(Close Window)
Topic: Richard Osterlind's Numeric Vortex
Message: Posted by: magicinsight (Feb 8, 2013 02:15PM)
I received Mr. Osterlind's new Numeric Vortex in the mail yesterday. IT comes with a 16 page instructional booklet and the specially printed 60 cards. The cards themselves are professionally made each with different 6 digit numbers on each card. The back of the cards have a simple design. The cards themselves are ungimmicked and are not marked yet you can know what cards and numbers were selected. The booklet itself describes in depth the method for knowing the numbers that the spectator(s) selects. The method itself is very easy and well thought out. Even if you are not good with math, you will be able to master his system with a very short time perhaps even minutes. Mr. Osterlind also goes into detail as to how to use thse cards for one or more spectators, for stage use and even for pre-show work. He also goes over some presentation ideas. As usual, Mr. Osterlind's booklet is very well written and is filled with his professional knowledge and ideas. You can use these cards for close-up use. These numbers can be written down on your own business cards if you wanted to.

This is a professional produced and well thought out routine. Mr. Osterlind does discuss how to introduce these cards and random 6 digit numbers. The presentation ideas are topical and people would be able to relate to the ideas of how numbers play an important role in our daily lives and how important it is to keep certain numbers such as your credit card number confidential and secure.

I would highly recommend it if the premise interests you.

Michael
Message: Posted by: MatthewSims (Feb 8, 2013 11:35PM)
I just watched the video. I'm curious, can you remake the cards for a smaller size (say business card size)? Also, I would much rather present this as a memory demonstration. Could you have 2 or 3 spectators choose a card, glance across them to "memorize" them, and then reveal the order?

Matthew
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Feb 9, 2013 09:09AM)
Mathew,

The numbers are listed in the book and you can make up your own set of cards, of course.

You could present this as a memory stunt, but I would never do that. That would take away a huge chunk of the impact. Besides, with a little work, you can memorized long strings of numbers, for real.
Message: Posted by: magicinsight (Feb 11, 2013 03:06PM)
I tried it out for the first time today. The participants followed my directions and no one dropped any cards so my previous concern was unfounded. I was able to reveal the first two numbers without any problems. I got the third number wrong. I asked teh participant if he was sure that the number was incorrect. When he confirmed that I was indeed wrong, I realized that I made a silly calculation mistake and immediately corrected my self and revealed the corect number. I then revealed the entire number but not in sequence. The fact I initially gave the incorrect thrid number reinforced the difficulty in revealing the numbers to the spectators. I might keep on initially missing the third number on purpose only to correct myself. I also think it is a stronger effect is you do not reveal the numbers in sequence. I used a pad and a pencil to keep track of the numbers. It is very easy to do and got very strong reactions. Highly recommended.

Michael
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Feb 11, 2013 05:25PM)
Michael,

Glad to hear you are using Numeric Vortex.

Here's what I think will happen to you as you perform it. (It happened to me!)

As you become more familiar with the math, you will not "worry"! And the more you don't worry, the less you will make any mistakes.

Somewhere in the back of all our minds is a mean little voice whispering, "What will you do if you screw up???" With a little time behind the effect, that voice will go away and you won't even think about it anymore.

But you are right about making mistakes. It is fine and you shouldn't even think about it. It makes it look real. I made a small mistake in the demo and we said, "Who cares?" That makes it look good.

Richard
Message: Posted by: gypsyfish (Feb 11, 2013 08:14PM)
I've been wondering if the same principle is used in Mental Numbers (by Dalhun) in Richard's Easy to Master Mental Miracles 2. I rather liked the demo that accompanied Numeric Vortex (I thought the kids were impressed) and the audience in EtMMM2 was very impressed, too.

Shad
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Feb 11, 2013 08:38PM)
Shad,

Mental Numbers was a distant starting point, but far from the finished product. The history is fully covered in the booklet with the effect.

There are no "index" numbers on each card and you can see from the demo that the mathematical progression used in Dalhun's Mental Numbers is not in use with Numeric Vortex.

More importantly, I have tried to give the effect some real-world meaning so that an audience can relate to the importance of secret numbers in this day and age.

