Re: numbers of siteswaps
- From: sjestme@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 07:29:41 -0800 (PST)
MichaelB wrote:
and have all of the 3 ball period 5 ones down, except 53034 (and 53404,
which I haven't tried yet).
....and won't be able to do ever, because the second code is '53403' to
total to the same fifteen divided by five for three balls.
Matt Hall then says:
I throw the 4's as inside throws, just like a regular 534 (which, if
you can juggle it, will help you with this pattern, as you might
expect).
The code in question is in fact '534' but changed from four balls,
which MichaelB may not be up to yet, to three by adding a '0' which
then divides the twelve by four instead of three. That is commonly
possible, even to dropping from five balls to three with two '0's.
Then, a '3' was added, as can commonlly be done to siteswap codes for
three balls, which allows it to be five-period instead of four and so
change hands as Matt also said he prefers as a "symmetric" pattern in
that way.
The question for this original topic would then be, is either a
distinct siteswap, since '53034' and '53403' are digit-shifts for the
same tosses. And for listing all your siteswaps, many are also
padding the list with what are only siteswap codes for patterns that
were not devised as numerical permutations, such as Shower and Box and
Three-in-one etc. Meanwhile, MikaA is holding out for not intending
to collect digital patterns, rather doing position variations on a few
standards. And that, in my view, was the original question for this
topic, with only a few answers so far here.
Are a lot of people concentrating on siteswaps as what to them is what
juggling is? Matt Hall has done a lot of that, Beever made his mark
with only that, Sondre has done a lot of that, 'Mats1' and 'Norbi',
and others posting to this topic. What has happened is that a lot of
people coming into juggling, such as 'GoldenJ' and MichaelB, have the
impression that if they don't do siteswaps, whatever that means, they
are not really juggling and certainly are not becoming "a juggler".
Doing siteswaps has become an obligation, taking a place beside doing
five balls or doing Back-crosses with clubs or even going to
conventions.
Yes: siteswap is now what juggling is, whether you do much of it or
not.
Yes: there are some (among the theoretical millions) that are most
common, but
No, each person has (as usual) his own preferences and list of must-
do's.
And, you cannot just toss numbers, even if you have chosen to toss
just numbers. As you will see with any animator, but no real
juggler. There will be, as Matt only hints at by saying:
I throw the 4's as inside throws,path conflicts that make collisions if only animator default positions
are used. Very commonly, adjacent values, such as '-65-' ( or a '5'
anywhere) will collide. You will have to "work out" a way to make the
specified tosses. And that (Ben Beever notwithstanding) is not going
to be done with just a glance at the number sequence, or any way to
make sense of the "rhythm" or force of toss or whatever. In fact,
some "valid" number sequences just about, pretty much, for most people
who might try, cannot be successfully juggled, because especially with
more balls up there, they gonna smack together, no matter what you try
to do.
Yes: siteswap is real juggling, because you gotta be a real juggler,
to do it.
..
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: numbers of siteswaps
- From: ChaseMartin
- Re: numbers of siteswaps
- From: MichaelB
- Re: numbers of siteswaps
- Prev by Date: [TRAILER] 1 Year Of Juggling
- Next by Date: Re: video cameras
- Previous by thread: Re: numbers of siteswaps
- Next by thread: Re: numbers of siteswaps
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
