Juggling is a Snap! - The Blog

Au revoir

2007-12-07T21:04:00.000-05:00

I finished my data acquisition! I downloaded my database last night, checked, and found out. Three more folks completed the instruction in the experimental group that had been lagging behind. They put me over the top. (Thanks!) That was a long year and a half. I can't believe I have the data!

I met with my advisor today and we worked on a plan to finish the dissertation. I'm shooting for May graduation, so I have to get analyzing and writing. As such, there will be no more Juggling is a Snap! - The Blog for a while. Signing off for now.

BTW - Juggling is a Snap! is still functional. I'll even be collecting data for a while, until I make my final analysis. I might as well continue to pick up data until the last minute, my findings will be more robust as a result.

The Science of Juggling

2007-12-02T21:16:00.000-05:00

Are you curious about juggling? Are you eager to read an entertaining and fascinating scholarly paper on the topic? Here's your site:

The Science of Juggling

It is simply the coolest article.

It is written by two giants in the field, Arthur Lewbel and Peter J. Beek. Lewbel is an accomplished juggler and perhaps the most recognized, respected, and published scholar in the field of juggling. Here's the kicker, Professor Lewbel is also the 20th most-published Economist in the world! Beek is a movement scientist at the Faculty of Human Movement at the Free University in Amsterdam. He and his colleagues churn out volumes of scientific research that frequently use juggling as a guinea pig. They were extremely kind and helpful to me. I was thrilled when one of the team, Joost Dessing (I love those Dutch names!), sent me a small library of their publications to help me with my research. These books were the theoretical underpinning to the method of instruction at Juggling is a Snap!

The article discusses various topics. After a brief history of juggling, it gets right into some of the scientific research focusing on juggling. You have no idea. Lots of people have looked at this activity in many ways, and some of the research is jaw-dropping. (I suppose this depends on the reader.)

A fitting start is a summary of Claude Shannon's work in juggling. He is the author of the Juggling Theorem. I discussed it briefly a few weeks ago in ...Time for Math. Like Lewbel is, Shannon was a prominent academic figure outside of the field of juggling. In his case, the field was information theory, and he was consider this field's father. Given our current and ever-increasing fascination with and love of computers, I'm surprised that his name is not more widely known. Bill Gates is much more famous, but he "merely" monetized Shannon's visions.

One of my favorites is the research on the gaze of jugglers. A juggler can't look at his hands. The information needed to catch objects is completely contained at the top of the flight path. Here the objects travel most slowly and, when sighted and tracked, our brains can extrapolate speeds and angles of objects to predict where they'll be when it's time to catch them. As such, jugglers stare somewhat blankly at an oval region high in the juggling pattern. One finding is that elite jugglers gaze at a much smaller, tighter field than do beginners. The really cool thing about this research is the instrumentation, though. It ranges from liquid crystal glasses to sensors detecting contractions in eye muscles!

The remainder of the article covers two more topics, juggling robots and siteswaps. Humans are no longer the only juggling machines. With the advent of fast computers, optical recognition, and robotics, engineers now have devised robots that can juggle! I imagine that practical applications are limited, but the rigor in achieving this goal has produced many understandings and insights. Finally, there is a great summary regarding siteswap notation. Nearly every juggling pattern can be expressed as a series of numbers. The system for this is called siteswap notation. Many jugglers use siteswap to explore new juggling vistas. They try to do every pattern. Instead of painting by numbers, they juggle by numbers.

Go there now (The Science of Juggling) and read it. Then, if you don't know how already, learn how yourself at Juggling is a Snap!

When you say "juggled," you mean "dropped."

2007-11-29T18:41:00.000-05:00

Ah, football season! I love this time of year. Despite the crappy weather and increasing gloom and darkness, you can find a game on TV at almost any time of day or night. My Eagles are struggling mightily, but even that doesn't keep me away. There are so many ways to enjoy. I can drop by a friend's house and help him scream at his television. I can choose to have refreshments. Food and drink are critical. Maybe some wings and a beer or three. Sour cream and onion chips are nice. If you really want to go all out, you can take out an additional mortgage and pick up some season tickets. Then you can tailgate in "The Link" parking lot at every home game , which closely resembles scenes from that 80's Mel Gibson movie, Mad Max.

I even look forward to the press. I like great sportswriting and great sports reporting on TV. Who doesn't like the playful, self-deprecating, and topical stories told by Rick Reilly? Who doesn't appreciate the frank, funny, and spontaneous color of John Madden? How about Chris Berman calling a long fumble return by an interior lineman, "Rumblin', Bumblin', Stumblin'?" Frank DeFord spans both worlds, writing for years for Sport Illustrated, and now broadcasting regularly on NPR. Yes, I like great sports journalism, but, unfortunately, even the best reporters are not entirely attentive to our language.

I have a variety of pet peeves, but none is more of a pet, and none gets me more peeved, than when a announcer or writer incorrectly refers to a dropped ball as a juggled ball. Here are two examples:

Boston Herald
Ryan, BC keep adding to accomplishments
Sunday, November 25, 2007
BC was driving late in the half when Ryan dumped a short pass to Rich Gunnell, who JUGGLED THE BALL before Miami defensive back Kenny Phillips swooped in to pick it off at the Miami 9-yard line with 52 seconds left.

http://www.49ers.com
49ers/Denver Qtr Summaries
August 13, 2007
Dilfer found Gilmore for a first down catch that officials initially ruled as being incomplete, saying that Gilmore JUGGLED THE PASS.

