Not sure if I can post the question directly, so I will pose it somewhat cryptically. Those who perform NFW, might get it (or I may just look like a crazy person).

The top card in the NFW packet seems to have "too much" and when it is on the bottom, or underneath another card, it has a habit of "staying there". Any suggestions how to make it "less"?

(too cryptic?)

Not too cryptic.

To make it "less", dab it to remove some.

Tried that. I am practicing the (show 4 jokers) and it....stays.....on the bottom. Holding too tight? even the weight of the card seems like "just enough" to make it.....stay....

The only time you should have an issue with this is during the initial show of 4. Catch a small break, problem solved.

That works very well.

This might be an excessively obvious suggestion, but you could make your own set, now that you've paid the creator for the idea. From my perspective, the weakness of NFW (if there is one) is that decks don't have 4 jokers, so the introductory premise demands something from the audience. Maybe there's nothing to that, but you can use magician's wax or small pieces of double sided clear tape to do what you need to do. I've made 4 or 5 sets that do things like start out as queens and end as aces, in an attempt to incorporate "NFW technology" into longer routines.

I don't really have a problem with using 4 jokers. The vast majority of people have not opened more than 3 fresh decks of cards in their entire lives, and for 90% of them that would likely have been years ago. So it's not common knowledge among laypeople how many jokers are in a deck. Many folks aren't even aware of jokers in the first place. Heck, I just watched an instructional video (non-magic or card related) and the twenty-something male demonstrator referred to a 4 of clubs as the 4 of clovers! You'd be amazed how unfamiliar the average person is with a deck of cards, especially in regards to extras such as jokers.

Now having said that, I am all for using cards straight out of a standard deck whenever possible. But with NFW aren't you showing 4 of the cards to be identical?
So IMO it would be more suspicious to use 4 non-jokers and apparently show duplicate suits. Most people DO know that there are not duplicate cards in a standard deck.
Another option often used is blank cards but I prefer jokers over blanks. I'm not a big fan of blank cards unless their use is unavoidable.

I learned the 2-Jacks-as-4 bluff from Paul Harris's Reset. Maybe people have noticed, but no one's ever called me out. I wouldn't want to use the Queen of Hearts twice in a count, because (I'm guessing, never tried it in real life) people might remember that card. But two red and two black jacks or kings at speed? I don't think it's an issue, except on video.

But honestly, I agree with you, the trick is fine, as-is.

People know I'm a professional magician and I tell them I go through many decks of cards in year,(I do). I say that most people discard the Jokers when they open a new deck of cards, but I always keep a few around so that I can show them something amazing using just 4 Jokers. No suspicion whatsoever. Pretty simple and for me, works every time.

Thanks for this; it makes a lot of sense. If you don't mind, do you count the 4 jokers all face up at the very beginning, or is your first count with 3 jokers face up and 1 face down? That's my other main question when I ask myself how the standard handling of NFW might be improved.

Thanks for this; it makes a lot of sense. If you don't mind, do you count the 4 jokers all face up at the very beginning, or is your first count with 3 jokers face up and 1 face down? That's my other main question when I ask myself how the standard handling of NFW might be improved.


I am also interested in what others who do this prefer, and why ???

Thanks
Paul

I am not liking my 4 face up, if I am not comfortable doing it for myself, I won't do it for performance.

I like doing the 4 face up to start. If you keep practicing you will find ways to make it smoother.

Work on different ways to hold the cards to maintain the block- try crotch of the thumb and forefinger. Try different ways to slide the cards over each other while doing the count. Experiment around with it and you will come up with a way that looks good and that you're comfortable with.

Another thing to possibly consider is to casually say, "I'd like to TRY to show you a difficult trick with these 4 jokers," while doing the count, but keep it casual and maintain some eye contact. You don't need to stare at the jokers while you do the count. Start the count as you're speaking and don't pay much attention to the cards. Your spectator won't either. They will casually watch and just assume you are showing them 4 jokers because you "are." Your voice and casual mannerisms will say so. Then with the count complete you draw them in deeper with, "But this one is a leader- see this one that turned over all by himself? Once he turns over..."

The reason I emphasize TRY is to set up for later. It implies the possibility of failure- some danger. It gets people's attention. Then at the end I remind them I said I'd try to show them the trick and explain that the trick is hard to do because I normally don't have 4 jokers- decks only have 1 or 2- so I usually use these 4 aces.

It just takes practice, but I think showing 4 is the best way to get maximum impact. Starting with one already upside down opens the door to skepticism. Is that really a joker? How do I know? I didn't see it. Showing 4 up also gives the routine 1 more magical moment.

Lots of good advice here on NFW. I'm mostly a coin guy, but here goes…

-As to the OP (And welcome to th Café, MM), the dabbing works as the more you use the cards the less of a problem you'll have. But just keep dabbing them with your thumb and the strength will break down a bit.

-As to using the jokers (4), videoman and Doug here are spot on, it's really not something specs would ever notice and an easy thing to dispel, so not to worry.

