Can we name this move? (bf anti-poly flower)

 Written by: coleman



all i did was say why (and blather on about antispin and polyrhythm fundamental theory which no-one else is really interested in).

cole. x

not true, cole, not true. color me interested. a lurker, but an interested lurker.

 Written by: cole

three loops is the minimum number of loops you can spin with a poi in an antispin pattern that starts and ends at the same point.

Really? why not two? because you can't move your hand fast enough? or because its not "proper" antispin then?

accepted staff 1:1 antispin is the diamond shape - eg. 2 loops with either end of the staff.

Also, if both the spin poi and the anti poi are travelling the same distance, i'd have thought that you'd have points rather than loops.

Regarding the actual point of discussion: Can we name this move?
i think we can't, so we should just call it "No"
which introduces a pleasingly paradoxical element.

edit - forgot to include hugs for cole: i miss yoo

 Written by: UnderControlOrFailure


I think Motley means in Wheelchairplane, not wall plane.... I think...


If you can do those, crossed, in wallplane, I'll eat the first fat person I see.

 Written by: simian

 Written by: cole

three loops is the minimum number of loops you can spin with a poi in an antispin pattern that starts and ends at the same point.

Really? why not two? because you can't move your hand fast enough? or because its not "proper" antispin then?

why not two?
two reasons: because of gravity and because poi are not solid.
same reasons as why you can't make a trammel with poi.

 Written by: simian


Also, if both the spin poi and the anti poi are travelling the same distance, i'd have thought that you'd have points rather than loops.

the loopy-ness of the antispin pattern is dictated by the size of the big circle (the path both hands follow) and by the speed at which you move your hand along that path.
i assume we all agree on that cos its been clearly proved by the god of epicylclic motion, the one and only 'mafamatix'.

so, consider the move symmetrically - i.e. do the big circle one way then the other way.
the possibility that switch itself suggests to me that the poi don't change linear speed and, if that is the case, they must travel the same distance, whether they are doing the spin or the antispin part of the pattern.

having said that, i haven't done the maths so you may well be right that the pointy-bendy-triangle pattern would be equal in distance to the longarm circle rather than the trefoil.
the antispin poi would in that case have to move slightly faster than the other, since the trefoil is a longer path than the pointy-bendy-triangle.
its only a tiny bit longer though, so the antispin poi only has to spin a tiny bit faster.
my point is IF the poi are moving at different speeds, there's still absolutely no way whatsoever that this move is a 3:1 polyrhythm.

i still reckon that the garthybrid is 1:1 but until i can be bothered to work out the path lengths to prove it i won't argue that point too hard

if its not 1:1, it'll be some meaningless speed ratio like 1.2:1.
the reason i say ratios like that (i.e. non-integer ratios) are meaningless is because you only spin at those kinds of ratios when the moves themselves create them - you couldn't intentionally spin at that ratio and maintain it through a variety of moves otherwise the poi would end up out of time for every move other than the first one.
tonnes of moves have small speed adjustments like that - its possible that its actually a high majority of moves.
i think the only time its worth considering a move a polyrhythm pattern is when its built on a speed ratio that is made of inetgers (e.g. 2:1, 3:2, 4:3) and thus the move can be linked to other moves that maintain that same polyrhythm.

ergo, the garthybrid is not a polyrhythm whether the trefoil is of equal length to the circle or not


cole. x

 Written by: coleman


yepyep - happy birthday jonny-yoo

meanwhile, at the supergeekfriends' secret lair...

 Written by: simian

 Written by: cole

three loops is the minimum number of loops you can spin with a poi in an antispin pattern that starts and ends at the same point.

Really? why not two? because you can't move your hand fast enough? or because its not "proper" antispin then?

why not two?
two reasons: because of gravity and because poi are not solid.
same reasons as why you can't make a trammel with poi.

Why ca't you do a tramle with poi..

There just "not 1.5s" with a full transition with no beats inbetween..

G was doing something like them or very closeat southern lights...

And if your hand folowed a oval type shape you could do a two point antispin move?

And I object to nameing them a "garthy hybrid" for many reasons...

1) I can't actually do the move
2) I'll have to learn it. (Causeif there named after me then people will ask me to do them)
3) I'm fairly sure I just saw Ronen do them and showed Cole badly
4) I'm not entirly sure which move we're talking about.

That's not many but it's enough to be getting on with.

And I like where you're going with the polyrythem distance traveled thing cole...
I'm going to have to think about that a bit...

With atomics you could have different ratios on the different axis... I think...
By moveing them aound and turning the axis...

So you'd have to define polyrythem atomics as (1:1)(1:2)(3:1)

(This thread rocks in a very Geeky way though)

 Written by: BlueHairSarah

See, now... I count polyrhyms by the number of completed circles. The long arm does one full circle, and the other hand does 3- one for each petal. So that would make it a 3:1... Ive never heard of the no. of times it passes a particular point method of counting, and I have noOOoo idea how you got 5 out of the longarm...