Think about it. What does a juggler do? Anyone can drop a ball, but a juggler actually catches balls. Gunnell and Gilmore didn't juggle their respective catches. If they had juggled their catches, Kenny Phillips would have one less interception, and Trent Dilfer would have had one more first down. The problem is that Gunnell and Gilmore failed to juggle their passes.

Here's where this kind of usage is not only annoying but also confusing in our current Juggling is a Snap! context:

Posted by: Curmudgeon | January 12, 2007 08:45 PM
Dallas, whose Tony Romo, Boy Wonder, juggled the snap on a ''gimme" field goal that would have...

(As an Eagle fan, I had a lot of fun with that particular play) He didn't juggle the snap. If he had, Dallas would have won.

Oh well, maybe this blog will help forward the cause of correct usage vis a vis juggling. I love to hear things like:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl
Baltimore Ravens wide receiver Derrick Mason, left, makes a juggling catch for 19-yard reception in front of San Diego Chargers Eric Weddle, right, during the first quarter of an NFL football game Sunday, Nov. 25, 2007 in San Diego.

Now that's accurate reporting!

Whether you're an NFL receiver, a fishmonger in Seattle, or a juggling wannabee, cruise over to Juggling is a Snap! It is free and gradual. You'll probably get better at juggling (not dropping). Good luck and have fun.

Juggling is a Snap!, but a dissertation is just about the farthest thing from being a Snap!

2007-11-25T07:54:00.000-05:00

As a male I'll never know for sure how childbirth feels. I suspect though, that even though the dissertation process has far less physical discomfort, it's prodigious mental anguish and seemingly endless seven years is beginning to give me some small amount of insight regarding the nature of real pain. Prenatal care is analogous to coursework. The timing of this stage is aligned with that mainstay of early gestation, morning sickness, which correlates with the swirling, nauseating helplessness felt by doctoral students when trying to figure out a topic of study. Pregnant moms and students both wander aimlessly as they get used to this new-found situation and, even in the best of cases, wonder occasionally, "Why did I get myself into this mess?"

The second trimester tends to be a somewhat blissful, glowing period for the expectant mother. She's passed the vomiting stage and hasn't yet begun to dilate. The pre-PhD's have a similar phase, when they have committed to a project and are busily, eagerly engrossed in their work. They, like the expectant moms at this point, feel the rush of doing something miraculous but have yet to experience the fatigue of a long and somewhat tedious and boring slog (This extended ranting whine exemplifies the real genesis for this portmanteau. Some erudite but misguided soul thought the term came from combining "Web" with "Log"). I have fond memories of those halcyon periods of focused and productive, albeit naive, time. Oh, those were the days.

Fast forward to the final pushing and the birth itself. Here is a mother's painful but exhilarating evolutionary reason for being. I imagine with fear and trepidation that my dissertation defense will resemble this experience. In the months leading up to "birth" (The light at the end of my personal tunnel - hold on here, I intended this to be a birthing allusion!) I'll experience the feeling of carrying around a huge weight. My normal life activities will be somewhat limited and may be curtailed completely in the event of "complications," like faulty data or a recalcitrant review board member. In my discussions with women at the analogous stage, I've found that, while their primary concern is the health of their child, many of them just want it to be over, at nearly any cost. This sentiment I understand completely and share with my pregnant sisters.

Unfortunately for women giving birth, their pain is typically intense. I think it was Bill Cosby who said that if you want to know how childbirth feels, imagine pulling your lower lip over your face to the top of your head (The laugh track, which undoubtedly included mothers, went off after this comic "delivery," but how exactly did Dr. Huxtable know this? Gratefully, I never will.) Fortunately for most mothers, it "only" lasts for a matter of hours. We ABD's (students who are "All But Dissertation") don't have the relative luxury of this more brief form of torture. If you extend the anguish past hours to days, weeks and months, you've arrived at our current affliction: chronic academic labor. Waterboarding is looking good.

Nothing can truly compare to the birth of a child. There is relief, great quantities of the most wonderful concoction of hormones, and a flood of love. I won't get the hormones or love, but I will have a big stack of paper and those three letters after my name, and I desperately look forward to the relief that will come with graduation.

P.S. - There's a special place in heaven for those intrepid masters of pain and achievement - Ph.D. moms.

P.P.S. - You may decide to take on either of these monumentally daunting but incomparably rewarding travails. If it's the reproduction thing, do it with someone (in my case, my wonderful wife) you love. If it's the Ph.D. thing, do it with something (in my case, juggling) you love. It helps in getting through the rough patches.

Is juggling an open or closed skill? (BTW - What's the difference?)

2007-11-24T21:31:00.000-05:00

The notion of closed skills versus open skills is a useful construct in the sport sciences. By categorizing different sports, and different skills within sports, as either closed or open, the reporter, athlete, fan, or coach can better analyze, diagnose, appreciate, and make recommendations to improve athletic performance. Juggling is an activity that is readily and constructively categorized this way. What's the difference between the two?

From my dissertation draft:

Individual juggling is a closed skill. A closed athletic skill is defined as one which has no interdependence on the activity of another person. For example, the high jump is a closed skill. The high jumper’s task is to clear the bar. She can do so at her own pace, without worry of interference from an opponent. Nor does she depend on a teammate for assistance.

