Viewing all threads involving Cedric Lackpot
Does anyone know where I might obtain audible props, some things that would appeal to the visually impaired? Or something that would help blind people play catch, an audible bean-bag or frisbee? Googling shows objects that beep but I hope there are cooler solutions. They have to make sound while they are in the air, not just on impact.
Not sure if it's much help but I found these: http://www.petqwerks.com/babbleballs.php# (You can click to hear the sounds). There are some for sale on ebay too.
The 2 3/4 inch Animal ball at the bottom of the page looks ok.. smooth and has the least annoying sounds. I quite fancy one myself!
Many thanks, we'll check it out. I see they are available at many retailers.
I have no idea of where you might get any, you might have to have some made specially, but what you need are audiballs (I have a set of three).
These consist of two hemispherical shells with bits of metal inside welded in a few points but with gaps wide enough to magnify the sound but not wide enough for the metal inside to fall out.
Interesting lead. Googling audiballs finds a 2004 r.j discussion amongst several edge people. The name has been hijacked for an Xbox guitar exercise and also, probably naively, for a student project here j
They've come up in conversation several times over the last few months, so I think the internet could do with some video of audiballs in action. Any chance you could film some so I can
remind myself how awful they sound pass it on to people who have asked about them?
I'm quite sure I can Paul. I will also throw in some Guy Heathcote Ball Sticks into the mix in case the audiballs are too quiet.
If you could arrange for someone to accidentally knock a selection of shaker cups off a table with a jitter ring in the background, that would complete the mid 90's cacophony.
Even better if you can find someone with one of those chiming metal devilsticks...
I can find the shaker cups and jitter ring. The chime devilstick is much rarer. Know anyone who has one?
Nick from London (I don't know his surname, and he's not fully credited) uses one about 3 minutes in to completing the circle:
But that was shot 10 years ago, and I don't know if he's still around or still has it.
I say that, but having just watched it (to see if his full name is mentioned) I think it might just be a length of pipe. I seem to remember the chime devilsticks being tapered?
Nick's still about and he's still performing with that devilstick, but it is something he picked up from a skip! It does make for an excellent prop.
Having nothing better to do, I watched the whole thing, was quite interesting.
Is his name not Nick Putz? He is the only Nick in the credits at the end, and he seemed to have enough talking that he would be credited....
btw: Nice cameo from you LP.
that would complete the mid 90's cacophony
How about a backing group of Chinese whistling diaboloists?
I have one of those as well. Let me see if I can bring them all to Upchuck and do a small video.
That should guarantee LP not showing
I think you're looking for something like this:
I guess similar props could be made reasonably cheap, provided you have the know-how - which I don't :)
Hope this helped!
New manipulation Hat!
Hi People, I am just about to launch a triple layer ,100% wool Cap for manipulation. Designed by me, Dan the Hat (www.danthehat.co.uk) and tailored by Anderson & Berner (the lovely chaps in Denmark who brought us The Manipulator ,designed by Nils Pol).
In these early stages I am seeking out peoples interest in such a product. Having played around for the last couple of months with the prototypes I can see that these caps open up a whole bag of worms as far as new moves and manipulations go! We have all seen cap tricks being performed with the classic 59fifty caps but these A&B caps make it easier to learn tricks because of the extra weight and sturdy build.
A short promo for the caps will be released soon as well as various shots of the hats,so watch this space.
If you are interested as to what they look like etc then drop me an email.I am hoping to get them in the juggling shops and on associated websites pretty soon. You will be able to pre-order the hats in various colours and sizes before the official launch day. Thanks for reading and do get in touch.Dan the Hat
Interesting! I've not really played with a hat in years, but I like the sound of this.
Will you have some at BJC?
Hi Paul, Yes I will. Thinking I may try and run a workshop with them. :)
You might want to let the workshop coordinator of the bjc know. I gather he is a helpful chap. Ahem
Hi Nigel, Is that going to be ok? The only thing is ,I will only be able to get to the BJC for the Sunday as I have gigs on all the other days..Will be going up and down from Exeter for the day. Would like to run a workshop with both Manipulators & The Caps...maybe 2 workshops?
There won't be many workshops on Sunday as it is the day of the public show. Some workshops possible in the morning and hopefully there will be quite a bit of interest in a different style hat.
I would definitely buy a manipulation hat with a 59FIFTY form factor, though I'd prefer snapback. My only concern is that it would be too thick and wouldn't look/fit correctly. I think with hats aesthetic is super important because you want the audience to believe you are using a normal hat.
I don't think I could carry off wearing a 59fifty without looking rediculous, but this thread has started me wondering about flat cap manipulation - and a flatcap rather suits me at the moment.
 truth be told I think that whole wide flat brim looks rediculous on most people
I like flat caps. I should find one, but the bloody things never fit.
Actually, hats in general never seem to fit. I seem to have an overly large head.
Stop laughing at the back there!
The key to finding hats that fit, is to measure your head and work out your hat size - and then buy a hat from a shop that sells them in proper sizes rather than "small,medium,large" - even with a size buying mail order is a risk because some milliners are a little erm "flexible" with their sizing.
Metric is the easiest size to work out. Measure round the fattest bit of your head, just above the ears. The circumference in cm is your metric hat size. Make the same measurement in inches, divide it by pi (3.14 is close enough) and round up to the nearest 1/8 inch.
At 7 3/8" (imperial) or 58cm (metric) my head is on the large size, but I don't have too many problems finding the right size.
I know. I seem to have a long head, since it is usually too tight at the front and back. But, at some point I will have to get to a proper milliner. Not many in .za though.
True LP , I too look ridiculous in a 59fifty !These hats have a slightly different look than the snap back caps.. they are far more aesthetic than the manipulators, and have a couple of different ways of being worn, normally or think fresh prince in the 90's! Because they are heavier and more solid and normal cap trick is far easier. In a range of colours too these caps are not too far off the mark. On stage they would like real caps, we had this discussion last week at a convention funnily enough. Anyway photos in a week .
Awesome, they sound cool, looking forward to seeing what they look like and then possibly buying one! Different styles of manipulation hats are the future, not everyone wants to wear a bowler or tophat!
yeah where are all the lady hats?
I suppose first you'd have to answer the question what in hell is a lady hat.
Oh go on, I'll have a go
Fascinators - look rediculous, and are usually pinned on so no good for manipulation
Wide brimmed sun hats - too floppy, but would work for a boomerang act
Old lady Sunday best hats - I've got a blue felt wide brimmed hat which I used to use for hat spinning, but you're about 40 years too young to get away with wearing it
Straw boater, 50s private school, st trinians sort of thing. Probably a reasonable amount of potential
Retro 1920s style flapper hat, far too floppy and shapeless
Youngsters don't seem to wear hats these days, apart from baseball caps or beanies
If I were to play "Emily's stylist" I think a brightly coloured traditional shaped bowler would suit you best for a character act, or a small brimmed, pillbox style hat. Actually, scrap that. A beanie is probably more "you"
 an exercise I don't think either of us would enjoy
I wrote all that on the train, got off and saw a woman, late 20s early 30s wearing a hat which would be perfect. Like a bowler with a high crown, small brim, and a great big red flower on one side.
