Forums > Social Discussion > defining technical spinning
Login/Join to Participategeek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
so.
What is 'technical spinning'?
Back in the day
what was 'tech' is now beginner stuff. This has been covered in many discussions, so i'm not starting one of those*. Also, individual moves, and expertise have been discussed to death, so i'll moan miserably if this turns into a 'I can do an antispin butterfly hybrid - that means i'm tech' thread or a 'tech vs dance/experience/style' thread. ARGH!
anyway. back to the point. Old stuff is not hard, and new stuff therefore is....:
Nowadays new concepts - or really hard variations of old concepts - come up very frequently (in every spin, i find at the moment, with several new things appearing in a session). Now, because they are new, people call them tech. but are they?
for example:
(Not) 1.5s are relatively new, so are considered 'tech'. In fact they are very easy, and can be taught successfully to 25 people in under ten minutes (last workshop). So why are they 'tech'? Is it because durbs can do them?
This relates to an old argument in 'the worlds longest teaching moves thread'
that peopl teach in different ways because of what they consider 'basic'... but I try to keep an open mind... and so consider (another example) airwraps to be much easier than a 3 beat weave. certainly i can make a group of beginners learn a consistent airwrap in about a tenth of the time i can get them all to understand the fairly complicated hand movements of a weave. It might seem harder, but in fact there is much less to do physically, and when explained as a physical action rather than a poi move anyone can do them.
So what defines technical spinning?
(please, not just a list of moves, though that may come at a later date...)
is it novelty?
is it ingenuity?
is it who invents it?
is it how hard it is?
is it how hard it is percieved to be?
is it because it is not 'normal spinning'
is it cause it LOOKS radically different (even if it is not)
wow factor?
is it because someone famous calls it tech?
is it because it has a wierd and funky name (mmmm antispin olos hybrids
)?
What on earth is this 'thing' that people either rail against it or support it or aspire to? And why do they? It makes some poeple incredibly upset/scornful/impressed! WTF?
Ond why, oh why, do people use it to describe stuff?
'oh, that's so tech'
What does that mean? What if you're wrong (meg?)?
Discuss. hand in your essays by december 1st please, and they will be returned before christmas, marked.
*and will violently shout
if it turns into one
so.
What is 'technical spinning'?
Back in the day
what was 'tech' is now beginner stuff. This has been covered in many discussions, so i'm not starting one of those*. Also, individual moves, and expertise have been discussed to death, so i'll moan miserably if this turns into a 'I can do an antispin butterfly hybrid - that means i'm tech' thread or a 'tech vs dance/experience/style' thread. ARGH!anyway. back to the point. Old stuff is not hard, and new stuff therefore is....:
Nowadays new concepts - or really hard variations of old concepts - come up very frequently (in every spin, i find at the moment, with several new things appearing in a session). Now, because they are new, people call them tech. but are they?
for example:
(Not) 1.5s are relatively new, so are considered 'tech'. In fact they are very easy, and can be taught successfully to 25 people in under ten minutes (last workshop). So why are they 'tech'? Is it because durbs can do them?
This relates to an old argument in 'the worlds longest teaching moves thread'
that peopl teach in different ways because of what they consider 'basic'... but I try to keep an open mind... and so consider (another example) airwraps to be much easier than a 3 beat weave. certainly i can make a group of beginners learn a consistent airwrap in about a tenth of the time i can get them all to understand the fairly complicated hand movements of a weave. It might seem harder, but in fact there is much less to do physically, and when explained as a physical action rather than a poi move anyone can do them.So what defines technical spinning?
(please, not just a list of moves, though that may come at a later date...)
is it novelty?
is it ingenuity?
is it who invents it?
is it how hard it is?
is it how hard it is percieved to be?
is it because it is not 'normal spinning'
is it cause it LOOKS radically different (even if it is not)
wow factor?
is it because someone famous calls it tech?
is it because it has a wierd and funky name (mmmm antispin olos hybrids
)?What on earth is this 'thing' that people either rail against it or support it or aspire to? And why do they? It makes some poeple incredibly upset/scornful/impressed! WTF?
Ond why, oh why, do people use it to describe stuff?
'oh, that's so tech'
What does that mean? What if you're wrong (meg?)?
Discuss. hand in your essays by december 1st please, and they will be returned before christmas, marked.
