Forums > Other Toys > most objects juggled
Login/Join to Participatemember
33 posts
33 posts
Posted:
tell us
6balls,5rings,4clubs
for 3 and 4 12 catches counts as juggled
for 5 and above twice the number of catches as objects
tell us
6balls,5rings,4clubs
for 3 and 4 12 catches counts as juggled
for 5 and above twice the number of catches as objects
Stalking amidst the desert, carrying an oversized scalpel...
1,019 posts
Location: Huddersfield + Hull Uni... UK.
1,019 posts
Location: Huddersfield + Hull Uni... UK.
Posted:
4 clubs, 6 balls, 5 rings.
Rings are tricky.
4 clubs, 6 balls, 5 rings.
Rings are tricky.
Willy - is bad for your health...
member
33 posts
33 posts
Posted:
tricky but because they are thin i find them easier to do in even numbers than balls ii only have 5 rings but i find 4 rings easier because they dont need to be thrown as far outside as balls do
tricky but because they are thin i find them easier to do in even numbers than balls ii only have 5 rings but i find 4 rings easier because they dont need to be thrown as far outside as balls do
Stalking amidst the desert, carrying an oversized scalpel...
1,019 posts
Location: Huddersfield + Hull Uni... UK.
1,019 posts
Location: Huddersfield + Hull Uni... UK.
Posted:
Four rings feels nice to juggle, I can run them for a while, but five, I can barely manage a juggle on most occasions, although I managed approx 15 catches once...
Constitutes a juggle!
Four rings feels nice to juggle, I can run them for a while, but five, I can barely manage a juggle on most occasions, although I managed approx 15 catches once...
Constitutes a juggle! Willy - is bad for your health...
Clubbles Jugs
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
Posted:
6 rings juggled
5 clubs juggled
7 balls (and bouncy balls) juggled
8 balls flashed (sorry ticked wrong box)
6 rings juggled
5 clubs juggled
7 balls (and bouncy balls) juggled
8 balls flashed (sorry ticked wrong box)
ah wah wah wah a wah wah
Stalking amidst the desert, carrying an oversized scalpel...
1,019 posts
Location: Huddersfield + Hull Uni... UK.
1,019 posts
Location: Huddersfield + Hull Uni... UK.
Posted:
I vote there should be a box for those of us who have passed largish numbers...
I've managed a 7club two count for a fair few catches!
I vote there should be a box for those of us who have passed largish numbers...
I've managed a 7club two count for a fair few catches!
Willy - is bad for your health...
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
does passing 7 clubs really count as numbers passing?
surely that's only the equivalent of 3.5 clubs each (which i admit, would probably be harder than 4 clubs
).
cole. x
does passing 7 clubs really count as numbers passing?
surely that's only the equivalent of 3.5 clubs each (which i admit, would probably be harder than 4 clubs
).cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
Stalking amidst the desert, carrying an oversized scalpel...
1,019 posts
Location: Huddersfield + Hull Uni... UK.
1,019 posts
Location: Huddersfield + Hull Uni... UK.
Posted:
Don't get cocky...
Don't get cocky...
Willy - is bad for your health...
member
33 posts
33 posts
Posted:
dont be dumb A and theres no such thing as 3.5 clubs and there is really know equivlent from 1and 2count passing and solo club juggling I consider 4or more clubs numbers 5 or more for rings and balls 5 is soo much better
dont be dumb A and theres no such thing as 3.5 clubs and there is really know equivlent from 1and 2count passing and solo club juggling I consider 4or more clubs numbers 5 or more for rings and balls
5 is soo much better Clubbles Jugs
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
Posted:
what about juggling 3 clubs and one ball? That's harder than 4 clubs!
what about juggling 3 clubs and one ball? That's harder than 4 clubs!
ah wah wah wah a wah wah
member
33 posts
33 posts
Posted:
see I am not in the circus my juggling will be on the moon before it is in the circus so I dont bother doing things like that And I believe that objects juggled should be counted only as the same object being juggled so I've never tried it but I would think that 3 clubs +1ball would be easier once I get the hank of it
EDITED_BY: pre1236 (1134308030)
see I am not in the circus my juggling will be on the moon before it is in the circus so I dont bother doing things like that And I believe that objects juggled should be counted only as the same object being juggled so I've never tried it but I would think that 3 clubs +1ball would be easier once I get the hank of it
EDITED_BY: pre1236 (1134308030)
Clubbles Jugs
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
Posted:
Think again dude, 3 clubs and one ball is damn hard!
