Sign up Latest Topics Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #1 
People...I think this is the greatest card trick that ever existed. I have been frying people like eggs with it.

Tell me why I am wrong...-)

(Page 241...Card College Vol 1)

K
0
Harry Lorayne

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,129
Reply with quote  #2 
Haven't read it - describe the effect.
0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #3 
Harry...it has the same effect as Numero Uno. They might be equal. The two best card tricks ever.

The spec cuts to a card (criss cross...Giobbi wants classic)...spec shuffles the deck...mag spread culls the card to the top.

Mag then spreads the cards on the table. A nice, wide curve spread. Mag hands spec a half dollar (with a cut out spot from a real card pasted onto it)

Mag has the spec drop the half dollar on "any place on the spread". We narrow it down to one card.

Then flip the coin over with the force pasted to it....and as he stares in disbelief we do a top change and fry his mind.
0
Harry Lorayne

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,129
Reply with quote  #4 
    Okay, thanks Kevin. But - greatest card trick that ever existed?  Please. You mentioned my Numero Uno - I didn't - but that, in my humble opinion is a much "greater card trick" than what you describe. I could list about a hundred others! I'd start with Paul Curry's Out Of This World.
0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #5 
Last night I did this at a restaurant and the bartender stormed into the kitchen shaking his head.

This, Numero Uno, and Triumph are direct and massively effective.

In my humble opinion....these tricks make statements. Everybody has a "card trick". But they don't have tricks like we do.
0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #6 
Harry..lay off.

I agree...never make declarative statements.

How about "one" of the best?

Aren't you supposed to be working on a book...that have ready by the fall....?
0
Harry Lorayne

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,129
Reply with quote  #7 
    There ya' go - never make declarative statements. Like I see so many on other forums saying things like "This is hands down the best way to do so and so" when they obviously have no knowledge of all the other existing methods of doing so and so.  Difficult for me to "lay off" when I see things like that.

    Yes, working on AND FINALLY!  Should be ready in the fall. I just (about a week or so ago) sent an email to part of my email mailing list people telling them the prices and telling them that they could order NOW to be sure they'd have a copy. Don't know if you received that.
0
Harry Lorayne

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,129
Reply with quote  #8 
   Oh, and Kevin --- "One of the best THAT I KNOW OF" really/actually "says it."
0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #9 
Absolutely. I fell into the pompous trap.

The declarative statement is one the most obvious advertisements as to your level of intellect. Screaming idiot, of course.

No...did not get the email and I AM on your list.
0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #10 
Your last post flew over my simplistic brain..-)
0
Harry Lorayne

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,129
Reply with quote  #11 
    Just as I don't understand what you mean.  Which "last post."  My last post here is:  "One of the best THAT I KNOW OF" says it." Is that what you're referring to? And if so - which part of that "flew over your simplistic brain"? I'm usually pretty clear in what I say - as I'm told I am in 50 or so books I've written and 240 issues of a monthly magazine!!
0
Anthony Vinson

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 2,023
Reply with quote  #12 
It's a good trick. Simple to follow, involves the spectator, and a twist ending that blows 'em away. I first saw Bob Sheets do his version using cheek-to-cheek, then a couple years later came across a version in a set of Racherbaumer's lecture notes using a regular deck and the Waikaki Shuffle. The version in CC is superior to both for the average card guy, I think.

Av
0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #13 
Yup. I'm not familiar with the sleights you mention..there are so many...with different names...

I agree, though.
0
Anthony Vinson

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 2,023
Reply with quote  #14 
In essence, both Sheets' and Racherbaumer's versions involved a face-up/face-down shuffle. Sheets used a special deck and ended with a Triumph-type kicker. Racherbaumer did not. 

Av
0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #15 
Seems like overkill.
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 90
Reply with quote  #16 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
...spec shuffles the deck...mag spread culls the card to the top..


In the above sentence, do you mean the spectator shuffles the deck with the selection within, then you spread the cards face-up to cull ?


Jim

0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #17 
Yes. Face up commenting "they are really mixed", or basically anything that makes sense.
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 90
Reply with quote  #18 
I've never seen the trick, but it doesn't sound like it's constructed very well.

The part I mentioned above - don't you think it would be better to force the card and shuffle yourself ? Think about it, the trick isn't you finding the card, it is the spectator who finds it. It wouldnt/shouldn't matter if YOU know the location of the card, as long as the SPECTATOR doesn't know where it is.

Looking through the deck straight after the spectator shuffle, even with some nonsense about checking the deck is well mixed is hokey. Of course they're well mixed, the spectator just shuffled them. Would you look through the deck at this moment if you didn't have to cull a card ?

And having to pick up the tabled deck and card to facilitate the switch at the end sounds equally as hokey.
It may play better than it sounds, but it doesn't read too well in my opinion.