*and will violently shout
if it turns into oneHolistic Spinner (I hope)
BRONZE Member
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Posted:
Unless you take "dancing with poi" as the desired result, I don't really see the tie-in... I'd say dancing with poi, seemlessly intergrating both, is hard, but with regards to the actual question, it's not "technical spinning"
This could be branched off even further, as "dance" (whilst being pretty hollistic and airy in terms of definition in itself) styles can be varied, some require huge amounts of precision (authentic tango, ballet for example), whilst others are hugely open to interpretation; contact dance, popping etc. So there's a whole seperate question there...
But in terms of "technical spinning" - i'd maintain it's about precision.
Someone spinning "basic" moves whilst perfectly executing a foxtrot is hard, but I don't think it'd be classed as "tech"
Written by: dreamWritten by: Durbs
Tech would be a move or technique that requires a significant amount of precision to achieve the desired result.
So dancing with poi (not just wiggling or bending your knees) is tech?
Unless you take "dancing with poi" as the desired result, I don't really see the tie-in... I'd say dancing with poi, seemlessly intergrating both, is hard, but with regards to the actual question, it's not "technical spinning"
This could be branched off even further, as "dance" (whilst being pretty hollistic and airy in terms of definition in itself) styles can be varied, some require huge amounts of precision (authentic tango, ballet for example), whilst others are hugely open to interpretation; contact dance, popping etc. So there's a whole seperate question there...
But in terms of "technical spinning" - i'd maintain it's about precision.
Someone spinning "basic" moves whilst perfectly executing a foxtrot is hard, but I don't think it'd be classed as "tech"
Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,749 posts
Location: Europe,Scotland,Both
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,749 posts
Location: Europe,Scotland,Both
Posted:
sure it would, technical dancing
:smug:
sure it would, technical dancing
:smug:
This is a post by tom, all spelling is deleberate
-><- Kallisti
BRONZE Member
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Posted:
True - but the poi wouldn't affect this, it'd be technical dancing without the poi.
This is a discussion on "technical spinning"
True - but the poi wouldn't affect this, it'd be technical dancing without the poi.
This is a discussion on "technical spinning"
Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude
BRONZE Member
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
Posted:
Um... No.
If popping is that open to interpretation, I never want to hear anybody say 'your popping needs work' or words to that effect ever again. Same with Contact Dance, or contemporary, or jazz... Same with ANY type of dance really, unless it's the 'Whiteboy can't dance' dance, or the 'I'm moving my body to the music in a way that feels nice to me' dance. Same goes for unclean spinning. maybe the spinner meant to do that? what's right and wrong when it comes to spinning? Does knowledge level affect how open to interpretation something is? Unfortunately, Interpretation is always going to be subjective to the individual.
But anyway, that was
I kind of agree with Nigel. Although I would also add 'or can do it but don't understand it fully'.
I want rid of that, though. I don't want the label 'tech' to be subjective to the individual. otherwise, F*ck it, butterfly is tech. Because it's subjective to me, you can't really argue me defining it as such, even though you and I both know it's a base move. If we say it's subjective to the community, then again; what are the criteria for labelling a certain style as tech?
For a move to be considered tech, it needs to adhere to at least one of the following criteria:
1) Is a newly discovered move, or concept, and is not widely known throughout the spinning community.
2) Is a move I can't do (subjective).
3) Is a move I can do, but don't have a full understanding of (Subjective).
4) Is a move that requires a lot of practice (Subjective part) and understanding of the concept, in order to execute.
5) Requires an undetermined level of concentration, in order to execute.
6) Is a move that looks really good.
7) Is a move that makes your head tilt to one side, and your mouth say 'What the f*ck?' the first time you see it.
Would you agree with any of those? I don't agree with them all, just throwing them out there, and by no means do I think any one of them is the definitive of 'tech'.
Could this create branch offs: Noobertech, Intermediatech, Ubertech? Nu-Tech? Maybe it's time for more types of 'style' than 'tech' and 'dancy'?
I like rambling.
Or maybe I'm playing up to the part of me that likes to group things too much. I probably am. I should go arrange some things into straight lines or something. If you'll excuse me, I have a jar full of buttons that need counting and sorting by size, colour, and number of holes. 
Written by: Durbs
This could be branched off even further, as "dance" (whilst being pretty hollistic and airy in terms of definition in itself) styles can be varied, some require huge amounts of precision (authentic tango, ballet for example), whilst others are hugely open to interpretation; contact dance, popping etc.
