(Close Window)
Topic: Thoughts on Mirabill
Message: Posted by: Tony Iacoviello (Feb 20, 2008 07:45PM)
By now Iím sure that at least a few others have seen this excellent effect put out by Dr. Bill. Personally, I love what he has done and feel this is a perfect routine, impromptu, in the participant's hands, easy to do, just wonderful.

And before Doc Spektor jumps in, yes, Iíve done it with tarot, and Old Maid cards to boot. ;)

http://outlaw-effects.com/outlaweffects/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=44&Itemid=79

Tony
Message: Posted by: IAIN (Feb 21, 2008 02:57AM)
Gaaah....sold! just ordered it...
Message: Posted by: Lior (Feb 21, 2008 07:33AM)
I just got it
Not a lot of time to read it all and poat a full review.
But I can tell you it's good.
I will read it tonight on my flight to Blackpool.

Lior
Message: Posted by: Kevin Cook (Feb 21, 2008 07:45AM)
[quote]
On 2008-02-21 08:33, Lior wrote:
I just got it
Not a lot of time to read it all and poat a full review.
But I can tell you it's good.
I will read it tonight on my flight to Blackpool.
[/quote]

I have not read it either. But I too can say it is very good indeed.
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Feb 21, 2008 07:46AM)
Thanks Tony and Lior! Old maid cards, hmm...

Abraxus, if you are who I think you are :), check your email.
Message: Posted by: Lior (Feb 21, 2008 08:16AM)
I meant I read part of it , not allof it.
:)
It is even very ggod
Lior
Message: Posted by: Jim-Callahan (Feb 21, 2008 10:13AM)
Let me state that I did purchased this work by Dr.Bill and that I am pleased with the ideas set forth in the manuscript.
(In fact very pleased)

I have been playing with this thing on and off for years and was never happy with my personal improvements to the presentation.

However I am pleased with Bills improvements and presentational ideas.
(Wish I had put it all together as Bill has)

This is something I will now use because it is greatly streamlined and very clean.

Thanks Bill.

J ...
Message: Posted by: IAIN (Feb 21, 2008 10:52AM)
[quote]
On 2008-02-21 08:46, Bill Cushman wrote:
Thanks Tony and Lior! Old maid cards, hmm...

Abraxus, if you are who I think you are :), check your email.
[/quote]

yes, I did, and thank you!
Message: Posted by: Chris K (Feb 21, 2008 11:10AM)
I hate you all so so much.

Like everybody else who cut their teeth on the original Miraskill, I have my own variations and approaches but I have been hoping for something really new and novel with the idea. Now there is Tony Eye, Lior, and Jim all saying this is good...

like I said I hate you. I had, literally, said that all purchases were on indefinite hold for the forseeable future (health issues have made me cancel shows and miss a lot of my day job) and the first thing I see is this. I hate you, I hate you, I hate you. I suppose if I eat pasta for the next week I can order it...
Message: Posted by: Joshua Quinn (Feb 21, 2008 11:48AM)
I generally wait for reviews, but last night when I saw the description and saw Bill's name on it, I took the plunge without hesitation -- and I'm glad. Every good thing everyone has said about it is true. The original never did all that much for me, but this -- especially the two-person version -- is something I will use, and often.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Quinn (Feb 21, 2008 03:03PM)
I know I've already posted about this, but the more I play with it, the more I like it. It's just really, incredibly good -- clean, fair, hands-off, logical, and baffling. With a little thought, it can be played as straight precognition, personality profiling, or influence. I've sent Bill a small addition I came up with for the two-player version, which allows you to make your prediction even earlier -- literally before [i]anything[/i] happens or any choices are made. If anyone else would like it, PM me (assuming you already have Mirabill, of course; if you don't, it will make no sense).
Message: Posted by: Chris K (Feb 21, 2008 03:47PM)
You'll have to PM me that later, Quinn. I ordered mine immediately after my post and am eagerly awaiting it.

L
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Feb 21, 2008 10:10PM)
Jim, you are welcome. And thank you for taking the time to make such a wonderful post. I'm interested to hear how you showcase Mirabill in performance.

Joshua I'm glad you are working on the two person game. The more I do it, the more I like it. It has a whole different vibe, especially when you get the right two participants. I can't wait to see what you've come up with.