An open athletic skill must account for another person’s help or hindrance. Playing tennis, for example, is an open skill. Every shot by a tennis player is dependent upon the position, movement, ability, and mental state of the opponent. Decisions must be made in real time. Adjustments must be made constantly to variations beyond the control of the player. Indeed, one strategy in sports using open skills is to make these adjustments as unpredictable and widely varying as possible, to throw off the competing athlete. Tennis can also be described as an open skill for its dependency on teamwork. In doubles tennis, it is critical to know the position, movement, ability, and mental state of one’s teammate as well as those of the opponent. It has been argued by singles tennis purists that singles tennis is much more demanding than doubles. This may be true in the physical sense, but there is much more activity to track in doubles than in singles!

Juggling is most frequently performed on an individual basis. In this mode, and for the purposes of this study, juggling is a closed skill. Learning and performing the skills of juggling can be done at the pace of the performer. Like the high jump mentioned above, the variables associated with performing the task can be controlled by only one person, the juggler himself.

One variant of juggling, passing, requires open skills. When jugglers collaborate to pass clubs among themselves, they must account for variability introduced by others. Like the tennis players mentioned above, they must decide in real time how to adjust for errant throws, varying body positions, and skill levels of their collaborators. It is hard to imagine a juggler not learning the closed skill of juggling first, before advancing to the open skill of passing.

Like many pursuits, juggling can serve as a metaphor for life. In order to succeed, you need determination and persistence more that anything else. Talent helps. A good teacher and good instruction help, but note the wise adage, “When the student is ready, the teacher will appear." After these attitudes are internalized, Juggling (truly) is a Snap!, and the juggler can move on effectively to passing. This transition from the solitary to the social also has an analog in human relationships. It is akin to "get your stuff together" (60's lingo), "be the change" (Ghandi lingo), and, "If emergency oxygen masks deploy, put on your own mask first, then your child's" (airline safety lingo). You can only help others after you've taken care of and developed yourself. Similarly, you can only pass with other jugglers after your own patterns are solid.

Something to wrap your head around. Time for math.

2007-11-23T13:08:00.000-05:00

I hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving yesterday. Now that you're recovering from your tryptophan coma, let's get back to juggling, shall we?

Claude Shannon was not only "The father of information technology." He was a juggler, too. What a stroke of luck that was. Mr. Shannon was able to capture the essence of juggling in a simple and elegant math equation. From my dissertation draft:

Shannon’s Equation, or the common equation of juggling:

(t_u + t_l)/H = (t_f + t_l)/N

where: t_u = the time that hands are unloaded

t_l = the time that hands are loaded

t_f = the time that the bean-bags are in flight

H = the number of hands

N = the number of bean-bags

Verbally, this equates the two perspectives of juggling: bean-bags and hands. In the cascade, the bean-bags “experience” being in two alternating states: free flight (t_f) and in a hand (t_l). The hands also “experience” being in two alternating states: unloaded (t_u) and loaded (t_l). Therefore, for any given period of time while juggling is occurring:
(The total time experienced by all hands)/H = (The total time experienced by all bean-bags)/N

Get it? If not, here is the subject blown out.

So, what does this tell us?

One interesting number in that mess above is t_l = the time that hands are loaded. This is also referred to as dwell time, or the time that it takes the hand to catch and throw any given ball. A common inference of novice jugglers or non-jugglers is, "Why don't you just throw 'em higher? Then you'd have plenty of time to juggle about a dozen of 'em." Well, that does sound easy. The problem is dwell time. In order to "throw 'em higher," the juggler needs to wind up, pulling the hand down and applying a strong force to the ball (or bean bag). This increases dwell time. When you add balls, you decrease time available for your hands to take care of them all. If you pile up all of those dwell times, the elite juggler's hands are a blur.

The other factor that comes into play is accuracy. Every throw has some error associated with it. It is thrown at the wrong speed and angle. The harder and higher the throw, the more pronounced are the effects of the errors in throwing. As such, the best jugglers in the world can't keep more than nine balls going for an extended period of time. The best ever achieved so far is eleven, and that was "only" a flash, or a pattern where each ball is thrown once and caught by the correct hand in the correct order. (Detail - actually, the best so far is fourteen throws and catches with eleven balls - a flash plus three.)

Why bean bags?

2007-11-21T17:04:00.000-05:00

Last week (November 18th - Juggling is a Snap! - The Blog) I discussed the problems with juggling scarves. Beautiful yes, but juggling scarves gets one no closer to juggling per se. This observation was based on Huatala's (1985) research. The skills needed for juggling scarves are not necessarily helpful in learning to juggle balls or bean bags. If your aim is to juggle the three ball cascade as soon as possible, skip the scarves.

Huatala was a busy juggling researcher in the eighties. From the draft of my dissertation:

Huatala’s second major finding (1988) is that bean bags are superior to balls for learners. In his testing, the results kept coming up better for bean bags. Why did this happen? He didn’t get the answer until after he did qualitative interviews with his participants. As is turns out, the major factor in the superiority of bean bags was not their texture, weight, or their ease of catching or throwing. The most important factor by far is that they don’t bounce! As a result, during the trial and error of learning, the students spend less of their time retrieving missed balls and more of their time on task juggling bean bags. Over the sometimes significant time working to learn, this seemingly minor difference adds up to a great savings in time and energy that can reduce anxiety and frustration and promote learning.

