(Close Window)
Topic: Do you think the Cross cut force fool someone? experiances?
Message: Posted by: mentalmagicgerman (May 23, 2015 08:47AM)
Hi

What are your experiances with the cross cut force?

...and what is a good out, if it does not work? ...should I jump to another Force-or does it seem weird?

thank you
Message: Posted by: merlin2812 (May 23, 2015 03:06PM)
Hello,

The cross force is really good for Anyone who doesn't altready know it... You need to avoid calling attention to it, and with a little Time misdirection , it Will work just fine!

Best,

Merlin
Message: Posted by: warren (May 24, 2015 05:05AM)
As long as time delay is used wisely it works very well and I can't really see an out as being needed as you can't miss with this force unlike the classic force.
Message: Posted by: george1953 (May 24, 2015 05:53AM)
Never had a problem with it and I use it a lot.
Message: Posted by: BeThePlunk (May 24, 2015 07:04AM)
I agree with the above, but for an out, explore the possibilities of a key card as a back-up.
Message: Posted by: jimgerrish (May 24, 2015 08:02AM)
The cross-cut force doesn't fool anyone. YOU, as a magician, use it as a tool to fool the fiddlesticks out of everyone, including other knowledgeable magicians. It's all in your presentation and style.

I suppose a clue is in order. Don't cross the bottom stack on top- instead put a shot glass on the top half and separate it with the bottom half (but not crossed). Believe it or not, this has fooled many magicians who should know better. You can also use the card box for separation, but the shot glass adds a concern of "danger", especially if it is full of liquid, that befuddles the mind from a card force to something else. The force comes later, when you ask a spectator to carefully lift the cards off the glass, peek at the card "to which they cut" and take a drink from the shot glass.
Message: Posted by: Atom3339 (May 24, 2015 10:52AM)
I disagree. I have used the Cross Cut Force hundreds of times fooling spectators and magicians. Like most things in Card Magic, it depends on PRESENTATION.

And........

Time.......misdirection.
Message: Posted by: ianchandler (May 25, 2015 12:27AM)
The magician makes the rules and performs the actions. The spectator follows. The cross-cut force, like many other principles, relies on the magician's authority and surety.
Message: Posted by: alicauchy (May 25, 2015 07:03AM)
In one occasion I had a spectator who only cut the top card . . . but even in that case the force worked well !!!

[quote]On May 24, 2015, jimgerrish wrote:
I suppose a clue is in order. Don't cross the bottom stack on top- instead put a shot glass on the top half and separate it with the bottom half (but not crossed). Believe it or not, this has fooled many magicians who should know better. You can also use the card box for separation, but the shot glass adds a concern of "danger", especially if it is full of liquid, that befuddles the mind from a card force to something else. The force comes later, when you ask a spectator to carefully lift the cards off the glass, peek at the card "to which they cut" and take a drink from the shot glass. [/quote]

Nice suggestion !!
Message: Posted by: Kabbalah (May 26, 2015 04:12PM)
[quote]On May 24, 2015, jimgerrish wrote:

Don't cross the bottom stack on top- instead put a shot glass on the top half and separate it with the bottom half (but not crossed).[/quote]

Sorry, but, I disagree. By using the shot glass you are calling attention to the deck exactly when you do not want to. And, what is the motivation for using the glass? It is not needed to keep the halves separated.

See Liam Montier's take on this force in John Bannon's effect, [b]BAN-NIHILATION[/b]. You can find this in Bannon's latest book, [i]Destination Zero[/i], pp. 48-49.

The final picture in the spectator's mind is a freely selected card protruding half-way out of the center of a ribbon-spread deck.

It is the best touch I have ever read, and I have read many in the past fifty years.
Message: Posted by: jimgerrish (May 26, 2015 08:10PM)
Exactly the effect I am looking for. You are so worried about what that glass is doing there you focus all attention thinking and worrying about it, even when we are just discussing it hypothetically. See? It works. You now think of it as the "trick with the glass" or as a "bar bet" or something other than a card trick. Don't knock it if you haven't tried it.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (May 26, 2015 09:20PM)
[quote]On May 23, 2015, mentalmagicgerman wrote:
Hi

What are your experiances with the cross cut force?

...and what is a good out, if it does not work? ...should I jump to another Force-or does it seem weird?

thank you [/quote]
I'm guessing you haven't studied many books.
Message: Posted by: JBSmith1978 (May 26, 2015 09:49PM)
Jim Gerrish

Great idea for a variation on Bert Allerton's effect.

Thanks,
Jed
Message: Posted by: Timtom (May 28, 2015 12:51PM)
As new to card magic I use it and it works great for me, no one have said anything. I just pause and say something before going back to the card and it works great.
Message: Posted by: jimgerrish (May 28, 2015 04:00PM)
Don't be afraid to "think outside the book."
Message: Posted by: magicphill (Jun 7, 2015 04:18AM)
If your woried about the deceptiveness you could always use the Marlo ruse from one of his magazines and also described under a Randy Wakeman effect in Apocalypse. You demonstrate what the spectator is to do by X ing the packets but then proceed to square the cards after the demo. This also throws magicians
Message: Posted by: Gregor Von G. (Jun 17, 2015 02:44AM)
Cross Cut has always worked for me.
The key, as many has already stated, is timing and misdirection.
You can be creative with your presentation, but the only thing to keep in mind is to draw the spec attention away from the decks.
And be relaxed/nonchalant
Message: Posted by: RLFrame (Jul 6, 2015 08:44AM)
Gregor,

I believe you are correct. And I 'll share some in hopes that this thread will continue. I have recently added a line for psychological cover. As the guest sets the cut cards down and I am reaching for the other half I look up and say, "I need to apologize to all of you..." followed by a pregnant pause as I lock eyes briefly with several of them and as if I am going to admit something difficult to admit. By this time, the deed is long since done and I continue on with "I am only getting this right 75% of the time and this may be a waste of time for all of us..." or any number of things peculiar to the routine.

People are quite sensitive to the possibility that they might have been or are about to be wronged in some way so offering an apology grabs their attention. It also provides the time lapse between the action and the guest peeking at the card.

I am also working on redefining what the positions of the packets are in a very subtle manner, as has been suggested. For example, I don't set the packet across the middle, but rather set it down on the edge of the now lower pack so that the much of the back of the card now on top of the lower is showing. My story involves my attempting to do for real what others are faking. As part of that I say, "They don;t allow people to shuffled the cards like you did, then by looking at the tiny markings on this card (he points to the top card of the now lower half) he knows what that card right above it is...." Pointing to the card sitting crossways above it.

Getting too long, but the idea is to A) To drive home that there is no way to know what that card is with a borrowed, shuffled deck. B) to subtly redefine top, bottom, above and below to enhance the force. And C) My wanting to point out those little markings provides a good reason to set the cards across in that manner.
Message: Posted by: Bill Palmer (Aug 22, 2015 08:43AM)
The late Ted Lesley was a close friend of mine. He used the cross-cut force any time he needed to do an absolutely sure-fire force as part of a larger presentations. He covered the use of this rather obvious (to us) method by appearing to be nervous about some other part of the piece he was presenting. Naturally, the part he appeared to be nervous about was the critical part of the piece, which had already been completed, so to speak, by the time the spectator needed to cut the cards. There was plenty of "time delay misdirection" involved as well.
Message: Posted by: Adrian Deery (Aug 24, 2015 01:07PM)
I have used it for years and it works and just as everyone has mentioned time delay and presentation are key when using the force.
Message: Posted by: RogerTheShrubber (Aug 27, 2015 10:26PM)
[quote]On May 24, 2015, jimgerrish wrote:
The cross-cut force doesn't fool anyone. YOU, as a magician, use it as a tool to fool the fiddlesticks out of everyone, including other knowledgeable magicians. It's all in your presentation and style.

I suppose a clue is in order. Don't cross the bottom stack on top- instead put a shot glass on the top half and separate it with the bottom half (but not crossed). Believe it or not, this has fooled many magicians who should know better. You can also use the card box for separation, but the shot glass adds a concern of "danger", especially if it is full of liquid, that befuddles the mind from a card force to something else. The force comes later, when you ask a spectator to carefully lift the cards off the glass, peek at the card "to which they cut" and take a drink from the shot glass. [/quote]

This is brilliant and I thank you for it. I just posted in the "Totally impromptu self-working favorites... (the fritz)" thread about my favorite bar trick, but I'm going to incorporate this as soon as football season starts and my sports bar visits become more frequent. Much appreciated.
Message: Posted by: Ross W (Sep 20, 2015 05:34PM)
My wife will not be classic forced. But this one works on her! (Shhh. Don't tell her!)
Message: Posted by: Roy Rocha (Sep 20, 2015 07:11PM)
^^^^^ Same here!
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Sep 25, 2015 03:23PM)
Been called out on it only once, and that was by a guy who was burning my every move and had some magic know,edge already. Everyone else totally fooled. Seems to work fine for most cases.
Message: Posted by: Sixten (Sep 26, 2015 08:15AM)
I, always, place a ***l**a** on the bottom, (already cased) then, I shuffle. :) (After crossing, either one, is offered) If seated, after the selection is made, I *** the other. If standing, after the selection, I use a little misdirection, & remove the other, by **l***g.

(Or... You can have 2 different, separate, predictions set up. Just, don't forget, where each is positioned. One time, I, completely, FORGOT!/LOL)

Give it a try!

Sixten :)
Message: Posted by: MagieFraudster (Sep 28, 2015 08:35AM)
Used it many times and it's great if you have a storytelling type of presentation. It seems as if you're just chatting with the volunteer and not really paying attention to the cut, which makes the audience not pay attention to the cut, since you're not giving it any importance.