Please don't hate me, but I also thought i would correct all the gramatical errors in your post - compare and see...
Written by: pre1236
See I am not in the circus, my juggling will be on the moon before it is in the circus, so I don't bother doing things like that.
I believe that objects juggled should be counted only as the same object being juggled so I've never tried it, but I would think that 3 clubs + 1ball would be easier once I get the hang of it.
Think again dude, 3 clubs and one ball is damn hard!
Please don't hate me, but I also thought i would correct all the gramatical errors in your post - compare and see...
ah wah wah wah a wah wah
SILVER Member
member
161 posts
Location: USA
member
161 posts
Location: USA
Posted:
dude this isn't english class
dude this isn't english class
SILVER Member
Tantamount to fatuity
15,966 posts
Location: Down the road, United Kingdom
Tantamount to fatuity
15,966 posts
Location: Down the road, United Kingdom
Posted:
Luckily for you. Or you'd get in trouble for not doing your learning proper
Luckily for you. Or you'd get in trouble for not doing your learning proper
Meh
SILVER Member
Tantamount to fatuity
15,966 posts
Location: Down the road, United Kingdom
Tantamount to fatuity
15,966 posts
Location: Down the road, United Kingdom
Posted:
Does the A stand for aardvark?
Surely there is such a thing as 3 clubs? There just isn't such a thing as 0.5 of a club...
Or, are you saying that there are no clubs? Like a sort of zen statement about juggling.
If a juggler drops all his clubs when there's no one around to witness it, do they actually fall?
Written by: pre1236
dont be dumb A and theres no such thing as 3.5 clubs
Does the A stand for aardvark?
Surely there is such a thing as 3 clubs? There just isn't such a thing as 0.5 of a club...
Or, are you saying that there are no clubs? Like a sort of zen statement about juggling.
If a juggler drops all his clubs when there's no one around to witness it, do they actually fall?
Meh
Check ya later
500 posts
Location: Lower Shaw Farm
500 posts
Location: Lower Shaw Farm
Posted:
I've got a radical fish that has snapped in half. Does that count as 0.5 of a club?
my numbers (on a good day ): 6 balls, 5 clubs, can't remember the last time a juggled rings . . .
I've got a radical fish that has snapped in half. Does that count as 0.5 of a club?
my numbers (on a good day
): 6 balls, 5 clubs, can't remember the last time a juggled rings . . . Jake the Juggler
member
33 posts
33 posts
Posted:
no half a club would be if you sawed the club down the middle you would need to have cut the club in half on most clubs their is a seem on the top. if you cut down that seem that would make 2 halfs of a club. excuse the spelling
no half a club would be if you sawed the club down the middle you would need to have cut the club in half on most clubs their is a seem on the top. if you cut down that seem that would make 2 halfs of a club. excuse the spelling
Clubbles Jugs
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
Posted:
Just been looking back on thread - how come you get to change what defines as juggled Pre?
Written by: pre1236
for 3 and 4 12 catches counts as juggled
Just been looking back on thread - how come you get to change what defines as juggled Pre?
ah wah wah wah a wah wah
SILVER Member
member
161 posts
Location: USA
member
161 posts
Location: USA
Posted:
I didn't this is what I've known as qualifying runs you can respectfully correct me instead of just insulting me for being wrong.
I didn't this is what I've known as qualifying runs you can respectfully correct me instead of just insulting me for being wrong.
Clubbles Jugs
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
Posted:
I just asked a simple question, stop throwing your toys out the pram little man
Insulting you for being wrong? So you admit that I'm right without even trying to argue your point?
I just asked a simple question, stop throwing your toys out the pram little man
Insulting you for being wrong? So you admit that I'm right without even trying to argue your point?
ah wah wah wah a wah wah
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
I believe that in juggling, for x objects, a 'flash' is to throw and catch x times; a 'qualify' is to throw and catch 2x times.
So, for example, with 7 balls, to flash them requires 7 throws and 7 catches; to 'qualify' 7, requires 14 throws and 14 catches.
I believe that in juggling, for x objects, a 'flash' is to throw and catch x times; a 'qualify' is to throw and catch 2x times.
