(Close Window)
Topic: Whats your best joke with linking rings??
Message: Posted by: ludmer (Aug 13, 2003 02:33PM)
Got ideas?? Im looking for some new jokes to use in a comedy linking ring routine.
Message: Posted by: belfazar (Aug 18, 2003 11:43AM)
After showing three rings I say, "This reminds me of the three rings of marriage....the engagement ring, the wedding ring, and the suffering.."
Message: Posted by: Neale Bacon (Aug 18, 2003 01:25PM)
I do a comedy version and one of my favorite lines is "I used to call this the Bruce Lee method but found out recently children didn't know who I was talking about, so its now the Jackie Chan method"
Don't ask why, but it gets a laugh.
Message: Posted by: Payne (Aug 19, 2003 03:16PM)
My favorite is,

. . . there's a hole in every ring, otherwise they'd be plates.
Message: Posted by: Dorian Rhodell (Aug 21, 2003 03:19AM)
Just to give credit where credit is due, the suffering line was the brain child of Tom Ogden.
Message: Posted by: Neale Bacon (Sep 12, 2003 05:36PM)
I also hold up five rings as the Olympic Symbol and say, "Look...a 10 billion dollar waste of time."

Funny here since we have just been awarded the 2010 Olympics.
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Oct 15, 2003 03:56PM)
Since I use 16" rings, an old joke from the Dick Van Dyke show comes in handy. I keep the rings behind me and say,

"A guy walks into a psychiatrist's office and asks: Doc, can a man be in love with an elephant?

"The psychiatrist says: Of course not, that's insane!

"So the guy says: Then do you know where I can get rid of an engagement ring this big?"

Show single ring.

Sure, it's borscht belt as all heck, but it gets a laugh!

Lee Darrow, C.Ht.
Message: Posted by: Curtis Kam (Nov 14, 2003 10:36PM)
Here's a line that's so bad, I've never forgotten it, from the moment I thought of it:

"The mystery of the Chinese Linkin' Rings. I don't know why they call it that, Lincoln wasn't even Chinese."

I dare you.
Message: Posted by: twistedace (Nov 25, 2003 01:26PM)
I just laughed so hard Curtis, thanks for the dare, haha. :lol:
Message: Posted by: matthewjohnson (Jan 31, 2004 01:05PM)
Linking ring gag for children:

"Most magicians buy these rings from magic stores, I bought these from an elephant's wedding shop."

Have fun with it,
Matthew :angelflying:
Message: Posted by: snedglow (Mar 7, 2004 04:50PM)
I use Dan Fleischman's (sp?) linking rings and they won't fit an elephant.

He has a good routine, I think, and one of the things he does with kids that I really like is he does a link while the rings are being held by two children. He clanks the key ring loudly on the ring the kids are holding and asks them if that hurt. When they answer no, he replies off the cuff, "It will! But just a little." This works well with 9-10 year olds, I've found. hey get a kick out of it.

Message: Posted by: mkiger (Mar 14, 2004 02:08AM)
Oh dear, I think I broke them.

I used to do a comedy bit in which I could not keep them from linking. Crash unlinking, double to the edge of the table, quick link while panting and wild-eyed. Down the arm to a link, a silent unlink with a baffled experssion.

The kids liked it.
Message: Posted by: London (Apr 4, 2004 10:55PM)
This does not really answer your question , however I would say one of the funniest if not THE funniest ring routines is Jay Marshalls routine. But the most unique routine and my favorite ring routine is Tom Franks routine.From my home town of Cincinnati Ohio. he has a dvd out with his routine. if you do a search you can find it easy enough.
Message: Posted by: MagicalArtist (May 3, 2004 11:25PM)
I have to question the wisdom of performing the linking rings to patter. This reminds me of the fellow who once asked on a message board what patter he should perform Zombie to. Some effects are so visual, that patter is not only unnecessary, it is superfluous. I think linking rings (and the Zombie) are most beautiful when they are performed to music, as David Copperfield did.

I am reminded of this quote from Expert Card Technique by Jean Hugard:

Turning to the other side of the question, we undoubtedly find not only effects which lose nothing by being presented in silence, but also a number which must actually gain in artistic value by that mode of presentation. Such are those effects which, on the one hand, include in their performance much that will attract the eye and, on the other hand, those in which close attention is desirable, on the part of the audience. In neither class can patter be regarded as an artistic essential. On the contrary, the introduction of patter where it must be either unnecessary or detrimental, could only be regarded as an advantage by those to whom the requirements of art are unknown. Anything not requisite or, at the least, not tending to enhance the effect produced, must be a blemish, artistically speaking. Therefore, we are bound to admit that silent presentation can be perfectly artistic, and that patter is not a necessary constituent of our art, in certain phases.