Forums > Social Discussion > What does "Technical" mean?

Login/Join to Participate
Page:
simian110% MONKEY EVERY TIME ALL THE TIME JUST CANT STOP THE MONKEY
3,149 posts
Location: London


Posted:
PLEASE NOTE: Anyone who posts the Dictionary definition of the word Technical in this thread is a very annoying person tongue wink



People talk about 'Technical' poi quite a lot. Sometimes in a positive way, but often in a way that's almost derogatory.



What does it mean to you? What do you think it means to others?



Moves that are difficult?

Ugly moves?

Moves where your feet are stationary?

Moves that concentrate on details rather than the whole?

confused2



if you dance, can your poi be technical?



can technical poi 'flow', or is flow the opposite of tech?



a genuinely rather confused monkey confused

EDITED_BY: simian (1101773439)

"Switching between different kinds of chuu chuu sometimes gives this "urgh wtf?" effect because it's giving people the phi phenomenon."


My hairs on fireIf its got pistons or boobs, its gonna be expensive...
515 posts
Location: Cyprus


Posted:
I think tech can be used when an understanding of what is being done is needed to apprechiate/realise the amount of skill and how hard that move or what ever actually is.

Any one how doesnt know anything about poi wont be able to tell the diffence between a 3 beat and a 7 beat inverted blah blah antispinning do-dah...
People who spin on the other hand will be like ''woah dude you jus did a 7 beat inverted blah blah antispinning do-dah'' if yopu get me?

Henry Hill - 'One day the kids from the neighbourhood carried my mothers groceries all the way home, you know why? It was out of respect'...

ahmet_20valve_ahmet(at)hotmail(dot)com
Hope all is well : )


UCOFSILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
15,414 posts
Location: United Kingdom


Posted:
I reckon its to do with if it requires loads of explanation.

I was goingt o say it was something that people argued over the definitons of... but then I remember the stupid use of different names for moves around the world and the general use of language, as a whole.

simian110% MONKEY EVERY TIME ALL THE TIME JUST CANT STOP THE MONKEY
3,149 posts
Location: London


Posted:
Written by: My hairs on fire

Any one how doesnt know anything about poi wont be able to tell the diffence between a 3 beat and a 7 beat inverted blah blah antispinning do-dah.






You reckon? i'd say a 7 beat inverted antispin weave would look totally and utterly crazy, and nothing like a 3 beat, whether you do poi or not.

"Switching between different kinds of chuu chuu sometimes gives this "urgh wtf?" effect because it's giving people the phi phenomenon."


GlåssDIAMOND Member
The Ministry of Manipulation
2,523 posts
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom


Posted:
... to you.
and which do you think most people would think looks better.

Simon, would you post your answer to your own question smile

Glass waves his hand in the air, I know, mee mee mee can I answer this one.
No Glass you've typed too much already today, why dont you sit at the back of the class and let the other have their turn.
/Glass sits on his hands and sucks his thumb quietly

MedusaSILVER Member
veteran
1,433 posts
Location: 8 days at Cloudbreak, 6 in Perth, Australia


Posted:
Tachnical Poi to me means moves that are so beyond comprehension that there is no way on earth that I am ever going to be able to figure them out!

simian110% MONKEY EVERY TIME ALL THE TIME JUST CANT STOP THE MONKEY
3,149 posts
Location: London


Posted:
"a 7 beat inverted antispin weave would look totally and utterly crazy, and nothing like a 3 beat"
to me or to anybody.
i didn't say it would necessarily look nice smile
on the other hand who's to say it can't be performed in an attractive way?
after all, if you'd only seen people doing 3b weave in an ugly and awkward way, you'd assume that that couldn't look good too.

The answer to my own question, eh...

To me Technical means:
Effectively nothing. An arbritrary label with multiple meanings.

i think other people think Technical means:
All that stuff in my first post probably. But i'm not sure about that. That's why i asked...

But generally it seems to mean: Difficult and Complicated.
with a very strong subtext of: Ugly and Static

Some other stuff i think:

When people attempt what is difficult for them, they often do it badly, and very rarely do it cleanly and gracefully. (watch me for examples of this)

Also when people attempt a defined 'trick' they often concentrate on fulfilling the requirements of the trick definition, not on trying to look good. (watch me for examples of this)

Therefore moves that are described as 'Technical' are generally seen to be performed in an unattractive way.

Which can lead people to assume that difficult tricks ARE ugly. When they don't have to be. (Don't watch me for examples of this)

It's just easier to do a trick ugly than it is to do it pretty.