So, for example, with 7 balls, to flash them requires 7 throws and 7 catches; to 'qualify' 7, requires 14 throws and 14 catches.
"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!
SILVER Member
member
161 posts
Location: USA
member
161 posts
Location: USA
Posted:
this was cut and pasted directly from TheWJF.com's competition rules if you don't believe me check it for yourself
3 objects: 4 times through the pattern (either as the same move, or in combination with other moves for a total of 4 times through the pattern)
4 objects: 3 times through the pattern (either as the same move, or in combination with other moves for a total of 3 times through the pattern)
5 objects and above: 1 time through the pattern
Written by: onewheeldave
I believe that in juggling, for x objects, a 'flash' is to throw and catch x times; a 'qualify' is to throw and catch 2x times.
So, for example, with 7 balls, to flash them requires 7 throws and 7 catches; to 'qualify' 7, requires 14 throws and 14 catches.
this was cut and pasted directly from TheWJF.com's competition rules if you don't believe me check it for yourself
3 objects: 4 times through the pattern (either as the same move, or in combination with other moves for a total of 4 times through the pattern)
4 objects: 3 times through the pattern (either as the same move, or in combination with other moves for a total of 3 times through the pattern)
5 objects and above: 1 time through the pattern
Clubbles Jugs
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
Posted:
Pre - since you seem to love the WJF and only seem to quote their website, their performers etc, please can you tell me, how do American jugglers and the public in general see the WJF?
I'd love to know what all the fuss is about - people over in the UK generally see it as another competition that JG can't win. How do you yanks see it?
[ooops i wrote that one in the wrong thread]
Pre - since you seem to love the WJF and only seem to quote their website, their performers etc, please can you tell me, how do American jugglers and the public in general see the WJF?
I'd love to know what all the fuss is about - people over in the UK generally see it as another competition that JG can't win. How do you yanks see it?
[ooops i wrote that one in the wrong thread]
ah wah wah wah a wah wah
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Pre- your origianl post seemed to be talking about how many objects we could juggle
the WJF rules seem to be talking about what is necessary for specific tricks in a routine to count as successful.
link here-
https://www.thewjf.com/rules.html
Given the standard of WJF competitors, I don't think there's going to be any need to validate 3/4/5 ball numbers attempts
As far as I can tell, when qualifying numbers, it's pretty much universally accepted amongst jugglers worldwide, that double the number of objects being juggled is the number of throws necessary.
ie for 3 objects, 6 throws/catches
for 4, 8 throws/catches
for 5, 10 throws/catches
*****EDIT******
I just looked further down the WJF rules page and found this in the endurance section-
EDITED_BY: onewheeldave (1135307427)
Written by: preWritten by: onewheeldave
I believe that in juggling, for x objects, a 'flash' is to throw and catch x times; a 'qualify' is to throw and catch 2x times.
So, for example, with 7 balls, to flash them requires 7 throws and 7 catches; to 'qualify' 7, requires 14 throws and 14 catches.
this was cut and pasted directly from TheWJF.com's competition rules if you don't believe me check it for yourself
3 objects: 4 times through the pattern (either as the same move, or in combination with other moves for a total of 4 times through the pattern)
4 objects: 3 times through the pattern (either as the same move, or in combination with other moves for a total of 3 times through the pattern)
5 objects and above: 1 time through the pattern
Pre- your origianl post seemed to be talking about how many objects we could juggle
Written by: pre1236 thread title= 'most objects juggled
'
tell us
6balls,5rings,4clubs
for 3 and 4 12 catches counts as juggled
for 5 and above twice the number of catches as objects
the WJF rules seem to be talking about what is necessary for specific tricks in a routine to count as successful.
link here-
https://www.thewjf.com/rules.html
Given the standard of WJF competitors, I don't think there's going to be any need to validate 3/4/5 ball numbers attempts
As far as I can tell, when qualifying numbers, it's pretty much universally accepted amongst jugglers worldwide, that double the number of objects being juggled is the number of throws necessary.
ie for 3 objects, 6 throws/catches
for 4, 8 throws/catches
for 5, 10 throws/catches
*****EDIT******
I just looked further down the WJF rules page and found this in the endurance section-
Written by: WJF rules page
Endurance Competition
Solo categories include: balls, rings, clubs and ball bouncing
Teams (consisting of two people) categories include: balls, rings, and clubs
Definition of Endurance Juggling:
A qualifying run consists of twice the number of catches as there are objects being juggled. For example, a qualifying run of 8 balls is 16 catches.
