Sign up Latest Topics Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
KenTheriot

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,134
Reply with quote  #1 
I've got an instruction for a trick that says to double cut the top card to the bottom. I'm a bit confused by that. I know how to control a top card to the bottom with the overhand shuffle. But I'm not familiar with the double cut control.

Can anyone clue me in?

Thanks!

Ken
0
Nicolás Pierri

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 164
Reply with quote  #2 

you take a break bellow the top card... undercut a third of the deck to the top mantaining the break, then you undercut another third of the deck to the top , aand finaly you undercut to the break.... this is how i do it lot of people swivel cut first from to to bottom then they unddercut but i prefer to start with an undercut to mantain the same line.

 

(when i say mantining a break i mean with the right thumb )

0
KenTheriot

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,134
Reply with quote  #3 
Awesome! Thanks Nicolas!!

Ken
0
Nicolás Pierri

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 164
Reply with quote  #4 
your welcome Ken if you still have troulbels let me know [smile]
0
magicfish

Honored Member - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,283
Reply with quote  #5 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicolás Pierri

you take a break bellow the top card... undercut a third of the deck to the top mantaining the break, then you undercut another third of the deck to the top , aand finaly you undercut to the break.... this is how i do it lot of people swivel cut first from to to bottom then they unddercut but i prefer to start with an undercut to mantain the same line.

 

(when i say mantining a break i mean with the right thumb )


One step too many Nicolas.
With all due respect Nicolas, I believe you have just described a Triple Undercut.
0
Blathermist

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,019
Reply with quote  #6 
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicfish
One step too many Nicolas. With all due respect Nicolas, I believe you have just described a Triple Undercut.

Yep. That's a triple undercut. Nothing wrong with it, but it's not a Double.
0
Claudio

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 283
Reply with quote  #7 
Here's a handling I've read in one of Darwin Ortiz's books: at completion of 1st undercut, the right hand takes the top packet and table it, then RH takes the packet resting in LH and put it on top of tabled packet. Same result and quite convincing.
0
Nicolás Pierri

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 164
Reply with quote  #8 

Magicfish : yea you are tottaly right, its a triple undercut to transfer a top card to bottom. [smile]

 

i just wanted to tell Ken the concept so he can do what he feels more comfortable that is why i described both versions.

 

to be frank i never do that for transfering a top card to bottom, i preefer a pass,

 

or to show it openly if i can in the middle of the trick and then bury it in the "middle" .

 

or to take de deck an let fall the first one to the table as a mistake and then say sorry and take it behind the deck or putiing all the cards on top of it to sccop it up.

 

 

or to say i woul like to tell you this is your card (and openly take it face down and gesture with it towards em) .....   and then as a gag i say ... i would like it!! (and put it back in the deck but leaving it on bottom)

 

 

i always try to develop a way to do the less secret technique i can, if i can develop a way to do the action i need OPENLY i will do it (not because i cant do it secretly, i really can i dont have a bad technique), since i believe that the less we have to hide, the more we can realx and connect [smile]

 

 

if you just need to control it and the deck doesnt matter then an overhand shuffle its very good solution, and sometimes I like to have a break below the top card, then y undercut half deck to top and mantaining the break i split the deck (just the exact way you splic for your normal riffle shuffle [wink] ) for starting a in the hands riffle and bridge shuffle procuring that the selected card fall first ending at the bottom.

 

 

 

 

 

0
Harry Lorayne

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,116
Reply with quote  #9 
   I probably have discussed double/triple cuts literally hundreds of times over the decades, in my books. Check out my Magician Vs Gambler,. which uses those cuts.

    My favorite simple control of a selected card is - kick cut top half deck into left hand, selection replaced onto left-hand half. Right-hand half dropped onto it holding break. Double cut to break and immediately do a couple, or three, overhand in*og shuffles.
0
Blathermist

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,019
Reply with quote  #10 
It's important to remember the Double Undercut is not a secret manoeuvre.
It's an open procedure that disguises its purpose. It looks like a cut--double, triple--but is more.
Much like a false shuffle. Looks like the real, regular thing, but isn't..
0
Harry Lorayne

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,116
Reply with quote  #11 
   Obviously. No way to keep the cutting "secret."
0
Magic-Aly

Avatar / Picture

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 612
Reply with quote  #12 
Harry wrote: My favorite simple control of a selected card is - kick cut top half deck into left hand, selection replaced onto left-hand half. Right-hand half dropped onto it holding break. Double cut to break and immediately do a couple, or three, overhand in*og shuffles."