Thank you for your nice comments about both performances. I do appreciate that.

Richard
Message: Posted by: gypsyfish (Feb 12, 2013 02:15AM)
Thanks for the answer, Richard! I think this is another Osterlind product I'll have to buy soon.
Message: Posted by: espkeith (Feb 14, 2013 02:38PM)
[quote]
On 2013-02-11 21:38, Richard Osterlind wrote:
Mental Numbers was a distant starting point, but far from the finished product. The history is fully covered in the booklet with the effect.

There are no "index" numbers on each card and you can see from the demo that the mathematical progression used in Dalhun's Mental Numbers is not in use with Numeric Vortex.
[/quote]
I was thinking the same thing. I've been performing Mental Numbers for some time now thanks to you, Richard. While it's ok as is, I think Numeric Vortex solves a problem or two that I've had with that effect. I'll have to get my grubby hands on this. Thanks for doing the heavy lifting, Richard! :bg:
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Feb 15, 2013 08:05AM)
[quote]
On 2013-02-14 15:38, espkeith wrote:
[quote]
On 2013-02-11 21:38, Richard Osterlind wrote:
Mental Numbers was a distant starting point, but far from the finished product. The history is fully covered in the booklet with the effect.

There are no "index" numbers on each card and you can see from the demo that the mathematical progression used in Dalhun's Mental Numbers is not in use with Numeric Vortex.
[/quote]
I was thinking the same thing. I've been performing Mental Numbers for some time now thanks to you, Richard. While it's ok as is, I think Numeric Vortex solves a problem or two that I've had with that effect. I'll have to get my grubby hands on this. Thanks for doing the heavy lifting, Richard! :bg:
[/quote]

If you have been doing the original Mental Numbers, I think you will really like Numeric Vortex. And remember, unlike Mental Numbers, you can do the effect with 2 or 3 or 4 members at a time, without ever approaching them and their cards. You can even go back and forth between them!
Message: Posted by: espkeith (Feb 15, 2013 08:32AM)
[quote]
On 2013-02-15 09:05, Richard Osterlind wrote:
If you have been doing the original Mental Numbers, I think you will really like Numeric Vortex. And remember, unlike Mental Numbers, you can do the effect with 2 or 3 or 4 members at a time, without ever approaching them and their cards. You can even go back and forth between them!
[/quote]
Ok, that first point is a very nice step up. I'm sold! Ordered! :bg:
Message: Posted by: magicinsight (Feb 15, 2013 06:00PM)
Today I did Numeric Vortex for a school teacher. She was so impressed with the routine that she wants me to do a mentalism stage show for the school.
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Feb 15, 2013 06:02PM)
[quote]
On 2013-02-15 19:00, magicinsight wrote:
Today I did Numeric Vortex for a school teacher. She was so impressed with the routine that she wants me to do a mentalism stage show for the school.
[/quote]

Congratulations! That is the kind of story I love hearing!
Message: Posted by: magicinsight (Feb 15, 2013 06:47PM)
Mr. Ostelrind,

thank you very much. I am thrilled. Now I have to come up with a mentalism stage show for 200 high school children.

Michael
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Feb 15, 2013 07:09PM)
Great! I have plenty of products to sell! :)







Just kidding. I know you have a lot of my stuff. ;)
Message: Posted by: magicinsight (Feb 15, 2013 07:14PM)
[quote]
On 2013-02-15 20:09, Richard Osterlind wrote:
Great! I have plenty of products to sell! :)

Yes, I do. Just ask my wife. LOL.

Michael






Just kidding. I know you have a lot of my stuff. ;)
[/quote]
Message: Posted by: Magicus (Feb 17, 2013 10:01AM)
Great product in terms of quality and value. So glad it was designed in stage work size!

I was concerned about the memorization/calculation factor. No worries on that front at all. Richard has done a great job coming up with a very easy system - but impossible to reverse engineer by someone not familar with the method (I sat around for an hour trying to crack things before reading on in the booklet, with no success figuring it out until I read the process).

I'm happy with the purchase. It's already in rotation in my work and very well received.
Message: Posted by: santlerconjurer (Feb 18, 2013 11:56AM)
This is a question directed to specifically to Richard and others familiar with the product.