In general, when learning or trying out new forces, always have a back-up trick for an indifferent card if your force fails. The spec never knows what you're going to do so it won't even appear as if anything has gone wrong.
Message: Posted by: esmerdon (Oct 3, 2015 06:57PM)
I like to place it down and bring up my hands to eye level and "talk with my hands" for a moment. Works pretty well for me.
Message: Posted by: MagieFraudster (Oct 9, 2015 08:46PM)
You don't need to overdo the "distraction" phase. Just, the less attention you pay to the cut, the less attention the audience will pay.
Message: Posted by: MagieFraudster (Oct 9, 2015 08:47PM)
...do have a killer reveal, though.
Message: Posted by: fonda57 (Oct 10, 2015 06:52PM)
Aaron Fisher has some good thoughts on this force on one of his teaching videos.
Message: Posted by: RS1963 (Oct 14, 2015 03:40PM)
This very force was a favorite of Michael Skinner's Of course it wasn't the only one that he used. Mike probably knew more ways to force a card than most magicians. He also knew which ones worked best for the effect that he wanted to perform.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Oct 15, 2015 01:28AM)
I hate this force. I hate it with a passion so strong you can't even begin to imagine my hate. That said, I'm sure the vast majority of people are stupid enough to fall for this nonsense. After all, half of them are of below average intelligence. However, I would rather kill myself than rely on this force. If you can't force better, you'll still probably fool a fair number with it. If you know your audience will fall for it, go for it. But dear god, please work on forcing better! This is a force that fools a significant percentage of the population, but it's very sad that fools so many. If you're just starting out? OK. I can see that. But please, please, work on learning better forces.
Message: Posted by: lumagic (Oct 15, 2015 01:37AM)
I agree with RiderBacks, there are many better forces and not very difficult. There is a good DVD called 40 Ways to Force a Card
Message: Posted by: jmbulg (Oct 15, 2015 09:33AM)
I agree that it can be easily spotted by someone looking for it and for a single card force probably better methods exist.
But what about the situation in which you want to force a small stack you prepared at the bottom (lets say four cards). Is there a deceptive way to do this without lengthy one by one forces ?
Message: Posted by: Professor Marvel (Oct 23, 2015 09:30AM)
RiderBacks, no need to insult the general public. This force works because of inherent errors in the human mind and memory that we all share. That includes you. They're not stupid, they just don't remember what happened or attach enough importance to attend to it.
Message: Posted by: Jerskin (Oct 27, 2015 04:13PM)
Saw Kreskin use it.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Oct 27, 2015 06:00PM)
I love this force. Not only does it work well, it seems so clean - all the spectator seems to recall is that they cut to the predicted card (or whatever). Can't get fairer than that ... :)

Ps: I love the Hindu force too, lol.
Message: Posted by: ejohn (Oct 27, 2015 06:06PM)
Jmbulg, Yes. I'll pm you.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Oct 28, 2015 11:44PM)
[quote]On Oct 23, 2015, Professor Marvel wrote: RiderBacks, no need to insult the general public. This force works because of inherent errors in the human mind and memory that we all share. That includes you. They're not stupid, they just don't remember what happened or attach enough importance to attend to it. [/quote]

Well, half the general public is of below average intelligence... That's just a fact. It's not an insult, and much will work on some which won't work on highly intelligent individuals. I'm just saying. I try things out first on some of the smartest and brightest. Not everybody does this. Nor does it matter for most. But if I can't use something to fool an intelligent Ph.D. in math, logic, physics, or some similar discipline (who also has at least some familiarity with cards---but not necessarily magic!), then I won't use it. And the cross-cut force won't fool a single math Ph.D. I know. So it gets a fail vote from me.

Would I perhaps use it if I was performing for obviously stupid drunks in a dive bar? Sure. This is all about knowing your audience. And I have already stated numerous times, that the force can be used effectively for the right spectators. If you know that your spectators are pretty clueless, go for it. Of course, most folks can't guarantee that they'll always be performing for the unthinking crowd. If that's you, then learn a better force.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Oct 28, 2015 11:47PM)
[quote]On Oct 23, 2015, Professor Marvel wrote: RiderBacks, no need to insult the general public. This force works because of inherent errors in the human mind and memory that we all share. That includes you. They're not stupid, they just don't remember what happened or attach enough importance to attend to it. [/quote]

Well, half the general public is of below average intelligence... That's just a fact. It's not an insult, and much will work on some which won't work on highly intelligent individuals. I'm just saying. I try things out first on some of the smartest and brightest. Not everybody does this. Nor does it matter for most. But if I can't use something to fool an intelligent Ph.D. in math, logic, physics, or some similar discipline (who also has at least some familiarity with cards---but not necessarily magic!), then I won't use it. And the cross-cut force won't fool a single math Ph.D. I know. So it gets a fail vote from me.

Would I perhaps use it if I was performing for obviously stupid drunks in a dive bar? Sure. This is all about knowing your audience. And I have already stated numerous times, that the force can be used effectively for the right spectators. If you know that your spectators are pretty clueless, go for it. Of course, most folks can't guarantee that they'll always be performing for the unthinking crowd. If that's you, then learn a better force.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Oct 29, 2015 07:28AM)
Hmmm... I'm not sure it's about intelligence. The cross cut had fooled smart people too, and I've been busted by someone not super smart ... Dunno.
Message: Posted by: Thudling (Oct 29, 2015 10:56AM)
I do a similar trick, telling people I'm going to use my "mental powers" to read the card they cut to. After they cut the deck, I say "Now remember, using my mental powers (tap my forehead, make them look up at me)..." That little break in their concentration is all I need, never been caught.
Message: Posted by: Count Lustig (Oct 29, 2015 03:31PM)
[quote]On Oct 29, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
Well, half the general public is of below average intelligence... That's just a fact.[/quote]
You're confusing "average" and "median" (which may indicate which side of the dividing line you fall on).
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Oct 29, 2015 11:49PM)
[quote]On Oct 29, 2015, Count Lustig wrote: You're confusing "average" and "median" (which may indicate which side of the dividing line you fall on). [/quote]

No I wasn't. But you clearly are. Good try, though.
Message: Posted by: RS1963 (Oct 30, 2015 04:01PM)
[quote]On Oct 14, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
I hate this force. I hate it with a passion so strong you can't even begin to imagine my hate. That said, I'm sure the vast majority of people are stupid enough to fall for this nonsense. After all, half of them are of below average intelligence. However, I would rather kill myself than rely on this force. If you can't force better, you'll still probably fool a fair number with it. If you know your audience will fall for it, go for it. But dear god, please work on forcing better! This is a force that fools a significant percentage of the population, but it's very sad that fools so many. If you're just starting out? OK. I can see that. But please, please, work on learning better forces. [/quote]

Mark Lewis is this you?
Message: Posted by: Count Lustig (Oct 30, 2015 09:22PM)
[quote]On Oct 30, 2015, RS1963 wrote:
[quote]On Oct 14, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
I hate this force. I hate it with a passion so strong you can't even begin to imagine my hate. That said, I'm sure the vast majority of people are stupid enough to fall for this nonsense. After all, half of them are of below average intelligence. However, I would rather kill myself than rely on this force. If you can't force better, you'll still probably fool a fair number with it. If you know your audience will fall for it, go for it. But dear god, please work on forcing better! This is a force that fools a significant percentage of the population, but it's very sad that fools so many. If you're just starting out? OK. I can see that. But please, please, work on learning better forces. [/quote]

Mark Lewis is this you? [/quote]
No way. Mark Lewis was opinionated, but he usually knew what he was talking about. And at least Mark is competent enough to fool people with a crosscut force. (He probably knows what a median is too.)
Message: Posted by: RS1963 (Nov 2, 2015 02:56AM)
By the way Riderbacks it is a fact that the more intelligent are easier to fool so if you have failed at using the C.C. force your spectators and maybe even your self have been the stupid ones.
Message: Posted by: Teyo (Nov 2, 2015 10:02AM)
Once you use good time misdirection you shouldn't have any problem with the CC force if that fails you can go into a cut deeper force
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 2, 2015 11:26PM)
[quote]On Nov 2, 2015, RS1963 wrote: By the way Riderbacks it is a fact that the more intelligent are easier to fool so if you have failed at using the C.C. force your spectators and maybe even your self have been the stupid ones.[/quote]

That's pretty cute. =)
Message: Posted by: lord_wallmotto (Nov 5, 2015 03:42AM)
Just as RiderBacks is saying, it depends on what type of audience you are performing for.

For a group of people who have had a few beers at the pub or for some average joe at a restaurant in vegas? Sure, use it, it will work most of the time.

But for a group of Ph.Ds who are highly trained in engineering, maths, physics, logics etc who are used to keep an insane amount of information in their working memory while solving incredibly difficult problems? Nah.

There is not a single thing in all of magic than hearing magicians saying "Do not worry, it will just fly by them! Use some time misdirection, they won't notice!"

Who are "Them" that it will just fly by?
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 5, 2015 10:05PM)
[quote]On Nov 5, 2015, lord_wallmotto wrote:

Just as RiderBacks is saying, it depends on what type of audience you are performing for.

For a group of people who have had a few beers at the pub or for some average joe at a restaurant in vegas? Sure, use it, it will work most of the time.

But for a group of Ph.Ds who are highly trained in engineering, maths, physics, logics etc who are used to keep an insane amount of information in their working memory while solving incredibly difficult problems? Nah.