Anything less than a qualifying run does not qualify and the competitor does not advance to the next level. For example, a competitor who gets 15 catches of 8 balls as their best attempt does not qualify at 8, nor do they advance to the 9 ball level.
EDITED_BY: onewheeldave (1135307427)
"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!
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
I did follow some of the WJF gatto baiting stuff, and the opinions various jugglers posted.
Amongst jugglers in general, some seemed to rate him (Garfield) as a excellent juggler, some considered him to be arrogant; most seemed to rate Gatto considerably higher in skill than Garfield.
From what I've seen of Garfield, i'd say he's simply one very highly skilled juggler, amongst many others who are equally skilled.
The WJF competition is orientated toward a very specific type of technical juggling, which is fair enough, but, many jugglers prefer other styles, and feel that maybe Garfield is misrepresenting his personal ideas about what constitutes 'good' juggling, as being somehow universal.
I felt that Gatto handled a situation which could have degenerated into pointless hostility, with maturity and skill.
I did follow some of the WJF gatto baiting stuff, and the opinions various jugglers posted.
Amongst jugglers in general, some seemed to rate him (Garfield) as a excellent juggler, some considered him to be arrogant; most seemed to rate Gatto considerably higher in skill than Garfield.
From what I've seen of Garfield, i'd say he's simply one very highly skilled juggler, amongst many others who are equally skilled.
The WJF competition is orientated toward a very specific type of technical juggling, which is fair enough, but, many jugglers prefer other styles, and feel that maybe Garfield is misrepresenting his personal ideas about what constitutes 'good' juggling, as being somehow universal.
I felt that Gatto handled a situation which could have degenerated into pointless hostility, with maturity and skill.
"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!
Clubbles Jugs
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
1,687 posts
Location: Manchester
Posted:
Quite right. And besides numbers starts at 7 and above, and certainly not 3 or 4.
Written by: onewheeldave
As far as I can tell, when qualifying numbers, it's pretty much universally accepted amongst jugglers worldwide, that double the number of objects being juggled is the number of throws necessary.
ie for 3 objects, 6 throws/catches
for 4, 8 throws/catches
for 5, 10 throws/catches
Quite right. And besides numbers starts at 7 and above, and certainly not 3 or 4.
ah wah wah wah a wah wah
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
a qualifying run is generally defined as:
'number of hands' x 'number of objects'
this doesn't make much difference for one juggler but makes a big difference to numbers passing.
here's a nice link to jugglewiki
cole. x
a qualifying run is generally defined as:
'number of hands' x 'number of objects'
this doesn't make much difference for one juggler but makes a big difference to numbers passing.
here's a nice link to jugglewiki
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
SILVER Member
member
161 posts
Location: USA
member
161 posts
Location: USA
Posted:
yes They are both very skilled the only reason people don't like garfield is because he is cocky. I personally like people who are maybe alittle be cocky and outspoken because they are typically funny and more entertaining. I saw the routine garfield put together for the 03' IJA combines technical juggling skill and humor. Another person which I have mentioned is Steve Prefontaine yes this is where pre comes from. He was one of the greatest and certaintly the most influencial distance runner of the 20th century. he was yes a little bit cocky but people loved him he had this sort of atmosphere or carisma is you may call it. Everyone cheered for pre. He was by far the gutsiest runner of track and field. And one who didn't run races to see who was the fastest It wasn't just winning its being better than anyone else. It's your style.
And one who didn't run races to see who was the fastest It wasn't just winning its being better than anyone else
- "pre"
see I enjoy people like Garfield And Pre I like a highly technical show of juggling and I like to be entertained. When I go to watch a track meet I like when races go down to the wire qas did the 72' olympics its not all about skill its about style.
Written by: onewheeldave
I did follow some of the WJF gatto baiting stuff, and the opinions various jugglers posted.
Amongst jugglers in general, some seemed to rate him (Garfield) as a excellent juggler, some considered him to be arrogant; most seemed to rate Gatto considerably higher in skill than Garfield.
From what I've seen of Garfield, i'd say he's simply one very highly skilled juggler, amongst many others who are equally skilled.
The WJF competition is orientated toward a very specific type of technical juggling, which is fair enough, but, many jugglers prefer other styles, and feel that maybe Garfield is misrepresenting his personal ideas about what constitutes 'good' juggling, as being somehow universal.
