Outside of more complicated tricks like the claw and other specialized patterns, the most common juggling patterns (such as the cascade [1]) don’t rely as much on pure handeye coordination as they do on maintaining a consistent, even toss. The key is throwing each ball so it rises and falls in a predictable arc, so it lands approximately in the same spot where your other hand is waiting to catch it.
When I teach complete beginners, I actually start with a set of special handkerchiefs. They fall more slowly than balls, which gives learners more time to react and makes it much easier to see and follow the path of each object through the air.
My favourite technique is after the initial two ball crosses was for me to stand in for their left (or non dominant) hand.
You stand slightly behind your pupil and get them to put their left hand behind their back and you put your left hand about where theirs should be. You give them one ball in their right hand and then you start the pattern with two balls.
Most people are amazed to find themselves juggling at this point. Yes, you are correcting their mistakes but it gives a real feeling of juggling for them. Most people manage 10 catches quite easily at this point.
Once they have the hang of that swap sides. This one is harder, don't do it too long before setting them off on 3 and they can practice themselves from here on.
I have taught 100s of people to juggle like that :-)
That's a neat approach! It's not really the same, but it kind of reminds me of an interview they did with Michael Moschen (the guy who performed the contact juggling scene in Jim Henson’s movie Labyrinth). He talked about how difficult it was because he had to thread his arms underneath David Bowie’s, so he couldn’t actually see the acrylic ball while he was doing the contact juggling.
I wonder if juggling positive buoyancy balloons upside down would develop skills transferable to right side up. You can make those as slow as you want. When jugglers juggle balls against the floor I guess they don't start from scratch.
Lol. I’ve juggled non-buoyant, air filled balloons but because of their elasticity they don’t exactly settle into your hand when they land.
In my juggling routine, one of the things I do is transition to lying on my back face up while continuing to juggle. I’m throwing the balls straight up above my head while lying perfectly flat, which feels pretty weird. So I can’t imagine how difficult it would be to be physically upside down while juggling.
A long time ago (pre-internet) I heard a normal person can learn to juggle in 1 day. It took me 2 days, but I learned to juggle 3 balls. But soon I realized what you said, the need for a consistent toss. Not sure of the reason, but I always make some errors with physical movements, they are never perfect. Even with typing, no matter how much I exercise, I cannot get bellow ~3% errors. Wondering if this is some kind of genetic effect, and how many ppl have similar issues.
I haven’t tried juggling for decades but I did manage to teach myself basic three-ball juggling when I was at university (any excuse to avoid revising!)
I think it took me a couple of weeks though. I’m a bit malcoordinated for that sort of thing in general. I think you’re right that there’s some sort of natural aptitude that not everybody has. Fortunately basic juggling is just about easy enough that almost any idiot can do it.
This made me laugh. The number of times I’ve Admiral Ackbar fat-fingered the flag button when I just wanted to hide a post on HN is almost too many to count at this point.
Every time I got better at dancing I got better at juggling too. In my folk psychology, juggling is a partially-attached extension of your hands, so it’s just weird dancing.
If you think of it like 3 jobs you have to do simultaneously everything falls apart. Internalizing the three balls as a single process that you are participating in makes it a lot more manageable.
Of course the only way to get there is some 10s of hours of practice
Yeah I could see that. I think that because dance is so heavily reliant on proprioceptive abilities, it makes sense that there would be some overlap with juggling.
I don't recommend tennis balls for a beginner: they bounce everywhere, and you'll spend most of your time chasing the balls rather than juggling. Cheap juggling balls are around 10$.
This. Something like a hacky sack also works very well. They don’t roll away from you, and they won’t drive your neighbors nuts especially if someone lives below you when they hit the ground.
I tried and failed to learn to juggle three balls many times, I've just got terrible coordination. But one day I stood over a bed and just threw them in the air and listened to the rhythm of the "thuds" as the missed balls hit the mattress. As soon as I'd got that down it was like a switch clicked and my hands knew "when" to be ready for the catch, rather than trying to follow the balls to catch them. I never managed four, so mileage may vary with this technique, but it was a very surprising lightbulb moment.
I taught myself in junior high to juggle three balls with two hands and two balls with one hand. It's not a huge accomplishment but what amazes me is that I can go years without trying it and when an opportunity comes up I can just do it again, within just a couple of tries. Those neuronal connections just never go away.
I can, but I wouldn't describe having two two-ball capable hands as being half-way there. If forced to put a number on it, something like 20% is the best I could do.
I may try that. I can do two balls in either hand already. I just never tried doing it in both hands at once.
Strangely even though I'm right-handed I feel more comfortable juggling two in my left hand. I also bat and golf left-handed so sometimes I wonder if my parents forced right-handedness was on me.
I can only juggle 3, but I prefer clubs. Balls are so boring they are so small and not spectacular. Clubs on the other hand, man they are rotating. Once, twice, treetimes, backwards. I believe that if someone stuck at this basic level of juggling 3 balls, he should try clubs - at least for me it's pure satisfaction watching these rotating in various variants before.
Thanks for posting this. You reminded me I have three juggling balls collecting dust behind my monitor. I forgot how fun it is! As others have said I'm surprised the muscle memory is still there even after a few years without trying.
