[video] Bruce Sarafian - multiplex madness
Sondre Øverby
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
--
----== posted via www.jugglingdb.com ==----
Daniele Caselli
sondre_...@sjonglering.com.nospam.com (Sondre Řverby) wrote:
>Bruce Sarafian's new video: Crazy 8 and 10 ball multiplex juggling.
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
Really cool! Thanks for the link Sondre...
Brilliant that start with a lever :-D
Daniele
--
memento Gaudere semper.
Torben Maiwald
> Bruce Sarafian's new video: Crazy 8 and 10 ball multiplex juggling.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
Crazy indeed. On his website I found this (under "instructional coach"):
"Learn the fastest way to juggle HIGH NUMBERS (7 or more objects)"
What might the "fastest way" be?
Erik Jernqvist
>
> Sondre Řverby wrote:
> > Bruce Sarafian's new video: Crazy 8 and 10 ball multiplex juggling.
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
>
> Crazy indeed. On his website I found this (under "instructional coach"):
> "Learn the fastest way to juggle HIGH NUMBERS (7 or more objects)"
"Drop them instantly" sounds pretty fast to me.
Torben Maiwald
>
> Bruce Sarafian's new video: Crazy 8 and 10 ball multiplex juggling.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
Now we're all waiting for the first 14 ball flash (stacked 7 ball
pattern). Or wouldn't that be a flash at all?
Erik Jernqvist
>
> Sondre Řverby wrote:
> >
> > Bruce Sarafian's new video: Crazy 8 and 10 ball multiplex juggling.
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
>
> Now we're all waiting for the first 14 ball flash (stacked 7 ball
> pattern). Or wouldn't that be a flash at all?
It would sure to be a flash, but not a JISCON record, since they don't
allow multiplexes.
Marden117
>
> Torben Maiwald wrote:
> >
> > Sondre Řverby wrote:
> > >
> > > Bruce Sarafian's new video: Crazy 8 and 10 ball multiplex juggling.
> > >
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
> >
> > Now we're all waiting for the first 14 ball flash (stacked 7 ball
> > pattern). Or wouldn't that be a flash at all?
>
> It would sure to be a flash, but not a JISCON record, since they don't
> allow multiplexes.
Makes me wonder if they'd disallow an 11 ball qualify with a ball held in
each hand as I did it aka [b2]
Doyen Dean
>
> Bruce Sarafian's new video: Crazy 8 and 10 ball multiplex juggling.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
>
>
>
I need to work more on multiplex, and this video will give me some
inspiration. Especially love that springboard-thingy start with 10 :)
KooKie
>
> Sondre Řverby wrote:
> >
> > Bruce Sarafian's new video: Crazy 8 and 10 ball multiplex juggling.
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Yeah, It's cool, probably an easier way to start with 10?
In his last run, the springboard-thingy isn't there. You still can't see
his first throws though.
Don't know how Grigoriy Lovigin does it. Maybe it's not that big of a
difference, the trick is pretty insane. Gatto-insane.
Liked the multiplex Backcrosses too. 8up pretty impressive
Kim
------------
America...fuck yeah!
Harm1
>
> Don't know how Grigoriy Lovigin does it. Maybe it's not that big of a
> difference, the trick is pretty insane. Gatto-insane.
> Kim
> ------------
Grigory starts from his hands going directly into the pattern. What makes
it even more amazing is that he uses russians more then 3 inches big,
making holding ten balls pretty hard, let alone releasing them. When I saw
him in Carvin his 10 ball multiplexes were pretty solid, he also did 10
ball 6 up pirouettes back into the pattern with apparent ease. Crazy.
Harm
brianpdailey
Alexandr Koblikov (goes by 'Sascha') is the juggler you saw in Carvin.
He also performed at IJA 2007. Grigoriy Lovigin performed at IJA in
2005.
They share the same WJF competition profile:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YbLpSrrdGM
Harm1
Oops, I assumed there was only other guy doing ten ball multiplexing.
Thanks for pointing this out. I assume both of them use the same balls and
same release method though.
Harm
bill coad
Technically they don't allow a multiplex to the extent that balls must be
released individually so a [b2] should count since 11 balls do get
released one at a time during the qualify.