If it wasn't dark, raining and windy I'd have taken a photo :)
you're about 40 years too young to get away with wearing it
My hypothetical stage character might not be so young, though...
A cloche hat is probably closest to a hat I might actually wear. It might require some reinforcement but there's no inherent reason the thing needs to be floppy. I don't know how you go about reinforcing a hat... hm....
Next I suppose I should establish what kind of handbag lends itself to silly tricks. Either that or learn zimmer frame manipulation.
A beanie is probably more "you"
I am amused to realise that many of my friends have only seen my "I got dressed in a tent" look which in my mind is distinctly not me at all. But I suppose it's probably the only version of me that would go juggling hats.
(You can play my stylist any time, so long as we don't invoke the demons of that fucked up lady-gets-gay-shopping-friend thing with the shrieking. we might explode into antimatter. we would have to discuss linux or something afterwards to redress the balance).
I don't know how you go about reinforcing a hat...
I'd start by building another hat out of felt and stitching it to the inside. As for handbags, I'd have thought anything with a single stiff, tubular handle would have some obvious possibilities. Just don't go down the Kris Kremo route - those bags looked awful!
As for the beanie comment, I guess you're right about the "got dressed in a tent" thing - but that's not really the look I had in mind. I'm finding it hard to prod google into giving me image search results which match the mix of stylish, practical, quirky, feminine but not overly girly. I guess Sue Perkins probably comes close.
If I *do* ever play stylist, can I skip the shrieking... and preferably most of the shopping, and skip straight to the tea, cake and gossip? :)
single stiff, tubular handle
hmm possibilities.... and one could rig the bag with a dent in the bottom for head balancing purposes.
It would be interesting to make an act with a character that wasn't either tarty or gentleman drag.
I googled to see what kind of a hat Sue Perkins would wear and the only thing I came up with was this which made me laugh.
tea, cake and gossip
Now you're talking.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
Please let it look like, you know, an actual hat.
I personally think juggling should be an Olympic sport! What do u guys think? Should juggling be in the Olympics yes or no? And please try and give some sort of explanation , I think is should be because gym jugglers are athletes! They train just as long and hard and put on just as good of a show, even contact juggling is a real sport I think should be included in the Olympics .
I agree completely. Especially since it's a very global sport. It would increase appreciation for it all.
I do have to disagree with contact juggling though. Although I (as a novice contact juggler) understand that it is very difficult and requires practice, I don't think that the public would really receive it well. I can hear it now.. "he's just holding a ball and moving it around!" Although a really good juggler can portray that floaty illusion, we all know what is happening.
You all have good points. I think a better thing to say is that it would make me happy if say that summer Olympics 2015 there would be technical juggling. It doesn't have to continue on but it would be extremely entertaining to see the "best" (whether you would agree or not) from each country go for old with the awe of mesmerized crowds. I think it would be nice for at least once. Perhaps though that would be something the WJF would do instead of the Olympics.
"contact juggling is a real sport I think should be included in the Olympics"
It's a girls sport
Wow! Awesome video, thanks for sharing.
I think peterbone's comment sums it up better than I could say it, as far as why juggling wouldn't work in the olympics. My personal problem with juggling in the olympics is if juggling became too mainstream I'm afraid it would lose some of it's magic for me. I'm sure there would be benefits too... I guess "hey, you should be in the olympics" sounds better than "hey, you should go on America's got talent!" haha.
Even when the WJF has offered decent prize money, it still doesn't draw in as many people as you would think. WJF10 will be December this year and first place will get $10,000! Plus they are doing a global regional video competition thing this year where people from all over the world can enter for a chance to win a trip here to Vegas to compete. Anyone who really likes to see juggling as a sport, WJF is the best we got. I'm hoping a lot of big names will show up this year, 10 grand would get my attention if I was good enough at the WJF tricks. Err, um.... I mean moves.
Okay this is the second time I see someone calling tricks moves. I'm guessing that Jason has the fear that calling juggling tricks 'tricks' will make it sound less professional. Am I right?
The sports the WJF seek to emulate (gymnastics, diving, american wrestling) call the individual components "moves" so that's what the wtf calls them.
It's just a case of adopting an existing sorting terminology
In that perspective it makes sense.
I like the WTF lets keep that one in!
It's almost as if it someone should put it on a tshirt...
> It's a girls sport.Yep. That notorious girl Kati Yla-Hokkala, who has been a fundamental part of The Gandini Juggling Project since its inception, was the Finnish RG champion before she turned to juggling IIRC.Yay for girls!
Indeed, and had she been male she wouldn't have been allowed to compete. My intent was factual, not derogatory.
Ball/Hoop/Ribbon/Club/Rope events are female only floor events, just as Pommel Horse/Still Rings/Vault/Parallel Bars/High Bars are male only events.
I do totally agree with you on both juggling and contact juggling. In my opinion the problem would come from the entry selection, since every country has to choose their champions. The difficulty would be to determine a global basic level and to decide how many participants each country can bring to the olympics.
Scoring could be similar to gymnastics or ice skating (as it's often said), with marks for both the tricks and the beauty of the whole routine. But then the hard part is to name and evaluate the difficulty of every trick on earth (I mean doing it officialy with the olympic commitee). Maybe it would take two separate categories, one for the "big classics" such as huge 7 club 5 up 360 etc. and another one just for creativity, where manipulation and just the creation of totally new patterns would be rewarded. (and I still think that part of juggling is a real sport).
But all in all it would be awesome to have such a beautiful stage for juggling!
Absolutely not. Firstly it's nowhere near popular enough. 99% of the general public wouldn't understand it. There are lots of other non Olympic sports that are a lot more popular, like karate, climbing and rugby. Secondly it would become far too competitive. It would become like gymnastics or trampolining where there are set moves and very little room for innovation - like the WJF but a lot worse. I think that juggling is just too broad an activity for inclusion. It would have to focus a lot more on one particular aspect and that would limit the number of competitors and public interest even more.
By the way, this subject has come up many times in the past on rec.juggling. This one for example.
Back in 2012, I spent a lot of the summer watching the gymnastics and the diving (for purely sporting reasons, there were no other reasons involved at all. Honest.) then once the Olympics were over I went back and re-watched some of the televised WJF competitions.
The WJF scoring made much more sense having spent all that time immersed in similar scoring methods. This escaped me completely the first time I watched the WJF.
Personally, I think that we're a long way off having the multinational structured competitions and globally recognised organisational body overseeing the sport and unifying competition rulesets etc which would be a prerequisite for it being recognised as an olympic sport - and even if we did it appears that once you get to that stage, you have to persuade the people running that organisational body to dissolve it and cede control to the IOC.
Which seems like more paperwork than any juggler I've ever met could be bothered with.
Was the WJF as erm, inspiring, as the diving and the gymnastics? ;o)
nowhere near it.
Although some of the haircuts were amusing.