In short, you only have so much time to learn before frustration sets in. Why waste this precious time chasing balls all over the place? Use bean bags.

Bean bags are relatively inexpensive, not dangerous, and can be found everywhere. Big hacky sacks are perfect and are found at sporting goods stores. You can even make juggling bean bags. Many kinds of fruit are excellent for juggling - oranges, apples, and coconuts come to mind. Apples have the significant and distinct advantage of being edible. Eating an apple during a performance is a winner every time, with laughs correlated directly to the amount of mess created, and inversely to the age of the audience. The problem with fruit is that it gets mushy after you drop it a few times, or painful if it lands on your head in the case of a coconut. Stick with bean bags.

Reference:

Huatala, R. M. (1988). Does transfer of training help children learn juggling? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 67, 563 - 567.

You can't tell, but I'm blushing.

2007-11-20T21:09:00.000-05:00

My MAIN man, over at Just Your Average Joggler has embarrassed me thoroughly, and twice.

First, he completely smoked me with his review of how-to juggling videos available on the Internet. I covered 5 videos (see November 12, Juggling is a Snap! - The Blog), he covered and ranked his top 25!

Second, he named my site as #1 in his review!

Joggling is a portmanteau of juggling and jogging. That's right, jogglers juggle while they run. Joggling is a sport unto itself. There are people, believe it or not, who sprint, do middle-distance, 10-K's, marathons and even ultramarathons, all while juggling! They typically practice and do entire races without dropping or only dropping a few. There are all kinds of amazing stories at JYAJ. My favorite is about a guy who juggles five while running! He's got some speed on him, too.

Joggling is something I have yet to try, but I see it in my future. I'm doing triathlons now, so I see it working into the run leg. I'll just leave the three (not five) balls in the transition area for when I get off the bike. It's perfect for me. I don't finish in the top ten, I can juggle, and while I do get embarrassed from time to time (see above), that rarely stops me from doing things that others might consider to be embarrassing.

Go now to JYAJ. Not only is his blog well-written, funny, and fascinating, but he was the first to review my site, the most recent to review my site, and he has the best taste in how-to juggling sites on the Internet.

"Let's begin our juggling instruction. Please pick up 3 scarves."

2007-11-18T07:49:00.000-05:00

Please don't.

Like so many things in life, the path that looks the easiest is not necessarily so easy. Many instructors that begin their juggling lessons with scarves believe that they will be helping their students learn faster and better. This is well-intentioned (we juggling instructors tend to be nice people), but not necessarily well-informed. The best way to teach juggling is to get right to the bean bags.

A separate skill.

Hey, don't get me wrong, I've got nothing against scarf juggling per se. It is a beautiful act - soft, billowy, brightly-colored juggling scarves gently yet quickly being placed in a pattern and floating back to earth, only to be re-inserted in said pattern and starting all over again. What's not to like?

Click here for more on "3 Scarf Cascade: Learn Scarf Juggling Techniques: Free Online Video Lesson"

Scarf juggling is a legitimate skill and can even be used in performance, but it isn't juggling.

The problem.

That's the problem. Scarf juggling isn't juggling. If the objective is to learn how to juggle, the best way to get from point A (not knowing how to juggle) to point B (knowing how to juggle) is to get right to the bean bags. Learning to juggle scarves takes time and effort learning a different skill. In my experience, this time and effort is only available in a limited quantity. Some folks will run through walls to reach a goal (it doesn't really matter how you teach them, really, they'll learn), and some folks refuse to take risks (it doesn't really matter how you teach them, really, they won't learn), but the majority of folks are somewhere in between. If you spend too much of this limited time not juggling, frustration builds and some folks give up. That's the worst thing. Once you've taught someone how to "juggle" scarves, then you have to go back to square one and teach them how to juggle. The patterns and flow of scarf juggling are somewhat similar to real juggling, but not the same.

The research.

These observations and practices are backed up in the literature. Back in the 80's a researcher named Huatala (1985, see references below) conducted some fascinating (to a juggling instructor like me, at least) experiments. (BTW - You would not believe the amount of formal scientific research has gone into juggling - "The guinea pig of gross motor skill science.") He taught lots of people how to juggle. He divided them up randomly, teaching some starting with scarves and some getting right to bean bags. Most of his students learned to juggle, and the scarf learners ultimately learned about as well as the bean bag learners. Unfortunately, the scarf learners didn't learn as quickly as the bean bag learners. They essentially had to learn all over.

The solution.

Juggling is a Snap! takes a different tack. The method seeks to avoid the frustration mentioned above, not by teaching somewhat related skills, but by breaking down the overall skill of juggling into it's most fundamental components. The more finely a method "chunks" the instruction, the smaller the increment from step to step. Once a student has mastered one skill, mastering the following skill is not that hard, because it is so similar. I'd like to "solve" the instruction of juggling, so that almost everyone can juggle. Wouldn't that be grand? Learning to juggle would be simply a rite of passage, like a Bar Mitzvah or learning to walk or read. (Unfortunately, some folks aren't jewish, able-bodied, or able-minded, respectively, and won't pass these rites. Juggling is the same. It is a great skill that ALMOST everyone can learn.) Have fun learning! Good luck! Persist! Juggling is a Snap!

