Relative Difficulty of Juggling
that Farmer person
difficulty of juggling 3,4,5,6,7..11 balls, or clubs.
My own score would look like 3-balls=1, 4-balls=4, 5-balls=40(estimated)
(it's possible as a juggler hits his/her limit that the difficulty index
goes to infinity!).
- Mike
Brian Milner
Max Oddball on his video says:
3 balls=1
4 balls=10
5 balls=400 or 500
I was sceptical at first, but ~2 months into the 5 ball cascade, I'd agree
with him.
NB: Check out multiplex - 5 ball multiplex is much easier than 5 ball cascade,
but you can convince an audience that it's *more difficult*. Plus, work on 7
ball multiplex for awhile, then tell everyone you can juggle 7 balls :-)
--
====Brian Milner, The Computer Centre, Brunel University, West London, UK====
==== Any sufficiently advanced juggling is indistinguishable from magic ====
=========WWW Home page - http://http1.brunel.ac.uk:8080/~ccusbdm/ ===========
==GJ d?(---) -p+ c++++(++) l@ u(+) e+@ m*/+ s n+(-) h--/- f- !g w+ t+ r y+ =
Jerry Carson
From: farmer@gedzch (that Farmer person)
>I would love to know how various jugglers would rate the relative
>difficulty of juggling 3,4,5,6,7..11 balls, or clubs.
>
>My own score would look like 3-balls=1,
4-balls=4,5-balls=40(estimated)
>(it's possible as a juggler hits his/her limit that the difficulty
>index goes to infinity!).
I like to think of it as a factorial. This makes:
3 balls = 6
4 balls = 24
5 balls = 120
6 balls = 720
7 balls = 5040
or to scale so that 3 balls = 1 divide by 6.
3 balls = 1
4 balls = 4
5 balls = 20
6 balls = 120
7 balls = 840
This may be a little low at the start (five balls maybe should be
higher than 20) but gives a good idea for the progression.
Jerry Carson
Scott HOC
Milner) writes:
> Plus, work on 7
>ball multiplex for awhile, then tell everyone you can juggle 7 balls :-)
can you describe any further what this looks like? I'v ebeen trying to
conceptualize it and failing....
snordo, the amazing human human
Robert Vancko
it is to juggle 5 balls can not actually juggle 5 balls. That is
how every trick is at first; it seems impossible, then a year later
you can't understand why you ever had trouble learning it.
My list goes like this:
3 balls = 1
4 balls = 2
5 balls = 7
6 balls = 11
7 balls = 13
8 balls = 16
9 balls = 1000000 (can't do this yet)
3 clubs = 1.766
3 clubs with a balance = 4
4 clubs = 5
4 clubs with a balance = 100000 (can't do this yet)
5 clubs = 10
5 club backcrosses = 1000000 (you guessed it!, can't do it)
6 clubs = 25
7 rings = 14 (I never juggle inside)
Notice the common thread? Everything I can't do seems impossible.
I doubt that people start learning 5 clubs and say "wow this seems really
easy". Maybe if people weren't so intimidated by tricks, more people
would make the effort to learn them.
Rob
.
Juggler
The only thing is that things change. There really are two scales to
use. Dificulty of learning (how hard it is to learn to do something. And the
difficulty of doing things now (how hard it is for me to do say five balls using
the three ball cascade as a baseline of one).
Learning:
IMHO:
3 ball cascade - 1
3 ball shower - 2
4 ball columns - 5
4 ball fountain - 5
4 ball shower - 10
5 ball cascade - 40
5 ball half shower - 45
5 ball shower - 55 (haven't actually done this yet)
3 balls one hand - 35 (weird..but I thought this was comparitivly easy to learn)
6 balls - ???
How they rank now:
IMHO:
3 balls - 0 can do this in my sleep.
4 balls - 1
5 balls - 5
3 balls one hand - 8
6 balls - 20 (still learning this one)
Chris
--
"All you need is a couple of cans of shaving cream, some liquid nitrogen and a
vivid imagination"
-me
%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*
Chris Kelly * E-mail: cke...@vaxc.stevens-tech.edu
Dept. of Mathematics %
Stevens Intsitute of Technology * WWW: http://www.stevens-tech.edu/~ckelly/
%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*