Webmaster's Blog

There are a number of topics that I run across fairly regularly as I interact with other jugglers and as I teach young upcoming jugglers -
ultimately, I hope to address many of these here - for now, here are a couple of topics that I hear about quite often:

March 7, 2007 - Are There any Unique Tricks?

A juggler recently noted in Anthony Gatto's sports juggling forum that "It just seems to me that most tricks are variations or combinations of other tricks." This was my response to his thought (and his misunderstanding of what a Chop was):

A Chop is when you catch a ball early in the pattern and then bring it across your body to the other side - or, in some cases, you just "carry" it quickly in some untraditional pattern - some simulators tend to be somewhat lowsy in demonstrating this. An Orbit for instance is a chop that is "carried" in a circle before being thrown back into the pattern. That said, the answer to your question is no. Your misunderstanding of Rubenstein's Revenge is a good example why the answer is no.

Virtually no performers juggle Rubenstein's Revenge the way Rick Rubenstein created it - their patterns are simply lazy. Rick nearly does an orbit but he twists his (right) hand counter-clockwise so that the ball is released in the same position that a Penguin catch is made (only higher). That hand then catches a ball in the same position and does a reverse orbit back to normal position. This trick is a great example of how you can take a simple throw and catch and mix them up and get a lot more out of the trick than a series of throws and catches - it is his nuance that makes the trick cool - not the series of throws and catches itself. You can see him juggling the trick here: Rubensteins Revenge

Similarly, there are several elements to tricks besides throws and catches - check the main elements out here: Learn Every Trick. However, this article does not take into account artistic nuances that most young jugglers seem to be missing in their performances.

Even still, there seems to be a limited number of elements that make up a trick so there would seem to be a limited number of tricks possible. However, people continue to make new tricks that demonstrate "thinking outside the box" and who come up with tricks that seem to elude mathematical considerations - (this is what I'm looking for on this site) - and there are many examples of these types of tricks that few people have learned so it is always helpful to ask around.

April 5, 2006 - Why Name a Trick?

A number of people have been perplexed over the issue of the purpose of naming tricks. On an IJDb forum, an astute juggler questioned the names given to tricks when many tricks do not resemble their names and when many names are simply alliteration on the creator's name - what is the purpose anyway? This was my response to his inquiries:

Although I agree that many of the names attributed to patterns are not descriptive of their appearance at all (I'm still wondering where the name Fountain came from - I've been told that Cascade refers to the peaks of cascading mountain ranges), I have found that using the different names has allowed me to remember more tricks than I otherwise would have been able to categorize in my limited mind. My website lists tricks by their names (and alternate names) and allows jugglers to find videos of certain tricks with common names and to easily find them again. If we simply labeled the tricks "Trick #1" or "That variation of that one thing" like I've seen on some websites, we would be insanely inept at communicating one with another. Additionally, having names has allowed me to teach tricks to other performers by referring to an unnamed trick as a variation of another trick. For example, while demonstrating the trick, I can say "this trick is a variation of the Boston Mess - the only difference is the Reachover catch becomes a Reverse Chop on each side" and the juggler I'm teaching can then learn the trick much quicker - and he now has a way to remember the trick.

The same problem exists in other venues. For instance, why are QQQ 22 and 888 55 both referred to as a Full House in Poker? Why is a certain footbag trick called a Jester Kick when jesters probably did no such thing on a regular basis? Why do we "dribble" a basketball? Why are patterns given names in Chess when no one but an avid Chess player would never even recognize the pattern as familiar? The whole point is so that we can communicate one with another by establishing a common paradigmatic idea the same we do when I refer to an object as a table or chair when speaking to you instead of referring to une table et une chaise (French for the same thing). Your question therefore is founded upon the very essence of our purpose for establishing language in the first place - grammatical or "radical" subjectivity a la Soren Kierkegaard. Once a trick has a name, we can all "tag" a pattern with a name in our memories and then refer to the tag when teaching other jugglers so that we can communicate more effectively.

That however leaves the second element of your question unaddressed. If we are going to name a trick, why not name it something that describes the pattern? Rubensteins Revenge doesn't look angry to me. However, it is a memorable tag and I've never forgotten the name since the first time that I saw it performed in the entrance of a corner juggling store in Provo, Utah. We could call that trick "Right hand Orbit followed by a right hand Reverse Chop - repeat both sides and twist your wrists to make it more flashy" but somehow, that just would be rather inconvenient as a "tag" - and maybe it would make Rick feel badly! Similarly, Mills Mess doesn't look messy - it looks like a sideways figure 8 if you perform it well. But - if we called it "Sideways Figure 8", what would we call Mills Mess 441 or Mills Mess 561 when they don't look like a Sideways Figure 8? They are unmistakably variations of that trick to any juggler who has learned them but would we call them Sideways Figure 8 Variation on the Siteswap 441? That's too messy.

Lastly, perhaps we could - as an international juggling community - make more effort to standardize how we name tricks to be more descriptive of their appearance but my impression is that if we did that, it would not fit well with all of the various personalities that are so integral to juggling. Let's rejoice in our diversity and rejoice that Penman's Pandemonium is now available in our juggling repertoire and not dampen our appreciation of this very creative upcoming juggler by focusing on the choice of the name if it doesn't fit our personality. Myself, I don't know what Penman's Pandemonium is but now, since he gave it a name, I'll bet I can find it really quickly on the web and then I'll have another juggling trick to add to my repertoire - and I'll have a tag to remember it with that I will likely never forget!

Also, check out my article: Is Juggling an Art or Sport?
This is what Dave Altman, the moderator of Anthony Gatto's Forums, had to say on March 31, 2007 about this article:
One of the fairest and best written pieces done on this much overly discussed topics of Art v. Sport. It probably helps that I share the same bias, but it wasn't slamming sport juggling, it just pointed out a couple of its flaws.