I came close to being that juggler. About 4.5 years ago I wrote a plan to get juggling into the 2020 Olympics. I did a lot of research and made many many notes on what it would realistically entail. My plan was basically to start with numbers and/or joggling since those are the easiest to judge (and wouldn't really go against Francis Brunn's purported quip: "I don't believe in juggling competitions. It's like seeing who could paint the fastest painting!" ), though I did consider eventually having some sort of freestyle event .
I shared my idea with only one other juggling activist and did get good response, but I chickened out before sending it to all the potential committee members I had considered.
2. See basically any discussion on juggling as art vs sport.
I think numbers juggling would be the only format that would make sense in the Olympics to a wide enough audience. The point of the Olympics is to answer the basic questions: Who can run the fastest? Who can jump the highest? Who can throw the farthest? For juggling the basic question is who can juggle the most objects?
Joggling while definitely requiring skill & athleticism will never be anything more than a novelty in the eyes of the general public.
I think those jugglers who think juggling can be a sport would like to see a competition based on rhythmic gymnastics & why not? The WJF have shown that juggling can fit that format. But then so could ballet or any other form of dancing. There are purely technical aspects to every performance art that could be measured as a sport. Should they all be Olympic sports too?
I'm not bothered whether juggling gets recognised as a sport or not. I practice my hobbies because I enjoy them, if everyone else on Earth thought that juggling was pointless, I'd still juggle. However, I'd hate to see it get to the point where 'armchair jugglers' came into existence.
I'd hate to see it get to the point where 'armchair jugglers' came into existence.
You are WAY too late on that one.
As well as joggling or numbers I think the one which stands a half decent chance (based on widely recognised rule sets and formal competition) is probably volleyclub
Although major league combat seems to be developing some coherent international rules, it's a bit like kabaddi. Although that made it onto uk tv, it's not an Olympic sport. I wish it was though, I used to enjoy watching it on telly. Very entertaining!
 I still can't take joggling seriously, no matter how much Albert Lucas wants me to.
Fully agree the first point.
"The ultimate jugglers' sport. The bid for olympic acceptance starts here. "
Whilst I play a lot more combat, I agree on volleyclub being better as a sport. I should really get round to playing more often...but having played on sand courts it always looks less exciting when someone has put a net up in a gym at a convention, but you can't throw yourself after wayward clubs.
Luke is making a push for Europe wide Combat via http://www.lukeburrage.com/combat/index.php
I think volley club would be great but I'm curious what rule sets these are? I've only played very informally but there are lots of things that seem to me like they could be taken advantage of, it's just unsportsmanlike so few people do...
I actually think MLC is easier to do a formal sport in the olympics as the rules are very clear cut (with the exception of 360 combat which I don't think works well)
If juggling would be allowed as an olympic sport so much other disciplines would have to be allowed as well.
The term olympic sport would lose all meaning.
Why would we even want to become an olympic discipline?
Paperwork? involvement of politics and nationalism?
I think plate spinning should be an olympic sport.
No, seriously another thing that should be a reason for juggling NOT to be an olympic sport: There are not enough good jugglers! I think very few jugglers can compare to athletes of other olympic disciplines, the level can raise a lot still! Of course many people train hard, but without any knowledge/research about training methods, no coaches etc... We jugglers still have so much to learn!
Among the few people who are at the top, many of them are not interested in 'sport' juggling...
Cat & Karina brought along TWJC's newest member: 5 day old Tristan Ullyses Lindfield (I may have been involved with the awesome middle name). He managed to sleep through pretty much everything so he'll fit in just fine. Our newbies came back again (I've forgotten the names though, any idea Kev?) & remain enthusiastic. The young lad picked up a unicycle for the first time & managed to ride half the length of the hall in about 20 minutes as seems to be typical these days. John brought along a ridiculously oversized hula hoop which was hard work. Kev was practicing balancing a rubber egg on top of a drinking straw on his nose.
Newbies names are Simon, Ben and I think Chloe.
I tried a real egg this morning and managed for about 3 seconds before getting very worried it would fall and break on my head.
Kev, if you're going to use real eggs then I think you need to video your practice sessions. Purely so you can monitor your progress, of course...
Today I managed a 30 second balance with egg on straw on nose, the first attempt went a bit wrong when the egg fell just glancing the side of my head before smashing on the ground.
Ullyses?!? Or perhaps you were thinking of Ulysses.
The spelling is correct on the birth certificate!
Name specifically comes from:
So what exactly happens when a new trick is created? or variations? I know that of course there are groups and individuals all over the world that may create or stumble upon a pattern and trade and share it via juggling with them or now the internet. But what about for example when steve mills "made" his famous pattern how does it become "the mill's mess" ? Is there like a data bank of all tricks or some sort of parliament for pattern names? That sounds stupid but its more an exaggeration I'm just interested in how some of this stuff comes about. Have any of you create some new pattern? I recall hearing about a move called the "Orinoco Flow"?
Like most language, development of vocabulary is largely organic. There is no centralised trick registrar, official database, or anything like that. I'm sure there are lots and lots of trick lists, but none are authoritative. Names stick because they become popularised; likewise they fall out of use when other terms become subsequently popular. It's all down to whichever usage gains the most consensus.
IIRC Mills Mess* had been discovered by more than one person, but Steve Mills name stuck to it, perhaps because it is memorably brief and alliterative.
Other names come and go. Not many people under forty will be especially familiar with club passing terminology such as everies, every others, every thirds, thundershower, all of which terms have now been rightly superseded by more modern words, i.e. 2-count or shower, 4-count, 6-count, 1-count or ultimates.
* The current consensus seems to be that it should be Mills Mess, not Mills' Mess, but the two often get confused so don't be surprised if their prevalence of usage flip-flops from time to time.
The exception to the esteemed Mr Lackpot's comment is, obviously enough, with siteswap patterns which are unambiguously named. You did not ask about those though....
Names can also vary from group to group, and if that group rises to prominence or are doing something unusual that gets them noticed, then their terminology can be picked up rapidly. And example is Aidan and his multi-person passing patterns. Since he makes them available widely, his names probably have a decent chance of sticking.
Thanks guys I kinda figured all this but I liked hearing it in the words of others.
I think I've recently discovered a few new pattern concepts. These discoveries are relative to my knowledge of juggling patterns; I'm sure that others have likely had the same ideas, just never published or popularized. I'm planning to submit some of them to the Library of Juggling website, for more or less "official" documentation.
I've found the Library of Juggling really helpful, I like the way patterns are broken down and repeated, I find it much easier to learn that way (rather than tutorials). I think they need to add the Crossed Inverted Box. Also I'm not sure about the difficulty levels - I know it's difficult to be accurate but surely the Inverted Box is more difficult than Luke's Shuffle?
To learn, certainly, and I think that's what the difficulty ratings should reflect. At this point I actually find inverted box much easier: the movements are smaller and I find it's a less collision-prone pattern. I've gotten decent (more than 50 catch) runs of inverted box, but can't get any kind of long runs with slams/Luke's Shuffle. Admittedly, I've practised slams/Luke's shuffle much less, but I think it's more fundamental than that.