-As to showing the 4 jokers, like Theo here, I like doing it that way too. It's a good exercise as to initially manipulating the cards and a bit more fairly showing the 4 jokers first. That said, I've found that it really doesn't make a difference to specs if you don't show them the 4 jokers and just do the trick as regularly done, simply implying that there are 4. Why? Well, because the spec's mind fills in the the blanks behind the logic of the patter and the moves. So they think they see what you say and half-way show. It's a perfect ruse!

Finally, I've been doing NFW for a long time and highly recommend it anyway you do it. As for me, I've put together a little set that's really centered around those 4 jokers and 4 aces. It's a 3 phase routine, 3 different effects, that has NFW as the finale. So when you don't want to do just one effect, but you want a consistency in an overall presentation that's a bit longer, this set really get's it done for me. Just had to make one change to the initial effect to get it all going in the right direction. *And thanks to Doug here for saving all those old jokers to help bring to fruition all my thinking on this.

Hey Marion:
Glad to be able to help you out with the Jokers, my friend!

I have a different take on showing the Jokers in my routine. I tell them I'm going to show them a great trick using just 4 Jokers but I intentionally show them only 2 Jokers. I tell them to watch closely and I take the packet in a biddle grip and shake it three times. I show one joker has turned over.

The spectator always points out that I just started with it that way, with one already turned over in the packet. I say to him that I used to do it that way but the world is full of very observant people such as him who aren't shy about pointing that out. I tell him I was tired of getting busted so I had to come up with another way. I say that I found that if I give the packet a shake 3 times like this, I'm able to turn a Joker over without anyone seeing it. I show him the second one turned over. Now I have his attention.

I tell him I tried turning it over like a page in a book but that was way too slow and I always got busted. So, I tell him I always revert back to the way I found that works perfectly by giving the packet a shake 3 times like this. I show all 4 Jokers turned over.

Then I tell him that I discovered a great bonus when I went to the "shake" method of turning the Jokers over. Not only was I able to turn them over one at a time with detection, but, I was able to switch them for the 4 Aces.

I have 4 Jokers in my pocket and a switch wallet (Showcase) loaded with 4 Aces. I pull the Jokers out and hand them to the spectator. I put the Aces away in the switch wallet immediately. When they're done looking at the Jokers they almost always ask to see the Aces. I pull out the wallet and hand them the real Aces which they of course can look at all day.

I'm not sure I get this part. Why pull out Jokers from your pocket? It seems to turn the trick into "I cleverly switched the Jokers with Aces that were in my pocket" instead of "I just pulled off a f'n miracle and *trnasformed* the Jokers into Aces". If you're going for the switch and handout, I would start with four real aces and NFW in the switch wallet. That way at the end of the trick you just quickly put the Aces away in the wallet which seems natural, and if (when) asked to see them, you pull the switch and hand out the real ones.

Inigmntoya:

I don't want them to think I've transformed the Jokers into the Aces. I want them to think I've cleverly switched the Jokers for the Aces without them seeing it. Another "f*n miracle" as you would say. I want them to have an out. I want them to think it's somehow possible. I want them to think this guy is so good he switched the Jokers out for the Aces right under our eyes, and that's exactly what they do think.

When I did the routine the original way, there was a lot of heat on those Aces and they wanted to see them. Obviously, I couldn't show them so I came up with this routine.

I'm not trying to persuade you or anyone else to use my routine. I was just never very convincing with my "two as four" count so I changed the presentation to suit that inadequacy. I also want them to think that there's a way, they don't know how, but a way, that I could possibly do that. I not only get credit for an entertaining and amazing card trick, but also as an incredible sleight of hand expert. Personally, that's what I'm looking for, and that's what I get.

Doug

I have had this issue sometimes with MANY effects that have this "thing". You will be surprised at how much you can "dab" it with your fingers and it still "stays the same". I actually moisten it and literally get it to the point that it is not even sticky anymore. But when it dries, it regains a bit of it's strength and the cards still slide apart very easily but just enough strength to "keep 'em together".

Also, isn't the original effect is to show "4" jokers, 3 face up and 1 face down (with an "EC")- then (with another "EC"), a joker turns face down and you now have 2 jokers face up, and 2 jokers face down. Then you say "do you want to see this top joker magically turn face down with the snap of a finger?". You jokingly snap your finger and just turn the joker face down with your own hand (spectator was thinking it would magically turn face down without touching it). Then the climax is well...."maybe it would look better if I used the 4 Aces" (now show the 4 aces)?

I do the effect as a transposition. I start with a switcharoo gimmick in my shirt pocket preset with duplicate jokers. Then place four aces in the switcharoo gimmick ready to be switched. After the reveal I pull out the four jokers out of my pocket. I have a couple touches that convince the spectators that they are the same aces. I actually use this as a lead in to an entire routine where the aces are placed away only to return to the deck twice more, then the aces are set aside with a spectator's hand placed on top of them and they return to the deck again and the spectator is found to have the four signed selections which were picked during the course of the routine.