulty, creativity, and choreography
2: better (difficulty, creativity, and choreography)
Or are you asking for ideal/fantasy tricks & routines? Or simply which type of (difficulty, creativity, and choreography) we individually like?
If the latter, something McKinney or Menes-ish would float my boat, but even better yet, something unexpected and fab.
Looking for something more specific than exactly the wording I gave. For example, how would you show difficulty? What are some very difficult 3b patterns/tricks that you can think of, especially ones that aren't mainstream?
What are some examples of 3b creativity that you've enjoyed? Were they creative in their juggling, their presentation, in some other way? What made you enjoy them?
I can brainstorm on these all day/week/month by myself, but I find that I most enjoy specific parts of juggling. I'm interested in reading others' thoughts about these.
Oops, I missed replying to the second part of your comment.
For Sean McKinney and Michael Menes, what about them do you enjoy? With such orthogonal juggling styles, I think they're interesting choices.
If a trick of one were to be done by the other, do you think you'd enjoy it as much?
Sean: Energy, attitude, standing apart from the crowd. Michael: Perfect choreography, variations, elegance. They're very different to each other, but they're each very much themselves. So, to the second question, probably not.
If you're unfamiliar with them, folks, treat yourselves:
"very much themselves" is a sentiment that's come up from a couple people. I wonder if there are many people who juggle in a way that's very much themselves that nearly everyone doesn't like watching. When I think of someone juggling in a very much themselves way, I think of people who excel at their area of juggling: Vova, Murakami, Pavel, etc.
I wonder if there are people who juggle in a way that's very much themselves, but it doesn't seem that way.
Not sure if you waited for an appropriate day to post that, or if it were a coincidence...
The ultimate (in my mind) would be a 90 second piece that was alive and playful without being too physical. The overall 'shape' would be balanced and beautiful. It would have to be made up of many original parts.. the more unrecognisable but less complicated the better. A couple of unbelievably difficult body tricks would be nice too.
"the more unrecognisable but less complicated the better."
I've been trying to move down this road. Do you have any favourite patterns like that?
Kouta Ohashi's juggling is like this I think. Modern, technical, beautiful, playful etc. It doesn't get much better (in my mind).
I just went to watch Kouta Ohashi on YouTube. Very nice, almost made me want to be a ball juggler.
...huh, I was pretty sure it was just called Ball. The video called "Ball Juggling" is the one I was talking about, I wonder if he changed the name.
Very hard question(s). First, I don't feel expert enough to be a good judge. First, I wouldn't want to rate other's achievements (but well, they go for a contest, they should be prepared to win or lose, and it's more than okay to have some competition). The winner should deserve his victory, else I'd rather have two, three, or more winners provided the field is big enough.
Leaving all that aside and assuming I were among the best available judges ..
it's very hard to tell without a distinct example, without concrete compare .. it's art after all, and as a judge, how to cope with personal preference versus objective rating. difficult, dilemmic. I don't really feel competent to answer, so only brainstorm anyway:
Subsequent assthrows to catches in front shower. °°° I like the juggler to move, not stand straight still only (and be it no steps, but then moving hips, torus, waving arms, bending knees, .. stuff). °°° Surprises are very welcome. °°° I love outstretched arms windmills, preferably front to back or vice versa (not front only). °°° .. ?
For "difficulty", I'd like to see skills that reveal a lot of time invested and-or a lot dealt with, it to look poised somehow.
For "creativity", I'd like it to show ``him-her-themself´´, it to be authentic, show someone doing his-her-their (intrinsical) ``thing´´.
show more than required e.g. artistic expression, show some fun, presenting in an original way, an awesome setup ..
But I really don't know.
Thank you for your thoughts!
How would you recognize someone who would, "show ``him-her-themself´´, it to be authentic, show someone doing his-her-their (intrinsical) ``thing´´.?"
.. or "selfmade". Yes, not all clearly definable, but often, you can see it, see, that an act, a show, a presentation, an ado, is not copied, not imposed by a teacher or coach, not ``learned by heart´´, not strictly after a concise choreography (or maybe it is, but you can't tell, cos' it's professionally high-class performed), .. but you see joy, fun, moves, bodymovement, flow, originality, that all fit together naturally. Still unclear, but I'm thinking of that act of the other guy performing and juggling with clay (he forms a mask, takes part off it to juggle with) or e.g. well choreographed acts by Stefan Sing, the DRUGS video, jugglers moving freely, doing freely, not strict and sterile like Boitzov troupe doing their puppet triple salto on a sustained balance beam, not technical only (like e.g. the Scheffler video going through all front juggling 3b tricks in a row) .. those latter examples aren't ``bad´´, but "creativity, authenticity, expressing yourself, stuff" just don't apply - they take value from skills and technique mainly.