Say I wanted to introduce the cards not as exemplifying random numbers (as per Richard's presentation) but, rather, as an announced "stand in" for, say, the serial number on a dollar bill, or the sequence of numbers on someone's credit card. (The audience would agree only "one person can see a dollar bill's numbers, so this way everyone can see the number and everyone can see the test is fair" -- something like that).

So my question is simple: can the six digit number be announced in the same sequence as it appears on the card? (Calling the numbers in sequence reinforces the idea we're using a stand-in for a serial number or credit card number, or at least it seems so to me.)

Thanks.
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Feb 18, 2013 01:20PM)
Yes, you can call out the numbers in sequence. No problem.
Message: Posted by: mindhunter (Feb 19, 2013 06:13PM)
[quote]
On 2013-02-17 11:01, Magicus wrote:
Great product in terms of quality and value. So glad it was designed in stage work size!

I was concerned about the memorization/calculation factor. No worries on that front at all. Richard has done a great job coming up with a very easy system - but impossible to reverse engineer by someone not familar with the method
[/quote]

Same feelings here, Magicus. I have been playing around with the set I recently got and LOVE this. Very high quality materials, and I "got it" much quicker than I thought I would.

You WILL be happy with this purchase!

Bryn
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Feb 19, 2013 06:55PM)
Thanks, Bryn. I know you will come up with something "special" for them!
Message: Posted by: espkeith (Feb 20, 2013 07:54AM)
This arrived yesterday. I will need to go over it a bit to get the workings of it down, but the method is pretty sinister. I'd like to add that while I don't think it looks very "proppy," if you disagree you can always make your own after the fact. Can't wait to test this out. Thanks (again), Richard!
Message: Posted by: David Thiel (Feb 20, 2013 12:07PM)
I don't just dislike number based effects...I REALLY dislike them. Looking at my show, you're not going to find a "single one." (Double pun intended.)

So when I heard about Numeric Vortex, I shrugged and thought "...nope. Not gonna happen. What else is there?"

I mean my decision to completely ignore NV was instant and absolute.

I had the opportunity to spend some time with Richard Osterlind recently and he was very excited about this concept. I tried to steer the conversation into ANY other area: kittens, global warming...anything. But somehow the conversation kept returning to this NV thing.

Finally, Richard asked me directly what I thought of it. No way out. So I told him that I feel numbers are sterile and uninteresting and that, while Magic Squares and Add A Number work well for other people, I despise them.

I was looking at NV in the very most basic NUMBER application.

He started telling me about the method he had devised and I have to admit that it was edging into the "hmmm...this could be cool" category for this mathophobe. But I still wasn't really sold. Osterlind was in Edmonton for a lecture and he demonstrated NV for a room full of magicians and mentalists. When he finished people were utterly silent. One mentalist said out loud "I have no idea how you did that."

And I must admit that it was easing into the "okay...that IS cool." because Osterlind has THREE spectators choose stage sized cards with completely different numbers and he told them what numbers they were looking at. From across the room. (It COULD be a remote viewing routine with TEETH.)

I rather expect that you have an idea of how this effect works...and you'd be right. But what you don't know is how brilliant the method really is. You'll pick up the idea of it within ten minutes of reading the instructions. And, while it will take me a while to be completely comfortable with it, I can see some significant advantages.

There's nothing to memorize -- which is good for me cause I have enough in my head.

You don't even TOUCH the cards.

You could do TEN spectators if you wanted to -- although I expect that after the first five or six the audience will start dozing off.

The system is bulletproof and, while you're going to need to do some minor mental summersaults, it's going to be perfectly manageable.

I worked with it for a couple of hours last night and have a great feeling about it.

And these aren't JUST numbers. As listed in the instruction document: they could be randomly generated numbers...coordinates in a "spy theme" effect...a code...think about it in terms a of a University study on paranormal abilities or scientific theory.

There's a LOT you can do with six numbers.

I like the effect...I love the method. Will it actually make it into my show? Honestly, I'm not sure yet. If it doesn't, it will not be the fault of the prop...just a shaggy minded mentalist who still doesn't like numbers.