There is not a single thing in all of magic than hearing magicians saying "Do not worry, it will just fly by them! Use some time misdirection, they won't notice!"

Who are "Them" that it will just fly by? [/quote]

I agree completely. And if you're performing for unknowns, you'll have no idea who has a Ph.D. in Logic, Set Theory, Quantum Physics, etc... And when one of these people decides to say, "Well that was lame, you just..." Well, then you're completely busted. You'd better have something really good to follow that failure up with if anyone is even still interested in seeing you do another trick.
Message: Posted by: lord_wallmotto (Nov 6, 2015 12:09AM)
[quote]On Nov 2, 2015, RS1963 wrote:
By the way Riderbacks it is a fact that the more intelligent are easier to fool so if you have failed at using the C.C. force your spectators and maybe even your self have been the stupid ones. [/quote]

What do you base that statement on? It is a fact? Are there scientific studies that suports your claim? Just wondering, since you are saying that it is a fact.

In this case, we also have to define what we consider as a "more intelligent" person before we move on.

If it works for you, fine, use it. I am just saying that most intelligent people who in addition to being intelligent are trained in subjects where you have to be extremely focused and aware and at the same time keep an insane amount of information in their working memory while solving difficult tasks won't have much trouble following what just happened. If they do fall for it, you have a problem, because they simply do not care enough about you to be focused enough on your performance.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Nov 6, 2015 12:29AM)
Without studies either claim is just conjecture ...
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Nov 6, 2015 12:31AM)
But isn't there a track record of magicians fooling intelligent, focussed scientists with simple tricks (Geller, babachek, Randi etc)?
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 6, 2015 11:41PM)
[quote]On Nov 6, 2015, Terrible Wizard wrote: But isn't there a track record of magicians fooling intelligent, focussed scientists with simple tricks (Geller, babachek, Randi etc)? [/quote]

Being a scientist doesn't make you especially intelligent. Neither does being a neurosurgeon, as Ben Carson aptly demonstrates. There are more or less intelligent and more or less gullible people in just about every category. Not sure what your point is.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Nov 7, 2015 02:29AM)
It was in response to those who made previous comments singling out certain professions etc in response to being fooled. Basically, I'm just saying, that sans true studies, we do have some evidence that points to intelligent people, trained in being focussed and observant, in a strict environment, still being fooled by simple magic tricks.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 10, 2015 01:09AM)
[quote]On Nov 7, 2015, Terrible Wizard wrote: It was in response to those who made previous comments singling out certain professions etc in response to being fooled. Basically, I'm just saying, that sans true studies, we do have some evidence that points to intelligent people, trained in being focussed and observant, in a strict environment, still being fooled by simple magic tricks. [/quote]

I suppose the truth of this claim depends upon what we mean by "intelligent." Is Ben Carson intelligent? If you think so, then you've got a prime example of an "intelligent" person who is easily fooled.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Nov 11, 2015 06:33AM)
Intelligence is a messy and controversial concept. Given the OP I suggest we consider 'intelligence' in its basic, vague, colloquial sense.

In which case the scientists that were fooled would have to be given the benefit of the doubt (assumed intelligent) given their profession and qualifications, and the burden of proof would rest would those who would argue they are not, in fact, intelligent (evidenced by IQ scores or similar).

So, given all that, it seems that we assume that even highly intelligent folk can be fooled by simple tricks, and thus we should tentatively conclude that the cross-cut can potentially fool even a smart guy. This is generally further supported by anecdotal evidence, it seems. Your mileage may vary, though.
Message: Posted by: Jacob3 (Nov 11, 2015 08:39AM)
It's a super bold force, but it does work. Good tip to make it work is to wait a while after a spectator cuts the cards.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 14, 2015 01:35AM)
[quote]On Nov 11, 2015, Terrible Wizard wrote:
Intelligence is a messy and controversial concept. Given the OP I suggest we consider 'intelligence' in its basic, vague, colloquial sense.

In which case the scientists that were fooled would have to be given the benefit of the doubt (assumed intelligent) given their profession and qualifications, and the burden of proof would rest would those who would argue they are not, in fact, intelligent (evidenced by IQ scores or similar).

So, given all that, it seems that we assume that even highly intelligent folk can be fooled by simple tricks, and thus we should tentatively conclude that the cross-cut can potentially fool even a smart guy. This is generally further supported by anecdotal evidence, it seems. Your mileage may vary, though. [/quote]

It's easy to fool people like Ben Carson. Fooling idiots who have some specific intelligence is not what I aim for. If you want to pull off moves that fool most laypeople, that's fine. I aim for fooling serious magicians and serious gamblers/ If the move can't fool members in those categories, I practice it more or give it up.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Nov 15, 2015 12:28PM)
Fair enough, if you have a highly specialised audience. But then it's not about intelligence or the general public. Always be aware of who you're going to perform for - sensible.

If I was performing for people who I knew were likely to know this force, I'd probably pick a different one too.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 16, 2015 10:30PM)
I probably overstated my case a little, and that may have hurt it. So let me clarify. My minimum bar for a move is whether or not I think it can reliably fool people with advanced degrees in fields which require strong critical thinking, problem solving, and analytic skills.) People in these categories include professional software engineers, those with PhD's in computer science, math, logic, physics, and so on... They don't need to be magicians or gamblers, but they do need to have a reasonable degree of familiarity with playing cards. They have played numerous games of poker, blackjack, hearts, bridge, or euchre. They have a good shuffle, and they understand the importance and purpose of a cut in a game of cards. They also know how to cut properly, obviously. And they have probably seen magic tricks more than a few times, and may have even looked one or more of them up, or even done a little themselves. After all, these are highly intelligent and curious people. But they don't need to *already* know what the "cross cut force" is.

I've now done a much better job of actually identifying the class of people I think a move should be able to fool to count as one worth using. Do you want to seriously tell me that you believe the cross-cut force, however well executed, is going to have any significant degree of success for members of this group?
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Nov 17, 2015 05:38AM)
I find your bar rather high, but I guess a lot depends upon who you perform for.

Regarding:
'Do you want to seriously tell me that you believe the cross-cut force, however well executed, is going to have any significant degree of success for members of this group?'

I really cannot give a strong or confident answer at all, since I have little experience performing for such, and know of no studies.

What little experience I do have, though (I've performed for two folks with advanced science degrees etc), and the 'evidence' that comes from things like Project Alpha etc, leads me to believe that it is entirely possible to fool such people with very simple tricks, including, perhaps, the cross-cut force. I certainly wouldn't believe that they wouldn't be fooled without more research.

Perhaps we need to collect in as much personal experience as possible on this?
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 18, 2015 01:27AM)
[quote]On Nov 17, 2015, Terrible Wizard wrote:
I find your bar rather high, but I guess a lot depends upon who you perform for.

Regarding:
'Do you want to seriously tell me that you believe the cross-cut force, however well executed, is going to have any significant degree of success for members of this group?'

I really cannot give a strong or confident answer at all, since I have little experience performing for such, and know of no studies.

What little experience I do have, though (I've performed for two folks with advanced science degrees etc), and the 'evidence' that comes from things like Project Alpha etc, leads me to believe that it is entirely possible to fool such people with very simple tricks, including, perhaps, the cross-cut force. I certainly wouldn't believe that they wouldn't be fooled without more research.

Perhaps we need to collect in as much personal experience as possible on this? [/quote]

I don't think the (revised and far more reasonable) bar I've set is too high. I think it's the minimum place to set the bar unless you're just performing at bars in a company town or something like that. Of course, you might know or reasonably believe that your audience will fall for the cross-cut force. If you know or reasonably believe that, then maybe use it. But if you have a better force available, why not opt for that one? And for god's sake, learn a better one!

I have an advanced degree. A significant number of the people I know have them too. And in the cities I have lived in over the past decade, the proportion of people with advanced degrees to those without them has been very high. At no point will I reside in some place where a large percentage of the population is not highly educated, curious, or unfamiliar with cards. Try to pull the cross-cut force at some random bar in Silicon Valley and see how it works for you. My money is on you getting yourself into trouble even if your audience is drunk.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Nov 18, 2015 04:54AM)
Dunno. Maybe your experience is different to mine. Have you tried the cross-cut (sensibly, and with good expectation) on all these academics you hang with?

As I said, I have very limited experience of doing magic for serious academics, but that limited experience plus some anecdotal evidence I've come across doesn't incline to think that these people are massively harder to fool than the rest. Experience with magic obviously makes a difference, but not a lot else as far as I've found.

I think we would need to look at some large collections of data for me to be inclined eitherway. At the moment I see no reason to think they won't be fooled in roughly similar percentages to everyone else. I fully accept I may be wrong, but at present I don't know, nor can I find out.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 18, 2015 10:50PM)
[quote]On Nov 18, 2015, Terrible Wizard wrote: Dunno. Maybe your experience is different to mine. Have you tried the cross-cut (sensibly, and with good expectation) on all these academics you hang with?[/quote]

I have not, and never would. And yes, a significant percentage of the people I hang out with are or were advanced academics. This can come with the territory if you have a PhD.

