Which is the most interesting siteswap?
fernan
I was talking to a friend of mine and this question came out of nowhere:
Which is the most interesting siteswap? (Well, actually it came out of a
couple of beers)
After that question, we found another: is there a "most interesting
siteswap" for everyone or everyone has a different opinion?
We were so curious about this question that we created a web site to
find out. The url is
http://frodo.matcom.uh.cu/Juggling
and we will need as many opinions as possible.
In the web site, you will be asked to compare several pairs of
juggling animations and in each pair you should select the one which is
more
interesting to you.
When we have enough information we will try to find out if it is
possible to "guess" how interesting is a siteswap using only
the numbers in the siteswap, without looking at the animation.
Comments, suggestions and beers are welcome.
Fernando.
--
----== posted via www.jugglingdb.com ==----
popstar_dave
Wow... this actually sounds really interesting. (I'm such a stats geek!)
I'll give you my thoughts when I stop getting the following error:
/////
The following error was encountered:
Connection to 10.6.121.183 Failed
The system returned:
(113) No route to host
/////
Cheers,
Dave
lutkus
> Which is the most interesting siteswap?
2
Marden117
>
> fernan wrote:
>
> > Which is the most interesting siteswap?
>
> 2
Yeah, which is probably due to the "should it be a hold or a throw?"
debate.
Drew_Ministry
>
> fernan wrote:
>
> > Which is the most interesting siteswap?
>
> 2
>
ohioohio
followed by a 121, 222, 232 or similar sequences.
maybe also sincro-multiplex could be nice, but I never close them.
simat
to do it aswell. I had to keep making sure i was picking based on what i
find most interesting rather than what i preffer to juggle.
fernan
>
> Thats a really cool idea! You should make sure you get some non jugglers
> to do it aswell. I had to keep making sure i was picking based on what i
> find most interesting rather than what i preffer to juggle.
>
Well, in fact we have more data from non jugglers than from jugglers.
Maybe jugglers and non jugglers have different preferences. It would be
interesting to find out from the data.
Fernando.
jzpri...@gmail.com
Is that what that "malabarista" checkbox was for? I thought it was
for Spanish speakers...
Jaksi
so I checked the box LOL!!
bill coad
I googled "malabarista" and the 6th item on the list was "Steven Ragatz",
so I figured it was asking if that's who I was.
Some of my favorite siteswaps involve multiplexes but I didn't see any
shown.
Ed Provencher
I didn't check the "malabarista" checkbox, but I've been juggling for
over four years. Will you reset the data and try again with a little
more English in the instructions or will you just keep going with what
you have? I'm willing to do the survey again. Also, how many "next"
are there?
While I was looking at the patterns, I found myself choosing patterns
that I thought I could feasibly do rather than simply looking at the
pattern in terms of how interesting it "looks". Certainly having data
for jugglers vs non-jugglers would be telling. Also, I wonder if I
would choose the same way given the same choice. Meaning, how
consistent will my selection be and therefore, how predictable?
I think this could be done with great effect for simple 3b tricks such
as: shower, half shower, 531, 441, 55500, snake, columns (with
variations), etc.
fernan
> Is that what that "malabarista" checkbox was for? I thought it was
> for Spanish speakers...
>
I'm sorry for the spanish word. "Malabarista" is the spanish word for
juggler. It survived the translation but we will fix it right now. Thank
you.
fernan
>
> I googled "malabarista" and the 6th item on the list was "Steven Ragatz",
> so I figured it was asking if that's who I was.
> Some of my favorite siteswaps involve multiplexes but I didn't see any
> shown.
We intentionally omitted multiplex patterns because we want to compare
what people prefer with some theoretical predictions, and up to this
moment we cannot "predict" how interesting a multiplex pattern is. That is
the main reason because of which there are not multiplex patterns. We want
to include them in the future.
Fernando.
fernan
>
> I didn't check the "malabarista" checkbox, but I've been juggling for
> over four years. Will you reset the data and try again with a little
> more English in the instructions or will you just keep going with what
> you have? I'm willing to do the survey again. Also, how many "next"
> are there?
I think that we will keep going with what we have AND we will add a little
more english instructions. I have done the survey several times. I would
suggest you to create a another user, this time checking the "juggler"
checkbox and repeat the survey as many times as you like. There are
infinitely many "next" as each page is randomly generated on request. That
is why you can do the survey as many times as you want. (Well, not
infinitely because we only have 70 animations, but anyway there are a lot
of "next")
>
> While I was looking at the patterns, I found myself choosing patterns
> that I thought I could feasibly do rather than simply looking at the
> pattern in terms of how interesting it "looks". Certainly having data
> for jugglers vs non-jugglers would be telling. Also, I wonder if I
> would choose the same way given the same choice. Meaning, how
> consistent will my selection be and therefore, how predictable?
>
> I think this could be done with great effect for simple 3b tricks such
> as: shower, half shower, 531, 441, 55500, snake, columns (with
> variations), etc.