David.
Message: Posted by: espkeith (Feb 20, 2013 01:13PM)
That's higher praise than I can give, and mine's pretty high. :bg:

I would say for most presentations, you do touch the cards to a certain degree(however minimally), although there are ways around that...but even then, that's hardly a deal breaker, in my book.

I agree, I doubt I would do 10 people. Probably 3 at the most in my case, since I think the point will be well made. :)
Message: Posted by: maxnew40 (Feb 20, 2013 02:15PM)
Dang, there goes my wallet again. I also feel a little cold about number routines, but this is getting some good praise.

-Max
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Feb 20, 2013 06:00PM)
[quote]
On 2013-02-20 13:07, David Thiel wrote:
I don't just dislike number based effects...I REALLY dislike them. Looking at my show, you're not going to find a "single one." (Double pun intended.)

So when I heard about Numeric Vortex, I shrugged and thought "...nope. Not gonna happen. What else is there?"

I mean my decision to completely ignore NV was instant and absolute.

I had the opportunity to spend some time with Richard Osterlind recently and he was very excited about this concept. I tried to steer the conversation into ANY other area: kittens, global warming...anything. But somehow the conversation kept returning to this NV thing.

Finally, Richard asked me directly what I thought of it. No way out. So I told him that I feel numbers are sterile and uninteresting and that, while Magic Squares and Add A Number work well for other people, I despise them.

I was looking at NV in the very most basic NUMBER application.

He started telling me about the method he had devised and I have to admit that it was edging into the "hmmm...this could be cool" category for this mathophobe. But I still wasn't really sold. Osterlind was in Edmonton for a lecture and he demonstrated NV for a room full of magicians and mentalists. When he finished people were utterly silent. One mentalist said out loud "I have no idea how you did that."

And I must admit that it was easing into the "okay...that IS cool." because Osterlind has THREE spectators choose stage sized cards with completely different numbers and he told them what numbers they were looking at. From across the room. (It COULD be a remote viewing routine with TEETH.)

I rather expect that you have an idea of how this effect works...and you'd be right. But what you don't know is how brilliant the method really is. You'll pick up the idea of it within ten minutes of reading the instructions. And, while it will take me a while to be completely comfortable with it, I can see some significant advantages.

There's nothing to memorize -- which is good for me cause I have enough in my head.

You don't even TOUCH the cards.

You could do TEN spectators if you wanted to -- although I expect that after the first five or six the audience will start dozing off.

The system is bulletproof and, while you're going to need to do some minor mental summersaults, it's going to be perfectly manageable.

I worked with it for a couple of hours last night and have a great feeling about it.

And these aren't JUST numbers. As listed in the instruction document: they could be randomly generated numbers...coordinates in a "spy theme" effect...a code...think about it in terms a of a University study on paranormal abilities or scientific theory.

There's a LOT you can do with six numbers.

I like the effect...I love the method. Will it actually make it into my show? Honestly, I'm not sure yet. If it doesn't, it will not be the fault of the prop...just a shaggy minded mentalist who still doesn't like numbers.

David.
[/quote]



David is only saying all that because, when I was in Canada, I stole his car keys and told him I won't send them back unless he gives NV a good review!
Message: Posted by: Chris Philpott (Feb 20, 2013 07:15PM)
I'll add my name to those who dislike most number and math effects but who really love this routine. I think it's because the way Richard frames it, which is an object lesson in how to make something which is kind of dull (a string of six digits) into something of profound meaning (this could be your PIN or a lottery number -- it's safety and security, wealth, dreams... Big stuff!)

But it also goes beyond that -- fiction writers are praised for unearthing insights about the way we live, but it's not often you see such insights come from a magic or mentalist show. But I had one of those moments of insight while watching Richard's video of the effect -- it kind of slipped by me how much we rely on simple strings of random numbers and how that's all a castle built on sand if someone can simply read our minds and know those numbers. This isn't just a "think of a number" effect: it plays on deep fears and dreams and therein lies its power.

-Chris
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Feb 20, 2013 08:14PM)
Thank you so much, Chris, for recognizing the routine's potential.

Just like a really good card calling routine should say to the audience, "I would hate to play cards with him!" this routine should say, "Man, I had better not think of my own social security number!"

