(Close Window)
Topic: Invisible Deck
Message: Posted by: Eric Grossman (Dec 28, 2001 12:54AM)
I thought this would be cool.

After a couple of card effects, you shuffle the deck, and cut it. "You know, sometimes, when I shuffle, people think that I've done something fishy".

Hand the deck to a spec.

"You shuffle, and then give the deck a cut".

Ask spec 1 to hand the deck to spec 2.

"Now, just to be sure we're all satisfied, why don't you shuffle and cut the cards?"

Ask spec 2 to hand the deck to spec 3.

"Spread the cards on the table, and remove any one that you want. Have you got one? Good. Now turn it face up, and put it down. Is everyone happy with that card?

Should we switch it? Good"

Now reach into your pocket,

and remove a zip-lock bag.

Open it and remove a deck,

that is bound by two rubber bands.

"This bag has been in my pocket,

the whole time.

Did anyone see me reach into my pocket? Well, even if I did, I still couldn't get into this bag, through the rubber bands, replace the bands, and close the bag, again, without anyone noticing. Right?"

Obviously, this is when you would remove the rubber bands, open the box, remove the cards, and dramatically show that one card is reversed in the deck, and it matches the one that was just chosen by everyone.

Any opinions?
Message: Posted by: Steve Brooks (Dec 28, 2001 07:49AM)
I do not use an Invisible deck myself, but if I did, this is an idea that I would consider using. Very good. :wavey:
Message: Posted by: Michael Peterson (Dec 28, 2001 10:53AM)
I like it! I’m also thinking that maybe you could put the deck in a locked box & have it sitting out before you start.

You could tell the spectators that you have a prediction in there. When you open it up you have an entire deck, so of course one of them has to be correct.

After they're done groaning, spread the cards & show that you reversed the same card. :bg:

Thanx for the inspiration.

Message: Posted by: p.b.jones (Dec 28, 2001 12:38PM)

But surely, it is stronger from an audience view point if they are allowed to just think of a card?

Message: Posted by: Eric Grossman (Dec 28, 2001 01:53PM)

That may be true, but either way, the card needs to be revealed by the spectator, first. Why not add some color to the routine, involve more spectators (turning them into participants), and still have a great kicker? Remember, even if they merely think of a card, they still need to tell us what it is, before we blow their minds.
Message: Posted by: DoctorAmazo (Jan 9, 2002 02:08PM)
I do a thing where I form a "committee" to think of the card. The cased ID is already on the table. I ask the first member "Red or Black?", then keep narrowing it down, going from member to member, finally arriving at one card...with no possibility of a confederate, because they all affected the choice.

It involves everyone (up to 6 ppl...), the card is just "thought of", the deck is in sight the whole time, and I know whether the card is "odd or even" well in advance. (Once the suit is determined, that's the first question I ask.)

Color, suit, odd/even, hi/low, face/number (if hi), then, when it's narrowed to 2 or 3, the last person picks one of those.
Message: Posted by: RayBanks (Jan 9, 2002 03:08PM)

On 2001-12-28 01:54, sbasscase wrote:

"This bag has been in my pocket,

the whole time.

Did anyone see me reach into my pocket? Well, even if I did, I still couldn't get into this bag, through the rubber bands, replace the bands, and close the bag, again, without anyone noticing. Right?"


Well, I don't usually tell the specs about the real deck. They can see for themselves that the deck is in a sealed container and has rubber bands around it.

I just think that when you use patter like that you are inviting the audience to start thinking more about how it is done than being entertained.

Other than that I think the routine is very good. Have fun with it.



Success is the journey, not the destination

Ray Banks
Message: Posted by: Magicman0323 (Jan 9, 2002 04:53PM)
Another gem from a member of the Cafe!


D'lites Up! :cool:
Message: Posted by: p.b.jones (Jan 9, 2002 05:19PM)

How about this:
Apparently throw out an invisible pack, get it shuffled etc. Someone takes a card (invisible) shows it to someone else who says the colour, another spectator anounces the suit, the spectator holding the invisible card picks it’s number. This spectator now seals it in an ordinary examined envelope, seals it shut themselves and signs their name in felt pen right across the front of the envelope (no switch).

A gesture or magical moment is created.

The envelope is cut or torn open and the selected card is removed from the envelope! (there is only one card in the envelope, it is unprepared and there is no equivocal)

What do you think?

This is in my cabaret act.

phillip :question:

Oh and I can tell you where to buy it (not from me) if you are interested.