Hmm, that's funny. I can run Luke's shuffle quite solidly now, but still stuck at a personal best of < 10 catches of inverted box. My practice ratio is similarly skewed, however. I generally don't spend much time directly hammering away at basic patterns that I find extremely frustrating (like inverted box, inline 3, 4b mills mess), instead preferring to slowly attack them over time from a variety of different angles.
This has been annoying me for hours now, I can't remember which Luke gave his name to Luke's shuffle.
Was discussing this yesterday and we couldn't either.
Now to see if Google helps
That's the chap!
I had an image of big hair, but couldn't trust it or remember any other details. I've not seen him in ages, anyone know if he's still around?
Ah that's him is it. Nice to see the face and get a little info on the originator of a juggling trick.
Indeed. It's all the Lukes, Burkes and Barrages/Burrages that confuses it for me.
I don't think I've ever known who the Burke in question was (although I'd love to think it was James), but could you be thinking of Ken Benge (juggling author)?
http://www.juggling.org/jw/86/3/festivals.html - search in page for "burke"
Is the 3 ball snake essential to learning the 5 ball cascade ???? Or no???
A lot of people find the 3 ball snake harder than the 5 ball cascade and I know several people who can run 5 balls for as long as they like, but can barely get 3 rounds of the 3 ball snake.
It's something about the way it screws with the natural left-right-left-right throw order makes it difficult to maintain the timing correctly.
I've never tried any snake patterns, so no. My method for learning 5 for both balls and clubs was to just start by flashing 4 in a crossing pattern starting from both hands. Once you can do that easily, then just go for 5.
No and I discourage people from learning it because I don't think it helps one bit.
Without the 3 ball snake, not sure I'd ever have gotten 5 ball to where it is today. It was *IMMENSELY* helpful. Please don't discourage it, different people learn 5 ball different ways.
wasn't that the name of a juggling video?
Ahh. Seems not. It was only 3 http://www.peapot.net/pages/7?product_id=15
I'll still discourage it. The 9 people I help by discouraging it will be worth more than the 1 person who would have progressed better with it.
Nothing against trying a snake, but don't practice it if you can spend your time on analyzing 55550 flashes!
I pretty much agree with this, except I would recommend 55555 flashes rather than the 55550. I always feel this patterns with zeros in do not teach quite the right timing and in juggling, timing is absolutely everything.
Snap your fingers (or clap your hip) during the 0, and don't do it multiple times in a row!
Of course 5 balls is nicer, but I see too many people starting with it too early and they have their first three balls all over the place before the 4th and the 5th are even thrown! Starting with 3 and going to 4 is fine imo!
I've still found it incredibly helpful, but I completely agree about the timing for 55550 (though 55555 can also have that problem as you don't need good timing for a flash). However the idea of having some balls not there can be very useful if the timing is forced (e.g. 7777070 which forces the timing of 7 quite well with only five balls)
I could never do 55550 and it didn't help me at all, imo it's more confusing than 55050, 552 helped a little though
as mentioned above, people learn differently and should try all of those siteswaps and work on whichever suits them best
I found 522 especially useful when going from flash to qualify and then again for improving the consistency of my throws when I got stuck at around 30 catches.
But like any other practice method, whatever works for you is great, I mostly bang on about the merits of 522 because everyone thinks it's a typo for 552. It's not a typo, I really do mean 522
Take your pick. I say it's far from essential, but I like throwing the occasional run of 50505 anyway.
I would advise staying well clear of the snake. They can slither into the sewers and then whip the balls off of jugglers when they're sitting on the toilet.
So to add to the multitude of replies:
I never used snake and wasn't a big fan - I did use 552 and 51 a lot. I found 552 significantly easier than 5 and useful - 55550 is closer but I didn't find it significantly easier which made it slightly less useful as a learning tool.
With regards to people saying the timing is tricky and different to 5 (I hear this complaint about 552 as well as snake and 55550): It is, and if your only goal is to learn the 5 ball cascade then you are probably better off just doing 5 ball flashes and then trying longer runs (so long as this is motivating for you).
But hopefully your aim is to get better at juggling in general, and 5 balls is one step in learning that. In which case I strongly recommend the exercises because they will teach you different things as well as helping your five. The timing is tricky and different - but by forcing yourself to get snake, 552 etc in 'correct' timing you will learn to control timing, rather than just learning one timing that isn't really in your control.
Note: I am mostly a passer these days where timing is far more important so this probably explains my keenness for timing!
I'm really surprised that this seemingly simple question is so contentious.
I too believe that you should learn as many patterns (props, styles...) as you can.
I just wanted to say to those saying that the timing of various siteswaps is 'different' that if you are doing things 'correctly' the timing for 5, 50000, 55000, 55500, 55550, 55050, 552, 522... should all be identical!
No-one does siteswaps to even heights. Seeing a siteswap simulator juggle some patterns looks ridiculous actually, as you can see some throws are wildly different to what real juggler would do. The best examples are probably showers. Try throwing b1 and b6666 into a siteswap simulator and then watch a normal juggler do a 5 ball shower and b6666.
Shower is a bad example because people always like to think they are juggling the async version, but in reality most everyone does showers either sync, or galloped but very close to sync. I see what you mean though...
Oh I agree, my point is saying that the timing for any pattern with a 5 in it is different from a 5 ball cascade is wrong because the timing is what *you* make it.
A good example of this is with 552, a lot of people make it look like a double-sided 2 ball snake (if that makes any sense haha) sorta right right, quick pause, left left... when it should be right left pause repeat. Maybe that's why some people don't like 552 for practicing 5 cascade.
I think it helped a bit as well as a 4 ball chase. Really though these are small parts that help. Really all there is to do is practice it more and more. Self analyzing is a big part. Knowing what your doing wrong with things like timing and spatial positions and body stuff. Maybe try slow motion video. Then you'll finally get it for a bit, then not be able to do it for days, then after 3 or so months of practice it becomes easy as pie.
That's a difficult question to answer, it certainly has its ups and downs, but hopefully the 'ups' make it worthwhile. I know they do for me and in that way I know I am quite fortunate.
Most of the time I have no idea. All I ever do is the best I can with what I have available. When I'm down it's often other people that get me through. Sometimes friends, sometimes strangers.
Do you mean
-earn enough money to get by on?
I think through a combination of hard work, dedication and fluke.
-not commit suicide?
I'm long since not a teenager, and nor do I have any drug habits to trigger clinical depression. I do occasionally verge on the SAD though. A bit of silliness here and there helps.
It seems the best option.
I avoid television, radio, newspapers... anything that might clue me in to the current state of chaos. It's very difficult sometimes because it seems everyone around me is addicted to constant updates about all the terrible things that are happening. I would rather focus on things in my life that I have direct control over. I try to exist in my own happy little oblivious world, rarely leaving my house or attempting to connect with people. It seems to work great, I have lots of fun and seldom give people chances to dupe me.
Although, occasionally, I wonder just how on earth I manage to keep living...
What has got you down, man?
I'm kinda in the same boat as steve. I don't watch television, internet (except for this), face book or anything like that. I only try to keep what I need as far as possessions. So then I have more time for things and people that are important to me. When it all comes down it's fulfilling relationships with your fellow humans that make a lot worth while.