So 'Technical' and 'Dance' really should mean the same thing, since dancing with poi is much more complex and difficult than standing in one spot doing ugly stuff.

Now what do you think, Drew? smile

"Switching between different kinds of chuu chuu sometimes gives this "urgh wtf?" effect because it's giving people the phi phenomenon."


Analemmaenthusiast
384 posts
Location: West LA


Posted:
Technical the way I see it is the analysis of Poi. Trying to understand what is possible and why it is possible. As well as to put it in a relation to Rhythm and Balance. It is the rational approach to Poi in contrast to the "instinct spinning".
Many moves that are "basic, instinct spinning" today would not have been discovered if the people wouldnt have thought "technical" about Poi.

The fact that most "technical stuff" is cosidered ugly is that people are experimenting and playing with new ways of spinning for the first time and dont know them too well. BHB weave or 5beat weave was ugly in the beginning too and there were even discussions on HOP if the BHB weave was actually possible. Today everyone knows that BHB weave and 5beat weave are possible and look wicked, but only because technical spinners have pushed the boundary.

On the other hand technical does not necessarily mean difficult. A technical advice could be:
"You always swing the butterfly over you right shoulder, try it over the left too!"
"Try this 3 beat as a 2 beat weave too"
"Work on your figure8"
...

A contrast that is often stated "technical vs. dancing" is misleading. The "vs." implies a contradiction that does not exist imo. There is for example technical dancing, a defined sequence of steps tailored to the music (classical dancing); and emotional dancing (just move to the music). Same applies to Poi.

my 2 cents

To learn - read. To know - write. To master - teach . . .


bluecatgeek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere


Posted:
:applauds:

nice one andy.

do a search simon wink

*tries to coax an answer(and pmspank )out of glass*

Holistic Spinner (I hope)


spiralxveteran
1,376 posts
Location: London, UK


Posted:
I consider myself into "technical" poi in the sense that I try and understand the hows and whys of what I'm spinning and then try and apply those principles in new ways. Taking a move and then going "but can I do that with the poi going opposite directions?" or "can I invert that part of the move?" is the sort of thing that means technical to me.

Which is what poibox just said ubblol

But if I'm spinning I work on my flow and movement as much as anybody - there are plenty of moves I can do but don't often use because they still feel awkward or I can't easily transition into or out of them. For me technical is about thinking about the possibilities and principles, not a performance thing.

"Moo," said the happy cow.


onewheeldaveGOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom


Posted:
To me, 'technical' is stuff that involves technique more than flow.

So, on one end of the scale is spinning that is simple moves but done in a really flowing, beautiful, dancey style. At the other end is difficult throws, advanced hyper-loops etc.

The two can merge and a style can have both aspects, but I see it as a useful distinction.

I think that, in general, juggling is more technical than spinning, and spinning tends to be more flowing than juggling.

Technical spinning tends to be more static (in terms of body movement) than flowing/artistic spinning.

"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!


vanizeSILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA


Posted:
as usual, I agree with poibox and spiralx.

the key point being that technical and dancing poi are not mutually exclusive.

-v-

Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!


TheWibblerGOLD Member
old hand
920 posts
Location: New Zealand


Posted:
Ah, this brings back memories of about a year ago and a certain "performance Vs Tech" thread which culminated in an explosive argument between Pele and myself and the creation of a rather Wonderfully Tech Website wink

Sorry about that by the way Pele, it's just something that i feel as stongly about as you do.

A year ago the argument was that Hyperloops were Tech and couldn't be performed well on stage. All I have to say on the matter is that Tangles now fit into the 'Basic' spinning of most people i've met . Everyone does them. I've met people who spin more tangles than me and have been spinning less than a year. Last years Tech is this years Norm.

So just to get things fired up i'll say this...

IMO Tech Spinning means this 'Slightly ahead of their time and misunderstood'

*runs off to hide*

As for flow, it can be felt emotionally or calculated mathematically.

To me it's about the balAnce between My Intellectual Body, My Emotionally Body and My Physical Body

m

Spherculism ~:~ The Act of becoming Spherculish.


vanizeSILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA


Posted:
tangles are definitely technical, even if they are a core part of someone's skill base.



"technical" does not mean "hard for everyone to do"



on the other hand, I could argue poipoipoi's point of view too - if I were allowed to use a dictionary definition of "technical"...



anyway, whatever - I think it just means exploring the theory and mechanics of poi. and I have yet to hear anyone really be derisive about saying technical in regards to poi - just more like they can't be bothered to get into that side of it.