Thanks again everyone!
Message: Posted by: Dr Spektor (Feb 22, 2008 08:18AM)
Got it - love it! Like all greats, the method is simple to do but required a great creative mind to think it up in that way - best of all - actually, 2 best of alls - you can do it far away across the room when the action begins - and you can include 2 participants instead of 1 as a game - the thoughts of fate, chance and so on spring to mind... ooops... 3rd best of all - borrowed shuffled deck! Oh yeah - one more thing - the price is way lower than what this is worth - a real worker you can start doing anywhere impromptu
Message: Posted by: Paul h. (Feb 22, 2008 10:30AM)
Agree with Dr Spektor,

This is a great routine. Well thought out, and the simple method is what makes it so brilliant. You can't get any more hands-off then this.

Highly recommended!

Best,

Paul h.
Message: Posted by: TheTableTopTrixta (Feb 22, 2008 01:41PM)
I Bought it and I LOVE it!

So simple and so clever, one of thoses things when ithink to myself how could someone think up that!

I Doubt I will use this gem all the time during my tablehopping work, personally I am going to keep it until that moment when someone chucks you a deck of cards and says 'Go on, show us a trick'

Very very clever - nice Ebook only 9 pages read it and learnt it within 10 mins!

Clever twist at the end!!!!

the 2nd prediction makes it a mch stronger routine

Well done and thatbks for the fast delvery (email)

Ash
Message: Posted by: John C (Feb 22, 2008 01:57PM)
Cool, certainly!
Message: Posted by: Jim-Callahan (Feb 23, 2008 10:05AM)
Just thought I would pass this on to those who have this manuscript.

Let them choose cards (Look and decide what card they will play next.)
Or show one card and let them pick the other from the face down lot.

One of the things I played with years ago was to let people choose pairs in the original version of this presentation.

This results in the spectators thinking back to the things they did that caused the outcome and the performer making note of the choices etc.
(The spectators have a greater investment in the outcome)
It is not random any longer because they are each choosing what card to play next.

Yet your prediction is still correct.
You are then not predicting a random event but instead how people will interact with each other and you.

It also ups the fairness quotient because the spectators are each looking and choosing from their respective hands.
Or choosing after knowing the color of one card.

Y'all have a good weekend,

J ///
Message: Posted by: Tony Iacoviello (Feb 23, 2008 10:24AM)
Just a thought for those who are in the know, imagine a hands off version with a prewritten written prediction on the table, all choices are made after the prediction is introduced, they play the game, read the prediction, and it is 100% correct. A marriage of Deddy's Free Will and Mirabill, call it Free Willy, it is a whale of a method!

Tony
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Feb 23, 2008 10:25AM)
I like that a lot Jim; there is kind of a 10 card poker deal feel to it. I had thought about giving the guest greater and greater freedom re: taking from different parts of their hand (I like calling it "their hand" too; great stuff and adds to the context I was striving for in The Twist version), shuffling, switching cards with the other guest (Turk's idea actually) but face up choices take it to another level. Thanks!
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Feb 23, 2008 10:30AM)
Tony and I were posting at the same time so I didn't get to read his great idea before responding to Jim's. Keep this stuff coming; I love it!
Message: Posted by: Joshua Quinn (Feb 23, 2008 12:09PM)
More off-the-top-of-my-head musings...

Like Jim, I had been playing with ideas about letting them choose freely. I was thinking that a good lead-in would be to do some sort of 50/50 prediction test with both of them, to gauge them. Like, try to guess whether each of them will choose red or black, two or three times in a row. This could use any number of different forms of subterfuge, depending on how involved and how non-impromptu you want to make it. Or, since it's nothing but a preliminary test, you could keep it simple and just do it for real, let it turn out however it does, and make note of the results for future reference. Then have them do it against each other. After they're done, write a prediction based on what you've seen, and go into the full "game."
Message: Posted by: Turk (Feb 23, 2008 01:03PM)
Here are a two [i]twists[/i] with which I have been playing around:

1. Allow the spectator to have the "one-time" option to exchange his remaining undealt packet with the other person (for his packet). If being performed with two spectators, they each have this "ont-time" option.

2. Allow the participants to, at any time, reach into the other person's packet and remove any card--and then have the other person reciprocate and reach into the first person's packet and remove any card from that other person's packet. (Or, to simply remove any card from his packet and not necessarily remove the current top card.)