They do allow multiplexing on the initial release since most start the 9
ball qualify with throws of [92222][9222][9222][922][922][92][92]99.
Anyway - nice video. Bruce was actually an inspiration to me once
removed. It was Allen Knutson long ago that told me Bruce was working on
a [3322]. I learned that pattern even though I still have never seen
Bruce do it.
bill coad
> Oops, I assumed there was only other guy doing ten ball multiplexing.
>
Besides RJ's own Dan Marden and myself, I've seen Eric Soulard from Canada
multiplex 10 balls and I've heard from reliable sources that Jerry Shugart
from Mexico has also done it on video. Note that these aren't all [55]
patterns; Eric's and mine were [3322] while Jerry's was a
([444],[444])([44],[44]).
I assume there are probably others than those mentioned here.
Marden117
I went out today to see if I could still qualify [55] because it's been a
year since the last time I qualified it [1]. I only managed 6 catches. I
think with a little more practice over the coming days, I'd see myself
back on form with this beauty of a trick. I did get a few rounds of [3322]
as well but not on camera.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jT-5FulM0I
[1] Haven't tried juggling it since.
Sondre Øverby
> I did get a few rounds of [3322]
> as well but not on camera.
Isn't that just a 6 ball [33] juggle while holding 4 more balls? I
wouldn't really consider that to be a "10 ball multiplex", like [2223]
isn't so much of a 9 ball pattern.
Marden117
>
> Marden wrote
> > I did get a few rounds of [3322]
> > as well but not on camera.
>
> Isn't that just a 6 ball [33] juggle while holding 4 more balls? I
> wouldn't really consider that to be a "10 ball multiplex", like [2223]
> isn't so much of a 9 ball pattern.
[3322] with the 2s thrown aka ([4x4x44],[22])([22],[444x4x])
Sondre Øverby
>
> Sondre Řverby wrote:
> >
> > Marden wrote
> > > I did get a few rounds of [3322]
> > > as well but not on camera.
> >
> > Isn't that just a 6 ball [33] juggle while holding 4 more balls? I
> > wouldn't really consider that to be a "10 ball multiplex", like [2223]
> > isn't so much of a 9 ball pattern.
>
> [3322] with the 2s thrown aka ([4x4x44],[22])([22],[444x4x])
>
>
Oh, nice!
Steven Noels
What makes it even more unbelievable is that he doesn't start with 5 in
each hand and releases the first 1 from each hand, he starts with 6 balls
(yes those big russians) in 1 hand.
Daniele Caselli
> Bruce Sarafian's new video: Crazy 8 and 10 ball
> multiplex juggling.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
Multiplex madness II:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLDire8gFB4
--
«Si enim fallor, sum.»
Augustinus Hipponensis
bill coad
>
> On 20/08/2008 Sondre Řverby wrote:
> > Bruce Sarafian's new video: Crazy 8 and 10 ball
> > multiplex juggling.
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
>
> Multiplex madness II:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLDire8gFB4
>
Thanks for posting this. I liked the double quad releases with 8 balls
and the run of [66][0] - or if you're a multiplex purist [66][00]. I've
flashed the [66][0] a number of times but never ran it yet, something to
work on.
Years ago Daniel James said that multiplexing would change juggling video
and likely get more jugglers on TV. His reasoning was that numbers
juggling had high patterns and the video couldn't get the whole pattern
and a close shot of the jugglers face. Bruce's multiplex patterns are as
high as many non-multiplexed patterns others throw.
Erik Jernqvist
>
> Daniele Caselli wrote:
> >
> > On 20/08/2008 Sondre Řverby wrote:
> > > Bruce Sarafian's new video: Crazy 8 and 10 ball
> > > multiplex juggling.
> > >
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibg9VlRA9lA
> >
> > Multiplex madness II:
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLDire8gFB4
> >
>
> Thanks for posting this. I liked the double quad releases with 8 balls
> and the run of [66][0] - or if you're a multiplex purist [66][00]. I've
> flashed the [66][0] a number of times but never ran it yet, something to
> work on.
You don't need the square bracket at all for the zero.