Um... No.
If popping is that open to interpretation, I never want to hear anybody say 'your popping needs work' or words to that effect ever again. Same with Contact Dance, or contemporary, or jazz... Same with ANY type of dance really, unless it's the 'Whiteboy can't dance' dance, or the 'I'm moving my body to the music in a way that feels nice to me' dance. Same goes for unclean spinning. maybe the spinner meant to do that? what's right and wrong when it comes to spinning? Does knowledge level affect how open to interpretation something is? Unfortunately, Interpretation is always going to be subjective to the individual.
But anyway, that was
I kind of agree with Nigel. Although I would also add 'or can do it but don't understand it fully'.
I want rid of that, though. I don't want the label 'tech' to be subjective to the individual. otherwise, F*ck it, butterfly is tech. Because it's subjective to me, you can't really argue me defining it as such, even though you and I both know it's a base move. If we say it's subjective to the community, then again; what are the criteria for labelling a certain style as tech?
For a move to be considered tech, it needs to adhere to at least one of the following criteria:
1) Is a newly discovered move, or concept, and is not widely known throughout the spinning community.
2) Is a move I can't do (subjective).
3) Is a move I can do, but don't have a full understanding of (Subjective).
4) Is a move that requires a lot of practice (Subjective part) and understanding of the concept, in order to execute.
5) Requires an undetermined level of concentration, in order to execute.
6) Is a move that looks really good.
7) Is a move that makes your head tilt to one side, and your mouth say 'What the f*ck?' the first time you see it.
Would you agree with any of those? I don't agree with them all, just throwing them out there, and by no means do I think any one of them is the definitive of 'tech'.
Could this create branch offs: Noobertech, Intermediatech, Ubertech? Nu-Tech?
Maybe it's time for more types of 'style' than 'tech' and 'dancy'?I like rambling.
Or maybe I'm playing up to the part of me that likes to group things too much. I probably am. I should go arrange some things into straight lines or something. If you'll excuse me, I have a jar full of buttons that need counting and sorting by size, colour, and number of holes.
Empty your mind. Be formless, Shapeless, like Water.
Put Water into a cup, it becomes the cup, put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle, put water into a teapot, it becomes the teapot.
Water can flow, or it can Crash.
Be Water My Friend.
BRONZE Member
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Posted:
#1 I'd not agree with, as many old moves are still tech (e.g. whip catches, 7-bt weaves, turning a/s flowers)
#2&3 - I don't agree with. I don't see why a move being classed as "tech" should depend on a persons level of practice/abilty/understanding.
#4 By their nature yes, but there's always some cheeky young upstart
I'd strongly disagree with #6 - looks have nothing to do with being tech or not.
#7 Sometimes, though some basic moves can still confuse ppl - isolations for example (Maybe not "basic", but they're not tech either...)
Dance - yep, side topic. Though I disagree with you...
I'm maintaining my stance on precision being the key point to a "tech" move.
#1 I'd not agree with, as many old moves are still tech (e.g. whip catches, 7-bt weaves, turning a/s flowers)
#2&3 - I don't agree with. I don't see why a move being classed as "tech" should depend on a persons level of practice/abilty/understanding.
#4 By their nature yes, but there's always some cheeky young upstart
I'd strongly disagree with #6 - looks have nothing to do with being tech or not.
#7 Sometimes, though some basic moves can still confuse ppl - isolations for example (Maybe not "basic", but they're not tech either...)
Dance - yep, side topic. Though I disagree with you...
I'm maintaining my stance on precision being the key point to a "tech" move.
Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude
BRONZE Member
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
Posted:
Continuing off topic (Sorry)
I think we're a little different on our interpretation of 'Open to interpretation'.
I mean the style, and being identified as a particular style.
on topic: Isolations are tech. There, I said it. (sorry Rob) And if you maintain your stance on precision being the key point, then Isolations are SOOO tech. Timing your poi correctly, is tech. in fact, doing ANYTHING cleanly is tech. SO I guess what this also means, is that you're either a tech spinner, or a sloppy spinner.
EDIT (In case someone posts before I type this) I reckon Isolations are Tech, because they require a specific, different technique to 'normal spinning'. Normal spinning... you know, regular circles with the centre of rotation as the hand..
EDITED_BY: Look_This_Changes (1195680343)
Continuing off topic (Sorry)
I think we're a little different on our interpretation of 'Open to interpretation'.