[quote]On Nov 18, 2015, Terrible Wizard wrote: As I said, I have very limited experience of doing magic for serious academics, but that limited experience plus some anecdotal evidence I've come across doesn't incline to think that these people are massively harder to fool than the rest. Experience with magic obviously makes a difference, but not a lot else as far as I've found.[/quote]

I do have experience with doing magic for serious academics. And my bar for calling someone a "serious academic" is set very high. Most professors do not meet it. When I obtained my PhD, it was from a institution which was ranked in the top five in the world in my subject area. You do not, and can not, fool most of these people with a cross-cut force even though you can still fool them with a well-executed DL. The speed with which the intelligent people I have performed for can deduce what you have done is astonishing. They (usually) know that magic and voodoo isn't something that exists. They (usually) know there is always a rational explanation for how the effect was produced. And they can often instantly land on that (simply by process of elimination or deduction.) That said, it is just not the case that academics are automatically intelligent. Most of them believe that god exists, after all. And most of them publish ********, if they publish at all.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Nov 19, 2015 02:39AM)
"You do not, and can not, fool most of these people with a cross-cut force even though you can still fool them with a well-executed DL."

If you haven't tried, and there's no studies, how do you know?
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 20, 2015 11:46PM)
[quote]On Nov 19, 2015, Terrible Wizard wrote: "You do not, and can not, fool most of these people with a cross-cut force even though you can still fool them with a well-executed DL."

If you haven't tried, and there's no studies, how do you know? [/quote]

The first thing most of these folks will be checking for is whether you are (or might possibly be) relying on the position of the top or bottom card. These types of people don't listen to your patter. They ignore what you're saying. They know you're trying to distract them. And they watch what you're doing carefully. They take mental notes. They don't lose the position of the top or bottom of the deck unless you do something fancy. They are already quite familiar with silly key card stuff. No form of misdirection that is remotely sane is going to get them to forget which packet went where. They have excellent spatial reasoning skills and usually possess a very strong visual memory. Attention to detail is what they excel at.

Please stop trying to so vociferously defend one of the world's most juvenile forces. You know, or should know, that this force is one of the most juvenile one's around. I hope and pray you are trying to do better and completely excise reliance upon it from your routines. If you do, your routines will be much better for it. You know that, as does everybody else. Just give it up.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Nov 21, 2015 05:46AM)
Errrr.... So you don't know then, you just assume.

Fair enough.

I guess we'll end it there since you seem to be moving into insulting language territory. Thanks for the exchange, I guess.
Message: Posted by: LesL (Nov 21, 2015 10:48PM)
[quote]On Nov 21, 2015, Terrible Wizard wrote:

I guess we'll end it there ... [/quote]


Thank G_d!!!
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 22, 2015 12:56AM)
[quote]On Nov 21, 2015, Terrible Wizard wrote: I guess we'll end it there since you seem to be moving into insulting language territory. Thanks for the exchange, I guess. [/quote]

I don't think I've descended into insulting territory. Calling the cross-cut force one of the most juvenile forces is not insulting. It's a simple truth. Up your game.
Message: Posted by: MikeBeaudet (Nov 24, 2015 12:25PM)
RiderBacks,

I totally disagree with you that the cross-cut force will not fool “any serious academics”. Having a Ph.D. in a “scientific” domain doesn’t mean that these people are superior or have superior skills and can or want to reverse engineered every magic trick. It’s all about presentation, misdirection and getting their interest with a good story or patter. Of course if your trick is just “pick a card and find the card” the cross-cut force is not the best force…

Also you have to perform for people who really want to be entertained. My 14 years old son doesn’t own a Ph.D. (even if he’s very intelligent) and he’s always trying to find how it works and he’s very good. But he is not enjoying the tricks because he just wants to know, to understand the working. Not a good audience for a magician.

Oh, before I forget, I own a Ph.D. in nuclear engineering from a university which is ranked amongst the best one in my domain.

Mike
Message: Posted by: ThomasJ (Nov 24, 2015 09:18PM)
The problem with this force, aside from being in every beginner book on magic, is this - if you use the needed time delay / misdirection, your audience rarely recalls which half was the top. They will naturally question (be it internal or outright) if that was the card they cut to. Sure they'll play along and (pretend to) take your word for it, but the force is not convincing at all. Cross Cut might be a decent principle to use for other purposes within the context of an effect, but as a force? No way. Vernon always said, "Confusion is not magic," and this force is borderline confusion.

TJ
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Nov 25, 2015 11:02AM)
If you're saying the force isn't convincing at all, are you saying it doesn't work? I myself (being stupid, I guess), have been fooled by it. I've fooled others with it. Seemed convincing enough at the time.
Message: Posted by: ThomasJ (Nov 25, 2015 12:15PM)
There are definitely people out there who are fooled by it. I don't see the need to use it as a force when there are more convincing forces that haven't been exposed in juvenile magic texts. Even if it works during the effect, the spectator will naturally think back on the phases of the effect and the criss cross cut will likely be the first thing they question. It doesn't take much thought to reconstruct how the magi might have forced the card.

To me a force is convincing when the audience cannot reconstruct how the card could have been chosen by any other means than free will. i.e. Jennings/Marlo's Convincing Control, Hofzinser spread cull force, dribble force, timing force, classic force - the audience is actively engaged while the selection is made and the process is extremely fair. The time delay necessary for the criss cross separates the moment of free will from the moment the card is shown, so the strength is lost. Also from a logical standpoint, if someone is selecting a card by cutting the deck, why can't the magi immediately turn that card over?

Overall a widely known and weak force I will never use.
Message: Posted by: Professor Marvel (Nov 25, 2015 02:34PM)
It's the time delay that's the key. The brain is a funny thing. Yes, it's in every beginner book. That doesn't mean it's not useful. I've never been caught out with it. People look up and by the time they look back down, the scene looks normal to them. Yes there are a lot of other great forces out there and you shouldn't use the cross cut for every trick in your set, but abandoning it wholesale doesn't make sense. Also RiderBacks, if you're not having fun performing for academic audiences, maybe you should find a better quality of people to perform for. Like people in a bar in a company town. Smart guys like my dad who didn't need an "advanced degree" to feel good about themselves and enjoyed a good trick without going out of their way to try to embarrass people or make them feel small by telling them how smart they are for figuring out their trick.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 27, 2015 10:42PM)
[quote]On Nov 24, 2015, ThePhoenix wrote: RiderBacks, I totally disagree with you that the cross-cut force will not fool “any serious academics”. Having a Ph.D. in a “scientific” domain doesn’t mean that these people are superior or have superior skills and can or want to reverse engineered every magic trick.[/quote]

Please don't misquote me. I think you can at least do me that one favor. Go back and read my Nov 18, 2015 post made at 11:50 PM. You've misread it, and I assume that your misreading of it is responsible for you mistakenly attributing to me the statement you just attributed to me (by placing it in quotation marks!) I would take more care in reading in the future, especially when you're going to place some kind of paraphrase of my remarks in quotation marks, as if I stated what you've placed in those quotation marks! The mistake you've made is common to engineers. It is also common to casual readers of Erdnase.

[quote]Oh, before I forget, I own a Ph.D. in nuclear engineering from a university which is ranked amongst the best one in my domain.[/quote]

I would and do expect engineers to be much more easily fooled (in general) by this kind of force than the academics I was talking about.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Nov 27, 2015 10:49PM)
I agree completely with ThomasJ's last two posts. And I might ask Professor Marvel why he isn't using a better force that doesn't require some absurd kind of time delay? I suspect that proponents or defenders of the cross-cut force are just too lazy to actually learn how to force a card in a competent and fair manner that arouses no suspicion and doesn't possibly provide the relatively oblivious spectator with the opportunity to think to themselves, "Well, I wasn't paying close enough attention. Maybe this guy cheated there..." If the only force you can pull off is the cross-cut, then I guess keep using it. But again, please, and for the love of all that is holy, learn how to force better. And please do not suggest that one should count only performing only for drunken coal miners in a company town. If that's your only kind of gig, maybe all you need is the cross-cut. Know your audience. And if that's it, I'm sure you'll be fine with the cross-cut.
Message: Posted by: lcwright1964 (Nov 29, 2015 03:37PM)
In his newest book, Simon Aronson describes a combo of a milk shuffle with a crosscut positioning that confuses which packet is which and I think is really deceptive and worth getting to know.
Message: Posted by: lcwright1964 (Nov 29, 2015 03:51PM)
I also want to put in a plug of Roberto Giobbi's latest video download, Simply Amazing, available at the site named for a certain flightless bird. The six effects therein are hardly groundbreakers. However, Giobbi brings sophistication and style to the presentation, and there are lots of learning points and subtleties that help make the crosscut, Balducci, and 10-20 forces seem natural and convincing with a lay audience.
Message: Posted by: ThomasJ (Nov 30, 2015 12:23PM)
[quote]On Nov 29, 2015, lcwright1964 wrote:
In his newest book, Simon Aronson describes a combo of a milk shuffle with a crosscut positioning that confuses which packet is which and I think is really deceptive and worth getting to know. [/quote]

This is the context in which I was referring to using the principle within an effect. In the same vein is Tenkai's Optical Revolve commonly used in Triumph routines. The disorientation is used as a means to an end, not as an end which it is when forcing a card.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 1, 2015 11:57PM)
[quote]On Nov 29, 2015, lcwright1964 wrote: I also want to put in a plug of Roberto Giobbi's latest video download, Simply Amazing, available at the site named for a certain flightless bird. The six effects therein are hardly groundbreakers. However, Giobbi brings sophistication and style to the presentation, and there are lots of learning points and subtleties that help make the crosscut, Balducci, and 10-20 forces seem natural and convincing with a lay audience. [/quote]

Giobbi always brings sophistication and style. The man has presentation down.
Message: Posted by: Lance Pierce (Dec 2, 2015 09:20AM)
Toward this lowly move, I can only offer that one of Michael Skinner's pet effects, that he shared with a very, very few, was simply a use of the cross-cut force. There was no other move or action in the entire piece. He said it was one of the strongest tricks he'd ever done and one that he used when he knew he needed to make a strong impression on his audience.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 2, 2015 07:08PM)
[quote]On Nov 24, 2015, ThomasJ wrote:
The problem with this force, aside from being in every beginner book on magic, is this - if you use the needed time delay / misdirection, your audience rarely recalls which half was the top. They will naturally question (be it internal or outright) if that was the card they cut to. Sure they'll play along and (pretend to) take your word for it, but the force is not convincing at all. Cross Cut might be a decent principle to use for other purposes within the context of an effect, but as a force? No way. Vernon always said, "Confusion is not magic," and this force is borderline confusion.