Well nothing is really wrong, but I wondered what motivates people to continue. I think my English wasn't (and continues not to be) good enough to express the question very well. It's like, I look around and it all looks completely pointless and if everyone else is doing the same then, why do we all continue?
Struggling to find a reason to continue will have to do as the best reason to continue :)
What about experience? That's a 'point' isn't it? After all, it's the only thing you really get out of life. If it all seems dull boring and repetitive then prise yourself away from what you're used to and start somewhere completely different.
If I’m just tired/deflated/ill, I remember that no matter how bad I’ve felt, better times have always returned at some point. And in a world with so much possibility and wonder, those times can be very good indeed. They don’t have to be major events - something as simple as walking in a wood on a fine day can be magical.
If things are worse than that, then it may be a matter of working out what needs to change and working towards that. But at the same time, don’t forget to live in the moment and find happiness there also.
As to pointlessness - sometimes it’s best to put philosophy to one side, and just have a bit of fun.
Sometimes I try living three lives simultaneously in the hope one of them improves quicker. D'oh! %-)
But then I find that the other two duplicate posts that were on my screen a moment ago have disappeared again...
can I ask how old you are and what your main language is?
English is my main (only) language and I'm mid twenties old.
Ah, the beginnings of existential angst. It's a very fashionable thing, especially amongst the young and impressionable (I'm looking at you, emo kids), but as far as I can see it's not a philosophy of life that takes long to logically dismantle. If, for instance, you find yourself asking "Why?" repeatedly, then perhaps you first need to establish that there needs to be a purpose to life in the first place. *That* should give you something to do for a while.
In the meantime, have a bit classic Carl Sagan to provide a bit of perspective :-
Weird philosophical mumbling threads FTW!
I've just found this:
I think you should watch it.
It was pretty darn good. But, correct me if I am wrong, weren't the tricks he performed here pretty much the 'staples' of the gentleman juggler routine?
I do love the way that the film cuts to the audience, seamless ;-)
It may surprise a chap like yourself who lives and breathes juggling videos, but I don't actually spend all that much time watching them.
Sorry, it wasn't meant as a criticism, just that I know this is exactly the sort of thing you'd like, and it had been on YT, JTV (featured) and RJ, so I was just surprised it hadn't crossed your radar. Well, it has now, good-o. (And that's very much the 5-years-ago me you're referencing there. Quite bored of most of the darn things now :-) ) Cheers.
So what exactly has upset Pavel?
I'd provide a link but Juggling Rock is now a closed group so not much point...
Pavel posted a link to a game design contest (I believe) and if he got 200+ votes he'd make a new video. Someone called him out for spamming the group and asked if he would delete it. Pavel didn't like that and deleted him and everyone who liked his comment. I never read what the person said exactly and it's now deleted.
Maarten Wills or Willis was the one who replied to the game design thing.
He can probably tell you what he wrote.
I read it myself but didn't pay a lot of attention since it didn't seem important.
It was not very subtle but not insulting either, the message was something like
Please do not spam, if others posted this you would delete the message."
Pavel then seemngly went on a power trip.
ADMIN SMASH THEN ADMIN BAN THEN ADMIN JUGGLE
I believe that jugglingrock had close to 6000 members at a point, now there are 5004 so there's probably more to it then this.
Pavel just posted the following: ( I think he is pretty upset and hope he calms down and reconsiders soon)
hey Guys who really knows me, understand what i am not doing something just like that! because i want etc. or have a power, or i am "a childish admin"))Norbi Whitney why you not say it here? guys smell from you in all internet space! i don't know you and all haters stay away from me , don't forget take your friends with you!
you see the message from Jacques Dupond THIS IS SPAM and this shit i delete everyday ! if you hear something, that not means you really know, what happens or becouse somebody say it to you.
No one of you will not telling me what to do!or what i have to do!
This Guy who write comment say what i have to delete my post?Really? who is he? my friend?no!he made this group?no! maybe he something did for this group(exept using?)no! because he thinking i am SPAMing here ADMIN SPAMING?1st i am not asking about his opinion,people who wants help me they will help,don't like roll down page thats easy))I warned him not speak with me like that! if you like use this page Welcome! NOT NEED TO SPECIFY what to do and how to manage page, I know my business!
This is my house and who don't like something delete yourself from here!
(I have no time for discussion)
As Gatto once said (in an almost identical situation):
Internet jugglers don't feed my family or pay my bills
or something like that
... for values of 'professional' > 'massive flouncing dick'.
Maarten gives his description of what happened at www.facebook.com/groups/191720694192524/permalink/694357223928866 not viewable to non-facebook user (but prob not of interest either as it is about a facebook group dispute)
And *this* is precisely what happens every time a forum has active moderation... yet how many people have begged for moderation on rec.juggling over the years (not that it's needed anymore it's so low traffic)
I for one welcome Orinoco's light touch approach.
I don't think I do any moderating really. I've refused to invite a juggling ball wholesale manufacturer a couple of times (tip if you want to sign up: don't tell me that you are going to hawk a container load of juggling balls to the group in advance), but that's it. I provide a way to ignore people you don't want to see so it's all up to you. If you can't moderate yourself, the internet is not for you.
If you can't moderate yourself, the internet is not for you.
Now, I won't criticise the moderation policy here because it's clearly working fine right now and nobody here is being obnoxious to anybody else that I noticed and jugglers are lovely, etc.
But in general I think this sentiment is poisonous. _The internet is for everybody_. Without any moderation, it's like watching while half the juggling club stop coming because they can't stand the one new guy who tells off colour jokes loudly the whole time. OK, maybe you let people "mute" this guy so they don't see him, but now every new person who walks through the door gets an earful of the inappropriate jokes AND ALSO sees that everyone else there says nothing and apparently thinks this is AOK.
As part of the 50% of the population that can't speak openly in large parts of the internet without receiving tirades of misogynistic insults and graphic rape threats I am biased on this issue. So what, the internet isn't for me?
On the other hand one of the reasons I like the juggling community is the total absence of that kind of bullshit, long may it continue.
Would you ban the people who make misogynistic insults & rape threats from using the internet? You stop short of saying you would because I think you realise that would directly contradict your statement that the internet is for everybody.
There are lots of people who I disagree with & some I outright hate. By the same token there are lots of people who disagree with & downright hate me. The same will apply to you. Which party gets to choose who can use the internet? I certainly don't think I have the right, because do you know what? Sometimes I'm wrong.
Nor do I feel I should be expected to look after you or anyone else. It is completely unfeasible to expect a moderator to protect everyone's sensibilities. Every single visitor will have a different level of tolerance, how am I supposed to know what is acceptable to who? The only person who can know your limit is you, which is why you must moderate for yourself.