Message: Posted by: Rob Wallis (Jan 9, 2002 06:54PM)
I once heard of an ID routine where the deck was gift-wrapped, with a bow around it, on the table throughout the act. Of course, people would wonder what was in the package, but the magi would wait until the right time to unwrap (or get the spec to do it) and reveal the thought-of card.

I also thought of sealing the deck in an envelope and mailing it to the house, ala a headline prediction.
Message: Posted by: Eric Grossman (Jan 9, 2002 08:15PM)
DoctorAmazo, and Rob Wallis,

I dig what both of you posted. Maybe adding your touches to my routine, will make it even better. I thank you for your creativity!
Message: Posted by: Peter Marucci (Jan 10, 2002 05:28AM)
Doctor Amazo, the same thing could be done with a regular deck, rather than an invisible deck.

That way, the spectators could examine the deck afterwards (and, believe me, they will want to!) :goof:


Peter Marucci

Message: Posted by: Eric Grossman (Jan 10, 2002 04:51PM)

How would you do this with a regular deck? Magician’s choice would be too inconsistent.
I wonder what your idea is.
Message: Posted by: Joe (Jan 13, 2002 12:12PM)
I use a pretty standard presentation getting the (invisible) deck shuffled, past to someone else, who fans the cards face down, for someone else to take a card etc.. with some good gags and interplay and talking about imagination... now a reality etc, and building the end quite dramatically. But I have been thinking of using a mobile phone as seen on John Lennahan.

p.s. Is anyone brave enough to go down the ’Derren Brown’ road (see Pure Effect)?

Message: Posted by: Bernard Lightfingers (Jan 13, 2002 12:15PM)
wow! Nice! :wow:
Message: Posted by: DoctorAmazo (Jan 15, 2002 10:11AM)

I’m as curious as sbasscase!

Point us in the right direction, please...
Message: Posted by: Gianni (Jan 20, 2002 10:52PM)
To pbjones:

I am interested in where to find the effect you mention.

Thank you.

Message: Posted by: Peter Marucci (Jan 21, 2002 05:50AM)
Sbasscase, Dr. Amazo, et al.

Actually, a repeated magician's choice is exactly how it's done.

This appeared in a Linking Ring Parade of some years ago. (Sorry I can't narrow it down more than that or remember the name of the contributor.)

I, too, thought the inconsistencies would be apparent. But, when I tried it on a lay audience, I was amazed at the jaw-dropping reaction it got.

Believe it or not, it works. It shouldn't, but it does.


Peter Marucci

Message: Posted by: mambra (Jan 24, 2002 07:42AM)
Hi all.

I perform a short version of the ambitious card, with a regular deck. The card is NOT signed.

First I find the card at the top, then at the bottom, then again at the top, twice, the second time with the "Giobbi" method to have the card popping at the top (it's not Giobbi's, but I have seen described there).

The climax is when it seems I fail to have the card at the bottom and at the top, and I say that magic is in the spectator's mind, not in the magician's hands... so please pass the shadow of your hand on the deck... and the card is found reversed in the pack (Ouellet method, as described in Close Up Illusion).

But the spectator's power is so strong...
invisible pack! Which I can use also as an out, just in case I really lost the card during manipulations...!!!

Hope that helps.


Stefano Mambretti

Almost Private Message: thanks Peter Marucci for your kindness... I was not able to write you for server's problems.
Message: Posted by: Stephen Long (Jan 24, 2002 05:44PM)
Here's an idea I had recently for a non-rough & smooth invisible deck effect where the spectator does NOT name the thought of card... Slightly different method.

Performer gives the spec a deck and asks them to put it in their pocket, (or at least keep it safe). The performer then riffles through another deck of cards and asks the spec to look for one from inside and remember it. They are then asked to concentrate on their card and fan through the deck the performer gave them at the beginning of the effect. One card is face down...

The working is simple:
Use any mental riffle force with one deck.(Banachek writes on this in "Psychological Subtleties", as does Derren Brown in "Pure Effect". I'm sure plenty of other people have, too.)
BUT, know which card you are going to force before hand and have it reversed in deck two (the deck you give to the spectator.)

This effect is made all the more powerful due to the fact that

a) they have thought of a card and NOT named it, and

b) THEY fan through the deck; the magic happens in their own hands.

As has been said before, (and can be said again, as many times as anyone would care to mention it): magic in the spectator's hands is the most powerful type of close up magic one can perform.

Option B:

Option B can be used if you decide to use an impromptu riffle force where you do NOT know which card you are going to force until you force it. In this case, give the spec an invisible deck (I'm rhyming all over the place here today) and YOU would have to fan through them. The spec still hasn't named the card though, which I quite like.