I mean the style, and being identified as a particular style.
on topic: Isolations are tech. There, I said it. (sorry Rob) And if you maintain your stance on precision being the key point, then Isolations are SOOO tech. Timing your poi correctly, is tech. in fact, doing ANYTHING cleanly is tech. SO I guess what this also means, is that you're either a tech spinner, or a sloppy spinner.
EDIT (In case someone posts before I type this) I reckon Isolations are Tech, because they require a specific, different technique to 'normal spinning'. Normal spinning... you know, regular circles with the centre of rotation as the hand..
EDITED_BY: Look_This_Changes (1195680343)
Empty your mind. Be formless, Shapeless, like Water.
Put Water into a cup, it becomes the cup, put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle, put water into a teapot, it becomes the teapot.
Water can flow, or it can Crash.
Be Water My Friend.
SILVER Member
old hand
768 posts
Location: San Francisco, California, USA
old hand
768 posts
Location: San Francisco, California, USA
Posted:
I think this statement comes close to nailing it...the further removed from 'normal spinning' something is, the more tech it is. i.e., the more 'specific, different techniques' are applied, the more tech it is. A weave = not tech. isolated weave = slightly more tech. hybrid atomic inverted weave = ubertech.
Therefore, a move's techiness depends on how many adjectives/qualifiers are prefixed to it.
Written by: Look_This_Changes
EDIT (In case someone posts before I type this) I reckon Isolations are Tech, because they require a specific, different technique to 'normal spinning'. Normal spinning... you know, regular circles with the centre of rotation as the hand..
I think this statement comes close to nailing it...the further removed from 'normal spinning' something is, the more tech it is. i.e., the more 'specific, different techniques' are applied, the more tech it is. A weave = not tech. isolated weave = slightly more tech. hybrid atomic inverted weave = ubertech.
Therefore, a move's techiness depends on how many adjectives/qualifiers are prefixed to it.
taken out of context i must seem so strange
~ ani di franco
BRONZE Member
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Posted:
By "isolation" are we talking buzzsaw isolation or just the general theory?
Because, you can do a sloppy isolation, still conveying the idea of moving the centre of rotation pretty soon after being told the theory... As I said earlier, polishing a move is always hard, but you can do a sloppy isolation and people will spot it. However a...i dunno...hybrid weave will just look rubbish until it's done properly (not perfectly, but properly)
[Ed part:] Having thought more, I'd remove popping, and change it to waving. C'mon, the amount of people who can do a shite arm-wave is limitless, and it is still an armwave. But a pliƩ (or whatever) requires certain structure and form to be right
By "isolation" are we talking buzzsaw isolation or just the general theory?
Because, you can do a sloppy isolation, still conveying the idea of moving the centre of rotation pretty soon after being told the theory... As I said earlier, polishing a move is always hard, but you can do a sloppy isolation and people will spot it. However a...i dunno...hybrid weave will just look rubbish until it's done properly (not perfectly, but properly)
[Ed part:] Having thought more, I'd remove popping, and change it to waving. C'mon, the amount of people who can do a shite arm-wave is limitless, and it is still an armwave. But a pliƩ (or whatever) requires certain structure and form to be right
Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude
BRONZE Member
Still wiggling
5,967 posts
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland (UK)
Still wiggling
5,967 posts
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland (UK)
Posted:
Hmm.
I think most of the people posting on this thread would be considered incredibly techy by anyone new to poi or spinning.
So perhaps 'tech is in the eye of the beholder' but also... would those people who haven't been exposed to HoP and the terminology consider any of these movements as 'technical'... or 'just ways to swing poi/staff that I haven't learned yet'? (ie. to a newbie, recent 'tech' moves don't look any more difficult than a 3bt weave. All you need is a good teacher...).
[And what makes a person want to learn any particular move... because of how well it's executed? Because of the pattern it creates?]
I don't really think it matters what is defined as tech or not... or dance or not... because poi and spinning is essentially dependant on the spinners interpretation, and that is individual.
We could try to define it for ourselves, but it's something that's changing so fast... and again, everyone's interpretation is different, so it can't really be inclusive (that, and the fact that any decision is likely to be made by a tiny minority of the poi spinning world).
g'luck tho
x
Hmm.
I think most of the people posting on this thread would be considered incredibly techy by anyone new to poi or spinning.