Jim

0
Anthony Vinson

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 2,023
Reply with quote  #19 
Jim,

It is a good trick. A really good trick, one with audience appeal. It's been around awhile. Jon Racherbaumer puts its origin back to 1968 in The Artful Dodges of Eddie Fields. The versions I mentioned above are excellent, especially Sheets's handling - It's a real showpiece in his hands. (I looked, but there's no public domain footage available or I'd link it.) The handling in Card College is streamlined, and the plot direct. The spectator freely chooses a card, which is subsequently controlled - using your favorite method - and then located from a spread using a clever gimmick. Remember: Giobbi's aim is to teach sleight of hand card magic. Consequently the tricks he uses in Card Collegeare specific to that end.  
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 90
Reply with quote  #20 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Vinson
Jim,

It is a good trick. A really good trick, one with audience appeal. It's been around awhile. Jon Racherbaumer puts its origin back to 1968 in The Artful Dodges of Eddie Fields. The versions I mentioned above are excellent, especially Sheets's handling - It's a real showpiece in his hands. (I looked, but there's no public domain footage available or I'd link it.) The handling in Card College is streamlined, and the plot direct. The spectator freely chooses a card, which is subsequently controlled - using your favorite method - and then located from a spread using a clever gimmick. Remember: Giobbi's aim is to teach sleight of hand card magic. Consequently the tricks he uses in Card Collegeare specific to that end.  


Hi Anthony.

Thank you for your reply. The way (methods) you describe sound much better than those mentioned by Kevin.
I'm not saying its a bad trick, it sounds like it COULD be good - I just didn't like the methods for accomplishing it as described by the OP.


Jim


0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #21 
Jim...they probably are. That whole spread the cards after the shuffle is a bit awkward. I have recently been using a Harry L style approach, saying "sometimes I get a tingle and can find it right away. No, you're going to have to find it".

Also...I will never use the word "best" again in any future post!
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 90
Reply with quote  #22 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
Jim...they probably are. That whole spread the cards after the shuffle is a bit awkward. I have recently been using a Harry L style approach, saying "sometimes I get a tingle and can find it right away. No, you're going to have to find it".

Also...I will never use the word "best" again in any future post!



Hi Kevin.

That line, while a good way to cover looking through the deck, won't work in this trick.

Unless I'm misreading your description, the card piece on the coin will be seen as a prediction. In which case you knew which card they'd choose in advance somehow.
So it then makes no sense for you to fail to find it in the deck.

For the line to make sense in this trick, the revelation on the coin would need to appear magically somehow, and not be seen as a prediction.


Jim

0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #23 
No.

I had a few when I posted that. Okay..I admit it.

You force a card.

They shuffle.

You then do the face up spread using whatever line you want...and cull the force card to the top.

You then facedown spread the deck and hand them a half dollar. You INSRUCT them exactly how to use the coin.

Once they narrow it down to one...you use the non-card to flip the coin and reveal their card pasted to the coin. Then top change.

Sorry for the confusion...it's my fault.
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 90
Reply with quote  #24 
Ah, that makes more sense. In that description, the top change sounds like the ideal sleight.

I still think you'd be better getting rid of the cull, and just shuffling the cards yourself - controlling the card to the top in the process.


Jim

0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #25 
I disagree.....all you are doing is spreading the cards.

You need a GOOD cull. Do it right under their eyes...ask them if they see their card...."you might even see your card".

A good cull works wonders. See Koysta Kimlat.
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 90
Reply with quote  #26 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
I disagree.....all you are doing is spreading the cards.

You need a GOOD cull. Do it right under their eyes...ask them if they see their card...."you might even see your card".

A good cull works wonders. See Koysta Kimlat.



There is no need to spread through the deck at all. In my opinion a cull is the wrong move here. The deck shouldn't have to be turned over at all and never mind looked through. Like I said above, if you didn't have to cull a card, would you still look through the cards at this point in the trick ?

The only reason you are looking through the cards is because the method demands it. And by the looks of it, the only reason that particular method is used in the first place is to allow for the spectator shuffle - which also isn't needed.
If the spectator is to try and find their own card from a spread, then it makes perfect sense for the MAGICIAN to mix them first before spreading them. There is absolutely no need for the spectator to shuffle the cards in the trick you describe.

And to look through them under the pretext of looking for their card (that you apparently know), yet not knowing what it is doesn't make sense.
From your description, the spectators are going to assume that the piece of card stuck to the coin, was there all along. So it is a prediction - which implys that you knew what card would be picked before it was picked.

It is like the mentalist who takes five minutes to divine a card, then shows his prediction to demonstrate that he knew what card they would think of before the show began.


Jim




0
Gunston

Member
Registered:
Posts: 19
Reply with quote  #27 
For a great version check Allan Zola Kronzek's book Artful Deceptions.

0
magicfish

Honored Member - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,300
Reply with quote  #28 
This is a good analytical discussion of this trick. Thanks for keeping things respectful fellas. I'm interested to hear more thoughts and opinions.
I've known about this for a long time and thanks to this thread, I've just glued a pip onto my Lucky Canadian Silver Dollar.
0
Kevin

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 81
Reply with quote  #29 
Magicfish...I would love to hear the reactions you get if you actually do this for people. Even with my rudimentary approach I got dropped jaws.


0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.