While I really like Mirabill as a stand-alone effect, I've also been playing around with ideas of being able to incorporate Mirabill into a two or three phase routine. Since the Royals are "just sitting there", I wanted to attempt to incorporate their use into a routine so as to tie the entire "thing" together like a big Tootsie roll.

Right now, I'm toying with following up Mirabill with John Bannon's "Degrees of Freedom" effect. Mirabill applies to colors; Degrees of Freedom applies to a favorite suit within a certain color.

One of the other reasons I am considering incorporating Degrees of Freedom into the effect is because Degrees of Freedom passed the "wife test" and because, like Mirabill, there is a huge amount of audience involvement involved in the Degrees of Freedom presentation. And finally, the methodologies are completely different and tend to cancel each other out in the minds of the spectators.

All told, you should be able to easily get approximately 10+ minutes out of such combined presentation. And all of it impromptu and with a borrowed deck (if required).

BTW, with the "Rule of Threes" always in the back of my mind, I'm also trying to think of a 3rd similarly related effect that can be performed with Mirabill and Degrees of Freedom. Any ideas in this regard would be greatly appreciated.

Then again, maybe I should just leave well enough alone and perform Mirabill alone and by itelf. Your thoughts greatly appreciated.
Message: Posted by: Tony Iacoviello (Feb 23, 2008 01:25PM)
Turk

I am using OOTW as a follow up and closing. This puts all emphasis back on the participant, and is in my opinion is a great way to end.

Tony
Message: Posted by: Necromancer (Feb 23, 2008 01:31PM)
On a sidenote -- Bill, have you tipped off Barrie Richardson about this? I think it's right up his alley.

I've said it privately and I'll say it here: well done.

Best,
Neil
Message: Posted by: bevbevvybev (Feb 23, 2008 01:48PM)
I would play it as the game of war
And I would have the second prediction already written and bring that in to play first - it would have written on it 'the second game will be won by...' etc
Then for the second game I would have seen quite a lot farther into the future
However, I concur with the idea of basing it around reading people and not getting into the prediction malarky, but basing it on some other skill
Message: Posted by: deputy (Feb 23, 2008 02:30PM)
I just read this and love it as well. Very easy to do and I think could be very fun to do and you can use a lot of presentation angles as a few have come up with. This will be used at an upcoming gig to test this out. Great job Bill
Message: Posted by: JohnWells (Feb 23, 2008 03:19PM)
Great stuff indeed Doctor.
Message: Posted by: Nathan Pain (Feb 23, 2008 04:15PM)
I ordered it...I will read and post!

Nathan
Message: Posted by: evolve629 (Feb 24, 2008 01:21PM)
I thoroughly enjoy the Mirabill!!! Excellent thinking, Dr. Bill.
I have a small problem though - I never get a tie in the 2nd round;
instead I always win!
Message: Posted by: Nathan Pain (Feb 24, 2008 01:46PM)
Yes...very good...a quick read and a quick learn...but take the time to have a good presentation.

Nathan
Message: Posted by: IAIN (Feb 24, 2008 03:13PM)
Mr eye - may I also recommend Worlds Apart by Pete Duffie as an inbetweener from this, to OOTW...it can set you up for OOTW too...

anyway - MIRABILL is a lovely piece of work...
Message: Posted by: Tony Iacoviello (Feb 24, 2008 03:20PM)
Abraxus


Thank you Sir. I have not had the pleasure to read that routine, and will look it up. Hopefully it will play well with Old Maid cards as well. :)

Tony
Message: Posted by: IAIN (Feb 24, 2008 03:23PM)
I've just checked - its in Inspirations, the Duffie and mighty Sadowtiz combo...
Message: Posted by: Tony Iacoviello (Feb 24, 2008 03:30PM)
Thank you again, it is not in my library, but I just located where I can get it.

Tony
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Feb 24, 2008 06:56PM)
I love all of this brainstorming, creativity, sharing and general good will on the Mirabill threads! You folks are wonderful and I appreciate all the feedback and support.

By the way, a Mirabill banner and direct link is now right next to the Luna banner when you open up the Penny forum.
Message: Posted by: jquackc (Feb 24, 2008 07:04PM)
I just recently bought this puppy and am very happy with my purchase. I don't really have any thoughts to add (right now) but I just wanted to give a mention to how clever I think this routine is. I'm new to the principle at hand so it's very exciting for me to have this little bit of information. This is a cool routine and the handling (if you could call it that) couldn't be easier giving a lot of room to focus on presentation.

