next level juggling .. props are dissolving .. post-deconstruction school
Hey Everyone! Fellow jugglers and those that are wondering how you got directed here, welcome!
My name is Mark, and I'm located in Beautiful Durango, Colorado. I am an avid juggler that loves to pass and learn new things as well as teach old things! If you are interested in learning to juggle, or interested in passing, throw me a sign and I'll throw it back!
You sound as enthusiast as you'd expect from someone with their name in all caps!
I thought you Brits or you juggling history lovers would particularly enjoy this episode of Juggle Jabber with Matthew Tiffany :)
Wintercon 2017 – The Ludwigshafen Juggling Convention Review (DE)
The city of Ludwigshafen played host to the annual Wintercon juggling convention from Friday 24th – Sunday 26th February 2017.
Please follow my link to read my recollections from the weekend:
Due to technical problems with the IJA site I was unable to upload the review until now, sorry to keep you all waiting!
Hope you enjoy, whether you did or didn't, join the discussion!
Can hardly tell myself, cos' nothing I juggle is really safe to not fail early before I get a good long lucky run in an attempt. (Guess, I'm doing at my limits too much, instead just "juggling" also easier stuff).
Going over endurance in order to then after that get a pettern safe enough for a short run to show, with 5b cascade, I feel pretty comfortable now (>1,000 catches), but doing the 5b reverse cascade lucky over 100 c a few times lately is still way from "solid, stable or safe", so I think, I need 250-300 catches (?) at least to feel like "I got that halfway down" with then still lots'a practise ahead to really "own", somewhat "master" it.
So, "solid" for me, at my current level, a lot means like being able to vary a pattern, bail out drifts, turns or lost timing and rhythm, and find back to comfortable fluent controlled pattern. (Yet that's still not "utterly controlled, mastered, rock solid", let alone "performable on big stage" as long as I get early fails a lot and longer runs luckily onlöy or after longer warmup anew on every single pattern).
So, (I'm aware it depends on the goals, on the difficulty of the pattern, on if to perform it for vid or onstage, but) how about your best patterns or tricks, .. are you okay with a few rounds (periods, cycles), with 50, 100 catches, or do you want them to last 300, 500 catches? When do you feel "safe" with them?
I should be able to:
Do it while talking to friends (and others, I suppose)
Do it whenever I want for however long I want
Rely on it completely when trying to do harder versions
^At least 95 % of the time. To me, if it feels good and has low variation, it's solid. Even inverted box I drop somewhat oftenish, and I'd consider it solid.
Solidly, with a club balance? If so, how do you know when you have that solid?
Obviously not otherwise it becomes recursive. Normally a qualify would be enough, or a bit more. Solid is such a vague word that I'm not sure I'd ever claim to have any trick solid to be honest.
"Solid for you" would like mean when you're satisfied with it far enough to stop practising it intensely for example.
.. or also when you feel it's ``ripe´´ to increase its difficulty and dare a harder version of it for example.
Hehe, I was imagining a progression of objects of decreasing length, ending with the silly end behaviour of no object at all.
I consider a trick solid when I can do it at least 9 times out of 10 in practice when combining it with another trick.
I will then introduce it into my show and if I am still dropping it too much I will revise my belief that it is solid until I can reproduce the same consistency in a show.
That - even though mine's different and much lower level - reminds me of wanting >10 rounds of a single extra throw in e.g. 5b practise, like #5-count backcross or reachover or 4b + one very small club, before I attempt on faster #n-count or add a club to 3b2c. Or >10 times "per run" (no matter how much cascade only in between). Same for e.g. 3b single behind back looking in about a #5-count.
Dinardi. There was an old music hall act whose tag line was "He fills the stage with flags!". Dinardi doesn't use flags.
Note to Orinoco: This post is b0rked. Preview wouldn't render it correctly, even when I edited it, and I have no access to the full editor since the reply page only gives a link to causal diagram help.
Not sure exactly what the problem is here. Did the preview render for you but not as expected or did it not render at all as per that screenshot? If that is not the 'full editor' in that screenshot what precisely is missing from it?