Richard
Message: Posted by: mormonyoyoman (Feb 23, 2013 09:14PM)
Confusion is not magic, and I got so confused by this thread, because of the earlier thread which was locked. (That thread has me wondering: In what world is claiming that someone thinks of his customers as "suckers" and claims of "new principle -- let me laugh!" NOT considered rude and the sort of things chicken would cackle only when they hide behind the internet?) Here I was wondering, what happened? Had it been unlocked with the chicken posts removed?

Well, now I can comment on my own experiences with NVortex. I performed it a couple of times within the confines of our apartment complex for elderly and really slow people. (That's the name of the apartment complex: Apartments for Elderly and Really Slow People.) But I performed it without the cards. Since there are about 5,000 flyers posted daily at our mailbox area down the street, on our car windshields, at the laundry building, and on our front gates, I tore up a bunch of them and put numbers on the back of them. Otherwise, I performed it rather standardly, ensuring that I spoke (during performance) about security, PINs, identity theft, etc.

Reaction was much larger than I expected - and the second time, it was even larger, though several of the folks had seen the first performance. The BEST reaction though, was that a couple of residents immediately walked to the front office and had their entrance codes changed.

People REALLY fear for their security these days, and NVortex can scare the bejunior out of them.

*jeep! & God Bless
--Grandpa
Message: Posted by: Nicolino (Feb 24, 2013 03:07AM)
The hilarious name of the appartement complex really made me chuckle, Chet - and it somehow reminded me of this tongue in cheek article:
http://searchwarp.com/swa312086.htm

I leave it to the readers whether fooling (and scaring) those residents with NV should be read as recommendation - or not! :D
Message: Posted by: CarlZen (Feb 24, 2013 06:19AM)
This effect is so strong I recommend it highly.Much potential here outstanding job Richard.
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Feb 24, 2013 07:34AM)
Thanks so much Carl. I am so glad that people like yourself waited to get the routine before commenting on it.

Please keep you eye on our newsletter. We have some exciting things about to happen. :)
Message: Posted by: Rodney Palmer (Feb 24, 2013 01:15PM)
I received my Numeric Vortex on Saturday. And like all of Richard's effects this one EXCELLENT. And I would expect No less than Perfection from Richard Osterlind. I, like many others tried to figure out the method first and I just could not figure it out. My wife who is a Teacher and Specializes in Math Principles also could not figure out the method. And she still does not know as I will not tell her.

Rodney
Message: Posted by: Olympic Adam (Feb 24, 2013 05:07PM)
Just ordered from Penguin and am really looking forward to it - will be back with thoughts I am sure!
Message: Posted by: santlerconjurer (Feb 28, 2013 08:13AM)
Received my NV late yesterday afternoon. By 7pm I was frightening myself with a new-found ability to quickly and accurately divine six unknown numbers.

Find a copy of La Dolce Vita or view Falkenstein and Willard in performance. The blindfolded seer on stage calling numbers on the cards held by audience members is as primal as the image of a tuxedo-clad performer answering questions written on little slips of paper.

Thank you Richard.
Message: Posted by: Olympic Adam (Feb 28, 2013 12:41PM)
Got mine today - I will be making this performance ready immediately!

hard to beat for a number effect, the numbers are excellent, though spectators wont have the opportunity to look through, there are multiple repeated digits and the same number does not follow the number every time, there are no funny marks on the cards,
I thought this would either be excellent or terrible, I'm happy to say that so far it's excellent!

Even if used slightly differently, the work that has gone into the actual numbers and learning the system will be worth the price - plus you get the nice set of cards with it if you want to use them,
plenty of room to play with this
Message: Posted by: PatrickGregoire (Mar 2, 2013 04:24PM)
Received this and it is great. Fooled a math teacher. I wish the cards came with a solid colored back design. There is no reason why they were printed with a pattern; it gives people the idea that maybe they are marked.
Message: Posted by: Olympic Adam (Mar 2, 2013 07:15PM)
[quote]
On 2013-03-02 17:24, PatrickGregoire wrote:
Received this and it is great. Fooled a math teacher. I wish the cards came with a solid colored back design. There is no reason why they were printed with a pattern; it gives people the idea that maybe they are marked.
[/quote]

solid black might have been nice, but it's not an issue for me - if it came to it, you could write or print your own cards anyway
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Mar 2, 2013 09:23PM)
We decided to go with a legitimate "security pattern" (its one that is actually used on some security envelopes) for the backs. We actually had to pay for the rights!