I think that control is an effective one, and I am certain has been quite successful. Harry certainly has had the time-honored experience to know what works. (I would imagine hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of controls performed)  

However, my own particular preference is never to have a card actually withdrawn from the deck.  That way, a spectator does not feel that he/she is being directed as to where to replace it back.  Some people do not want to put it back where the magician indicates. It also eliminates the cliched, "take or pick a card" procedure, which sometimes arouses a bias or suspicion on the part of spectators.  

If I want to control a card to the top I riffle the cards from my right hand to my waiting left hand below until they say "Stop." I then thumb over the top card of the cards in my left hand for all to see as I turn my head away, then thumb it back.  When I casually riffle or drop the remaining cards from my right hand to my left hand, I in*og them over the selection.  Then its either a double undercut, overhand shuffle or Hermann Pass as a remark or question is addressed to spectator(s). .

For a control to the bottom, when they say "stop," I show the bottom card of the cards remaining in my right hand, then do a riffle or drop, in-*gging the packet, then an overhand shuffle controlling the selection to the bottom (i.e. accomplished by turning the deck sideways, pushing with my thumb thereby getting a br*k between the two packets, and bringing the packet not containing the selection from behind the packet that does contain it in the first motion of the overhand shuffle, and shuffling off.

An additional move I use, when controlling the selection to the top, is to do a d* lift showing the card is not on top and also to show the bottom card is not the selection either, thus dispelling a common suspicion of spectators.  When the card is controlled to the bottom, I then double undercut a card to the bottom, thus making the selection second from bottom.  In that manner, both the top and bottom cards can be shown not to be the selection.
 
0
Frankm6

Member
Registered:
Posts: 10
Reply with quote  #13 
There is also a fancy cut, that brings the card to the bottom, called Death to the Double Undercut by Joel Paschall. 
0
Blathermist

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,019
Reply with quote  #14 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Lorayne
   Obviously. No way to keep the cutting "secret."


My point exactly. But there is an ongoing resistance to the Double Undercut in certain card quarters simply because of its open nature.

Much like the Cross Cut Force, I've seen it described as "obvious," which, of course, it isn't.
0
Harry Lorayne

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,116
Reply with quote  #15 

    When controlling a card to top with a double cut, as I posted, and immediately following up with an overhand in*og shuffle, there's no way the control looks "obvious." The overhand in*og shuffle, as I've written a few times, covers a multitude of sins.

0
Blathermist

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,019
Reply with quote  #16 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Lorayne

    When controlling a card to top with a double cut, as I posted, and immediately following up with an overhand in*og shuffle, there's no way the control looks "obvious." The overhand in*og shuffle, as I've written a few times, covers a multitude of sins.


Yep. See my earlier post about false shuffles and disguises. The shuffle adds to the disguise inherent in the Double Undercut itself.
0
Nicolás Pierri

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 164
Reply with quote  #17 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blathermist
It's important to remember the Double Undercut is not a secret manoeuvre.
It's an open procedure that disguises its purpose. It looks like a cut--double, triple--but is more.
Much like a false shuffle. Looks like the real, regular thing, but isn't..

 

im agree but if the trick deserves the people to think that the card is not lost and instead is in the middle of the deck then a double undercut or a shuffle wouldnt be my choices [smile]

0
Nicolás Pierri

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 164
Reply with quote  #18 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Lorayne

    When controlling a card to top with a double cut, as I posted, and immediately following up with an overhand in*og shuffle, there's no way the control looks "obvious." The overhand in*og shuffle, as I've written a few times, covers a multitude of sins.