It should've read :-
"I'd suggest the flags in question are irises, but they don't really look like irises."
... with a link to Wiktionary on the first 'irises'.
I was going to check the source, but without the means to reach the full editor I couldn't do that either. I note that I still do not have access to the full editor in comment replies.
That was rubbish, he didn't catch a single thing!
I did like the orange stripey suit at 1:58 though.
I love that, you just don't see production acts any more.
Also, those spring flowers are gorgeous! i haven't seen any that well made in a long time, most I've seen available commercially look more like feather dusters.
Which is of course, more or less what they are
No more production acts? There are still some people performing with loads of bottles and umbrellas, right?
I love that you just don't see production acts any more.
I saw a production at the start - in the basket. After that, all I saw was some people unpacking some boxes on stage (albeit with great enthusiasm).
I'm so glad that I've never had to sit through an act like this live. It's interesting to see the video, from a historical perspective, but I found myself using the "skip forward 10 seconds" function over and over, waiting for something to happen.
Whereas I was thinking of the poor stage-hands having to quickly clear all that stuff off the stage. Hope the compare has lots of filler material.
ball tracking maths
Stephen's log entry: http://www.jugglingedge.com/log.php?LogDate=2017-03-14&UserID=913
[here's more editing space and eventually more maths gifted readers]
I'd go from there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercept_theorem, 1st graph (or better 3rd, below, ignoring "E" and "F" - "better" because ball's pictures' locations are parallel to camera's plane in the 3rd graph) .
So B and C then is the two camera's distance from each other. Where their common focus is, is S; its distance to the two cameras' plane can be measured from where the balls' pictures fully overlap. The ball's pictures then are A and B.
I just don't know how translate ball's pictures' distance in pixels as provided by tracking software into centimeters or inches in-real-distance, or, vice versa, how to translate the two camera's distance from one another in centimeters or inches into pixels. .. Holding two blue balls right onto the camera's lenses would make the software give the known cameras' distance also in pixels, but ball's pictures are then too big, so the blue tip of a needle might do it and still then I don't know, if cameras take any pics at all from object right on their lens.
But maybe using the known ball's diameter for gauging pixels versus inches or centimeters would work: find the distance at which the two ball's pictures touch. One then has a line segment AB in pixels for the ball's diameter's amount of centimeters or inches.
.. have to correct
So B and C then is the two camera's distance from each other. to "B and D".
The ball's pictures then are A and B. to "A and C".
Street football juggler [vid]
Ultimate control over one ball...
What is the physical limit for 7 ball cascade?
I have been training 7b cascade for several years, with various types of balls. Running 7 balls for two minutes is unfathomable, and running 7 balls for one minute is a goal that I hope to achieve (currently at 42 seconds).
Gatto said that running 7 clubs for >10 minutes is impossible. Certainly there is a physical limit for endurance in juggling. What is the physical limit for 7 ball cascade endurance?
I don't know what the limit is, but the record appears to be just shh of 13 minutes
I reckon it would be over half an hour. The thing is with balls is that with Norwiks, endurance becomes 100x easier, so if people can run 7b for 5 minutes with heavy beanbags, with Norwiks or equivalent you could go for a very, very long time. I think the limit in skill will always be hit first.
Yeah, people run ultra-marathons. If you train 7b hard enough, you'll have the physical ability to go a long time. I agree with Austin about the skill limit being hit first, but I'll add something else: concentration. You have to concentrate on every catch, and that mental effort is going to be physically draining in itself. Okay, with familiarity, it will become somewhat automatic, but not entirely. Ultimately, how good AND how determined you are will drive your limits forward.
Austin made a good point. Mental focus and skill are more likely to be the determining factor than physical exhaustion.
5 ball cascade has become 'automatic' for me, and I can combine it with head balance or joggling. 6 balls and 7 balls don't seem to be progressing toward automatic. It seems like there is some threshold where activities under a certain difficulty can become automatic, and activities that are harder always require maximum attention regardless of skill level.
View older threads
Subscribe to this forum via RSS
1 article per branch
1 article per post
Green Eggs reports