I'm going to use it next time I get the chance. It would make a great opener.

:carrot: :banana:
Message: Posted by: Matt (Feb 10, 2002 08:18AM)
As Valenine's day nears, I was thinking of an Invisible Deck routine that had the woman of the couple pick a card from a regular deck, while the male picked one from the invisible (true love indicator?) deck.
In the end the male, (lets face it, we need all the help we can get) has chosen the same card in the ID that his sweetie picked indicating a true connection heart and soul.

Just check to make sure they're not brother and sister first.

Unless you're perfoming in Arkansas.

Message: Posted by: Greg Arce (Mar 19, 2002 07:08PM)
I love a lot of the thinking that is going on here so I'll throw in my two cents... but I want change back.

I've taught this subtlety when using the Invisible Deck to do it a second time on the same person. First, DON'T have him call out a card and then immediately fan out the deck again to show the card reversed... that will only prove that the deck does the work. So before you do it a second time pretend to do something to the deck as if you are preparing another card to be predicted.

Okay, now for the subtlety: If you still do the Invisible deck theme the second time, what you would do is ask him to name the card he is thinking of... let's say he says, "3 of Clubs". You now say, "Okay, so we can find it easier this time, let's put your 3 of Clubs upside down next to the 10 of diamonds". Well, for those that are following along, when you fan out the cards the face down card will be next to the 10 of diamonds and it all happened when you both were apparently playing with an invisible deck.

I'm sure those that own the deck will understand how this subtlety works without further explanation.

Have fun.
Greg Arce
Message: Posted by: Eric Grossman (Apr 8, 2002 02:34AM)
BTW, guys-
I've added a marked deck to the routine, so the card is never named. Also, it is never seen, until the final moment that both cards are revealed. The reactions that I get from this, are way too good. This is why we do magic. It may not work for y'all, but I love this routine, SOOOO much.
Message: Posted by: Platt (Apr 8, 2002 09:41AM)
Bob King invented a great new effect called New Wave Prediction. It's an invisible deck type of an effect where the spectator never has to name his card. Of course the spectator has to do something, but considering by the end of the effect, the prediction appears to have been made in advance, it goes over like real mind reading. They'll forget they did anything. Check out the slightly overpromising description at, I believe, Hank Lee.
Message: Posted by: Alan Wheeler (Apr 12, 2002 04:23AM)
I wrote about this idea in another thread, as I think these strings of posts are called:
"Double Invisible"--From the first deck that can't be seen take the card the spectator picks andf put it in your wallet or checkbook. Then do the regular ID routine. In the end pull the (now visible) card out and put it "back" into the first (now visible) deck. For the other deck I use airline cards or cards with special backs to seal the idea in all of our minds that the card is going back into it's original home.
--alan :bikes:
Message: Posted by: Alan Wheeler (Apr 13, 2002 08:58AM)
OK then. What about an entire routine based on invisible things?
Message: Posted by: stevenking (Apr 14, 2002 10:22AM)
Worth checking out is a routine which appears on the Dessert Brainstorm video with an invisible deck.
Briefly, a card is selected and reversed in the pack and held by one spectator, a second spectator is given a pad and pen and draws the image of a thought of playing card. The face down card is removed from the pack and matches the drawing.
My explanation doesn't do it justice ... so go and buy the video! (I think a version of it appears somewhere in Mind Myth and Magic???)


Steven King
Message: Posted by: ColinB (Apr 19, 2002 08:24AM)
Great ideas! I like to use routines where a spec selects a card from a real deck, then I match it with the ID.
Message: Posted by: Alan Wheeler (Apr 29, 2002 01:58AM)
The impact of Steven King's idea above just hit me. It is absolutely wonderful.
If I am imagining it right, though, first a card is reversed and replaced in the deck by a spectator without looking at the face; then the picture is drawn; only then do we see that they match.
This is really cool.

Another thing to keep in mind about the invisible deck is that any card can be shown to be MISSING. This provides other applications...

--alan :kitty: :bikes:
Message: Posted by: stevenking (Apr 29, 2002 11:50AM)
It's worth buying the Dessert Brainstorm Series of videos for that one much overlooked effect. In fact in someways I'm glad its overlooked ... leaves the good stuff for me!!

Its a gem Alan!


