There is nothing "typical" about a visual coins across beyond it's resemblance to something that has not been so well explored in billiards.

Beyond wanting to show off by holding a fan of manhole covers... what's the point?

If it's about showing off... you have to be very charming to have the audience on your side.

Since Roth et al showed the spider vanish using a jumbo coin and its subsequent Tenkai based production sleight back in the 1970s there is little to be added here till you get to that last coin vanish.

To be fair to those who are still in that 'bigger is better' phase yet are too shy to simply pick up the billiards... at least put a coin stand down on your table and perhaps one on your microphone stand so you can set them down while keeping them in plain view.

This is where tenkai coin palm will come in handy(pun intended). While angles will pose a challenge it is possible. I've been playing around with the idea for a few years and here are the outline methods/gimmicks I've come up with that will work.

1.Sleights-
-tenkai(learned best from jeff McBride's coin magic dvd)
-sleeving(i came to the conclusion that if using an extra coin, justin miller's style from his dvd "silver dream" is the best.
-Stealing a coin-either from a holdout,pocket, or sleeve

2.Gimmicks-
-shell with milled edges(to match ALL 3 coins)
-Jumbo flipper with milled edges(several of the "pro's" can make one, if not, sasco can make a custom one for you)
-4 jumbo 3 inch coins(i found 1 cent pennies work the best for me) with milled edges.
-1 copper/silver or sun and moon set to match for optional kickers


Hope this helps all of you.
JBK

I have been doing a very straight forward jumbo 3-fly for some time now using just four regular jumbo halves.

No gimmicks or such.

While a non-gimmick 3 fly looks good, gimmick aid in the reduction of fumbles and a more "magical' routine. I know there are "purist", but gimmick make the difference....for instance, look at cfwm by mark mason....a perfect example.

If you want to be a "purist" look at your routines from the audience's perspective and refine then to look like pure magic. The audience could not give a darn about methodology. So whatever it takes, be it sleight of hand, mechanical, optical or other it's just there to serve a purpose. What they get is the "effect" side of the show. How about giving them pure magic?

Lets see Jonathan do a video on the jumbo 3 fly ,I`d love to see that maybe in person. would be great for a big croud where the people in the back can see the coins to.

I agree with you about the audience perspective, they want magic not technique...BUT, gimmicks will give them that magic....If I could give an audience real magic, I'd use some on myself.lol. But you all do make great points.

jbk

Jbk2006,

Are you kidding?

for instance, look at cfwm by mark mason....a perfect example.

that is the worst 3 fly out there, the audience can even touch the coins.

I have a jumbo 3 fly with an extra as clean as drinking water with open palm through out the effect, no shell require, just lots of practice mate.

that is the key, practice,practice gaffs are not a short cut mate,almost anything done with gaffs I can do it with plain coins mate.

WU
The Man.

You know when the effect works with things your familiar with ,something new for many can be scary.Being in front of a large croud like that for him.I think it would be more like "Mater & the ghost light" from a movie I seen

There is some great thinking on the Café and that is why I enjoy frequenting this site so much. It's good to see so many people actually thinking in-depth about their magic and how best to present it. Naturally, eventually, we will all agree to disagree on various matters of techniques and presentations as art, much like anything really, is a matter of personal preference. While we strive to entertain our audiences, we also attempt to perform our magic how we, as magicians, believe it should be. I feel it's a matter of making the art reflect the artist. You guys continually inspire me with your insight and I am most appreciative of everyone's contributions to the art.

Spydur,

I completely understand what you are saying and, in fact, within my Jumbo 3 Fly routine I do say that I will "make the coins larger" for those who cannot see during the phases in which I transform the small coins into larger coins. Yet, the entire routine is meticulously structured to generate the greatest magical impact while, more importantly, introducing me to an audience.

Allow me to explain. This is an opening effect in my comedy act. This effect comes at a point where the audience is making judgements about me and they are still suspiscious of the magic. First, I magically produce 3 solid silver coins at my fingertips. Those coins they fly from hand to hand ala my version of the 3 Fly effect. Then, explaining that the coins may be too small for everyone to see, I transform them one at a time into 3 jumbo coins. I then explain I've been accused of just hiding the smaller coins in my hands OR up my sleeves so I demonstrate that the jumbo coins couldn't possibly fit in my hands and I pull back my sleeves. A quick note here is that I say "coins in my hands OR up my sleeves" by combining these two ideas with the "OR" it negates the first statement of hiding the coins in my hands. People tend to not concentrate on that issue too much despite me even demonstrating it. Also by apparently giving them a possible method, I become a likable, trusted friend to them. "Obviously, if that were how it was really done, why would he tell us?" is what they are thinking. They are lead to believe that my explanation of hiding coins in my hands and up my sleeves couldn't possibly be the real explanation and I even support that idea by following up with the Jumbo 3 Fly.

I've seen performers like Chris Korn use this approach in his coin routines wherein he uses sleeving techniques, then talks about sleeving, then demonstrates that he couldn't possibly sleeve a jumbo coin, yet he proceeds to make it disappear. Andy Nyman refers to this as "hiding in plain sight" wherein he describes the workings of a previous effect to dismiss the possibility of that methodology being employed in the current effect being demonstrated. It is a very powerful psychological ploy that I have found plays well into this particular routine.

Because it is an opening routine for me, the main purpose is to create both engaging, visual magic and put me on the audience's side, make me a good guy that they don't mind spending some time with. It packs small and plays big - which I am a huge fan of and acts as a great way of introducing myself and my magic to an audience. It is for these reasons that I choose to perform the effect in the fashion in which I do, but I understand, acknowledge, and consider all feedback and comments suggested to me.

Thank you very much for your comments regarding the routine. Again, I appreciate all of the commentary and feedback as it helps me to further think and develop my magic into the powerful repetoire I hope my audiences will enjoy! Thanks very much!

I will be lecturing in the NY area very soon and this 3 Fly routine will most likely be a part of the material discussed. For details please do not hesitate to email me. Thank you again!


Best,

Michael Matson

With jumbo cards?...

Messing with bigger coins gives folks a good excuse not to learn about other long established areas of conjuring, including billiards, candles, canes, doves, and rabbits.

I suggest one make use of what serves the audience in the working venue. Coins (money) are what they are: small, valuable, and intended to permit easy trade.

You are correct, Jon.

I would add thimble magic. A complete act can be done with them, as you already know.

Take care,

Tom Wolf

Like to see Jonathan performing the Jumbo 3 fly put a link to the video on U-tube .I`m planning to put some of my tricks on there.

Okay seriosly why would you bother with 3 fly with jumbo coins vs the original?
I'll go one step further and ask why bother with three fly?

The trouble I see with three fly (having performed it often) is that is is just a series of moves. There's no actual plot other than a show-tell magic show.
Snore. The audience is left wondering about the puzzle rather than being entertained.

I struggle with this type of show and tell stuff, since I personally favor Ron Bauer's Gadabout Coins Revisited since it has a plot, payoff, and an ending. It isn't a bunch of moves...it actually entertains.

Thoughts? or are we just interested in jumbo sizing a bunch of coins that fly across?

Not sure what you mean by "three fly" in this case. Agreed that displays of a "clever" nature are tough to sell as magical entertainment.

If this is about my coins across the script for the trick and it's handling, almost exactly as first shown to a few in 1987 was recently published. Have you read the article and tried that routine for people?