By the way, Bill, $15 for any ebook these days is rare. You could've easily charged much more (but don't!). Thank you for your fast delivery too.
Message: Posted by: coupcoupdaddy (Feb 25, 2008 06:14AM)
We love your new work with our old friend, Dr. Bill. Thank you. Were James' familiars with you?
Message: Posted by: Waters (Feb 27, 2008 11:43AM)
All,

I posted this elsewhere, but I realized my comments were not on the "primary" thread. I really have enjoyed Bill's developments here. My comment was:


I buy for a number of reasons:

1. A great routine/presentation
2. A streamlined or improved methodology
3. Simply for knowledge (to inspire and develop myself)


In my opinion, all are worthy reasons to buy. You never know when an idea or two will finally spawn a new idea or, when an "epiphany" may occur. This can't happen if I don't develop a base of knowledge and immerse myself in the ideas of others.

Biil's routine, "Mirabill" is one such example. I honestly have never investigated the "Miraskill" effect or method. I owe Bill a lot for introducing me to the plot/routine and providing a great (and improved) method to accomplish it. He has also included a number of presentational possibilities to help us blend this into current work (and our subtexts). This is very clear and concise and the method has been carefully woven together. Very nicely done.


This was a great purchase and I look forward to working more with it.

Great!

Sean
Message: Posted by: John Smetana (Feb 27, 2008 05:05PM)
I bought it..I love it..I'll use it...It's an elegant presentation for a true classic...Thanks Bill


all the best,
John
AKA Doc Jakson
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Feb 27, 2008 09:28PM)
Coupcoupdaddy, Sean and John, I appreciate all of your wonderful comments. I'd love to read stories of you all using Mirabill out in the trenches once you are at that point. I've been employing the many suggestions our peers have made and my presentations get more and more intense.
Message: Posted by: evolve629 (Feb 28, 2008 09:10AM)
[quote]
On 2008-02-24 14:21, evolve629 wrote:
I thoroughly enjoy the Mirabill!!! Excellent thinking, Dr. Bill.
I have a small problem though - I never get a tie in the 2nd round;
instead I always win!
[/quote]
Dr. Bill, can you solve my quandary? Thanks.
Message: Posted by: Xtasy0 (Feb 28, 2008 10:53AM)
[quote]
On 2008-02-28 10:10, evolve629 wrote:
[quote]
On 2008-02-24 14:21, evolve629 wrote:
I thoroughly enjoy the Mirabill!!! Excellent thinking, Dr. Bill.
I have a small problem though - I never get a tie in the 2nd round;
instead I always win!
[/quote]
Dr. Bill, can you solve my quandary? Thanks.
[/quote]

that happened to me once while I was practicing, then I figured out what I did wrong and it hasn't happened since. pm me if you are still having trouble.
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Feb 28, 2008 03:55PM)
"I have a small problem though - I never get a tie in the 2nd round;
instead I always win!"

I honestly thought you were teasing when you first wrote that!

I think the quandry is why aren't you taking this logic defying run of luck to Vegas? :) Seriously, if Xtsay hasn't already solved your problem please PM or email me.
Message: Posted by: Tony Iacoviello (Feb 28, 2008 09:50PM)
This is a great thread, I love the ideas and creativity.

Thank you all!
Message: Posted by: carmean (Feb 29, 2008 09:12AM)
Thanks Bill, great effect!
Message: Posted by: mindhunter (Mar 6, 2008 10:33AM)
Please add my name to the list of those that really enjoy having this routine at our disposal! I agree with many of the great points made in the above posts and will not repeat them.

I have a few select card mentalism routines that I perform, and of these, most involve stacks and memorization.

This is certainly great to have at hand when someone tosses you THEIR deck...but is strong enough to use as a performance piece that you introduce yourself.

I like the additions of having the options for the spectators exchange cards, packets, etc., and I have been playing this up in a "DEAL or NO DEAL" kind of theme. It has been playing very nicely!

Thanks, Bill.