Steven King
Message: Posted by: McCritical (Jul 16, 2002 05:48AM)
I've been tinkering with a similar effect to Matt and Steven's...different delivery:

I give a brief description of the Schrodinger's cat problem (enough to suit the purpose of the trick, anyway), and fault Schrodinger's theoretical experiment with the point that the cat inside the box would be able to observe at least one of the states, so Schrodinger's illustration of superposition is flawed. The only way to perform the experiment is to use inanimate objects.

I ask a spectator to pick a card without looking at the face (to preserve the integrety of the "experiment") and place it back into the deck. I shuffle the deck. I tell the spectator that since no one knows which card has been picked, that there is a great probability that the card could be any one of the 52 cards in a standard poker deck and a minute possibility that it may not (an obvious red herring to the conclusion), and that it exists as all those possibilities until it is observed.

I set the deck aside and ask another spectator to join us. As I pick up the deck, I mention that at some point, there is a good probability that someone will observe the chosen card. I also state that it makes absolutely no difference what order the events of this experiment take place since the second spectator knows, at some point in time, which card is eventually revealed. I ask her to name the card that the first spectator chose. Once she says the name of the card, the ID is picked up, and the card is revealed, matching her "revelation."

The beauty of using "probability" patter is that it makes everything seem logical until a split second after they actually see the card the second spectator chose. It also doesn't hurt that the conclusion of the trick is not obvious to the audience until the last minute.

Any suggestions for making it better?
Message: Posted by: Marien Hopman (Jul 16, 2002 08:40PM)
Triple Coincidence? (Using the I.D.)
Here is an idea I have used and gets great results.

There is a mathematical effect wherein 2 people each have a deck of cards. One Blue, one Red. Each person shuffles the deck thoroughly. The patter is about ‘when the stars are in alignment and that my birth-sign is in the international house of pancakes etc., then this may just work’. All the time the I.D. is laying on the table wrapped in a sandwich bag with rubber bands around it and a post note saying "Prediction" written on it.

Both spectators shuffle their decks (no jokers) and then, holding the decks in dealing position, start dealing them face up one at a time together. (so that the cards are exposed face up on the table together). I don't know how or why this works but you will get a match of two identical cards. (sometimes not, and the cards are re-shuffled)

The second time you will get a match or sometimes you will get two perfect matches. When you get two or even three, have them decide on which card they want. When decided, leave the 2 matching cards on the table and then remove the I.D. from the plastic sandwich bag and show the 3rd perfect match.

This is very strong....
Try it...
(P.S. I still don't know what makes the cards match)
Marien Hopman..ala..Magicdog...
Message: Posted by: ecardinal (Jul 23, 2002 10:12AM)
Magicdog's 2-deck coincidence idea is very nice, but could take a while.

What if you said the first time the suit matches it would be the suit to use, and the first time the value matches, that would be the value to use... mathmatically this should happen fairly quickly but still be random.
Message: Posted by: MAGICTOM (Jul 31, 2002 03:36PM)
Ok, got a question for you all.

I saw a magician perform an invisible deck routine in a very odd way!! He had a spectator on stage randomly think of a card, say.. the 10 of diamonds. Then he removed a new deck of playing cards from a brown paper bag, still in the plastic wrap and tossed it to another member of the audience.

When the new deck was opened, by the audience member, the audience member fanned through the cards to reveal the 10 of diamonds the only card face down in the deck!!!

The deck was not gaffed. I was watching from below and the audience member was a friend of mine, so I know he was not a stooge.

Anyone heard of this? I am stumped on the method. Great trick though!!

Tom :wow:
Message: Posted by: Scott Cram (Aug 3, 2002 03:11PM)
On 2002-04-14 11:22, stevenking wrote:
Worth checking out is a routine which appears on the Dessert Brainstorm video with an invisible deck.
Briefly, a card is selected and reversed in the pack and held by one spectator, a second spectator is given a pad and pen and draws the image of a thought of playing card. The face down card is removed from the pack and matches the drawing.
My explanation doesn't do it justice ... so go and buy the video! (I think a version of it appears somewhere in Mind Myth and Magic???)


Steven King


The trick Steven is referring to is Christopher Caldwell's "Auto Brainstorm" on Vol. 3 of the Desert Brainstorm series. Steven's right - it's great!