TJ [/quote]
This is totally incorrect.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 2, 2015 07:16PM)
Anyone who thinks a PROPERLY executed cross cut isn't effective is disagreeing with Ackerman, Skinner, Fechter, Lorayne, Aronson, Bannon, Cervon, Nelson, Jennings, Carney, Ortiz, Dingle, etc.
Read and study the effects published by these greats and see how they use simple techniques for maximum impact.
Message: Posted by: ThomasJ (Dec 2, 2015 10:24PM)
I've read them, and I've used the force myself plenty of times in the past. However, there are more convincing forces out there that will convince 100% of the people 100% of the time that they had free will. Even if the cross-cut is executed properly, there's still the chance that one person is aware of the exact method. That's one too many.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 2, 2015 10:59PM)
[quote]On Dec 2, 2015, ThomasJ wrote: I've read them, and I've used the force myself plenty of times in the past. However, there are more convincing forces out there that will convince 100% of the people 100% of the time that they had free will. Even if the cross-cut is executed properly, there's still the chance that one person is aware of the exact method. That's one too many. [/quote]

Pretty much this. The fact is that most thinking people (who quite properly don't believe in voodoo or special, non-existent Satanic powers) will be left underwhelmed even if you initially sneak this lame force by them. While you might initially sneak it by them, their reconstruction will quickly reveal to them the moment at which you, in their mind, probably pulled off some ********. With so many better forces available, I really pity the person who uses this one. Up your game, FFS and for the sake of magic. Stop being so gimpy. Banish this garbage from your arsenal. I *could* use this force on some people I know. One woman I work with believes that Magic The Gathering is some kind of Satanic devil-worship. I'm sure it'd fly by her. But since I can force better, why should I rely on this lowly move? This woman isn't stupid, despite her fracking odd beliefs. Why give her the chance to reconstruct the method when one can use forces that provide much less of such a reconstruction being arrived upon? With her, I can probably easily land a Classic Force. So why not go for it?

I'm not usually concerned about someone having advance awareness of the method. Most of the brilliant people I hang around probably don't know the Cross-Cut force. But they will, post-effect, be able to figure out that you cheated them with the "force", or, at the very least, suspect that you cheated them at that point. Since better forces are available,, why give them this opportunity? Eliminate the opportunity to question as best you can. Using this "lowly move" doesn't satisfy that desideratum.
Message: Posted by: Uli Weigel (Dec 3, 2015 06:37AM)
RiderBacks, would you say, that the Jay Ose False Cut also fools nobody?
Message: Posted by: Claudio (Dec 3, 2015 10:39AM)
Darwin Ortiz's effect [b]One Shot, One Kill[/b] from his book [i]Lessons in Card Mastery[/i] uses a cross-cut force, because it's the best force (for laypeople) at that stage of the effect.

It's possible to embellish the cross-cut so that it's genuinely deceiving, though it does not look much like the CC force anymore, and it's maybe a good thing.

PM me for a description if you're interested.
Message: Posted by: Lance Pierce (Dec 3, 2015 11:34AM)
[quote]On Oct 15, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
I hate this force. I hate it with a passion so strong you can't even begin to imagine my hate. That said, I'm sure the vast majority of people are stupid enough to fall for this nonsense. After all, half of them are of below average intelligence. However, I would rather kill myself than rely on this force. If you can't force better, you'll still probably fool a fair number with it. If you know your audience will fall for it, go for it. But dear god, please work on forcing better! This is a force that fools a significant percentage of the population, but it's very sad that fools so many. If you're just starting out? OK. I can see that. But please, please, work on learning better forces. [/quote]

I'll suggest that perhaps part of the problem is that everyone thinks of it as a force. It's not. It's a bluff. That's a meaningful -- and critical -- distinction.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 3, 2015 05:41PM)
The cross cut force is an extremely powerful tool. If as a performer you are unable to exploit its power then please don't use it and choose something else.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 3, 2015 10:10PM)
[quote]On Dec 3, 2015, Uli Weigel wrote: RiderBacks, would you say, that the Jay Ose False Cut also fools nobody? [/quote]

That's a good question, and I have my own anwer. I avoid these kinds of cuts (and especially avoid the flourishy in-the-hands versions). This for two reasons. First, I try (within some limits) not to be too flashy with cards. Second, I think these moves create confusion, not magic. I believe that the appropriate spectator response to cuts in this style is, "I don't know what you just did. Maybe you cut the deck. Maybe you didn't." (That's what the *intelligent* spectator's response would be, at least.) For a tabled false cut, I would prefer to substitute an up-the-ladder sequence.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 4, 2015 06:30AM)
An up the ladder sequence is much flashier than an Ose False Cut.
Ose's is extremely deceptive.
Up The Ladder is wonderful but conveys an air of great skill and manipulation by the performer.
Both are excellent but are in no way interchangeable. You wouldnt catch Ted Lesley or Barrie Richardson doing an up the ladder but they have devastated intelligent, high paying, sophisticated audiences for decades with subtle procedures like the cross cut and the Ose.
Message: Posted by: Count Lustig (Dec 4, 2015 09:25AM)
[quote]On Dec 3, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
[quote]On Dec 3, 2015, Uli Weigel wrote: RiderBacks, would you say, that the Jay Ose False Cut also fools nobody? [/quote]

That's a good question, and I have my own anwer. I avoid these kinds of cuts (and especially avoid the flourishy in-the-hands versions). This for two reasons. First, I try (within some limits) not to be too flashy with cards. Second, I think these moves create confusion, not magic. I believe that the appropriate spectator response to cuts in this style is, "I don't know what you just did. Maybe you cut the deck. Maybe you didn't." (That's what the *intelligent* spectator's response would be, at least.) For a tabled false cut, I would prefer to substitute an up-the-ladder sequence. [/quote]
Your linking the Ose Cut with "being too flashy with cards" makes me wonder whether you even know what the Ose Cut is. There are few false cuts less flashy than Jay Ose's. (If you do know the move, it makes your comments even more ridiculous.)

"[i]Second, I think these moves create confusion, not magic.[/i]"

All false cuts rely on confusing the audience as to which packet is which. The trick is to keep them from realizing it--indeed, to leave them convinced that they followed exactly what happened. And false cuts are not supposed to create magic. They're supposed to create the belief that the cards are in a different order than they were before. Few false cuts achieve those goals better than Jay Ose's.

Your constant evoking of a ghost chorus of "*intelligent* spectators," "highly intelligent individuals," "intelligent Ph.D.s," and "brilliant people I hang around" who all conveniently happen to see things your way, is a perfect example of the No True Scotsman Fallacy. If a spectator doesn't react the way you think he should, it just proves that he's not [i]truly[/i] intelligent. (If you can't understand the link below, perhaps you can get one of those "brilliant people" you hang around to explain it to you.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

RiderBacks' motto: Always wrong; never in doubt.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 5, 2015 12:29AM)
[quote]On Dec 4, 2015, Count Lustig wrote: Your linking the Ose Cut with "being too flashy with cards" makes me wonder whether you even know what the Ose Cut is. There are few false cuts less flashy than Jay Ose's. (If you do know the move, it makes your comments even more ridiculous.)[/quote]

Reading is hard for some people. Apparently reading is hard for you. I recommend that you reread my comments to which you replied and try to achieve some modicum of understanding. I did not say that Jay Ose's cut was flashy. You're showing you foolishness off. Stop pretending that confusion results in magic. If you are asked to cut the cards while playing a serious game of poker, and you execute some hard to follow ****, you might just get shot. Who cares about that, of course. Swindling others isn't my game. I'm interested in magic, not snookering gambers. So make it clean and fair. Oh ****. Making it clean and fair works for magic just as much as it does for cheats!
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 5, 2015 12:36AM)
[quote]On Dec 4, 2015, Count Lustig wrote: All false cuts rely on confusing the audience as to which packet is which.[/quote]

Meh. You can rely upon confusion if you have to. I recommend not relying upon confusion. Make your moves look clean and fair. Don't settle for relying upon confusion. To do so is to take the lazy way out.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 5, 2015 08:32AM)
I hear movement under the bridge...
Message: Posted by: Count Lustig (Dec 5, 2015 12:58PM)
[quote]On Dec 5, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
[quote]On Dec 4, 2015, Count Lustig wrote: All false cuts rely on confusing the audience as to which packet is which.[/quote]

Meh. You can rely upon confusion if you have to. I recommend not relying upon confusion. Make your moves look clean and fair. Don't settle for relying upon confusion. To do so is to take the lazy way out. [/quote]
"Clean and fair" is a pretty good description of the Jay Ose False Cut. (Look it up some time.)

You favor the up-the-ladder cut. Nothing wrong with that. But if you don't realize that the up-the-ladder cut works by confusing the audience as to which packet is which, you don't understand the move. (If the audience realized which packet is which, they would realize that the deck is in the same order.)