I know it will sound stupid from this end of the business, but just say, "The backs have a "security pattern background" to prevent any kind of markings." Just say it and keep on going. No one ever questions it. :bg:
Message: Posted by: PatrickGregoire (Mar 2, 2013 10:54PM)
Thanks guys. I didn't think anything of it until I performed it for someone and he was trying real hard to figure it out and asked if the backs were marked because of the pattern. I agree that if I mention what Richard said that it will probably shoot down that theory completely and make it seem that much more impossible, and I won't be lying either!
Message: Posted by: JanForster (Mar 3, 2013 05:08AM)
First of all: Richard I have it, I love it! In the mid nineties I was playing with the original idea, I even still have the cards I made up in those days - but I never performed it. So I really can appreciate what you have done - it is a gem! I will perform it, perfect for some of my clients (banks who often have the theme of security, the numbers are TANs in my case :) ... ) The back pattern is a non issue. And Patrick: you are also allowed to ly, I do it all the time - thanks to my catholic education. The back pattern is also no problem at all as there are so many options to perform with your back towards your spectators. Jan
Message: Posted by: Magicus (Mar 3, 2013 06:47AM)
[quote]
On 2013-03-02 17:24, PatrickGregoire wrote:
Received this and it is great. Fooled a math teacher. I wish the cards came with a solid colored back design. There is no reason why they were printed with a pattern; it gives people the idea that maybe they are marked.
[/quote]

After the two specs have their cards, I take the rest of the stack and hand them to an audience member bottom side up. It's a natural move and I also tell them they can check the cards over without letting me see them. I leave them be and run the rest of the routine to its conclusion with the two specs. That way if someone thinks the card backs are marked they have to reconsider (otherwise why would I hand them out). And it lets me set up what I need in a smooth manner.
Message: Posted by: rgnprof (Mar 3, 2013 08:42AM)
I just got this as well and REALLY like it - fooled my wife which is not easy to do! (She is a tough audience). I am a math/statistics guy by training and this really fits my approach and I found learning the technique very easy and straightforward. I can see many different ways to utilize this. Had not really thought about the backs being an issue - focus on the randomness of the numbers...I like the "security background" idea though, but probably will not even mention the backs in performance.

My only concern is that I'm a little skittish about allowing the spectators to handle the cards too much, although my initial routining takes the cards out of my hands pretty quickly. Any 'recovery' ideas? I will, of course, model cutting the cards and handling them etc., but I'm just thinking ahead...

ryan
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Mar 3, 2013 09:05AM)
I would never worry about putting the cards in a spectators hands. (Unless, of course, you were doing a dinner for mathematics scholars at an MIT dinner - that was not serving liquor!)

As a matter of fact, I do EXACTLY what Magicus does and hand out the cards, face up, to a nearby spectator. I just say, "Make sure these are all different, just like I did with my card calling routine on Mind Mysteries two.
Message: Posted by: PatrickGregoire (Mar 3, 2013 12:13PM)
[quote]
On 2013-03-03 06:08, JanForster wrote:
The back pattern is a non issue. And Patrick: you are also allowed to ly, I do it all the time - thanks to my catholic education. The back pattern is also no problem at all as there are so many options to perform with your back towards your spectators. Jan
[/quote]

No, it's not a non issue because it came up for me. Yes it was a casual situation and I will only be using this on stage so nobody will dare or have time to ask about the back pattern if for some reason they think it's marked. It's overall a non issue and not a big deal. I just wanted to raise the "issue", that's all.

I do know that you can do it with your back turned, that's how I did it. That's why I mentioned that he was trying REAL HARD to come up with a method because it seemed so impossible. People reach pretty far when they have no clue.