>
With the data we have so far, mostly from non jugglers, we have found that
it is easier to predict when there are more balls in the pattern. This is
not a final answer, but it is what the numbers show right now. We keep
collecting data and comparing with our predictions to find out more.
Fernando.
> www.icantstopjuggling.blogspot.com
lutkus
>
> lutkus wrote:
> >
> > fernan wrote:
> >
> > > Which is the most interesting siteswap?
> >
> > 2
>
> Yeah, which is probably due to the "should it be a hold or a throw?"
> debate.
Funny, I didn't choose '2' for reasons of debate. Though, I suppose the
reason I like 2s is that they need not be simply held. I think 423 is one
of my favorite siteswaps because of how easily you can try different kinds
of throws on the 2 beat. (Naturally, there is no reason to limit yourself
to the 2... that's just the easiest place to start.)
Of course all this has nothing to do with the intended meaning of the
original post. I'll try to add something, though. I think a lot of
asthetics of siteswaps depends on the context. For example, I think a
well executed 97531 looks beautiful when done from, and straight back into
a 5 ball cascade. The way that every ball reaches its own peak at the
same time has the feel of momentarily stopping the juggling... until they
begin to fall, and then the cascade resumes. But I think that running
97531 looks a lot less interesting. There is no longer the contrast of
the cascade with which to compare it.
All of this is, of course, entirely subjective.
--
Jeff Lutkus
bill coad
>
> Marden117 wrote:
> >
> > lutkus wrote:
> > >
> > > fernan wrote:
> > >
> > > > Which is the most interesting siteswap?
> > >
> > > 2
> >
> > Yeah, which is probably due to the "should it be a hold or a throw?"
> > debate.
>
> Funny, I didn't choose '2' for reasons of debate. Though, I suppose the
> reason I like 2s is that they need not be simply held. I think 423 is one
> of my favorite siteswaps because of how easily you can try different kinds
> of throws on the 2 beat. (Naturally, there is no reason to limit yourself
> to the 2... that's just the easiest place to start.)
>
>
If you're picking single digit siteswap values, I like 0. The empty hand
provides some slack time to deal with the other throws. Patterns with a 0
can always be expanded by adding 2 to each value, e.g. 450 -> 672, which
then has a hold where the empty hand had been.
popstar_dave
Anyone else having this problem? I'm running an Avant Browser shell
around IE6 on an XP/SP2 computer. It could be a firewall issue, as I'm at
work a the moment, I'll have a crack from home tonight. I'd really like
to help you out with this.
ttg
>
> Anyone else having this problem? I'm running an Avant Browser shell
> around IE6 on an XP/SP2 computer. It could be a firewall issue, as I'm at
> work a the moment, I'll have a crack from home tonight. I'd really like
> to help you out with this.
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
>
Yes, I'm getting same error as you are. I'm using Firefox in version
2.0.0.14 and XP/SP2. I tried IE6 as well but no difference.
tom
Marden117
>
> Marden117 wrote:
> >
> > lutkus wrote:
> > >
> > > fernan wrote:
> > >
> > > > Which is the most interesting siteswap?
> > >
> > > 2
> >
> > Yeah, which is probably due to the "should it be a hold or a throw?"
> > debate.
>
> Funny, I didn't choose '2' for reasons of debate.
It's cool; I just meant it as a little hearted comment.
For me, I like tricks with (2x,2x).
Marden117
>
> lutkus wrote:
> >
> > Marden117 wrote:
> > >
> > > lutkus wrote:
> > > >
> > > > fernan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Which is the most interesting siteswap?
> > > >
> > > > 2
> > >
> > > Yeah, which is probably due to the "should it be a hold or a throw?"
> > > debate.
> >
> > Funny, I didn't choose '2' for reasons of debate.
>
> It's cool; I just meant it as a little hearted comment.
> For me, I like tricks with (2x,2x).
That was supposed to read "light hearted".
popstar_dave
>
> popstar_dave wrote:
>
> >
> > Anyone else having this problem? I'm running an Avant Browser shell
> > around IE6 on an XP/SP2 computer. It could be a firewall issue, as I'm at
> > work a the moment, I'll have a crack from home tonight. I'd really like
> > to help you out with this.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Dave
> >
>
> Yes, I'm getting same error as you are. I'm using Firefox in version
> 2.0.0.14 and XP/SP2. I tried IE6 as well but no difference.
>
> tom
>
>
>
Hmmm... Now that I've tried it from home, it seems to be working. So it
was either an issue with it not making it through my firewass at work, or
the problem was fixed overnight.
But working now.
Cheers,
Dave
ttg
>
> Hmmm... Now that I've tried it from home, it seems to be working. So it
> was either an issue with it not making it through my firewass at work, or
> the problem was fixed overnight.
>
> But working now.
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
The problem seems to be gone, working here as well.
tom