But it's thin ice and - regarding art - I don't feel well rating words and notions after scales, or trying to define. ( but it needs examples and compare ((and an idea of what one's even exactly talking about lol)) )
maybe: sometimes there's a spark, that goes over .. passionate ado that comes from inside, from the heart, or soul or one's own style or uniqueness .. or maybe: when it's there, you can see and feel it ..
Thank you for both messages.
It's funny to imagine someone like Falco Scheffler "moving freely", almost in a Stefan Sing-ish way. My major influences when I was a wee juggler were Falco Scheffler and Murakami Tsubasa - both often admired for having such control over their patterns that they looked like gifs. I practice in that way often. I don't think that's a good way to perform. Perhaps I should review Murakami's old JJF performances: he did move, though from memory I don't recall any of the movement having special meaning.
To then think of myself making a free-flowing act...it's difficult. There are certain body throws that seem to ask for movement in a particular direction. They're always forward or back, though, not side to side. Perhaps I'll have to loosen my rule about practicing practically only ambidextrous patterns.
I do practice improvising juggling a lot, but that's an area that only my club members see. I wonder if it would be interpreted as "not me" if I were to do it on stage.
To then think of myself making a free-flowing act [..]
Do I read between the lines, that you think it might ``add´´ or ``be necessary´´ to and are in search of a way to ``add ´´ to your appearance, to make the performance of your high technical skills ``more pleasing´´ for an audience, for show, acts, onstage?
Well, it's for the individual prop competition, which is limited to 90 seconds. I think a full out costume would be overkill.
But I'm certainly not going to only drill fast patterns on stage, because heck, I can't follow my faster patterns on video. I can't ask others to be able to!
I think I'll limit the fast stuff to a few punctuation points. In my choreography, I'm trying to focus on phrasing and buy-in. In phrasing, I often forget to build in parts where people don't need to pay particularly close attention (i.e. everything being done is obvious). With buy-in, I need to do some highly relatable patterns/tricks that are widely acknowledged as difficult or interesting (then make them more difficult/interesting!).
Olivia Porter is "creative, inventive and authentic" merging footwork with contact, with stalls, with juggling, with comedy, with expressionism in an unique, "her own" way. Gilligan is "creative, inventive and authentic" .. they both in an original way, making up completely new ways, finding what they like, want and want their juggling to be and discovering the possibilities, opening any new doors cross their way. (as appears to me from what bit I've seen so far)
noslowerdna, or also you, as appears to me so far (but I haven't seen all), are "creative, innovative" in a technical way, noslo in a systematical way working off on siteswaps that develop from the ones he already knows and has perfectionned. Both you also "authentic" in doing exactly what you want, but not "creative" in longing for the completely new, but mostly building up on what you already can, creative in finding new branches off both your repertoire trees.
Different approaches, i think.
Let's take Delaney Bayles - awesome very high class master juggling - but utterly "technical", (Albert's and known siteswaps and numbers' backcrosses, numbers' flat fronts and all, aren't "innovations"), not meant to be "creative" or "authentic" in any way.
I think you represented my juggling style and motive well, I do value creativity much more than pure difficulty. Of course, tracing the creative branches often leads to some pretty difficult places.
Ah, °whew°, glad I didn't put my foot in it .. it's a thin line between critique, feedback, analyzing or comparing other's styles in arty terms, and simply dropping a fat brick.
1. Difficulty: Probably at least "top 100" level, probably 3+ years of experience, clean and smooth execution, a few drops are okay. Creativity + Choreography: Like any presentation, a pleasant blend of cohesion and contrast. There should be some recognizable theme / style / persona / logical progression / recurring motif, not just a series of tricks or patterns strung together seemingly randomly. At least 5 things that I've never seen (including 1 or 2 completely new fundamental elements) - with an infinite number of possibilities out there, high-level 3b jugglers should ideally be exploring fresh territory instead of just copying the work of other trailblazers.
2. A 3b legend (Murakami, Falkov, Falco etc) shows up and does their usual thing. Or something totally innovative and unexpected is presented, redefining a core concept such as "juggling", "ball", or "three". Or a flawless performance of a sequence of cute and somewhat clever tricks by someone less than ten years old. Or an experienced and well-known professional (Viktor Kee, Michael Moschen, Stefan Sing etc) presents a polished routine.
Thanks for the thoughts. I started choreographing yesterday, and there will definitely be more than 5 things that I think are new. I think I have one new fundamental element (well, okay, the element is in one video, but not very well flushed out).
I'd love to have a shot at any of the 3b legends.
View older threads
Subscribe to this forum via RSS
1 article per branch
1 article per post
Green Eggs reports