-v-

Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!


TheWibblerGOLD Member
old hand
920 posts
Location: New Zealand


Posted:
Tangles are far less Technical than running in straight line.

It's just a matter of perspective.

Spherculism ~:~ The Act of becoming Spherculish.


colemanSILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom


Posted:
i mainly agree with mr box and mr x here.

dave - i think your definition is equating 'technical' to 'difficult' which is slightly different to how it sits in my head - for example, throws, although they are undoubtedly hard and even harder to make look good, do not rank as 'tech' for me.

personally, for me the more variables a move involves, the more technical it is.

i.e. parallel circles swung in the wheel plane at your sides is pretty much the least technical thing you can do.
hence you can do it standing static or you can do it jumping around the place like a nutter and it doesn't affect the move itself.

by that definition, moves with high technical factors cannot be mutually exclusive of flow because the more complex a move becomes, the less 'room' you have for variation (imho).

that is to say, if the move has a lot of requirements on your body, it will restrict your ability to dance with it - if you need to factor in things like the string position, relative hand-string-poihead positions, tangle type, arm movement relative to poi (including longarm, isolated spinning, inverted spinning) you will have less scope to play with body positioning and movement whilst performing the move.

so in summary; the more complex the movement of the poi and the more complex the body movement required to do it, the more technical i consider it.

Written by: vanize

I have yet to hear anyone really be derisive about saying technical in regards to poi - just more like they can't be bothered to get into that side of it.




i hear it a lot unfortunately and you hit the nail on the head there i think.
its like 'if you spin tech poi you must be a crap dancer' - but this tends to come from the people that are not inclined to spend the time developing any more new poi theory/mechanics.
without people to push the technical limits of poi, the field would get very stale, very quickly.

its nice to watch different dance styles but if no-one comes up with anything new other than "here is my style of 3bt weave - i bend my knees a little more than you do on the crossover and use head flicks and kicks to jazz it up" i doubt that there would have been enough demand to sell col5 and i doubt even more that i would still be posting here.

innovation vs. stagnation weavesmiley


cole. x

[you really should have looked up that thread matt mentioned though monkey wink hug2]

"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood


bluecatgeek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere


Posted:
ooooh yes i remember it well.

eek

thanks again for anticipating my lengthy reply cole.

can i borrow your reply?

Holistic Spinner (I hope)


nearly_all_goneSILVER Member
Pooh-Bah
1,626 posts
Location: Southampton, United Kingdom


Posted:
Personally, and as has been said above, Tech always seems to mean moves that look impressive only to those who know how hard they are. For example, a TTN is more tech than a butterfly, but to most passive observers they look pretty similar.

I'm not at all tech as I'm not skilled enough yet to understand most of this stuff, so from the perspective of one who doesn't really appreciate much techy stuff, that's my definition.

I'd also go with the whole tech=not flow argument, as it's a lot harder to make techy stuff flow, or so it seems from the outside.

What a wonderful miracle if only we could look through each other's eyes for an instant.
Thoreau


vanizeSILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA


Posted:
I disagree with the tech roughly equals no flow thing - all it means is that the added restrictions of techy moves require more imagination on when, where, and how to use them to keep the dance flow. Tech stuff thrown in properly can look friggin mind-blowing if you can dance with it too - even to people who are not experienced poiers



but that is the key I think: more technical requires more imagination to "make it work" in dance form, otherwise it wil often lead to a break in flow that will disrupt the look of the dance even for a lay observer.

-v-

Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!


bluecatgeek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere


Posted:
Written by: nearly_all_gone


Personally, and as has been said above, Tech always seems to mean moves that look impressive only to those who know how hard they are. For example, a TTN is more tech than a butterfly, but to most passive observers they look pretty similar.





antispin flowers.

they make even the least interested non-spinner go 'woooooooooo'. maybe no more than a fast three beat weave. but they are exceedingly 'tech'. as are complex isolations. but they make non-spinners go wooo as well.

so how can it be that you hold this belief rigorously? (i'm saying that cause you put 'always' instead of 'mostly'. even that i would disagree with. of all the best poi dancers i have ever met, about 80% of them are also poi tech-heads)

i'm very much with matt.

last years tech is this years norm, and tech things can be beautiful to non-spinners, beginners and 'techies' alike. (please note i said 'can be', not 'are')

smiles
R

Holistic Spinner (I hope)


nearly_all_goneSILVER Member
Pooh-Bah
1,626 posts
Location: Southampton, United Kingdom


Posted:
Fair enough

I just think that someone who has no knowledge of poi would look at a fast 3 beat, as you say, and at an antispin flower or a point iso and wouldn't be any more impressed by either. But someone who knew how hard they are would be more impressed by the more techy things. I think the passive bystander would be more impressed by really really smooth flow between weave, windmill and rev weave, for example, than they would for a more tech move.