I know I can lie, and I don't mind it at all. My point was that since I don't have to lie about it, I can 100% confidently tell them that it's a security pattern to prevent seeing through the cards. It's just a nice bonus to be able to tell the truth because it can't backfire on you.
Message: Posted by: George Hunter (Apr 15, 2013 07:04PM)
In my experience for a month or so now, the back pattern is very nearly a non-issue. Yes, the most skeptical spectator who is trying to impress his friends will free associate and seize on any plausible explanation, including memorization of all 60 cards and (yes) the back pattern. Fortunately, there is absolutely nothing in the back pattern to find. Unlike some book tests and other props, they could study it to their heart's content--though, overall, it is unwise to set that precedent.
The longer I reflect on this effect, and perform it, the better I like it. And, performing it for two spectators (like in Osterlind's demo) is indeed more powerful than performing it for one spectator.

George Hunter, "Mentalist Subordinaire"
Message: Posted by: David Thiel (Apr 15, 2013 07:44PM)
In many ways NV is a lot like the Invisib*e Deck. There's simply no way it can be figured out. When Osterlind did it for a group of magicians and mentalists there were open jaws and some very soft whispers. No one had any idea...and ultimately it's impossible to back your way into the solution either.

It's devious...and it's brilliant. You do have to do some minor mental somersaults to perform it. There's nothing to memorize...which rocks.

I've been playing around with it for months now. I have yet to perform it for a paying audience. But I can see that day coming. And some things are worth having just because they're cool.

NV is one of those things.

David
Message: Posted by: jlevey (Apr 16, 2013 08:35PM)
[quote]
On 2013-04-15 20:44, David Thiel wrote:
In many ways NV is a lot like the Invisib*e Deck. There's simply no way it can be figured out. When Osterlind did it for a group of magicians and mentalists there were open jaws and some very soft whispers. No one had any idea...and ultimately it's impossible to back your way into the solution either.

It's devious...and it's brilliant. You do have to do some minor mental somersaults to perform it. There's nothing to memorize...which rocks.

I've been playing around with it for months now. I have yet to perform it for a paying audience. But I can see that day coming. And some things are worth having just because they're cool.

NV is one of those things.

David
[/quote]


...."LIKE" (FOUR thumbs up!) ....and this from a performer who hates math and math-based effects.

Thanks again Richard for sharing this wonderful effect with us!

Jonathan
Message: Posted by: espkeith (Apr 17, 2013 08:10AM)
I did this at a presentation for a mostly cynical group of Ivy-League MBA students. You could tell they wanted to be impressed by it, even if they wouldn't admit it out loud. :bg:
Message: Posted by: BigWheel (Apr 30, 2013 03:03PM)
I just received NV and have to say it is incredible. The system is very straight forward and gives the performer a lot of options to deliver the selected numbers. For those who may be concerned that it is difficult, I would say that a read through of the accompanying documentation will take 10 minutes and you will understand how the process works. In an effort to be smoother with my ability to recite numbers, I have a copy of all 60 numbers in NV at my desk and I use it as a guide to practice. If you go from the first number to the last as practice, you'll be very comfortable with the process to determine the number. I'm extremely happy to have this in my routine.
Message: Posted by: kaos333 (May 3, 2013 12:29PM)
I too just received it. It is a wonderful and devious effect. I have been practicing it on my family, and they were stunned.

BigWheel, thanks for the suggestion on how you practice the process to determine the number. That will be part of my regimen before I start showing it.
Message: Posted by: Worsham (Sep 22, 2014 02:51PM)
This is my first Magic Café post. I am looking to obtain a small set of the cards for Richard Osterlind's Numeric Vortex. I got Numeric Vortex sometime in early 2013 when Richard lectured at Denny & Lee's in MD. I brought the small set of NV cards to Magic Live! last August, but somehow lost them. I recently got back to performing NM, identifying or 'divining' 3 cards, as Richard suggests, and reactions have been very good. I would like to get the smaller set for walkaround, etc. I am willing to buy the whole NM set again (i.e. get another duplicate set of the large cards) in order to get the small set.

Alternatively, any suggestions for doing a good job printing one's own cards, i.e. like the best card stock, how to make the cards fully opaque, etc., which may or would apply not to just NV but to other mentalism or magic where you may need to make your own cards, would be appreciated. Thanks.