If someone signed up to the Edge & started being offensive, I probably wouldn't ban them, but I would lay into them, & I expect most other Edge members would too. This is what makes the juggling community so good, there is very little tolerance of arseholes. Feedback is much more important than moderation. I remember as a teenager, at a time when I'd only been going to TWJC for a few months, someone tried to tell a racist joke. One of the guys just said with a subtle sneer, "I don't want to hear this" & walked off. This simple act of defiance had a really profound effect on me & I knew that TWJC was a great place. Before then I never would have had the confidence to stand up like that. If I visited your hypothetical juggling club I wouldn't go again not because of the offensive person but because it was full of people that tolerate offensive behaviour.
Out of interest, which large parts of the internet populated by misogynists & rapists are you visiting? I don't deny there are online communities of overly hateful people (Stormfront comes to mind) but I'd hardly call them large or successful & I struggle to believe a community comprised of arseholes is capable of functioning.
I struggle to believe a community comprised of arseholes is capable of functioning.
I've got 4chan on line 2 for you...
Would you ban the people who make misogynistic insults & rape threats from using the internet?
No. I have no idea how we have got from "moderation is a good idea on forums" to "ban people from the internet".
Which party gets to choose who can use the internet?
The internet is for everybody. Everybody can use the internet. What they should not be able to do is make the internet intolerable for other people with impunity.
Every single visitor will have a different level of tolerance, how am I supposed to know what is acceptable to who?
The usual way this is done is to start with common decency and a reasonable sense of empathy, and combine that with listening to people when they mention that something or other bothers them, and taking a common sense approach to the whole thing overall.
I probably wouldn't ban them, but I would lay into them
This sounds exactly like active moderation to me, so I am confused as to what we are disagreeing about.
I struggle to believe a community comprised of arseholes is capable of functioning
I am literally completely taken aback that there is anyone existing on the internet who is oblivious to this! I mean, I would think you were joking or trolling but you don't seem to be. Many communities moderate the shit out of that stuff so it doesn't linger on stinking up the place, but Reddit, Twitter and Youtube are the biggest counterexamples that spring immediately to mind. See http://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/women-arent-welcome-internet-72170/ for the most recent article I saw on the subject, but a swift google turn ups millions more.
I don't suggest that communities are actually comprised entirely of arseholes; only that arseholes are plentiful, that failing to moderate them results in a hostile community, and that community owners and community leaders can't absolve themselves of responsibility for the results.
"No. I have no idea how we have got from "moderation is a good idea on forums" to "ban people from the internet"."
Ok, please read, "ban people from using a part of the internet", ala Pavel.
"This sounds exactly like active moderation to me, so I am confused as to what we are disagreeing about."
Sounds like we disagree about what moderation is. If I stop you from seeing an offensive post(er) I consider that moderation. Me expressing my opinion that the post(er) is unacceptable is not.
"I am literally completely taken aback that there is anyone existing on the internet who is oblivious to this!..."
Ah right, I don't consider Reddit/Twitter to be one community but hundreds of thousands of communities. To say otherwise is too broad a stroke for me.
Also my urlfilter blocks embedded facebook, twitter, G+, Youtube comments, disqus etc. which is why I probably find the internet to be a much nicer place than you. I assure you there are thousands of oblivious people like me who do the same.
Unfortunately you will find me a very irresponsible community leader. From my experience moderation causes the very behaviour it hopes to stamp out. If you start banning people then it becomes a game to circumvent the moderators & you end up with a load of anonymous accounts where consequences don't matter.
My experience of moderated communities is that the majority of most moderation work is in being present on the site setting the tone, in chatting to people and asking them to kindly knock it off, or deleting individual comments, and that banning people is an absolute last resort when offenders refuse to knock it off - which is pretty much a failure of moderation. Instabanning people for expressing disagreement with the moderators is not something I'm upholding as a paragon of modly virtue!
Nevertheless I'm pretty sure you'd ban someone if they spammed the house down, the same as you'd probably ban someone eventually if they showed up every day to berate people with offensive language.
Ah right, I don't consider Reddit/Twitter to be one community but hundreds of thousands of communities
I'd agree with that but don't see what it has to do with my actual point, which is that the (absence of a) moderation policy in those places allows the proliferation of really unpleasant shit which spoils everyone's day, apart from apparently the dungeon dwellers who write it.
This is what makes the juggling community so good, there is very little tolerance of arseholes
"Little tolerance of arseholes" is exactly what I would like to see. To me, saying "moderation is a bad thing" sounds like "The official policy of this site is that arsehole behaviour is welcome, and if you don't like it that's your problem". Which makes me sad, especially coming from a demographic disproportionately affected by that shit.
On the upside I am still pleased that this discussion is thus far academic as we do not seem to have been visited by any arseholes.
I am still pleased that this discussion is thus far academic as we do not seem to have been visited by any arseholes.
There are apparently only 3 people on ignore, out of 578 registered users. That's not bad going.
Yes, setting the tone is one of the most important aspects of any online community & which is helped here by the invitations system but I don't feel that is moderation, that is just being a good citizen & should be the responsibility of everyone, not just a moderator.
"I'd agree with that but don't see what it has to do with my actual point"
Well when asked for an example of a large part of the internet that is a no go area for women, you kind of scoffed at me & suggested Reddit & Twitter, but I think there are huge parts of those sites that are most definitely female friendly zones (in fact of all the Twitter users that I know personally are overwhelmingly female), you yourself said they are not all bad. So... (I think Steve is in the same boat as me here) what large parts of the internet are no go areas for women?!
However, no need to answer because I see now that the existence or non existence of such a community is unimportant because you believe it is moderation that makes the large communities bearable. I also see that you have a much broader definitition of moderation than I do, & by your definition the Edge most certainly is a moderated community.
"But in general I think this sentiment is poisonous. _The internet is for everybody_."
Oh, wait, that wasn't what you meant?
"As part of the 50% of the population that can't speak openly in large parts of the internet without receiving tirades of misogynistic insults and graphic rape threats I am biased on this issue. So what, the internet isn't for me? "
What are you speaking about and where, that gives you an experience of constant misogynistic insults and rape threats? Perhaps those particular parts of the internet aren't for you if it bothers you so much. I'm sure there are more places in the real world you can go to literally get raped, robbed, beaten, murdered etc. and I'm sure you would avoid those places. I've learned that lesson the hard way many'a'time, and I know not to leave my house at night anymore. I get the idea of "why should the nice people leave because the assholes ruined it?" but also, why hang around somewhere full of assholes? And why waste the effort to try to get everyone on the same page as to what should or shouldn't be allowed or tolerable? That'll never happen!
And Orin, surely you would ban somebody if they started being pointlessly offensive to the extreme. Like multiple posts per day of senseless personal attacks or something like that. At least I hope you would block them. Luckily we never see much of that on juggling forums :)
Banning people just causes sock puppets. I have features available that would er... help a troll reconsider their behaviour. But short of them posting a Womble mutilation video I don't think I'd ban them. In fact I think I'd only ban someone if it was really funny to do so.
"Banning people just causes sock puppets."
True, I guess I hadn't thought of it that way. I think your attitude toward the way this place is moderated is why I like it here :) Thinking back, I remember all the sock-puppetry on the Gatto and old WJF forums when people would get banned or whatnot. It does seem like a huge waste of everyone's time.
