My easy way is to collect 3 balls in my left hand one after the other, then pass the lot into my right hand before catching the 4th ball then you can just start (6x,4)* as if starting from cold.
So in siteswap that's 5555 52555 at this point you should have 1 in your left hand, 3 in your right & one in the air heading for your left hand.
The  is a bit arbitrary but I think it looks & feels nicer.
New edition of Spectacle now available. Interesting take on Viva Fest which is presenting circus art as a competition, hmm where have we heard that before! Nice pic of Steve Ragatz in the photogallery.
Is it too early to talk about #BBU2017 ? As builders are currently demolishing half our house we're quite looking forward to being somewhere with functional plumbing...also I hear there's a Fight Night on the last weekend and this time I might even understand the rules.
My weekly blog post this week is about a new juggling practice system that I have been playing with. It seems to be working for me. Let me know what you think.
So, the 3 Fails start point is arbitrary? You could make it lower or higher to make things easier/harder for yourself? Interesting, I might give it a go.
The 3 is arbitrary. But I think three is a good number. If you can do something three times in a row, you don't need to practice it anymore that day. If you can do it 3 times in a row EVERY time, then maybe the trick is too easy and it is now "in the system".
Sounds interesting. So if I get a repeating sequence of fail, success, success I will always win the game up to any value, despite never getting more than 2 in a row? I guess that this makes it less frustrating that aiming to get a certain number of successes in a row?
That's right. Either way you ending up "winning" the game. Best case is you get three times in a row, then move onto something else. Worst case, you end up doing whatever it is 10 times. If every session you end up doing it 10 times, then there will be a point where you might be able to achieve 9 times in the system. And then 8 etc.
Somehow this reminds me of a two-clear points or Advantage/Deuce system. I guess it recreates a similar property.
I understand, that basically you need 3 more successes than fails within 10 attempts, which makes sense to me. It's a way of limiting yourself to 10 attempts going for over 50% success.
I see a dilemma when having a line like
fail -- fail -- fail -- success -- fail -- success -- success -- fail -- success -- success ( 5 : 8 ) or
fail -- fail -- fail -- fail -- fail -- success -- fail -- success -- success -- fail ( 3 : 10 )
.. you've then ``lost´´, but have worked yourself up to a better success rate, found into pattern better, and might say to yourself like: "let's make it 3 more attempts, as with the later attempts I came close" or so. The game then can come down to deciding whether to go on trying, or else to stop, just as would when limiting your practice time for that trick with say a ``buffer´´ of a few more attempts or minutes when things go well towards end of that stint (or to stop earlier when it's not that trick's day) - also, that is, depending on success rate and-or general form and confidence, then.
[ #practice #structuredPractice ]
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.
Looks like a fun twiddly kind of thing. I liked when it stopped vertically 'on its own' (0:38). Do you think a three Kururin pattern would be possible?
Undoubtedly. What exactly that pattern would be, whether including "trap-stops" or "free-stops" (I don't know the terminology. I head people saying "stonk" at BJC, but wasn't paying enough attention to know what that means.) or both, is open to question. But if someone's dedicated enough, they'll nail at least a simple 3-kururin pattern, for sure.
I'm probably not dedicated enough, and I only own 2. Over to you! :-)
Someone whose name escapes me was trying a cascade with three at BJC, although 5-kururin-1-count was apparently easier.
If you raise one end of the table and roll them uphill, you can get them to come back to you as well, which opens up a lot of other options.
It might have been Will and Mike doing the 5 kururin 1 count.
I had a reasonable 2 kururin shower using a double roll on my second attempt. A 3 shower should be fairly easy using multiple rolls and a cascade should be fairly straightforward.
I just need to make some matching ones, once my frozen shoulder recovers and I can get out to the workshop
That was Mark who coined the verb "to stonk" (and noun "stonker") while we were sitting around playing one evening. If you push it with too much force, and it fails flat on the table, this we dubbed a flopper.
Avril & I then spent a few hours playing a table-wide game of "Land a stonker as close to the opposite edge of the table as possible."
The name stonker is perhaps a bit stupid, but a name was needed, and it's started to stick now.
I think the most accepted name for when the Kururin stops vertically without external influence is "ghost".
It's slowing down but the most popular online Kururin community I know of is on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/377903982559978/?fref=nf
There used to be loads of posts each day but not much is happening now.
One of my Kururin's has very smooth silicone pads, at the workshop Duncan organised I managed to get it to roll, then stop and change direction (on a level surface) because the pads sometimes get stuck. It's looks very strange when that happens. I think it might be interesting to add magnets to the ends to see what strange tricks can be done.
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 ]
Competition type: Poll
Closing date: 7th May 2017
Select option to vote
Mr Barron has been doing that juggling thing again.
(14 ball flash)
It's probably rather unfair that I saw that and thought 'oh had he not done that yet?'
I had a similar reaction when I saw the video title... but when I saw the flash itself, I was surely more impressed than last time :)
I was shown a secret video recently of Alex getting as close as you can possibly get to doing it without actually doing it. But that was sync. I love the fact that he did it async.
I also really didn't expect this to be done as an asynch pattern, if a 14 ball flash was possible at all.
I know that sync numbers is very tough on the abdominals and Alex needed recovery time between sessions. Perhaps this is why he switched. His recent 12 ball record was also async.
Yeah, I know what you mean about the abs. It's also the reason I haven't kept trying 12 balls myself. But then I have trouble launching the first of six balls from my left hand when trying asynch, and I presumed that would be a limiting factor in 14 balls with seven from the left hand (or second hand).
Well done, Alex. Incredible.
If you're reading this: Chance of this being front page featured, if it were uploaded to JTV: 100% :-)
View older threads
Subscribe to this forum via RSS
1 article per branch
1 article per post
Green Eggs reports