This is the latest from Steve Fearson. I have a copy and, trust me, this is seriously awesome mentalism. Steve has taken a fantastic, diabolical principle in mentalism and modified it in a borderline revolutionary handling. It is really 100% impromptu and 100% surefire.

Check it out here: http://emagicsupply.com/112-mentalepoch-60-custom.html

I will post a complete review in a few days.

Michael Kras

"This is NOT a rehash of old methods. This is a truly original, fresh method to produce an amazing 4x prediction effect!"

So...there won't be a f***e of a playing card? As else this would just a rehash...wouldn't it?

I'm pretty sure it uses a p***l and not a f*****e. If it's anything like his a****t move I'm sure it will be a****e.

MagicSpank, t**nks for th* *nf*rm*t**n.

C** a***ne u***rst*** **** an***ys?

I can't say I've seen any better impromptu epics than Osterlind's latest one in "Mystique". What would separate this from his extremely fair-looking version, using only three index cards?

I use Emotional Intelligence by Luke, but Gabe does have a point.

Alex

This uses ONE single card or sheet of paper, and it looks MORE THAN fair. It's completely stumped all of my magician friends, and some of them swear I used a nail writer.

I've posted a review in the Ebooks section.

Combining the routine of E.I. with the technique of Osterlind's has provided me with a close-up epic that's hard to beat.

I encourage you to try this one out... it only uses ONE card or sheet of paper and everything is super-far in appearance.

y** b** I'm w**de***g if I'm r****t?

Th*nks!

Wow, really? Having watched the video, I can only surmise that my idea of "super-fair" is markedly different from yours.

If this had come out maybe five or seven years ago, I could see where it might have been worthwhile. But given the advancements published since then by the likes of Richard Osterlind, Neil Tobin, Docc Hilford, etc., I honestly don't even see the point of releasing this. Even if it were deceptive (which I don't believe it would be for a moderately observant audience), the only "advantage" it purports to offer is that it uses only one piece of paper — which, to my mind, is not an advantage at all. Writing each prediction on its own piece of paper is both more natural and more deceptive. In contrast, this relies on a bizarre and unjustified numbering procedure to create a "convincer" which has to be specifically pointed out in order to even be noticed... but which will then lead directly to the method if the person thinks about it too much. (And "too much" is not very much at all IMHO.)

The only time I could ever imagine using this would be if I spontaneously decided I just had to do a Mental Epic-type routine at a moment when, for whatever reason, the only writing surface available was a single napkin, AND my intended audience seemed sufficiently slow on the uptake.