Both the Ose cut and the up-the-ladder cut are effective because the audience doesn't [i]feel[/i] confused. They [i]think[/i] they followed what happened. (Kind of like the way you [i]think[/i] you know what you're talking about.)
Message: Posted by: Ben Blau (Dec 5, 2015 03:51PM)
The Jay Ose false cut even fools people who know it.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 5, 2015 10:02PM)
Jon Racherbaumer observed that the Ose Cut looks more real from the spectator's vantage point than a true triple cut to the table.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 5, 2015 11:52PM)
I'll look up the Jay Ose false cut. I didn't respond with particular knowledge of this false cut. However, generally, these false cuts are done so quickly that you it's very hard to follow the cards. They're also done with a limited number of packets. When a limited number of packets are cut in such a way that it is difficult to follow the cards, the intelligent spectator immediately suspects a false cut. A well-executed up-the-ladder sequence does much less to arouse suspicion. Way too much mixing appears to be going on for it to be suspected false, even in the minds of highly intelligent spectators.

In other news, I actually witnessed the most lowly force/bluff I've ever seen recently. This might actually have a name. If so, I don't know it and I don't want to. First, the magi gave the deck a single ruffle shuffle (preserving top stock, of course.) Then he asked an audience member to pick a number, say, between one and ten. He then dealt that number of cards face down off the top of the deck into the audience member's hand. Next, he picked up the packet in the audience member's hand and showed the audience the bottom card (that'd be the top card of the initial deck). This was supposed to be the randomly chosen card. I carefully observed the audience's reaction. I noticed that at least one adult whispered an explanation of what happened to his buddy. I was unable to determine what the children thought, or how many of the adults noticed this bluff. I am, however, reasonably confident that many, if not most, were completely (and very sadly) fooled.

I wonder if defenders of the cross-cut are going to claim this move is permissible? Thankfully, the move was followed by a little bit of misdirection, but it clearly wasn't enough misdirection for any adult with a working brain. Maybe it played well for the children, but I couldn't really tell. I sort of think that the children present were probably not sure what to think of the trick.

As an aside, I thought the performer's show was overall alright. Many people were puzzled by at least some (if not all) of the effects. I was also puzzled by one or two, and if you manage to puzzle me on occasion, I'm happy to say you're doing fine.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 6, 2015 12:11AM)
[quote]On Dec 4, 2015, Count Lustig wrote: You favor the up-the-ladder cut. Nothing wrong with that. But if you don't realize that the up-the-ladder cut works by confusing the audience as to which packet is which, you don't understand the move. (If the audience realized which packet is which, they would realize that the deck is in the same order.) Both the Ose cut and the up-the-ladder cut are effective because the audience doesn't [i]feel[/i] confused. They [i]think[/i] they followed what happened. (Kind of like the way you [i]think[/i] you know what you're talking about. [/quote]

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. With most tabled false cuts using small numbers of packets, intelligent people feel confused. Intelligent people do not feel confused by a well-executed up-the-ladder sequence, since they don't expect it to possibly be false.
Message: Posted by: Count Lustig (Dec 6, 2015 01:37AM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
[quote]On Dec 4, 2015, Count Lustig wrote: You favor the up-the-ladder cut. Nothing wrong with that. But if you don't realize that the up-the-ladder cut works by confusing the audience as to which packet is which, you don't understand the move. (If the audience realized which packet is which, they would realize that the deck is in the same order.) Both the Ose cut and the up-the-ladder cut are effective because the audience doesn't [i]feel[/i] confused. They [i]think[/i] they followed what happened. (Kind of like the way you [i]think[/i] you know what you're talking about. [/quote]

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. With most tabled false cuts using small numbers of packets, intelligent people feel confused. Intelligent people do not feel confused by a well-executed up-the-ladder sequence, since they don't expect it to possibly be false. [/quote]
Well, I'm sure you must feel that you're making some sort of a point.
Message: Posted by: Ben Blau (Dec 6, 2015 07:59AM)
[quote]On Dec 5, 2015, magicfish wrote:
Jon Racherbaumer observed that the Ose Cut looks more real from the spectator's vantage point than a true triple cut to the table. [/quote]

It's true. Absolutely one of my favorite techniques in card magic.
Message: Posted by: Peckham (Dec 6, 2015 10:53AM)
I use it occasionally and it works fine. You need to delay the reveal and the forget the sequence. I think Gary Ouellet had a version of this page n his book, Close Up Illusions.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 6, 2015 11:16AM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, Peckham wrote: I use it occasionally and it works fine. You need to delay the reveal and the [sic] forget the sequence. I think Gary Ouellet had a version of this page n his book, Close Up Illusions. [/quote]

Sometimes I'm not sure why I continue this. You do not make magic by adding "time delay." You increase confusion. What kind of hubris must you have to believe that your (polite) spectator is fooled by this nonsense? What they're thinking to themselves is, "Oh crap. I forgot which packet was which. Darnit, why didn't I pay better attention!?" There is no illusion of a real cut created for a remotely intelligent spectator. They know you're doing a magic trick. They expect you to be cheating. They will, and do, realize they haven't been paying close enough attention, and they will suspect that you did not cut the cards fairly. Since they are probably polite, and fault themselves for not keeping better track of a single packet, they won't say anything. But you're not doing magic.
Message: Posted by: Count Lustig (Dec 6, 2015 11:48AM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
Sometimes I'm not sure why I continue this. [/quote]
Because you enjoy looking foolish?


[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
You do not make magic by adding "time delay." You increase confusion. [/quote]
Time delay is a form of misdirection. In fact, it's often called "time misdirection." Misdirection is the foundation of magic. No magician needs to apologize for using it.


[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
What kind of hubris must you have to believe that your (polite) spectator is fooled by this nonsense? What they're thinking to themselves is, "Oh crap. I forgot which packet was which. Darnit, why didn't I pay better attention!?" [/quote]
What kind of hubris must you have to believe that you know what a spectator is thinking, not based on what they say, not based on how they act, not based on how they react to the effect, but just based on what you want to believe is true?
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 6, 2015 12:29PM)
Im having trouble taking this whole thing serious. I suspect we're being pranked.
There is no way a knowledgeable magician can pontificate with such authority ...and have so very little knowledge.
He's going to "look up" Ose's Cut. Is he serious?
He's unaware of one cardmagic's great weapons from Close-Up Card Magic but he is an authority on false cuts.
He refuses to acknowledge the expert treatment given the Crosscut Force by the all time greats.
Is this a joke?
Now watch? His next post will begin with, "The only joke here is your....."
Yawn.
Message: Posted by: Overworked (Dec 6, 2015 01:17PM)
"You do not make magic by adding "time delay." You increase confusion."

? It is a bit difficult to believe that anyone who would say this has any experience actually performing for people.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 6, 2015 04:50PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, magicfish wrote: He's going to "look up" Ose's Cut. Is he serious?[/quote]

I looked it up. Then I snorted coffee out of my nose.

[quote]He's unaware of one cardmagic's great weapons from Close-Up Card Magic but he is an authority on false cuts.[/quote]

I do not consider Ose's False Cut to be "one of card magic's great weapons." I consider it to be a basic, beginner move for a magician who doesn't want to acquire any serious chops. It's simpler than I expected it to be. In fact, you can't get simpler... Thanks to you, I'm now going to be stuck remembering the name of this lowly little move I'll never, ever deploy.

[quote]He refuses to acknowledge the expert treatment given the Crosscut Force by the all time greats. Is this a joke?[/quote]

The expert treatment of the cross-cut force? What are you talking about? That's like talking about some "expert treatment of drying dishes with a dish towel!" Now I know you're just pulling my leg. By the way, Harry Lorayne has published about three million things. Not all of them are going to be good, bud.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 6, 2015 04:58PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, Overworked wrote:
"You do not make magic by adding "time delay." You increase confusion."

? It is a bit difficult to believe that anyone who would say this has any experience actually performing for people. [/quote]
Ah yes. It seems you have support from your own alias.
Time misdirection is one of the strongest principles in magic; deeply explored by its greatest practitioners. Fred Kaps, Tommy Wonder, Houdini,Copperfield, Henning, Slydini etc, all used it. You, and your alter ego, are clearly trolling.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 6, 2015 05:00PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, magicfish wrote: He's going to "look up" Ose's Cut. Is he serious?[/quote]

I looked it up. Then I snorted coffee out of my nose.

[quote]He's unaware of one cardmagic's great weapons from Close-Up Card Magic but he is an authority on false cuts.[/quote]

I do not consider Ose's False Cut to be "one of card magic's great weapons." I consider it to be a basic, beginner move for a magician who doesn't want to acquire any serious chops. It's simpler than I expected it to be. In fact, you can't get simpler... Thanks to you, I'm now going to be stuck remembering the name of this lowly little move I'll never, ever deploy.