Reference:

Huatala, R. M. (1985). Juggling Scarves: A Learning Tool That Aids or Hinders Learning? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 60, 447-451.

This is research?

2007-11-17T21:19:00.000-05:00

What, you're getting your Ph.D. in Jugglology? No, the Ph.D. is in Sport Psychology, and I'm pursuing it at Temple University. Juggling is only a vehicle for the experiment that I'm doing. You, as a participant, won't realize that you're actually being used as a guinea pig:
. No, you'll be on your merry (albeit arduous) journey toward learning to juggle. You'll get a fun, worthwhile skill to teach your grandchildren one day, I'll get data.

So, what's the experiment? As they say in the CIA, I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you. It's a big secret unless:

1. You know how to juggle the three ball cascade, or
2. You are under 18.

If either of these conditions apply, please feel free to read on. I can't use you as data, so knowing the secret is ok. (BTW - The only reason kids under 18 are excluded is that people under 18 are protected. It's not that they can't learn. For example, I taught myself when I was 10. The thing is that, for some reason, the Temple University Internal Review Board - the folks who, among other things, protect the rights of testing participants - don't take kindly to middle-aged men trawling the web in search of children to teach to juggle. It really isn't a bad thing it just sounds terribly unsavory. I guess they like to stay off of the front page of the Philadelphia Inquirer or something.)

If you're 18 or over and you don't know how to juggle, go immediately to the website: Juggling is a Snap!, and learn. Then, come back and read the rest. Go ahead, I'll wait. Really. Go. Now! Don't scroll down!

Okay, welcome back! Isn't it great to know? Do you have a new-found sense of accomplishment? Are you just dying to get a gig at a birthday party?

Anyway, here's the big secret.

In my experiment, I'm trying to learn more about imagery. Imagery is what we perceive in our mind before we do something. When you think of it, there is no way that your body can do something willfully that your mind can't in some way anticipate. If you didn't perceive it first mentally, what would your brain tell your body to do? I intentionally use the word perceive here, because imagery can refer to visual, auditory, tactile, or kinesthetic modalities. This is Sport Psych lingo that means that you can "imagine" something using your sense of sight, hearing, or touch, or even your body's awareness of itself.

Imagery is used by everyone, yes, but is used extensively by athletes. (As such, it is vitally important to Sport Psychology, my area of study.) Tiger Woods envisions each shot in the Master's before he takes it. He can see a putt rolling along the path to the hole and dropping. Maria Sharapova can feel her body executing a passing shot the day before Wimbledon. Some consider the quality of an athlete's play to be directly correlated to their ability to use imagery effectively. Imagery has also been shown to enhance learning. One study even showed that there are two valid ways to practice free-throw shooting in basketball: actually shooting baskets, and just thinking about shooting baskets. If the people practicing using imagery can "see" their own perfect form and the ball going in the basket every time, their practice is almost as effective as those folks actually shooting!

I'm testing a few different kinds of imagery. First, I'm testing between the modalities of visual and kinesthetic (or seeing vs. bodily sensing). If I teach juggling using visual cues and with a discussion of the visual attributes of juggling, I might get different result than if I use kinesthetic cues and talk about how the participant feels. Second, I'm testing between the perspectives of internal and external imagery. Internal imagery is from the perspective of the participant, while external imagery is from the perspective of "the audience." It is thought that the differences between these modalities and perspectives could be significant, and that's what I'd like to know. Of course, I compare these results to a control group.

Participants signing in are randomly assigned to one of five different instructional paths. They don't know it, but all they ever see during their juggling instruction is one kind of imagery, or they could be in the control group. After a certain number of people finish in each group, I will have enough data for statistical significance. In other words, I'll have enough information to show that it is highly unlikely that any variations in success between the different test groups is due to chance. That's what I'm pushing for now.

So, if you've reached this point in the story I know you know how to juggle or you're under 18. If you're under 18, you can still learn to juggle, I just can't use you in my data. So go ahead and learn. Once you do, you can join your juggling friends and work to teach everyone! Regardless of your age, please spread the word, and if your students are still struggling send them here: Juggling is a Snap!

"How to Juggle" Videos

2007-11-12T17:56:00.000-05:00

The Internet has meant many things to many people, just ask Al Gore. I've heard all of the assertions. "The Internet doubles in size every 19 minutes." "One day the average American will do their laundry using the Internet." The claims go on and on. With the Internet's mix of audio, video, and on-demand, it is perfect for the transmission of all kinds of multimedia information: movies, commercials, and home-made videos. I even saw a video of "The Cheese Shop," my favorite Monty Python skit. Yes, we've come a long way. However, even classic comedy sketches from the 70's pale in comparison to the ultimate expression of the World Wide Web, it's very reason for being...

"How to Juggle" videos have exploded onto the scene in the last few years. They've filled a niche. You just can't tell someone how to juggle. You have to show them. It's best to be face-to-face, but there's only one teacher at a time and millions of people who don't know how to juggle. The Internet leverages a juggling instructor's ability to reach out to this unfortunate, needy demographic. Websites with video and dialogue can capture most of what a human being can do, and can spread the good word far and wide. Professional and amateur directors, videographers, producers, and jugglers sniffed this out a few years ago and started cranking out instruction. Some is for a fee, but some really great stuff is free...