So perhaps 'tech is in the eye of the beholder' but also... would those people who haven't been exposed to HoP and the terminology consider any of these movements as 'technical'... or 'just ways to swing poi/staff that I haven't learned yet'? (ie. to a newbie, recent 'tech' moves don't look any more difficult than a 3bt weave. All you need is a good teacher...).
[And what makes a person want to learn any particular move... because of how well it's executed? Because of the pattern it creates?]
I don't really think it matters what is defined as tech or not... or dance or not... because poi and spinning is essentially dependant on the spinners interpretation, and that is individual.
We could try to define it for ourselves, but it's something that's changing so fast... and again, everyone's interpretation is different, so it can't really be inclusive (that, and the fact that any decision is likely to be made by a tiny minority of the poi spinning world).
g'luck tho
x
Getting to the other side 
BRONZE Member
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posted:
:waits for someone to suggest that iso's are as easy as normal spinning:
mmm yeah I can be bothered...(why stop with one light hearted rant in a week!?)
FFS people I dont see why its so hard to work it out - Mountain bikers have a good idea of what a 'technical section' is, in-line and figure skaters seem to know what good 'technical skating' is, technical skiing seems to be fairly well understood at high levels etc etc
In fact it seems that twirlers are the only group of people who dont seem to be able to understand the concept out of any group of movement artists / technicians I've ever heard of.
https://dictionary.reference.com/browse/technical
Many references to 'specific skills in the art, or scientific / mechanistic approaches to art eg
technical
adjective
1. of or relating to technique or proficiency in a practical skill; "his technical innovation was his brushwork"; "the technical dazzle of her dancing"
I just dont see why this dead horse wont just lie down. When youre concentrating on spinning 'hard' tricks' you are doing technical spinning. When you are spinning hard tricks but you are able to make it look like you are doing it effortlessly and are able to direct your attention to the _other_ elements of spinning you are doing more than just spinning the trick - youre a damn fine holistic twirler and you enter a new category, because you are no longer just emphasizing or showing the trick. the emphasis has moved enough away from what your hands and poi are doing to what _you_ are doing.
and just to throw the cat among the pigeons;
Or is it that those who believe the distinction of 'technical' doesnt exist also dont believe there is anything more to twirling than the moves? perhaps this is what this is all about...
Perhaps - thats why there's such a strong animosity between the "I wish people would stop calling me tech" twirlers towards the "Those
hippy fire sex magic" twirlers???
^^^^^^^LIGHT HEARTED!!!
(light hearted flames in response accepted with grace;))
EDITED_BY: Pyrolific (1195683300)
:waits for someone to suggest that iso's are as easy as normal spinning:
mmm yeah I can be bothered...(why stop with one light hearted rant in a week!?
)FFS people I dont see why its so hard to work it out - Mountain bikers have a good idea of what a 'technical section' is, in-line and figure skaters seem to know what good 'technical skating' is, technical skiing seems to be fairly well understood at high levels etc etc
In fact it seems that twirlers are the only group of people who dont seem to be able to understand the concept out of any group of movement artists / technicians I've ever heard of.
https://dictionary.reference.com/browse/technical
Many references to 'specific skills in the art, or scientific / mechanistic approaches to art eg
technical
adjective
1. of or relating to technique or proficiency in a practical skill; "his technical innovation was his brushwork"; "the technical dazzle of her dancing"
I just dont see why this dead horse wont just lie down. When youre concentrating on spinning 'hard' tricks' you are doing technical spinning. When you are spinning hard tricks but you are able to make it look like you are doing it effortlessly and are able to direct your attention to the _other_ elements of spinning you are doing more than just spinning the trick - youre a damn fine holistic twirler and you enter a new category, because you are no longer just emphasizing or showing the trick. the emphasis has moved enough away from what your hands and poi are doing to what _you_ are doing.
and just to throw the cat among the pigeons;
Or is it that those who believe the distinction of 'technical' doesnt exist also dont believe there is anything more to twirling than the moves? perhaps this is what this is all about...
Perhaps - thats why there's such a strong animosity between the "I wish people would stop calling me tech" twirlers towards the "Those
hippy fire sex magic" twirlers??? ^^^^^^^LIGHT HEARTED!!!
(light hearted flames in response accepted with grace;))
EDITED_BY: Pyrolific (1195683300)
--
Help! My personality got stuck in this signature machine and I cant get it out!