I suspect there are enough intelligent thinkers here to discourage crazy a**holes with challenging conversation. Over the years I've engaged some youtube trolls leaving A-hole comments on my videos, and in some cases it would eventually turn into a conversation and they would actually watch some of my other vids and leave nice comments. But, again, I haven't seen any A-holes here yet :)
The example was give of offensive jokes, and recently I've been introduced to an effective way of dealing with them, which is to just say. "Nope, I don't get it. Can you explain what's funny?" and repeating that requesting an increasing amount of detail each time .
It's effective because you're not contradicting them, or enforcing your view on them, or giving something they can argue/pick holes in ... but it doesn't take long to get the message across that you're not the right audience for that sort of thing.
I've only had to use it a couple of times since I heard about it, but I'm enjoying it as an approach so far
One of my favourite troll abatement tactics which works best on threads started by a troll is to reply with a question that completely ignores the original poster's point. With a bit of luck it will be a good question & you can steal the limelight. It's especially effective if there is some sort of notification of a new post because every new notification is a new reminder that people are not interested in whatever diatribe was put forward & also gives a positive example of what people are interested in.
Haha! I do that exact same thing with "ball jokes", when someone compares my juggling apparatus to a part of the male anatomy, I act really confused and make them explain. Most people become uncomfortable really quickly when they realize they literally just started talking about testicles for no good reason. Totally turns it back on them. And you're right, in doing that I'm doing nothing more than asking them to explain what THEY are talking about.
What are you speaking about and where, that gives you an experience of constant misogynistic insults and rape threats? Perhaps those particular parts of the internet aren't for you if it bothers you so much
Already covered in another comment further up.... And indeed it's quite obvious that those bits of the internet are not for me. Fifty years ago my job would have been not for me and a hundred years my house and my vote would have been not for me. Things are getting better.
And why waste the effort to try to get everyone on the same page as to what should or shouldn't be allowed or tolerable? That'll never happen!
I've seen productive discussions before about community norms and moderation, and I think in general most people are able to talk about things in good faith and learn to understand where other people are coming from. Is it really completely impossible that I could say "look, here is a point of view you probably haven't considered" and have someone or other go "oh well I hadn't really seen it like that before!" ??
"Already covered in another comment further up"
I still don't see it.... perhaps I need my eyes checked? If you meant the article you linked to I clicked it and it wouldn't load for me.
"Is it really completely impossible that I could say "look, here is a point of view you probably haven't considered" and have someone or other go "oh well I hadn't really seen it like that before!" ??"
That is fully possible and quite common, and great, too! However, your scenario involves two people considering different points of view, my point was about all of humanity coming to a concrete agreement about what is acceptable on the internet. What were we talking about?
perhaps I need my eyes checked
You need http://www.streetcred.biz/accessories-c2/contact-lenses-c39/funky-lenses-c40/checkered-contact-lenses-p501
The article I linked was this one http://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/women-arent-welcome-internet-72170/
but there are plenty more at the end of a quick google.
my point was about all of humanity coming to a concrete agreement about what is acceptable on the internet. What were we talking about?
You were directly replying to me, asking me what was the point of trying to get humanity to come to a concrete agreement about what is acceptable on the internet. Assuming it wasn't a random non sequitur, I suppose that you were suggesting a) that I was doing that and b) that it was pointless. I suggested that what I was in fact doing was a) something else and b) not pointless.
Well that's what I was talking about anyway.
Reading my original post again, my point was rather vague, and parts of it were just thoughts on the topic and may not have been directly aimed at you, my apologies :)
I think I was mostly agreeing with Orin that everyone has to moderate themselves to some extent, and I was also genuinely curious what topic you're into and where you discuss it on the internet that has given you such a bad experience with threats and such.
"also genuinely curious what topic you're into and where you discuss it on the internet that has given you such a bad experience "
Also, link still isn't working for me and I was interested in your point of view rather than googling why women aren't welcome on the internet. Did you write the article? Is that what I'm missing?
no, but I don't really want to derail a juggling forum any further with what was intended to be a trivial aside to explain why moderation is nice and benefits some people even more than others.
Happy to discuss this shit somewhere more appropriate with anyone somewhere else, so long as the anyones can keep the discussion in good faith and we are on "try to understand another point of view" and not "make Emily defend the entire minority population of the internet" or "massive debate about the precise detail of the wording of a comment rather than discussing the actual point".
"massive debate about the precise detail of the wording of a comment rather than discussing the actual point"
isn't that how internet arguments are supposed to work?
Oh come on! You could of at least misplaced the apostrophe ;)
The link worked for me, it's by a reporter that gets death and other threats via twitter. Harrasment on the internet is an old story. I think it broke into the non-internet in 1993 http://www.juliandibbell.com/texts/bungle_vv.html It's a little long by today's standards. LambdaMOO still operates but few people visit.
Defamation and harrasment require a communication channel and there is no law in physics that says the internet is any different. Community requires shared values.
If you can't moderate yourself, the internet is not for you.
Prolly better to think of this as "running a forum on the internet is not for you". The Edge is great, partly because Orinoco is a moderate moderator.
Any person operating a system that accepts user input must filter it at several levels if they want to maintain operations. Some are there to protect the server. There are character strings you cannot enter into this box and have them appear on this forum. Some filters are there to prevent massive advertisement. And any system run by identifiable people must moderate defamation and the promotion of illegal activity. r.j only filters at the first level although most web portals also filter the second level. But r.j does not have a person or sponsor with something to lose if people or government entities object to what is posted.
If we are counting protecting the server from attack as moderation then I make Darth Vader look like a hippy.
If only he'd lived just a little longer I think he would have found his inner hippy.
sigh. i was coming from an experience many years ago in a nearby galaxy when I ran a bbs that would accept any ascii character and you could, for example, write strings that said one thing and then back-spaced ^H over it for an impressive effect on your screen. In the really early days we could do that without passwords.
The point is it's all filtered or moderated, it's all about where you draw the line. I trust you to do the right thing, I think we all do or we wouldn't be here.
Oh no, I joined the dark side.
I've been made a moderator on the new 'juggling in Europe' group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/191720694192524/)
You are all welcome to join and remind me not to **** things up.
I hope jugglingrock pulls through but it seems that some changes Pavel made are irreversible.
...& to further confuse everyone there is now a new group called Juggling Home which has just popped up. I think I'm a member of all these groups but it's all just making my head spin at the moment.
I think everyone would benefit from having a nice cup of tea & a sit down for a while.
I suggest joining whatever pops up and review in a months which groups flourish and which wither.
For those who haven't found juggling Home yet : https://www.facebook.com/groups/1514667295424548/
I thought juggling in Europe was an alternative group created by Maarten but it seemed to have a history before that.
Instead of stealing juggling in Europe away from the original members it was decided creating a new group with a more global name was a better option.
Now as long as nobody asks me who decided what and where did he/she get the authority I can pretend to know what's going on.
(Illuminati have plans for the juggling world, Jason Garfield's secret plot splinters facebook groups, jugglers crawl back to WJF forums, Pavel asks for asylum inside Gatto's forums , bans keep protesters at bay.