The guy in the library

I don't know exactly what's up with the hat, but I certainly don't have much room to talk. This one is extremely brief! If you're an incredible athlete, you can look at this video and figure out juggling in a second. It's pretty much, "Here I am juggling, now you do it!" I'm sure he does more in person, but on video there's not too much to sink your teeth into.

Johnny Macaroni

Now here's a good video! The juggler (Johnny, but I'm guessing this is a stage name. If my last name was Macaroni, I think I'd name my kid something like Fred or Bob.) is excellent, but he is not too full of himself. He appears to have a great sense of humor, dropping clubs and balls and dancing around. I'm sure kids love this video! Johnny (hmmph!) is very thorough, and takes it step by step.

The guy with the Fu Man Chu mustache

You gotta love this guy! He kind of has a chat with his webcam. He is clearly an amateur and revels in his homey instruction. He makes good points and is relatively thorough, covering everything including how to make juggling balls!

Jason Garfield

The only REAL juggler out there in a big way teaching the fundamentals. Garfield is arguably the best technical juggler in the world (however the argument against Vova would be hard to win), and his instruction is flawless. The video is hilarious. Not only is Garfield a talented juggler, but he's also a great comedian.

The guy with the hats

That would be me. Like it says at the website: "Learn to juggle a different way. Gradual, free juggling lessons with videos, animations, and Sport Psychology support." This video captures the Juggling is a Snap! method and directs viewers to the main website (Juggling is a Snap!) for an even more gradual approach. This website breaks down the process of learning how to juggle more completely than anything else on the Internet. If the other sites presume too much, go to this site. Don't struggle - juggle!

Viral Juggling Videos

2007-11-09T20:42:00.000-05:00

So, here I am trying to get people to learn to juggle again. I know my website (http://www.jugglingisasnap.org) is a quality site for teaching juggling, but not everyone else knows. How do I lead everyone to the promised land?

Easy. I make a video describing the method used in www.jugglingisasnap.org (here's what it looks like: Juggling is a Snap! - Lite). I make it appealing, short, and fun. I include the URL (www.jugglingisasnap.org). Then I post it EVERYWHERE. Hopefully, someone will Digg it (someone did: Juggling is a Snap! - Dugg). Then it goes viral, everyone in the world sees it four times (on average), I become a household...uh...juggler, the percentage of jugglers increases from about a quarter to about a third of the world population (which would be an increase of around 480,000,000 people), and most important, I reach statistical significance in my data capture for my PhD experiment.

Well, as it turns out, I'm not the only one with this idea. Lately there's been a rash of cool, catchy juggling videos. As many people know that I'm a juggler, I've become somewhat of a lightning rod for these, and when they come out about eighty people email me with the links! It's fun. I get to renew old friendships, shore up my unofficial position as juggler extraordinaire, and informally track various viruses. Here's a recap of the viral juggling videos I've seen:

Hammer Time, 65,530 views

This is a truly remarkable video, whether it is real or not. I'm glad that I'm not charged with determining its veracity. The guy looks good, and the task is just on the edge of possibility. However, I know they're doing amazing things with CGI these days. If it is a fake, then someone should do it for real, on stage, verified. If someone can juggle 11 in real life (Bruce Sarafian), someone can juggle-hammer in a nail. Also, if you can make shots like this: Sick Basketball Trick Shots, once every 400 tries and edit out the 399 misses, then why can't a hammer-juggler edit out the 39,999 misses he has?

Conic Section, 1,454,565 views

No doubt that this one is real, but it is still amazing. I think the really compelling aspect of this video is it's novelty. Who thought this up? "I know, I'll get a huge sheet of heavy-gauge, transparent plastic, roll it into an inverted cone shape and step inside with my juggling balls." Funny, that never occurred to me. The novelty is just starting though, because the juggler then explores all kinds of great variations in his new habitat.

The Chris Bliss Beatles Juggling Finale, 383,109 views

The definitive viral juggling video. The number of views quoted above appear low because many different people posted this one. This is the views from just one poster. Add up all the posters and you get the "Granddaddy of all viral juggling videos." It is also understated because this one got emailed around for the last two years as attachments and links. It's everywhere. What's not to like? A great sound track, no misses, entertaining juggling, and all in front of a live audience! It beat everyone to the punch. Of course, success breeds contempt...

Jason Garfield's Chris Bliss Diss, 506,277 views

He's right. He's better. He might be the best. There is probably nothing in juggling that Chris Bliss can do technically better than Jason Garfield...except spread juggling virus. Even though Jason's number is higher on this count, his "Diss" was not the same phenomenon. Both videos show men of amazing talent and showmanship performing rock solid, entertaining routines. The main difference: Bliss created while Garfield borrowed.

Vova, 479,441 views

Ok, I changed my mind, you don't need CGI to do hammer time. Vova could do hammer time on the first take. Vova is simply remarkable on this Fatboy Slim video.

Juggling is a Snap! - Lite, 30,173 views

Let's just say I like this one. I know that you will do your part to bubonically infect your address book with this URL. One day, everyone will juggle. BTW - if you're just going to watch 45 seconds of this video, please watch the last 45 seconds. I'm no Vova, but this is some of my best 3-ball stuff.