The variation in MMM that he mentioned is "Automanticard" (page 214).
Message: Posted by: Jason Cardwell (Feb 28, 2005 01:23AM)
When I first started using ID, I was stressing because my brain wasn't working quickly enough for me to perform smoothly, so I started using a whole different story line that gave me more time; now I just use it because I like it. I take the ID and hold it upright in the palm of the spec, holding it by the top of the pack (in the box, obviously). I ask the spec to imagine they have x-ray vision, and can see through the deck to any card they choose. I get them to tell me the card. I do some back and forth, emphasizing the "visual" nature of what they are doing (i.e., "you see that the card is red, the number three in each corner, the hearts running down the middle"). Once they have confirmed that they can clearly see the card of their choice, I tell them to imagine that their vision can not only see the card, but can "grip" the card like a tractor beam. I tell them that I'm going to turn all the other cards around, but they will hold their one card in place as it passes through all the others. I do a little vocal sound effect as I slowly turn the deck 180 degrees, finally "snapping" it in place reversed from its original orientation. I say, "now if we did this right, the three of hearts should be the only card reversed in the deck, right?" All that remains is the revelation. I have been pleased with this approach...what do you think?
Message: Posted by: Hideo Kato (Feb 28, 2005 06:16AM)
[quote]On 2002-07-16 21:40, Marien Hopman wrote:
P.S. I still don't know what makes the cards match.[/quote]
Here is a thread about that principle.


I think it is not wise to have spectator select one pair in case two or more pairs match. Just stop dealing and proceed to show third match.

Hideo Kato
Message: Posted by: MR2Guy (Mar 15, 2005 12:50AM)
Here is my routine.

I bring out the deck, and place it on top of a glass, or have someone put it in their pocket, or just place it on the table. Then I start by asking the audience if they've noticed that card effects seem to all start out the same, a card is chosen, placed back in the deck, shuffled, etc. Doesn't it make more sense if I were to take out a single card first, lay it face down on the table as a prediction before anyone chooses a card? As I say this, I pull out a single, opposite colored back card from my pocket, and lay it on the table. Now I milk it for all it's worth. Have a spectator put their finger on the card. Wouldn't everyone agree that this would be the fairest conditions? Then I have a spectator name any card. Once again I milk it, making sure they have a totally free choice, the ability to change their mind, etc. etc. Then I ask them to name their thought of card.

Turning the card over, it is the gaff card with all 52 cards printed on the face, which always gets a laugh. Then, of course, turn attention to the ID deck that was in full view during the effect and reveal their card.

This routine always has a strong impact. It dispenses with the akwardness of asking the spectator to name their card first, as your prediction card is on the table. Also, when spectators think back, they seem to forget the gaffed card joke, and only remember you putting a single card on the table, them naming any card, and turning it over and it matching.

Message: Posted by: Hideo Kato (Mar 15, 2005 06:23PM)
Although I was not impressed when I read MR2Guy's post first the time, I found it was a good use of 52 cards when I tried it.

A joke with 52 cards relaxes spectators' guard, and make the reverse in ID more powerful.

I also reconfirmed Maigc is to control spectators' mind to have them feel samll things bigger.

Thanks for the inspiration. I will try this strategy for other tricks.

Hideo Kato

I recently started to think Magic is like Hypnotism. If audience is under magician's control, he can impress a trick more effectively.
Message: Posted by: MR2Guy (Mar 15, 2005 07:37PM)
Thanks Hideo

You are right, it kinda looks bland on paper, but I've been doing the routine for years, and it's a worker's effect, and I wrestled with sharing it, but this forum is so positive, what the heck.

One note if you are going to use this, after revealing the single 52 card gaff, you must immediately pull the spectator's attention on the ID, to them, the trick is over, and was just a joke. As in all effects, timing is crutial.

Message: Posted by: Hideo Kato (Mar 16, 2005 06:30AM)
Thanks for the further suggestion.
Please be assured that I understand your point. In the first trial, I believe I did it just as you suggested. I always try to construct most effective framing of routine.

Hideo Kato
Message: Posted by: chrisch (Apr 10, 2005 11:45AM)
Use Osterlind's new breakthrough card routine (found on his blog) . It's a killer - because you don't actually touch the deck. You don't extract the info.
Message: Posted by: chrisch (Apr 10, 2005 11:46AM)
BTW his blog is on "osterlindmysteries.com"
Message: Posted by: Sonny Vegas (Apr 12, 2005 08:29PM)
Great ideas from everybody :)

Invisible Deck: I like to throw in a little "Spirit from Beyond". I say I had an Uncle Morrie who was a famous magician who is no longer with us, but he still likes to be in the limelight every once in a while. Well, he's here tonight and bugging me to let him do a trick. This is open field for some funny clarvoyance and a great card effect to boot.
Message: Posted by: fr3ky magick (May 1, 2005 03:21PM)
I have jsut bourght the Invisable deck trick,am waiting for the delviery now. Has any one got any tips/advice on it etc?