 

im totaly agree that if you double undercut and shuffle then there is no question about that the card is lost , wich in tons of tricks its perfect, but in others if the people think it could be anywhere... ok then it could be on top [tongue] and maybe you tell me ok then i do a double lift saying yourcard is not on top,   and for that i tell you that if you say that ....then you alrready lose XD

0
luvisi

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 106
Reply with quote  #19 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blathermist
My point exactly. But there is an ongoing resistance to the Double Undercut in certain card quarters simply because of its open nature.

Much like the Cross Cut Force, I've seen it described as "obvious," which, of course, it isn't.


My favorite commentary on the psychology of the double undercut is from How to do Tricks With Cards by Bill Turner.

Quote:
Do you see the subtlety of cutting twice? The spectator thinks something like this: "He's cutting the deck. I wonder if he's somehow marked the place where I returned my card and is cutting to it. Maybe that's my card he's cut to the top. Nope, he's cutting again.  If that was my card he's lost it. He has the deck all mixed up now."

That's the way people think, son.  They confuse easily. And when they are confused they sit back and trust the guy who confused them. Ask any politician.


I don't know if I believe it, but I've always found it amusing.
0
Frankm6

Member
Registered:
Posts: 10
Reply with quote  #20 
Luvisi, I've found this to be exactly what goes on in the spectators mind. The first time I did the double undercut (1976!), when I cut the deck the first time the woman exclaimed something like, "Oh come on..." Like she knew I was just cutting the car to the top of the deck. But a half second later when I did the second cut she exclaimed... "Oh... ok..."

--Frank
0
Harry Lorayne

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,116
Reply with quote  #21 
     To repeat: " When controlling a card to top with a double cut, as I posted, and immediately following up with an overhand in*og shuffle, there's no way the control looks "obvious." The overhand in*og shuffle, as I've written a few times, covers a multitude of sins."
0
StevePR104

Avatar / Picture

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 249
Reply with quote  #22 
Gilding the lily just a bit further...

I've found that taking the break under the top card, then breaking off half of the deck from below and placing it on top of the top card.....THEN MOVING THAT ENTIRE HALF TO THE TABLE, and slapping the other half on top, is pretty effective.  You not only accomplish the move, but the sound provides an additional dimension.
0
Harry Lorayne

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,116
Reply with quote  #23 
   I've used that occasionally (rarely lately), and it's fine. Honestly, to me, that's not gilding the lily, it's dulling the lily actually. Please forgive - it's only my opinion. Also please forgive the redundancy/repetition - it's the overhand in*og shuffle immediately after the double cut that makes it a strong control. We can even say that that's "gilding the lily." Cutting to the table breaks that continuity - although you can of course pick up the deck and do the overhand shuffle or two then.
0
Bulla

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 181
Reply with quote  #24 
I never understood the reasoning of bringing a card to the top only to bring it back to the middle and then back to the top.  I feel a shuffle should never follow a cut as that goes against common card table procedure.  A cutting action should be the denouement of the shuffle.  I know the procedure stated above is deceptive and works just fine but I just wanted to express my own opinion.  Hopefully I don't get criticized too much for going against the norm.

I also wanted to share this article I came across years ago that talks about the action of the double undercut.  I remember reading it and seeing the double undercut in a whole new light.  http://web.archive.org/web/20070222100536/http://www.andigladwin.co.uk/blog/posts/double-double/
0
Rudy Tinoco

Founding Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,096
Reply with quote  #25 
You don't have to worry about expressing your opinions here. Even if folks may disagree with you, you can expect to be treated with respect.

I'm glad that you shared this post by Andi Gladwin. I ready it a long time ago and actually changed the way I perform my double undercut because of it.

Rudy



__________________
http://www.facebook.com/magicrudy
http://www.facebook.com/themagiciansforum
0
zarrow52

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 86
Reply with quote  #26 
I have used a ploy akin to putting a card under 'tilt' to put a card to the bottom of the deck. Tilt the whole deck forward a bit so that the top is angled towards the spectator, then do the fake 'poke' in the middle of the deck that pushes a few cards forward (like some people do with the tilt move). After that, just actually slide the card onto the bottom of the deck and square up! It's kinda bold, but I have gotten away with it over and over!

Seam
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.