BRONZE Member
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Posted:
What the flip's "normal spinning"?!
Written by: _khan_
...the further removed from 'normal spinning' something is, the more tech it is.
What the flip's "normal spinning"?!
Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude
BRONZE Member
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Posted:
Who let the hippy in?
Written by: _Clare_
I don't really think it matters what is defined as tech or not... or dance or not... because poi and spinning is essentially dependant on the spinners interpretation, and that is individual.
Who let the hippy in? Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude
BRONZE Member
Still wiggling
5,967 posts
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland (UK)
Still wiggling
5,967 posts
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland (UK)
Posted:
Heheheh. Sorry.
(somewhere in my mind I think that's true though, which means any argument about definition, or the need of definition, is slightly unnecessary.)
I liked this from Josh tho:
"When youre concentrating on spinning 'hard' tricks' you are doing technical spinning. When you are spinning hard tricks but you are able to make it look like you are doing it effortlessly and are able to direct your attention to the _other_ elements of spinning you are doing more than just spinning the trick - youre a damn fine holistic twirler and you enter a new category"
But I think you guys are trying to define what is 'hard tricks', no?
hippy
Heheheh. Sorry.
(somewhere in my mind I think that's true though, which means any argument about definition, or the need of definition, is slightly unnecessary.)
I liked this from Josh tho:
"When youre concentrating on spinning 'hard' tricks' you are doing technical spinning. When you are spinning hard tricks but you are able to make it look like you are doing it effortlessly and are able to direct your attention to the _other_ elements of spinning you are doing more than just spinning the trick - youre a damn fine holistic twirler and you enter a new category"
But I think you guys are trying to define what is 'hard tricks', no?
hippy
Getting to the other side
BRONZE Member
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posted:
hard = tricks that take time to learn
like BTB 5bt WW - you just dont see many people doing it - even tho its been around for ages? you especially dont see people doing it smoothly while making eye contact with the audience and paying attention to posture and balance
hard = tricks that take time to learn
like BTB 5bt WW - you just dont see many people doing it - even tho its been around for ages? you especially dont see people doing it smoothly while making eye contact with the audience and paying attention to posture and balance
--
Help! My personality got stuck in this signature machine and I cant get it out!
BRONZE Member
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
Posted:
[durbs part] Ok. On waving I'll concede that point and agree with you. now I feel like I really need a shower even though I had one this afternoon...
I love the idea of holistic twirler. Although, I'd rather it was holistic 'spinner'
[durbs part] Ok. On waving I'll concede that point and agree with you.
now I feel like I really need a shower even though I had one this afternoon... I love the idea of holistic twirler. Although, I'd rather it was holistic 'spinner'
Empty your mind. Be formless, Shapeless, like Water.
Put Water into a cup, it becomes the cup, put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle, put water into a teapot, it becomes the teapot.
Water can flow, or it can Crash.
Be Water My Friend.
geek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
hahahahaha thank you josh.
I think i'm done now
but the horse was worth flogging
hahahahaha thank you josh.
I think i'm done now
but the horse was worth flogging
Holistic Spinner (I hope)
BRONZE Member
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
Posted:
Can we have a list of moves anyway please?
Can we have a list of moves anyway please?
Empty your mind. Be formless, Shapeless, like Water.
Put Water into a cup, it becomes the cup, put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle, put water into a teapot, it becomes the teapot.
Water can flow, or it can Crash.
Be Water My Friend.
110% MONKEY EVERY TIME ALL THE TIME JUST CANT STOP THE MONKEY
3,149 posts
Location: London
3,149 posts
Location: London
Posted:
Josh and the dictionary are wrong
Technical is a vague term without a definite definition
That doesn't mean it doesn't mean anything though
and it's all about [Old link]
mainly: i agree with Clare
Josh and the dictionary are wrong
Technical is a vague term without a definite definition
That doesn't mean it doesn't mean anything though
and it's all about [Old link]
mainly: i agree with Clare
"Switching between different kinds of chuu chuu sometimes gives this "urgh wtf?" effect because it's giving people the phi phenomenon."
geek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
er.
no.
but i might start soon. I have to start a list anyway (for other, more exciting reasons)
incidentally, josh - isolations are as easy as normal spinning. have you tried to isolate the heads of two staffs together? easy as pie some 'normal spinning'is much harder. but then some isolations...
but what is normal spinning?
is it;
not doing 'tech'?
learning loads in a few months, then not keeping up with the Joneses?