[quote]He refuses to acknowledge the expert treatment given the Crosscut Force by the all time greats. Is this a joke?[/quote]

The expert treatment of the cross-cut force? What are you talking about? That's like talking about some "expert treatment of drying dishes with a dish towel!" Now I know you're just pulling my leg. By the way, Harry Lorayne has published about three million things. Not all of them are going to be good, bud. [/quote]
Anybody more eloquent than I care to publicly ridicule this buffoon?
Message: Posted by: LesL (Dec 6, 2015 05:05PM)
[quote]On Dec 5, 2015, magicfish wrote:
I hear movement under the bridge... [/quote]
Too funny! I don't even know why you people even bother to respond.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 6, 2015 05:08PM)
One last thing before I go.
The reason you are oblivious to the expert- yes expert- treatment of this cut by John Bannon Simon Aronson, Alan Ackerman etc, is because you don't read. You don't study. You are magically illiterate. You are who Mike Close was writing about in his essay in Workers 5. Which you don't know about.
You have less knowledge of magic than my hamster has about ancient Mesopotamia.
Everything ive said here is of course, not true, because your position here is untrue. Its a lie.
You're "pulling our leg" and a few of us have an idea who you might be.
Well played.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 6, 2015 05:09PM)
For you, magicfish. I'll let you try to figure out the source of this cut, since I'm sure you won't recognize it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO5tukq0Ly4#t=4m28s

This is not the best execution, but I wanted to make you do at least a little work to figure out where that's from.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 6, 2015 05:10PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, LesL wrote:
[quote]On Dec 5, 2015, magicfish wrote:
I hear movement under the bridge... [/quote]
Too funny! I don't even know why you people even bother to respond. [/quote]
Sometimes we like to humour the trolls for a bit. They start off convincingly, but then they betray themselves within a few posts. It was kinda funny though. Meh not really.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 6, 2015 05:14PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
For you, magicfish. I'll let you try to figure out the source of this cut, since I'm sure you won't recognize it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO5tukq0Ly4#t=4m28s

This is not the best execution, but I wanted to make you do at least a little work to figure out where that's from. [/quote]
Very well done, Rider, let me check my library and I'll see if I can track it down. My first instinct is Charlie Miller but don't quote me on it. But it must be one of the greats. Very smooth Rider. Thanks
P.s. I see you're left handed.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 6, 2015 05:23PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, magicfish wrote: My first instinct is Charlie Miller but don't quote me on it. But it must be one of the greats.[/quote]

You're sort of close. That guess was better than I expected from you!
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 6, 2015 05:44PM)
For giggles, here's a ten word explanation of the Jay Ose Tabled Full False Cut, the miracle of contemporary card magic, one of the greatest gifts to magicians ever, and the shiniest, hidden gem in Close-Up Card Magic! From the greatest minds in card magic! All rights reserved. A real fooler! You'll have the audience in fits. Start clean and end clean! No gimmicks or memorization. Instant reset! Works with any deck of playing cards. And 100% gaff free. Here we go folks! Are you ready?

Top of deck to table. Repeat. Lay down remaining. Assemble.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 6, 2015 05:55PM)
Keep talkin Rider, we're getting closer...
Do you wear glasses?
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 6, 2015 06:05PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, magicfish wrote: Keep talkin Rider, we're getting closer... Do you wear glasses? [/quote]

Does a monocle count? I aim to give the appearance of an 18th century dandy. I feel it really helps my act.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 6, 2015 06:16PM)
Ok. I tracked down your card work, Rider. You took that directly from Faucett Ross. You almost had me stumped.
Faucett Ross got the idea from Vernon but Ross perfected the idea. He showed it to Francis Carlyle who was initially unimpressed. It wasnt until Faucett showed it to a young John Carney that its full potential was realized.
It caught on in the west coast underground and has remained there all these years- until now.
Rider, your work is awe inspiring both in its elegance and in its lineage.
Bravo sir.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 6, 2015 06:19PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, magicfish wrote: Ok. I tracked down your card work, Rider. You took that directly from Faucett Ross. You almost had me stumped. Faucett Ross got the idea from Vernon but Ross perfected the idea. He showed it to Francis Carlyle who was initially unimpressed. It wasnt until Faucett showed it to a young John Carney that its full potential was realized. It caught on in the west coast underground and has remained there all these years- until now. Rider, your work is awe inspiring both in its elegance and in its lineage. Bravo sir. [/quote]

Perhaps Faucett Ross did get the idea from Vernon. I wouldn't be remotely surprised. Where did Vernon get the idea? You still haven't found the source. And now I'm just giving you too many hints.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 6, 2015 06:24PM)
That's where I'm stuck rider, Vernon got stuff from a couple places other than his own mind. Youre videos got me thinking it's pre $20 Dollar Manuscript. So pre New York. Im thinkin this is from his Ottawa days?
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 6, 2015 06:29PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, magicfish wrote: That's where I'm stuck rider, Vernon got stuff from a couple places other than his own mind. Youre videos got me thinking it's pre $20 Dollar Manuscript. So pre New York. Im thinkin this is from his Ottawa days? [/quote]

Warmer! No, let's call it hot... You're hot on the trail now. At this point, I'm sure not just a few people are chuckling... But you'll get there.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 6, 2015 07:12PM)
Ok, I got it. It was the very first trick Vernon ever saw . His dad performed it for him at age 7.
The rest is history, no wonder it's not in my tiny little library.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 6, 2015 07:24PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, magicfish wrote: Ok, I got it. It was the very first trick Vernon ever saw . His dad performed it for him at age 7. The rest is history, no wonder it's not in my tiny little library.[/quote]

I'm not yanking your chain. I hope you're not yanking mine. It sounds like you've read a little bit. (By the way, I read a fair bit. Maybe more than you, though I read smartly and selectively. And yes, I have read Close. No, I have not read every word of Workers, just as I have not read every word of Close Up Card Magic. Why would anyone do that? I also have a love-hate relationship with Close's writing style.) But whatever, if you're well-read and have a reasonable library, I'm sure the source is in it. And perhaps you should consider consulting that source more... The Professor would have slapped you at this point. And yes, the source is pre-1920's. You might go back to that YouTube video I linked and check its references for further help on identifying the source of the cut I linked. Once again, you'll get there. If I wasn't in a foul mood I'd just give it to you. But right now, I'm in a foul mood.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 6, 2015 07:51PM)
Come on Rider, don't be foul, tell us the source of this gem.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Dec 6, 2015 08:14PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, magicfish wrote: Come on Rider, don't be foul, tell us the source of this gem.[/quote]

I am disappointed in you. Who published a book (from which Vernon learned in his early days) for the alleged reason that he needed the money? That's your source.
Message: Posted by: ianchandler (Dec 6, 2015 09:20PM)
This is a hilarious thread.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 7, 2015 02:11AM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, magicfish wrote: Come on Rider, don't be foul, tell us the source of this gem.[/quote]

I am disappointed in you. Who published a book (from which Vernon learned in his early days) for the alleged reason that he needed the money? That's your source. [/quote]
I am disappointed in myself, Rider. All these years of study and I had no idea that the source of Extreme Card Magic, Sybil Cuts, One handed quadruple cuts etc, was Erdnase all along.
The Expert at the Card table for me, and according to Vernon, was always about economy of motion and naturalness at the card table. About not arousing suspicion of sleight of hand.
But I guess I need to read it again. I was totally unaware of the XCM contained within.
Thanks for the lesson, Rider. It just goes to show you, you can never know it all.
Message: Posted by: Sh9bum9 (Dec 13, 2015 12:21PM)
Check out Michael Close's "The Ooh-Ah Bird" for an excellent lesson on the Cross cut force. It works for many, so if it doesn't for you, don't use it.
Message: Posted by: Russ Martin (Dec 17, 2015 01:34PM)
[quote]On Dec 6, 2015, RiderBacks wrote:

. . . You do not make magic by adding "time delay." You increase confusion. What kind of hubris must you have to believe that your (polite) spectator is fooled by this nonsense? . . . [/quote]

And yet Hartman (1991) writes:

"The A-D Revolving Force, the Criss Cross Force, and other related sleights have an element of optical confusion or at least time delay to provide cover or misdirection.'

I fail to see why cover and/or misdirection are not integral parts of "magic".
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Dec 17, 2015 08:51PM)
Of course you are right, Russ, as is Mr. Hartman and countless other experts. I'm not sure if you read the entire thread but it was derailed by a troll pulling a prank.
Message: Posted by: lurker (Jan 2, 2016 09:38PM)
There is nothing whatsoever wrong with the cross cut force. I have been using it for years. You have to know how, when and which tricks you can use it for though. It always deceives but you must use time misdirection in order to get the best result.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Jan 8, 2016 11:32PM)
[quote]On Jan 8, 2016, David Fillary wrote: Anyway, back to that first question. The CC force obviously has some flaws, so if you can share a sure-fire way to force a card where you don't touch the deck, I would happily change to it. [/quote]

Mathematical forces should fill the bill provided you can set the forced card at a location.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Jan 8, 2016 11:55PM)
[quote]On Jan 8, 2016, Lance Pierce wrote: Sorry...I should be clearer.

[quote]I put the best possible delivery of the cross-cut force roughly on par with the best possible delivery/framing of the force I described.[/quote]

My point was that if this is the best a magician can do with these kinds of forces, then the technique can be expected to fail -- and rightfully so. However, the scenario you described is far from the best way to frame these kinds of techniques.

I think part of the problem with this sort of discussion is the idea of "time misdirection" itself, because rarely does anyone stop to think what it really means; people just fire off arguments about whether it works or not. You're probably right in that most of the time, the simple passage of moments isn't enough to ensure that a cross-cut force will be deceptive. What has to happen is that in those moments, the audience must be given something more important or interesting to think about. They must be carried along by a greater theme or priority than simply which packet is where. It's this, combined with the passage of time, that causes people to forget comparatively less significant details, like which packet was on top or whether the bottom card of a packet was originally the top card of the deck.

The same holds true for Poker Player's Picnic, of course. I hope someday you can see Florida magician Ed Oschmann perform his version, which is a great party trick, because he saw a way to reframe the deals.