Michael
Message: Posted by: JanForster (Sep 22, 2014 06:25PM)
You could buy through Richard's website just a spare set of small cards some time ago, but they seem to be sold out. Do what I do: Prepare your own business cards. You can write the numbers by yourself on the backside of your business cards using a waterproof marker. It looks good and you can (at least occasionally) let your participants keep their taken cards. Good advertisement, and you have only to replace some cards. Jan
Message: Posted by: George Hunter (Sep 22, 2014 08:11PM)
Richard recently sent a Clairvoyance effect to purchasers of Numeric Vortex that, in my experience so far, exceeds (in impact) any of the effects in the manual.

Essentially, a spectator cuts the number cards and, without looking at the top card, places it in an opaque envelope. The mentalist slowly discern the number, writes it on the envelope which, when opened, matches the number on the card inside. I love it!

George
Message: Posted by: Worsham (Sep 22, 2014 08:14PM)
[quote]On Sep 22, 2014, JanForster wrote:
You could buy through Richard's website just a spare set of small cards some time ago, but they seem to be sold out. Do what I do: Prepare your own business cards. You can write the numbers by yourself on the backside of your business cards using a waterproof marker. It looks good and you can (at least occasionally) let your participants keep their taken cards. Good advertisement, and you have only to replace some cards. Jan [/quote]

Thank you for the idea. I have fortunately been able to find a set of the small NV cards. In focusing on NV it got me to thinking: is there a way to rework NV or another mentalism effect so as to be able to "divine" 9 numbers (the number of digits in a soc. sec. #), as opposed to the 6 numbers in NV?
Message: Posted by: JanForster (Sep 23, 2014 05:55AM)
Not that I know on the fly... But you could certainly work a system out. But what is wrong with 6 numbers? I "sell" them as TAN numbers, transaction numbers you need for online banking. You get a good story about security of online banking if there is a mentalist around :) and officially I created random numbers by using one of the many online password creators... Jan
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Sep 23, 2014 08:05AM)
Hey Jan,

I love that idea! Thanks.

Richard
Message: Posted by: JanForster (Sep 23, 2014 10:46AM)
Richard, we see us soon in Vegas... :) Jan
Message: Posted by: Richard Osterlind (Sep 23, 2014 01:22PM)
I am looking forward to it, Jan!
Message: Posted by: Worsham (Sep 23, 2014 01:49PM)
[quote]On Sep 23, 2014, JanForster wrote:
Not that I know on the fly... But you could certainly work a system out. But what is wrong with 6 numbers? I "sell" them as TAN numbers, transaction numbers you need for online banking. You get a good story about security of online banking if there is a mentalist around :) and officially I created random numbers by using one of the many online password creators... Jan [/quote]

Jan - Numeric Vortex is fantastic, I am glad Richard came up with it, and there is nothing wrong with 6 numbers. I was simply thinking that if you could do something similar with 9 numbers, it is first off more impressive because you are 'divining' a longer number, but also because 9 is the number of digits in a soc. sec. number, and the possible fear that the magician/mentalist can read a mind and hence a soc. sec. # that much more palpable and real. One might even get people to actually double check the security of their passwords, etc.

Michael
Message: Posted by: SamNJ (Oct 1, 2014 05:52PM)
Instead of using calculations, why not use a memory system, linking the cards in a prearranged stack.
Message: Posted by: George Hunter (Oct 1, 2014 08:48PM)
Sam:

One may, indeed, prefer a memory system to a calculations approach, but the latter does not really apply to Osterlind's Numeric Vortex. VERY simple addition is the MOST demanding aspect of Richard's process.

George
Message: Posted by: bowers (Jan 9, 2017 05:21PM)
Waiting on this to arrive.Late to the party as usual.
Some great reviews on this effect.Can't wait to get it.
Todd
Message: Posted by: George Hunter (Jan 10, 2017 09:49AM)
Todd:

You should like it, a lot. After Richard put out the effect, he came up with a clairvoyance version which, in my experience, plays strongest. Richard would be glad to sent it to you by email attachment.

George
Message: Posted by: bowers (Jan 14, 2017 07:42AM)
Thanks George
I will get in contact with him.
This is a really good effect.
Todd