Brushes with Greatness

2007-11-04T13:52:00.000-05:00

Well, I suppose greatness is a relative term. "Conventional greats" are names that everyone knows, for example: Elvis, Ghandi, Madonna, and Desmond Tutu (the only person on this short list with two names, you'll note). I've had no contact with these folks to the best of my knowledge. Having written that, I'm sure that I've been in an elevator or on a sidewalk next to someone of this stature. They use elevators and sidewalks, don't they? Maybe I was buying nectarines next to Bill Clinton. Could I have ever been swimming at the beach two blankets down from the Dalai Lama? In any event, even if this type of brush (with a "true" great) happened, I didn't know.

I have had memorable (for me, at least!) brushes with what I'll refer to as "second-tier" greats. I'm not saying that these folks aren't great, it's just that they all need at least two names for purposes of recognition. These are people that most Americans know of and consider to be great. I shook Charles Barkley's hand once. We had a nice conversation when he was a Sixer. Huge hands and shoulders. Genuinely nice guy, very serious. I got Jack Nicklaus' autograph when I was a kid. I had a picture taken with a hero, Elie Wiesel, a couple of years ago. It was bizarre. This political giant, this internationally famous concentration camp survivor and advisor to world leaders having champagne and getting pictures taken with ordinary people. He was very gracious, as I expected. Last but not least, I saw the Pretenders at the Chestnut Cabaret in West Philadelphia the night before Live Aid! It was such a small venue, it was almost like a private audience. Chrissy Hynde and Martin Chambers almost ran me over on their way to the stage!

The last kind of brushes that I'll describe here today are my brushes with juggling greatness. I saw Penn Jillette juggle back in the 70's (!) when he was with the Asparagus Valley Cultural Society. It was a very small venue, so I'll count it as an official brush. This was way before the big marquees and pay checks of Las Vegas. Maybe my most direct brushes with juggling greatness came a few years ago at a NYC gig. Hovey Burgess, the father of American juggling, had been a faculty member at NYU's master's program in theater. Upon his retirement, the jugglers he had influenced (pretty much everyone) came to his party. Many greats were there. They performed and hung out, juggling, afterward. I hung around too and was able to pass clubs with Hovey (!) and the Flying Karamazov Brothers, among others.

They don't remember me, I'm sure, but it's kind of cool to realize once in a while that we all share this time on Earth. They are larger than life, but they all have to put on their shirts, sneeze, and pay taxes just like we do.

BTW - I mention an Internet brush with the great Robert Shields below.

BTW2 - I wonder if any famous folks have signed on to my website yet? If you're reading this and you're profoundly famous, please do: http://www.jugglingisasnap.org/ If nobody knows you, it's a good way to get someone to know you: Learn to juggle!

Micheal Crichton where are you?

2007-11-04T00:06:00.000-04:00

Ok, off the topic of Juggling is a Snap for just a moment. (However, if you want to learn how to juggle, go there now: http://www.jugglingisasnap.com - I never miss an opportunity to insert my URL)

Here's an idea for you, Michael. I think you're the man to write the book. Its title: "Soulmate."

So, there's this guy. He's successful in many ways: smart, wealthy, attractive, nice family, athletic, in good health, with a burgeoning, productive, and fulfilling career as a pre-eminent geneticist.

So what's the problem? Well, this guy faces an inner loneliness. He feels unique. He feels like no one, not even his wife, kids, or best friends, of which there are many, know him. In many ways, his perception is accurate. He lives in a rarified segment of the population, restricted to brilliant people who've managed to have it all.

Not too uncommon, huh? (I mean the loneliness and the uniqueness, not the brilliance and success.) Lots of folks have felt this way, probably since the dawn of self-consciousness. (I think that was just about the time that the "Honeymooners" came out on TV, or when "Civilization and Its Discontents" was published by Sigmund Freud - one or the other) Yes, most people have probably felt this way at some time and to some degree. However, up until now folks have just had to bear it...

Enter science. Our hero is a geneticist in the year 2023. The genetic code has been broken. The human genome project is complete and "gene typing" is done "while-u-wait" at an outpatient clinic for only $250, roughly the cost of dinner for a family of four, supersized, at McDonald's. Our hero, like most folks in 2023 is terribly facile with information technology and can easily access and search databases of gene types for other individuals. (The ridiculous privacy laws of the early Internet days have all been repealed, vanishing as completely as polar bears.) Hmmm...

What if I could find someone just like me? Maybe they would understand me. Maybe they'd feel just like I feel. Maybe I could finally relate to someone.

Our hero searches. He begins with the computer, doing his searches based on the genome. As it turns out, his doppleganger lives in South America, and traces his roots back to the same few towns in central Europe as he does. (Geneology is, by 2023, essentially "solved" back to the eighteen-hundreds in most families in industrialized nations.) They are related, albeit relatively distantly. He takes a leave of absence from work and sets out to meet his Soulmate. Travels, intrigue, wild goose chases, intrigue, mistaken identities, intrigue, etc. Finally, he meets him.

They are in fact, frighteningly similar. They are not unlike the cases of twins raised apart. Both love radishes. Both have thoroughly embraced the use of the flo-bee. Both adhere to the Rastafarian belief system (and, as such, share the nuisance of getting their dreadlocks jammed in said flo-bee). They hit it off and have a great time.

Initially, our hero is disappointed. While he did find his Soulmate, not all of his problems were solved. Life still went on, with all of its problems. Finding his mirror image did not turn out to be a silver bullet for life's issues.