Bryn
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Mar 6, 2008 10:57PM)
You are welcome and thank you Bryn! It is interesting you mention using Mirabill in more formal performance. Several other mentalists have suggested that The Twist version included is particularly suited to such presentations and have offered some valuable enhancements.
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Mar 11, 2008 08:37PM)
I made a real glitch on another Mirabill thread that I'd like to correct. It should have read:

I appreciate all the wonderful feedback and I've been surprised by some of the people who have purchased copies. I'm even hearing some good things from card guys! Peter Duffie(!) wrote me:

"I grinned widely as I read your elegant solution. Far from adding any
complications, you have managed to simplify and actually improve an
established classic card trick. I am sure Stewart James would have loved
this as much as I do."

I wrote John, not Peter on the post in question and didn't catch it until it was too late. Sigh.

I've gathered several wonderful ideas and variations from a wide range of mentalists and magicians. Some from this very thread. John Bannon was kind enough to share something from his own wonderful variation of Miraskil that is at once so simple (a real "duh, why didn't I think of that" moment) yet takes The Twist handling in Mirabill to the next level. I will be collecting all these great ideas and sending them out as a supplement.
Message: Posted by: Nathan Pain (Mar 11, 2008 09:34PM)
Yes!!!! I love supplements!

Nathan
Message: Posted by: DT3 (Mar 11, 2008 09:41PM)
[quote]
On 2008-03-11 22:34, nathanpain wrote:
Yes!!!! I love supplements!

Nathan
[/quote]

And I am very happy that you do.

DT3
Message: Posted by: ricardo carpenter (Mar 29, 2008 04:09PM)
The idea of two spectators playing a game is very good.

Twist... in French it could be a variation of "Bataille"...

Jacques Terrien
Message: Posted by: MaXiMoN (Sep 6, 2013 09:33PM)
For those interested in my handling and my thoughts on mirabill -for mirabill owners and fans of course-

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=515108&forum=82&4

your welcomed to use it just let me know how it went :)
Message: Posted by: Pomyles (Sep 7, 2013 03:36AM)
Thanks for your reviews. I'm waiting for it. Feedback soon.
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (Sep 7, 2013 12:16PM)
Maximon, I like your additions.

Mirabill is a great routine. I like it, and Bannon's version, a lot.

I know this trick fools people, but I can't for the life of me understand why. (And this goes for the original.) If you have an equal amount of two objects and match up some of them, obviously the ones not matched up will be the same. This seems so intuitive to me and I have a hard time understanding why it's not to everyone.

(I have the same issue with the piano card trick. It's another one where the method strikes me as almost a non-trick.)

But as I said, I DO know this fools people. I wish I could have had this performed on me 20 years ago before I knew the secret. Most tricks I can get myself to see from a spectator's perspective even if I know the method, but with miraskill(bill) I just can't wrap my head around what they think they're experiencing.
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Sep 7, 2013 04:17PM)
Finally, an easy explanation for how the principle underlying Miraskill works, lol! Now on to why it fools.

First, the logical disconnect of the first phase where things don't end up the same. Phase 2 alone would go over my head but Joe is likely correct that it would be transparent to many.

Second, embedding the processes within a meaningful framework. To quote KK, "Meaning is the best misdirection. " I think John Bannon and I, simultaneously, took this up another notch via the handling I call "The Twist." By the way I LOVE using John's method, especially with folks who know mine . It is so sneaky! Fun to pull off, a true "magician fooler."

And another by the way; I just found out that the sale prices for my ebooks are still up at Outlaw and won't be able to be changed until Monday. That and this thread explain a sudden spike in Mirabill sales!
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (Sep 7, 2013 05:26PM)
[quote]
On 2013-09-07 17:17, Bill Cushman wrote:
Finally, an easy explanation for how the principle underlying Miraskill works, lol! Now on to why it fools.

First, the logical disconnect of the first phase where things don't end up the same. Phase 2 alone would go over my head but Joe is likely correct that it would be transparent to many.

[/quote]

You say the first phase is a logical disconnect, which I think is true, but my mind can't wrap around [i]why[/i] the audience doesn't call shenanigans after the first phase. If we're at a high school dance with 26 boys and 26 girls and there are a certain number of boy/girl couples slow dancing -- regardless of [i]how many[/i] couples are dancing -- then obviously the boys and girls not dancing will be equal. This, which is the backbone of the trick, is essentially common sense.

