|
|
Go to page 1~2 [Next] | ||||||||||
TheMetalMagician New user 87 Posts |
Forumites,
Looking for feedback on my method here. I don't think it's terrible, but there's got to be room for improvement. I want spectator A to pick a number between 5 and 20, then I want spectator B to pick a card, and I want to force that card on them. For example, if spectator A says 17, I want spectator B to THINK he/she is making a free choice but is actually being forced to pick the 17th card. This is the best way I could come up with: - spectator A picks a number (say, 13) - I count 13 cards off the top of the deck - I spread them out and use the 13th card to do the move where you turn them over from the left to the right and then back to the left (ribbon spread? not sure) - put the cards back in the deck with the 13th card on top - do a riffle shuffle, making sure the top card stays on the top - palm the top card, do a one-handed cut and return the top card to the deck - riffle down the side of the deck with my thumb asking spectator B to say stop, and use a slip force to force them the top card Thoughts? Thanks TheMetalMagician |
|||||||||
TheMetalMagician New user 87 Posts |
If it helps, the CONTEXT of the trick is I'm trying to re-engineer the trick Anna Deguzman did on Penn and Teller Fool Us to remove the dependency on memorizing the decks. The only dependency in my case would be the 2 decks would need to have the same top 20 cards and could be false-shuffled before the trick starts and a spectator is asked to choose a deck.
|
|||||||||
Rachmaninov Inner circle 1076 Posts |
I would pinky count to the A number, and riffle force that rank to B. More economic.
To make the pinky count easier, I would pinky count to 12 before A names a number. Alternatively, I would spread casually the deck and take a break under 12 cards, spreading / counting them 3 or four at a time. From there, if a number under 12 is named, you can use Marlo’s count if it’s close to 12, or leave the break and start a new pinky count. If it’s above 12, you pinky count from the break. An overhand shuffle could be useful too : you run singly up to the A number, you lift shuffle after that up to the B stop, at the stop, you release the lift packet on the left hand cards. It would require to be able to count and speak in the meantime. |
|||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts |
Would you be able to specifically describe the effect on its own? Leave out the method for the time being. Just pretend you're capable of real magic and the thing works exactly as you describe it.
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
TheMetalMagician New user 87 Posts |
Quote:
On Jan 19, 2020, The Burnaby Kid wrote: You can literally YouTube "Anna Deguzman Penn and Teller Fool Us" to see the trick. In as few words as possible she starts with 2 decks, hands one to teller, has Allyson pick a "random" number and has Penn choose "any" card, then Penn's chosen card appears at Allyson's chosen number in the deck Anna hadn't touched since she gave it to Teller. I'm just not crazy about how Anna executed the trick and am trying to improve on it. First, I was thinking 5 to 20 or even 5 to 15 to limit the number of cards that have to be manually counted - possibly TWICE - while the audience just sits there and waits. Second, I'm trying to remove the dependence on actually memorizing the deck. Hope that helps. |
|||||||||
TheMetalMagician New user 87 Posts |
Quote:
On Jan 19, 2020, Rachmaninov wrote: Lots of valuable lessons in here! It'll be WEEKS before I'm done Youtubing all those terms and practicing those moves! |
|||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts |
Oh, you kids and your Youtube tutorials. I tell you, if I was teaching Card Magic 101, the very first lesson would be to stay the heck away from those.
Oops, I've said too much already!
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
Rachmaninov Inner circle 1076 Posts |
Yes, I second Burnaby. Forget the YouTube tutos. Purchase classic texts as Royal road to card magic, Expert card technique, Card college…and study those ones thoroughly.
|
|||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts |
Heh heh, I guess I was too obtuse.
Dude can study off youtube if he likes. That's his business, not mine. However, in that last post is everything he needs to be able to do the same effect Anna Deguzman did not only with no memorization, but also with no sleights. It wouldn't be 100% identical, but it'd be close enough.
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
Ray J Inner circle St. Louis, MO 1503 Posts |
Quote:
On Jan 17, 2020, TheMetalMagician wrote: You asked for feedback, so here is mine. First of all, I'm not a fan of magicians publicly trying to reverse-engineer something they've seen on TV or the internet. That's just me. I would prefer it be done offline if you insist on doing it. Anna did a wonderful job with the trick and now folks are going to speculate, reveal, etc. I think it is a shame. Now, regarding your "version". I guess I'm not getting something. You have a number selected and you spread them out, using the 13th card to flip the spread over and back, putting it back on top. Why? is the 13th card supposed to be a selection at this point? Are you using one deck or two? I'm assuming one. You say you put the 13 cards back IN the deck. I assume you mean ON the deck? Palming a card just to do a one-handed cut seems to me to be a lot of work. Just do a false cut. Doing it your way is an invitation to get burned. Finally, you do a standard riffle force of the top card. I don't like it. These types of tricks generally begin with a card selection. Then the number is selected and the card is found at the number. The manner in which the card is initially selected can be in any manner you choose. The one you suggest seems odd to me. YMMV. BTW, as far as the deck is concerned, if you don't want to go through the work involved to memorize the deck, there are other ways to know the order. One easy approach would be to have the deck on new deck order. Do a couple of false shuffles and cuts and away you go.