Just today I improved my record to 18 minutes. Btw, I noticed my juggling is completely subconscious, I don't move my hands voluntarily where the ball is, the hands move on its own.
> Another mistake is completely ignoring the ball and staring into the distance. I'm not entirely sure why, but I've seen it a bunch more with *rats* than anywhere else. In any case, I would recommend you just casually glance up at the ball as it reaches the top of its arc
Is 'rats' a juggling jargon I'm unfamiliar with? Or do rats stare into the distance often?
To be fair, I can do 3 balls effortlessly, but I can't do 1 ball like it is in this description, I just have a lot of error correction, enough to do it pretty much indefinitely. But I cannot reliably throw it accurately to the other hand.
A little disappointed that the writer never attempts to address the title of the post, which is either a) why most people can't juggle a single ball, or b) how the author even knows this to be true, aside from some limited anecdata.
My (admittedly limited) juggling experience would indicate something closer to "Anyone can juggle", or that your average person, particularly young people, can learn to juggle one, two, or even three balls with an afternoon of practice, but I suppose that makes for a worse title.
Technically this is not incompatible with the title. Just uses “can” in a different sense. The title would be using “can” in the “has the skill already”, while you use “can” in the “able to acquire the skill” sense.
It is not hard to imagine that most people when asked the question “can you juggle?” would answer in the negative. That’s what the article’s title describes. And then if those people, given sufficient motivation can learn to juggle that leads to your sentence. And they both can be true at the same time.
I agree that it would be nice to provide source for the claim though.
Just juggling with balls in the air gets boring very quickly, and the added numbers don't make it much different. Learning statics and flows from contact juggling, but performing them with standard juggling balls is so much more fun. And then you discover statics with hoops: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF6UuPsw2i4
Outside of more complicated tricks like the claw and other specialized patterns, the most common juggling patterns (such as the cascade [1]) don’t rely as much on pure handeye coordination as they do on maintaining a consistent, even toss. The key is throwing each ball so it rises and falls in a predictable arc, so it lands approximately in the same spot where your other hand is waiting to catch it.
When I teach complete beginners, I actually start with a set of special handkerchiefs. They fall more slowly than balls, which gives learners more time to react and makes it much easier to see and follow the path of each object through the air.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascade_(juggling)
You stand slightly behind your pupil and get them to put their left hand behind their back and you put your left hand about where theirs should be. You give them one ball in their right hand and then you start the pattern with two balls.
Most people are amazed to find themselves juggling at this point. Yes, you are correcting their mistakes but it gives a real feeling of juggling for them. Most people manage 10 catches quite easily at this point.
Once they have the hang of that swap sides. This one is harder, don't do it too long before setting them off on 3 and they can practice themselves from here on.
I have taught 100s of people to juggle like that :-)
In my juggling routine, one of the things I do is transition to lying on my back face up while continuing to juggle. I’m throwing the balls straight up above my head while lying perfectly flat, which feels pretty weird. So I can’t imagine how difficult it would be to be physically upside down while juggling.
I think it took me a couple of weeks though. I’m a bit malcoordinated for that sort of thing in general. I think you’re right that there’s some sort of natural aptitude that not everybody has. Fortunately basic juggling is just about easy enough that almost any idiot can do it.
For instance, I attempted to upvote your comment but initially downvoted it. Sigh.
If you think of it like 3 jobs you have to do simultaneously everything falls apart. Internalizing the three balls as a single process that you are participating in makes it a lot more manageable.
Of course the only way to get there is some 10s of hours of practice
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLGV8mtb7t-4PuziHauottOfqp...
Great teaching style and a fantastic juggler
I would bet against him being able to learn three balls.
But he was very dedicated. Long story short. After many years he could comfortably juggle 6 (six!) balls.
It looked wobbly, he still looked like a person without coordination, but the balls somehow stayed in the air.
I can, but I wouldn't describe having two two-ball capable hands as being half-way there. If forced to put a number on it, something like 20% is the best I could do.
Strangely even though I'm right-handed I feel more comfortable juggling two in my left hand. I also bat and golf left-handed so sometimes I wonder if my parents forced right-handedness was on me.
Memory Masters draw me to it, and I found some super normal niche Streamers showing what to do.
Juggling is some sort of meditation.
Enjoy!
Is 'rats' a juggling jargon I'm unfamiliar with? Or do rats stare into the distance often?
Our software stack is the opposite of that.
My (admittedly limited) juggling experience would indicate something closer to "Anyone can juggle", or that your average person, particularly young people, can learn to juggle one, two, or even three balls with an afternoon of practice, but I suppose that makes for a worse title.
Technically this is not incompatible with the title. Just uses “can” in a different sense. The title would be using “can” in the “has the skill already”, while you use “can” in the “able to acquire the skill” sense.
It is not hard to imagine that most people when asked the question “can you juggle?” would answer in the negative. That’s what the article’s title describes. And then if those people, given sufficient motivation can learn to juggle that leads to your sentence. And they both can be true at the same time.
I agree that it would be nice to provide source for the claim though.