Again, I'm not saying this trick doesn't fool people. I'm saying just the opposite. There is an 80 year history that shows it does, and Bill's version is an improvement on the original. I just wish I knew why the method is so difficult for people to grasp, as I would like to put other methods in a similar neurological blindspot.
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Sep 7, 2013 06:57PM)
Perhaps it is a combination of the initial logical disconnect and "cloaking the hoax" in meaning that establishes the neurological blindspot? And could you be underestimating the power of giving a "persuasive meaning" even on its own? I mention the possibility, especially given that you didn't examine the second part of my explanation. Almost like it evoked a neurological blind spot in your seeking a logical explanation. This is not meant in anyway to be a criticism; I'm enjoying exploring the answer to your question.
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (Sep 7, 2013 07:53PM)
[quote]
On 2013-09-07 19:57, Bill Cushman wrote:
Perhaps it is a combination of the initial logical disconnect and "cloaking the hoax" in meaning that establishes the neurological blindspot? And could you be underestimating the power of giving a "persuasive meaning" even on its own? I mention the possibility, especially given that you didn't examine the second part of my explanation. Almost like it evoked a neurological blind spot in your seeking a logical explanation. This is not meant in anyway to be a criticism; I'm enjoying exploring the answer to your question.
[/quote]

Well, the only reason I dismiss the "persuasive meaning" explanation is that I've done miraskill since I was maybe 11 or 12 when I got it out of Scarne's book and it fooled intelligent adults and I was no prodigy of magical performance, I was just a kid. And the "logical disconnect" you mention is really what I find most interesting. It [i]shouldn't[/i] be a logical disconnect. It should just be a huge red flag that you're not on the up and up.

I guess maybe the explanation is that the fact that you're going through this whole process with them suggests that there must be a purpose to it, so it doesn't occur to them to think that the outcome would be the same every time. Even if that's theoretically an easy leap to make, they just don't think to ever go that direction. (maybe I'm saying what you were saying Bill, I'm not sure.)

Well, regardless, I just enjoy thinking about these types of things. I've had people suss out methods I thought were much more clever, but this trick usually flies by them. But that's just one of the things I love about this craft.

I still have no idea why the piano card trick fools people.
Message: Posted by: MaXiMoN (Sep 7, 2013 11:20PM)
[quote]
On 2013-09-07 13:16, Joe Roberts wrote:
Maximon, I like your additions.

Mirabill is a great routine. I like it, and Bannon's version, a lot.

I know this trick fools people, but I can't for the life of me understand why. (And this goes for the original.) If you have an equal amount of two objects and match up some of them, obviously the ones not matched up will be the same. This seems so intuitive to me and I have a hard time understanding why it's not to everyone.

(I have the same issue with the piano card trick. It's another one where the method strikes me as almost a non-trick.)

But as I said, I DO know this fools people. I wish I could have had this performed on me 20 years ago before I knew the secret. Most tricks I can get myself to see from a spectator's perspective even if I know the method, but with miraskill(bill) I just can't wrap my head around what they think they're experiencing.
[/quote]

Thank you Joe you are more than welcomed to use them if you like :)

On the subject why it fools I believe what Mr Cushman said has perfect sense to me
Besides I'll add this as what I believe is going on, as well as the facts mentioned before
its a discrepancy that a laymen needs time and some trigger to start thinking about it ( and these two factors are not supplied ;) )

Best Regards
Message: Posted by: Pomyles (Sep 9, 2013 04:12AM)
Why people are fooled ? It's the same question with the well known trick that fooled Einstein and many others.

In the case of Mirabill I would say that the version with 2 spectators helps a lot because people are playing a game, not looking at a trick, and each one is focused on one thing : winning the game.
Message: Posted by: Bill Cushman (Sep 10, 2013 05:41PM)
But that doesn't address Joe's very accurate observation about the most basic Miraskill presentation flying over the heads of very intelligent people. In other words, it worked just as well before John and I shared our 2 person variations. I happen to think the main advantage is it amps up the entertainment, not the deception.

This is downright embarrassing, but I performed Miraskill for DECADES without a clue as to how it works. Even worse, I didn't know when I created Mirabill! I'd start to think about it at times, get confused and just move along. It worked, it fooled and entertained people so why strain my brain? Gulp, I am not really sure I fully grasped the oh so simple truth behind it until Joe summed it up with such simple language.

I don't know if this says more about me or the state of education! We are generally taught to retain and regurgitate facts, not how to think. I like to believe that I have moved beyond such limitations but obviously they still play a role, lol.