The way i spin is normal *
:zen:
off to design fun burny things
*to me
Written by: _Clare_
But I think you guys are trying to define what is 'hard tricks', no?
er.
no.
but i might start soon. I have to start a list anyway (for other, more exciting reasons)
incidentally, josh - isolations are as easy as normal spinning. have you tried to isolate the heads of two staffs together? easy as pie
some 'normal spinning'is much harder. but then some isolations... but what is normal spinning?
is it;
not doing 'tech'?
learning loads in a few months, then not keeping up with the Joneses?
The way i spin is normal
*:zen:
off to design fun burny things
*to me
Holistic Spinner (I hope)
PLATINUM Member
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Posted:
Yes. Post an incomprehensible list with no explanations and arbitrary names you made up in it. Just like Drew's. What fun that was.
Written by: bluecat
but i might start soon. I have to start a list anyway (for other, more exciting reasons)
Yes. Post an incomprehensible list with no explanations and arbitrary names you made up in it. Just like Drew's. What fun that was.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
110% MONKEY EVERY TIME ALL THE TIME JUST CANT STOP THE MONKEY
3,149 posts
Location: London
3,149 posts
Location: London
Posted:
Yay! Splitting things up into groups is the same as explaining them!
oh wait, no it isn't
Yay! Splitting things up into groups is the same as explaining them!
oh wait, no it isn't
"Switching between different kinds of chuu chuu sometimes gives this "urgh wtf?" effect because it's giving people the phi phenomenon."
BRONZE Member
sanguine
382 posts
Location: sur, USA
sanguine
382 posts
Location: sur, USA
Posted:
Sarcasm?
Category assignation does require a loose explanation, where as further detailed explanation would most certainly be required afterwards to justify the inclusion of each move in a certain group.
Sarcasm?
Category assignation does require a loose explanation, where as further detailed explanation would most certainly be required afterwards to justify the inclusion of each move in a certain group.
"to a man whose only tool is a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail." Abraham Maslow
BRONZE Member
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
Posted:
Non-Https Image Link
Non-Https Image Link
Empty your mind. Be formless, Shapeless, like Water.
Put Water into a cup, it becomes the cup, put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle, put water into a teapot, it becomes the teapot.
Water can flow, or it can Crash.
Be Water My Friend.
geek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
misunderstood by two of the finest techy geeks of our age. do i get a medal?
misunderstood by two of the finest techy geeks of our age. do i get a medal?
Holistic Spinner (I hope)
PLATINUM Member
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Posted:
Whatever. But you certainly won't be posting any incomprehensible lists after this now will you?
My work here is done.
Whatever. But you certainly won't be posting any incomprehensible lists after this now will you?
My work here is done.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,964 posts
Location: Southampton - Possibly..., United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,964 posts
Location: Southampton - Possibly..., United Kingdom
Posted:
I dont know what tech is.......
but i do know that this question is technically boring the pants off me
I dont know what tech is.......
but i do know that this question is technically boring the pants off me
"...We don't stop playing because we get old, we get old because we stop playing......."
BRONZE Member
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Posted:
Go away - you don't go on HoP anymore remember
Go away - you don't go on HoP anymore remember
Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,964 posts
Location: Southampton - Possibly..., United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,964 posts
Location: Southampton - Possibly..., United Kingdom
Posted:
and your surprised with discussions like this STILL goin on......
hippies!!!!
and your surprised with discussions like this STILL goin on......
hippies!!!!
"...We don't stop playing because we get old, we get old because we stop playing......."
geek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
i wasn't exactly planning to post an incomprehensible list. i am not drew, or arashi.
don't take credit for what you have comprehensibly failed to do, mop.
and struggles, dear, if you had actually read it, you might have found some of it interesting.
i wasn't exactly planning to post an incomprehensible list. i am not drew, or arashi.
don't take credit for what you have comprehensibly failed to do, mop.
and struggles, dear, if you had actually read it, you might have found some of it interesting.
Holistic Spinner (I hope)
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,964 posts
Location: Southampton - Possibly..., United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,964 posts
Location: Southampton - Possibly..., United Kingdom
Posted:
i found the back button interesting dude ........
i found the back button interesting dude ........
"...We don't stop playing because we get old, we get old because we stop playing......."
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [defining technical spinning] we found the following existing topics.
Show more..
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com