I felt that Gatto handled a situation which could have degenerated into pointless hostility, with maturity and skill.
yes They are both very skilled the only reason people don't like garfield is because he is cocky. I personally like people who are maybe alittle be cocky and outspoken because they are typically funny and more entertaining. I saw the routine garfield put together for the 03' IJA combines technical juggling skill and humor. Another person which I have mentioned is Steve Prefontaine yes this is where pre comes from. He was one of the greatest and certaintly the most influencial distance runner of the 20th century. he was yes a little bit cocky but people loved him he had this sort of atmosphere or carisma is you may call it. Everyone cheered for pre. He was by far the gutsiest runner of track and field. And one who didn't run races to see who was the fastest It wasn't just winning its being better than anyone else. It's your style.
And one who didn't run races to see who was the fastest It wasn't just winning its being better than anyone else
- "pre"
see I enjoy people like Garfield And Pre I like a highly technical show of juggling and I like to be entertained. When I go to watch a track meet I like when races go down to the wire qas did the 72' olympics its not all about skill its about style.
SILVER Member
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
Posted:
"its not all about skill its about style."
Which quote from Penn Giullette from last years WJF would you like?
"its not all about skill its about style."
Which quote from Penn Giullette from last years WJF would you like?
BRONZE Member
veteran
1,453 posts
Location: Lancs England
veteran
1,453 posts
Location: Lancs England
Posted:
sorry this is going to be a bit
humm
I think I have to disagree with you hear having been into athletics since quite early on in school life and even achieving some high standards as an “inter boy” I have a bit of an interest in athletics and so forth.
Steve Prefontaine may have held many American records (a record number of American records lol) he was certainly not
“one of the greatest and certainly the most influential distance runner of the 20th century”
just simply a very good runner in America.
He held no world records to my knowledge and was only held in such high regard by Americans he was not a dominating force on the athletic scene of the time. Just a bit of a jack of all trades.
One of the only reasons he is remembers so fondly is because he died so young if he had continued to run he would have faded into obscurity with so many other talented runners.
Sorry people I know this is all off topic but this kind of hero worship kind of annoys me.
Just to elaborate on my point
Frankie Fredericks is a top class runner by all standards he has competed in the Olympic and world championships numerous times. He also holds the records for the 60m, 100m , 200m, 400m, and 800m for his country (Namibia).
Yes he is a top athlete bun no he is not one of the most influential athletes of the 20th century.
Back to the juggling chatter of who is better than who??
sorry this is going to be a bit
Written by: pre
He was one of the greatest and certaintly the most influencial distance runner of the 20th century
He was by far the gutsiest runner of track and field
humm
I think I have to disagree with you hear having been into athletics since quite early on in school life and even achieving some high standards as an “inter boy” I have a bit of an interest in athletics and so forth.Steve Prefontaine may have held many American records (a record number of American records lol) he was certainly not
“one of the greatest and certainly the most influential distance runner of the 20th century”
just simply a very good runner in America.
He held no world records to my knowledge and was only held in such high regard by Americans he was not a dominating force on the athletic scene of the time. Just a bit of a jack of all trades.
One of the only reasons he is remembers so fondly is because he died
so young if he had continued to run he would have faded into obscurity with so many other talented runners.Sorry people I know this is all off topic but this kind of hero worship kind of annoys me
.Just to elaborate on my point
Frankie Fredericks is a top class runner by all standards he has competed in the Olympic and world championships numerous times. He also holds the records for the 60m, 100m , 200m, 400m, and 800m for his country (Namibia).
Yes he is a top athlete bun no he is not one of the most influential athletes of the 20th century.
Back to the juggling chatter of who is better than who??
before i met those lot i thought they'd be a bunch of dreadlocked hippies that smoked, set things on fire ,and drank a lot of tea but then when i met them....oh wait (PyroWill)
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
I've started a thread in 'social discussion' on the WJF convention vid clips, that addresses some of the issues in this thread; it's here- [Old link]
I've started a thread in 'social discussion' on the WJF convention vid clips, that addresses some of the issues in this thread; it's here- [Old link]
"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!
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [object * juggled] we found the following existing topics.
- Forums > most objects juggled [62 replies]
- Forums > 'Sport' juggling & the WJF [24 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com