Michael Bay acquires movie rights. )
There was a poll on Juggling in Europe to decide the name of the new group and Juggling Home won, so that group was created. The idea is to have quite a large number of admins from all over the world.
anything on facebook will always have the potential audience smaller than anything not on facebook.
so why do people keep trying to drag things onto facebook?
Because it feels as though the opposite is true. Also, in terms of time spent on activity x, if activity x is on Facebook, although less users might be on it, there's a good opportunity that people will spend a great deal of time on it.
Weren't you heavily plugging a juggling G+ thing a while back? :P
Potential audience is very different to the realistically potential audience. JugglingRock was a lot more active than any other juggling internet community I've ever used - and I've used most of them.
I started using facebook because I checked jugglingrock.
I had an account for ages but even now I mainly just read the groups there.
You use an account here so I don't really see the problem with making an account on facebook for a group there.
"so why do people keep trying to drag things onto facebook?"
It's a lot easier than coding your own!
Lolz, sounds like he's on some kind of power trip, I left juggling rock cause I was sick of seeing it in my Facebook feed 24x7, and this just re-affirms to me that it was the right decision.
People like that really grind my gears, he could do with a good smack no doubt, but failing that for everyone to leave "his house" and let him fade into obscurity.
So I understand it got to the point where everyone who 'liked' the responses of people complaining about Pavel posting spam got banned from the group...
On top of that, when I read the title "What upset Pavel" I had to think of his performances:
He was performing for Christmas in my home town. I went to see the show with the people from the local youth circus and it was really great! However, also everybody was talking about how the juggler was so visibly upset about the many drops he had during the performance.
I talked to some people who went to see the show later who also noted that he dropped a lot.
So I can imagine.. If you are a Russian juggler who tries to make a solo career in the west, and you feel a big pressure because the internet thinks you are one of the best in the world, you can get very upset if thinks don't work out as you wish they'd did!
Poor Pavel... I've had to deal with upset people far away from their homes before, and life can feel really hard if there are expectations you can not meet!
More difficult pattern?
4 ball Mills Mess vs, the five ball cascade?
The 5 ball cascade is probably harder, but not by all that much.
I would vote for the Mills Mess, but obviously I trained it way less than my cascade.
Same Difficulty...,but why do they all ask always for the Mills Mess? In my opinion it´s the most overrated pattern in history of juggling.Everyone is doing it and it´s nothing special about it anymore.It looks cool if its juggled well, but in my opinion it don´t feels cool or flows much. I vote for the cascade as the much more natural and better feeling pattern.Good Luck with both pattern.Christoph
I agree. The number of people who can juggle mills mess with more than 3 objects vastly outstrips the number of people I've seen who can make it flow or look "nice"
Mind you, the number of people who can make 3 ball mills excite me is quite small as well.
I think the way to make Mills flow is by concentrating on continuing the 'sideways 8' shape with a quick carry of the lower left and right corners. The carry really needs to be blended in (continuing the speed and shape) to create the effect that the balls are following each other. I think its a good idea to learn this with one ball before starting to learn the pattern. Mills Mess is beautiful (IMO) and perhaps the most 'flowy' of all juggling patterns. In my mind it seems old fashioned though, not old enough to be a classical style trick, but not modern either, like box juggling. It's an 80's trick, best juggled wearing small white shorts and head-sweatbands.
best juggled wearing small white shorts and head-sweatbands.
If that doesn't excite LP nothing will.
Interesting contrast between Mills Mess and box patterns... In my latest research  I've tried to blur the line between the two styles, typically starting with a mess base and making it more boxy, rather than starting with a box base and making it more messy. I suppose with some intentions of modernizing Mills Mess, since even the "advanced" mess patterns seem pretty stale at this point.
On a side note, I would suggest a major factor behind the popularity of Mills Mess is that its perfect blend of simplicity and complexity makes it a fantastic base pattern from which countless variations can be derived. The box is popular for the same reason, I think.
I'm *really* loving your 3b exploration Andrew, I've watched your latest video several times. Such interesting and original patterns.. please keep them coming!!
I agree with this. Why always mill's mess? It's very rare to see someone doing Boston mess, reverse mill's mess, crossed arm cascade or other arm movement type tricks with 4+ objects.
What I read online and most YouTube tutorials say 4 ball Mills Mess is more difficult than the five ball cascade, I diss agree and wanted to try out the "set this thread as a competition"feature on here and this is what I came up with,
I prefer 4 ball Boston Mess and Cross-Arm cascade to Mills, both feel much nicer!
How difficult would you say 4b Boston mess is compared to 4b mill's mess?
4b Boston is hard to learn because you basically need to unlearn your 4b mills and approach it from a different angle. I'd say it's probs 2-3x more difficult than the mills.
I prefer 4 ball Boston Mess
Isn't that just pistons? If so, it's much easier than 3b Boston mess. Weird but true.
Nah not pistons, it's the same hand movement as a 4b mills mess but none of the balls interlace; so it looks like pistons but with hands crossing underneath. Definitely took me a long time to get it right!
I seem to remember there's more than one permutation you can do the "vanilla" 3 ball boston mess in (depending on which column you start with and which way your hands are crossed when you do so)
I can't be bothered to think it through carefully, but is the same true of the 4 ball version?
As I understand it there is only 1 permutation of the 4b Boston Mess (though I could be wrong here!) I'll record a vid tonight and see if I can figure out if there are more; it's one trick I don't think I've ever filmed for some reason.
Thanks to you CamS, I just started having a go at this trick. It feels very much like a mill's mess and if I make a crossing throw accidentally, it really wants to collapse into mill's mess.
I'm doing the version of this which is included on Jongl, which I assume is the correct one? Each hand throws and catches the same two balls always, while making a mill's type arm movement. I did a rubbish diagram of what I mean:
Ball: 1 2 3 4
Hand: R L R L
: ^ ^ ^ ^
So the balls stay in those positions and that is where the hands are. Would be cool to see a video of you doing it. Real-life videos are way better than Jongl.
oh of course I forgot the post formatting would be ruined. Here is a better (though still rubbish) diagram.
Ball: 1 2 3 4
Hand: R L R L
^ ^ ^ ^
Yeah that's the version I do (I think) didn't have a chance to record last night as I ended up going to see Anchorman 2 and drinking too many cheap cocktails, I'll do it tonight for you :)
I like the cross arm reverse cascade as well, I switch from lefty to righty by doing half of Mills Mess , it pretty try doing Mills Mess with 3 cross arm reverse cascade throws inI between every rotation,
When I do Mills Mess it flows with any type of music I put on! From extreme death metal to country bluegrass that pattern flows perfectly with the beat!i know eaxactly how to make it flow all 3 balls perfect figure 8! Fast with low throws looks so good, when u 1st become a serious juggler and u watch a vid of 5 ball Mills Mess!thats it dude ur hooked like a f,,,,, dope addict !!!!!!
View older threads
If it's a bit quiet today that may be because everyone is at Glühwein 9.
Subscribe to Small Talk via RSS 1 article per branch (updated every 24 hours) 1 article per post