And Vanize, I didn't make my point very well by summing it up with an = symbol, but the bit after made more sense.. that it's a lot harder to make tech moves flow, at least so it appears to someone who doesn't "do" tech. I've rarely seen someone make a tech move flow well and not interrupt them to some extent.

But then maybe I've just not watched enough tech people spin. smile

What a wonderful miracle if only we could look through each other's eyes for an instant.
Thoreau


spiralxveteran
1,376 posts
Location: London, UK


Posted:
I think that on average tech moves might be harder to incorporate in a flowy way... but only on average. And there are a lot of tech moves that for me have vastly increased the possibilities of linking other moves together - they've provided me with a whole bunch of new ways to use the "room" you have available to spin in. So that they provide the ability to flow between moves that are otherwise exceedingly difficult to move between i.e. knowing crossarm butterfly inversions allows you to do all kinds of opposite direction moves through and between your arms that would otherwise get caught.

"Moo," said the happy cow.


TheWibblerGOLD Member
old hand
920 posts
Location: New Zealand


Posted:
The funny thing about these threads seems to be that everyone agrees and then seems to argue about what they agree on. Maybe not yet but this could go seriously down hill.

Tech poi doesn't exist.

Flow can be great
Tech can be great
Tech can be Flow
Flow can be Tech

And it can all be sh1te if you're not yet very good at poi.

m

Spherculism ~:~ The Act of becoming Spherculish.


vanizeSILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA


Posted:
going on about some aspect of what spiralx just said, I think one of the greatest benifits of learning lots of techy moves is actually increased flow - both in the form of a greater pool of possible transitions and in ability to smoothly recover from mistakes. Learning techy stuff can help both of these things tremendously, even if you never get really technical during your performances - just practicing technical stuff can help improve your non-technical spinning to a large degree.



poipoipoi does have a gift for understanding the nature of technical threads: "The funny thing about these threads seems to be that everyone agrees and then seems to argue about what they agree on." ubblol

-v-

Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!


bluecatgeek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere


Posted:
(@PPP)



ubblol



bloody zen poi-ists

wink
EDITED_BY: bluecat (1101829065)

Holistic Spinner (I hope)


vanizeSILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA


Posted:
Written by: bluecat


(@PPP)

ubblol

bloody zen poi-ists
wink




funny - I actually almost said "zen" in my reply to what PPP said too! rolleyes

-v-

Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!


nearly_all_goneSILVER Member
Pooh-Bah
1,626 posts
Location: Southampton, United Kingdom


Posted:
Written by: vanize


just practicing technical stuff can help improve your non-technical spinning to a large degree.





Now that I totally agree with.

What a wonderful miracle if only we could look through each other's eyes for an instant.
Thoreau


vanizeSILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA


Posted:
the last thing PPP said has led me to a new definition of what technical spinning is:



if, when you describe a move, 95% of the readers do not clearly get the jist of it, and it takes more than say 50 posts to clear up the original meaning while simultaneuosly creating several sub-arguments which are all essentially saying the same thing with different semantics, then it is technical.



wink

-v-

Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!


bluecatgeek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere


Posted:
ubblol


i might disagree with you there tho.

but give me a while, i have to go look up some old arguements in the 'teaching moves or longest post' thread...

R

Holistic Spinner (I hope)


mo-sephenthusiast
524 posts
Location: Edinburgh, UK


Posted:
Hmmm... Agree with PPP.

Following on, I don't think that moves are technical or non technical, I think that the approach one takes to the moves is technical or not. If you're sat there thinking "right, I can do this forwards so there must be a backwards and then an inverted and inverted backwards and..." that's fairly technical. But if you've just been playing about and slipped into a particularly nice move with no idea what it is, that's fairly un-technical. Might well be the same move in both cases though.

And I think most of the time "technical" is used to mean "his planes don't suck", and flowy is used to mean "she wiggles her hips while she spins". wink

monkeys ate my brain


ado-pGOLD Member
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland


Posted:
So would this be a technical discussion then? smile

Love is the law.


Page:
HOP Newsletter
Sign up to get the latest on sales, new releases and more...