All this is why someone like Michael Skinner, in all his years of experience and performing, considered a handling of the Cross-Cut Force as one of his prized gems and hailed it as one of the strongest tricks he ever did, sharing it with only a very select few for many, many years. [/quote]

Unfortunately, the scenario I described was a perfect description of what I actually witnessed a magician perform (minus the time misdirection). :-/

I'm with you on the point that there are ways to obfuscate here. There are no doubt more and less convincing routines which incorporate the cross-cut. You can pull it off poorly or with great expertise.There is no doubt that with proper routining, you can pull off one of the most stellar cross-cut forces ever. Still, I continue to maintain that the most stellar cross-cut force is lackluster when performed for intelligent people who rightly don't believe in the existence of anything remotely akin to "real magic". (Such individuals will immediately notice that, because of your amazing performance, they have *forgotten* which pack was the top or bottom. And then the trick is over. The explanation is obvious (it's that they lost track of the cards), and they will blame themselves for not paying more attention despite your disarming patter and routining.

Ok, suppose that most of that's wrong. Are you going to work really hard to perfect routining and patter for every trick you perform with the cross-cut such that you can get away with the cross-cut as your main force? No. Nobody is that good. Investing massive quantities of time into trying to develop a stellar cross-cut (which is, I maintain, still lackluster) for each and every trick you perform which requires a force? No way. And even if you could pull that miracle off, why not opt for spending the time you spend routining on working on a better force instead? That makes more sense. Nor is the fact that the cross-cut can be used as a hands off force particular interesting, IMO. (And here I respond to someone else.) It's absurd to think that spectators find a Classic Force unfair because the "magician's hands touched the cards." But if you want a purely in the hands of the spectator force, it's not that hard to find better ways (especially if you can set the card you want forced at a location).

I appreciate you taking the time to provide your thoughts. I have great respect for your work, and even if we wind up disagreeing, which we may or may not, I wish that I was half as competent as you are and will always pay attention to what you have to say.
Message: Posted by: Lance Pierce (Jan 11, 2016 11:05AM)
[quote]...and even if we wind up disagreeing, which we may or may not...[/quote]

It's all good! We're not arguing...just two folks discussing something we love.

[quote]I'm with you on the point that there are ways to obfuscate here...[/quote]

I see this as an issue. To obfuscate means to make something obscure or unclear. Only in the least of senses can it be said that's what's happening in a well-managed Cross Cut force. Instead, what we want to do is present a very clear narrative...just not one that includes the relative positions of the packets as meaningful in any way.

I do see what you're saying, though. It's quite reasonable to say that in no way should a Cross Cut Force (which is actually much less a force and much more a bluff) be a person's "go to" technique to force a card. For that, there are far better ways. I simply don't think a blanket statement that it's completely worthless and never fooling is supportable.

Thanks...
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Jan 17, 2016 05:16PM)
[quote]On Jan 11, 2016, Lance Pierce wrote: It's all good! We're not arguing...just two folks discussing something we love.[/quote]

I like your style! =)
Message: Posted by: Charles Gaff (Jan 24, 2016 10:51PM)
I learned this cut with the x!!!!!d deck. The introduction of the folded paper and patter is the time misdirection that I've used many times to distract/misdirect/fool/direct the spectators focus. I think this is a great force, I've never had a bad reaction to it.
Message: Posted by: marc_carrion (Jan 26, 2016 04:59PM)
As indicated by others, there are other methods that are not much more difficult, so it's better to invest a little bit of time on learning a better force than relying on the cross cut. But if what you need is a force where you don't touch the cards, maybe the 10/20 is a better way to go. Or use 13 card from a one way deck in your regular deck and force by estimation, ask the spectator to cut more or less half the deck... with 13 cards it's difficult to miss.

Marc
Message: Posted by: obrienmagic (May 11, 2016 05:38PM)
I perform the force differently. I hold the deck face-up and ask them to say stop as I drop groups of cards face-up onto the table. When they stop me, I turn all of the cards on the table facedown, then point to the remaining cards and ask, how many do you think are left? about half or so?, then place that packet onto the table packet in cross force positon. It just ads an extra layer to the thing, but in reality the same thing is happening as the standard version.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (May 12, 2016 08:57PM)
Or one could do it how Marlo did it with a demonstration cut, and, as John Bannon and Randy Wakeman agree, step the cut without "crossing it".
Combine these two tactics and the force is simply diabolical.
Message: Posted by: ebackes88 (May 16, 2016 03:52PM)
It works, I've seen it fool the same person multiple times.
Message: Posted by: steinarthelen (May 19, 2016 12:18PM)
There are some great variations and tips on the force in Move Zero by John Bannon.
Yes I do think it fools someone. Not only someone but almost anyone. Not the force alone, but as a part of a well structured performance.
And especially if you make them believe they shuffled the deck before the cut.
Message: Posted by: Raymond Singson (Jul 22, 2016 01:34AM)
[youtube]rzUO17bo3_Q[/youtube]

This is one of my go-to favorite effects to perform for people. I filmed this performance a while back, but I think it demonstrates how time delay makes the force incredibly more deceptive. I've since adopted a lot of the additional subtleties that John Bannon covers in his work -- as stated above, there are some really great variations in [i]Move Zero[/i].

RS.
Message: Posted by: SvenSigma (Jul 27, 2016 12:53AM)
I still remember the very first time I saw somebody do a cross cut - long ago. My reaction, roughly in this order:

1. That guy just cancelled the cut.
2. Did I really see that happen?
3. That guy is really bold.
4. Nobody can expect the audience too be so stupid.
5. No, I did not see that happen.
6. He really fooled us and I missed something.

So, in a way that cut captures the essence of magic.

Knowing my reaction, I am not bold enough to use it.
Message: Posted by: tomd (Jul 27, 2016 04:59AM)
I've never used it. There are plenty of other forces that don't require much practice, and achieve the same goal. I don't see why you can't use it though, it forces you to misdirect which is a great skill to practice. And as others have said, it clearly works.
Message: Posted by: nattefrost (Jul 31, 2016 11:55AM)
SevenSigma- when you first saw that force, did the magician use time mis-direction after the cut was marked, or did he immediately turn over the "cut to" card? I know it has been said a million times but with a force like the cross-cut, the time delay you need to do with this is very, very important. I have used this force hundreds of times and have never been called out on it. That doesn't mean it will never happen, but I'll tell you it amazes me that with all of the effects I do, all the sleight of hand, gimmicks, gadgets, props, etc, sometimes I'll just take a piece of paper, write down the name of a card, put it in an envelope and place it on the table in full view, use the cross-cut force, MAKE SURE I tell a little story built in to the time mis-direction (NEVER just say "watch this.... cut the cards, look at the card you cut to, open the envelope", effect is over). I raise my voice (drama) to the tune of something like "now what is about to happen is so incredible" (or whatever patter you want to use), tell a quick story while looking them in the eye, and it just makes the entire sequence so much better. Just raising my voice a bit always makes them look away from the cards and directly at me, which is what I want.

Quick question for people that use this force- do you ever use it to force the BOTTOM card of the deck?
Message: Posted by: nattefrost (Jul 31, 2016 12:06PM)
Tomd- that's true though, there are a bunch of forces that don't require a lot of practice. The force that is used in "Overkill" by Paul Harris is great. I know it's a procedure just to get to the forced card but it's just a really nice force for that effect.
Message: Posted by: SvenSigma (Jul 31, 2016 04:15PM)
Nattefrost - I'm pretty sure there was some time misdirection, but it added more to the fact of not believing what I saw than being real misdirection. But I know that in many situations I see details that others miss (could have no connection to magic).
Message: Posted by: tomd (Aug 1, 2016 04:19AM)
Nattefrost - Very true, and there can only be a positive outcome from expanding your knowledge of forces. My prefered force is the pinky slip (Not sure of the actual name), its easy to master, natural and quick. That being said, I rarely incooperate force cards into my magic, I guess I always prefer to give them a genuine free choice. I have utilities that allow for me to pretend I knew which card they picked (CTW like the F1), and that seems to hit harder from experience.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Aug 5, 2016 11:56PM)
[quote]On Jul 27, 2016, SevenSigma wrote:

I still remember the very first time I saw somebody do a cross cut - long ago. My reaction, roughly in this order:

1. That guy just cancelled the cut [/quote]

That'd be a smart first reaction. You should have stuck with it. Most smart people do.
Message: Posted by: SvenSigma (Aug 6, 2016 01:56AM)
[quote]On Aug 6, 2016, RiderBacks wrote:
[quote]On Jul 27, 2016, SevenSigma wrote:

I still remember the very first time I saw somebody do a cross cut - long ago. My reaction, roughly in this order:

1. That guy just cancelled the cut [/quote]

That'd be a smart first reaction. You should have stuck with it. Most smart people do. [/quote]

Well, in a way I stuck to it in the long term. The beauty of magic is that it does not only address the intellect but also emotions. It still works for me when seeing a true master at work. Then I stop to guess how he does it and just enjoy. Cross-cut excluded :-)
Message: Posted by: Craigers (Aug 17, 2016 01:40PM)
John Bannon - Move Zero !! Takes the cross cut force to places you wouldn't believe !!
Message: Posted by: John C (Aug 20, 2016 03:19PM)
You don't "fool" people if you make it look like just a thing. A second thought. Time misdirection etc. Yes watch bannon.
These things have been in play for decades. They are timeless.
Message: Posted by: Soumyajit (Aug 23, 2016 04:51PM)
Just tried cross cut for the first time today on my roommate. As I lay the pack on top, I explained him the premise of the trick and then went back to it. Worked like charm :P
Message: Posted by: AndreaMooreMagic (Nov 14, 2016 02:31AM)
There is 2 way that works for me with the cross cut .
One is to use the time delay between the cuts,
Second is to hit the 2 halve of the deck together to "keep" them square up, with interrupts there thinking pattern.