Eventually, our hero is somewhat fulfilled. The major thing that he learns is that even his Soulmate must deal with problems every day, unceremoniously and privately. He revises (which here means "lowers") his expectations for his life and lives with more stability and realism.

Ok, Mike (I hope you don't mind if we do away with all of this formality), have at it. It's yours. I think the premise is good, even if the ending is a little weak. Feel free to play with it, that's why you make the big money. Speaking of money, if you'd like to shoot me a few percent of gross I'd be very appreciative (that would be a few percent of book sales, movie gate, software, and, of course, lunch box sales). Also, please take an hour or two and learn how to juggle: http://www.jugglingisasnap.com.

(BTW - Can I be accused of spamming my own blog? There must be an Internet term for that. Splogging?)

So, where is the Juggling is a Snap - Lite - video?

2007-11-02T21:28:00.000-04:00

Glad you asked:

5min.com
blip.tv
break.com
caught-on-video.com
current.com
dailymotion.com
eyespot.com
google.com
grouper.com
guba.com
helpfulvideo.com
instructables.com
juggletube.com
jumpcut.com
kewego.com
livedigital.com
livevideo.com
lulu.tv
metacafe.com
mojiti.com
multiply.com
myspace.com
myvideo.co.za
oneminuteu.com
photobucket.com
sclipo.com
sharkle.com
shasyk.com
squidoo.com
sumo.tv
tinypic.com
twango.com
uvouch.com
veoh.com
viddler.com
videojug.com
videowebtown.com
vidilife.com
viewdo.com
vimeo.com
vmix.com
yahoo.com
youtube.com
ziddio.com

Okay, so I went a little crazy on this. It's the PhD talking. It does strange things to your mind. In any event, I suppose this video is fairly well promoted. I am two data points away from study completion!

Actually, at this point this blog post serves as a guide to video web-hosting. The sites linked above were the most dependable and logical I've seen. All of the links worked on 11/2/07.

There's always next year...

2007-10-07T23:19:00.000-04:00

Yes, the fightin' Phils went down last night and those smug Yankees stayed alive tonight.

So, what's the deal with the whole snapping thing?

I read a whole lot of research about juggling for the Sport Psychology Ph.D. I'm pursuing. You would not believe how much formal research there is out there on Juggling. There is a group of human motor scientists in Amsterdam (informally led by Peter J. Beek) who specialize in it. One of the things I realized is that juggling is highly complex. Another is that learning to juggle is highly complex. I kind of knew that, but now I learned some of the details of the complexity from an academic perspective. Research is good for this kind of thing. It goes through what everyone else has thought and fills in some gaps. No matter how hard you think, you'll never figure things out on your own as well as you will with others in collaboration.

Juggling involves time and space. You need to time your throws and put them in the right place or you get collisions. The absolute beginner often finds this to be a daunting task. When learning with three balls, there is so much to think about that the learner often goes into a panic mode, in which there seems to be excessive pressure to give up. The snap method slowly works up to 3 balls. Instead of the balls, there are snaps. Snaps account for timing and take up the space in the cascade pattern like a ball, but they are infinitely more easy to control. This enormous control benefit gives the learner a feeling of accomplishment and time to learn the rhythm of juggling.

Once the rhythm and form are established, the foundation is laid for juggling. After mastering juggling with one ball and two snaps, a ball is substituted for one of the snaps, and the learner is juggling 2 balls in the 3 ball pattern. After mastering juggling with two balls and one snap, a ball is substituted for the last snap, and the learner is juggling 3.

Okay, that's the theory. In practice, it seems to work pretty well. I've been teaching juggling for a long time, and this seems to be the best method. Next project: Test it! Maybe after I get the degree.

Finally, please know that my method is not entirely novel. I thought it was, but after doing some Google searching, I found someone else who used this method and talked about it something like 20 years ago. Amazingly (to me, at least), the person in question was famous (again, to me, at least). His name is Robert Shields. He was half of the mime troop Shields and Yarnell, but maybe more importantly he was one of the greatest street performers of all time. Now, I'm not a big mime fan (not that there's anything wrong with that). Check this out though: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1xAnlo5rd0. That's talent and courage. I contacted Robert Shields and he wished me luck with my project. Thanks for everything, Mr. Shields.

Go Phillies!

2007-10-06T22:40:00.000-04:00

I'm starting this blog on the same evening that the Phillies will be starting yet another amazing comeback. They're down 0-2 to the hard-hitting Rockies, playing away at Coors field, and they have their backs to the wall in the best of 5 series. No sweat.

Getting some great exposure for the website (http://www.jugglingisasnap.org/) this week. The best day EVER in the history of Juggling is a Snap! was 10/3/07, when some very nice person Dugg me! 18,000 people saw the new video (http://www.digg.com/videos/educational/Juggling_is_a_Snap) and 12,000 came over to the website and logged on! At this rate, I'll be done my data collection in no time.

So, I'm trying to get on blogs tonight. Heck, I'll make one of my own and get on it!

Here are the links I'm using to promote:

http://www.youtube.com/user/havlicj
http://skirmisher.org/human-intelligence/juggling-pro-offers-free-instructional-video/

(I have made money juggling, so I guess technically I am a pro.)

http://justyouraveragejoggler.com/learn-to-juggle-in-a-snap-2/
http://www.prleap.com/pr/61049/
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/5615.php

That last one is just for fun. I don't know if my website will increase the amount of gray matter in the world or not, but why not hedge your bets?