It's never crowded on the extra mile....
|
|||||||||
TheMetalMagician New user 87 Posts |
I'm sure those are great books, but isn't something as visual as card magic easier to explain and learn through video than through books?
I'm genuinely interested to hear your opinions and plan to read objectively. |
|||||||||
TheMetalMagician New user 87 Posts |
Quote:
On Jan 24, 2020, Tortuga wrote: This is a TOTALLY fair and valid point. I don't know Anna personally but she is one of the people who got me excited about card magic. I'm only trying to use her trick as a learning experience, so hopefully she'd be more along the lines of "Hey, that's great, I inspired somebody to learn" rather than "That internet *$#&*$ is plagiarizing me". But I will certainly keep your point in mind for the future. |
|||||||||
magicfish Inner circle 7006 Posts |
Quote:
On Jan 24, 2020, TheMetalMagician wrote: For me it isn't even close. I learn much easier from books than from video. |
|||||||||
Ray J Inner circle St. Louis, MO 1503 Posts |
Quote:
On Jan 24, 2020, TheMetalMagician wrote: Thanks for not taking my post too critically and keeping an open mind. On the subject of videos versus books it really depends on the teacher to a degree. I've seen videos where the camera never quite captured the moves and the magician was not good with verbally explaining what was going on. Similarly, some books have horrible pictures or drawings or not enough of either. And some authors have a knack for explaining minute details, many don't. I prefer books but like videos if done well. I fear sometimes that videos create clones or mimics instead of allowing for interpretation and creativity.
It's never crowded on the extra mile....
|
|||||||||
countrymaven Inner circle 1426 Posts |
I would suggest not trying to literally copy an effect. But if you work out a clean cull force, you have it made. all kinds of ways to use it to do this.
Cull force it, cull it to the number . Done. |
|||||||||
TheMetalMagician New user 87 Posts |
Quote:
On Jan 19, 2020, Rachmaninov wrote: When you gave me this response 9 months ago (thank you 9 months late by the way), I had very little idea what you were talking about. It's fun to look back and see how much more sense everything makes now that I've had more study and practice under my belt. When you say "riffle force", are you talking about the force where you riffle down one corner of the cards until the spectator says "stop" while keeping a break on the opposite corner, and then you cut the cards at the break regardless of where the spectator said stop? I ask because I learned the slip force first which also includes a riffle so I feel like I get the two confused. By the way, here's something I'm working on: Pinky count to their number minus 1, then do a sybil cut, making sure the top packect breaks off at that break, then at the end, DON'T SWIVEL THE TOP PACKET BACK TO THE TOP. Done - the card that I want to force is now the top card in the deck and I can do a slip force. It's really difficult, I just started seriously practicing the pinky count a couple months ago, and can barely get a double lift consistently - it's going to take a lot of practice for me to be able to consistently pinky count down to 13 or 17. It's also not exactly trivial to start the sybil cut at a break, but I'm having fun practicing it erst the while! I do like your suggestion of asking for a number between 10 and 20 and counting down to 10 before they pick the number. Now that I've read the first half of "Expert at the Card Table", I understand your overhand shuffle suggestion better as well. That might be easier than doing a pinky count since I can false overhand shuffle in full view of the spectators rather than have to do a pinky count with my hand turned a certain way. I will definitely continue to practice both. I still don't know what Marlo's count is but I'm sure I can Google it. Further bulletins as events warrant! TheMetalMagician |
|||||||||
Rachmaninov Inner circle 1076 Posts |
Yes, the riffle force is the technique you described in your post, not the slip force.
I’m glad I gave you something to think about, search and study ! |
|||||||||
Nikodemus Inner circle 1140 Posts |
It is supposed to be a random number and a "random" card.
When the second spectator selects a card, it must appear like a completely free and fair choice. The whole effect would be ruined by any hint of trickery or a special procedure. Therefore the original suggestion above to start by counting 13 cards off the top of the deck is (sorry to be blunt) really bad. This would be a massive clue that the card is NOT freely chosen - no matter how many false shuffles you do after that count. The essence of the problem is to find the nth card quickly and accurately without it being obvious. In fact Anna could have done the trick without any memorisation. The real challenge was not knowing the card at the 24th position, it was locating it. People like Michael Close (I think) have published advice on how to do estimation to find a card [in a memorised deck]. |
|||||||||
Nikodemus Inner circle 1140 Posts |
Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCtyRu1E1DA
This is "Convergence" by Cameron Francis. It uses broadly the same principle as Anna's, but is much easier. Spectator names a card C. Performer removes that card from deck 1. Spectator deals off cards from deck 1 to select a random card with a random number N on the back. Spectator opens deck 2 and counts to the Nth card - it is card C. |
|||||||||
ethanb New user 1 Post |
Classic Force..
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » Forcing the nth card (5 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |