Although I don't believe in "handwashing", I do agree with Paul Chosse that acquitments are valuable sleights. They are integrated into the coin magic that I do. They are very powerful tools. The following acquitment type moves are explained in my new book. A chapter is devoted to each of them:
Flying Changeover Palm
Pivoting Changeover Palm
Double Helix Change and Acquitment
Over Easy Change and Acquitment

Larry

I'm not a handwashing fan either, I wouldn't have phrased it like you (sorry you cant be on my debating team) but don't care for it. Funny the only time I do it is when I'm hanging with boys who are flinger flickers and not workers. However, as Dan pointed out in Ramsay's cylinder routine, as long as the move is motivated (especially when used as a feint) then the sleights that can move mulitple coins between the hands can have it's merits.

However I prefer moving multiple coins in secret while working with a visible coin(s).

Rune Klan has a few on his "Three Pieces of Silver" video, one is original the other I believe belongs to Kurtz.

Nathan

The problem with "Handwashing" is that the phrase itself assumes a specific situation, i.e. one where the heat is on, and your intent is to diffuse suspicion. In these instances, most acquitments performed by most people are not deceptive.

However, the use of a changeover acquitment in order to casually establish that your hands are empty before an effect begins, or before the effect occurs, can be quite effective. See Sawa's Slot Machine, Andrus' ball bearing production, Bob Fitch's "Circles" and the prelude to Kurtz's "Trio".

Given the above we may conclude that "Handwashing" is inadequate to Diffuse suspicion, but it can successfully Deflect it before it attaches.

Said in practical terms: Handwashing is a good way to introduce a production, but a poor way to follow a vanish.

Back me up on this, brothers?

Agreed Curits.

One begins to wonder if some folks feel "unclean" after doing a coin vanish, and so feel compelled to bring back the coin, or worse, to stand there and fidgit, wishing there were some magic salve to wipe the silver stain from their hands and minds.

I suspect the O/C and magic-handwashing issues are related. To start with, if the performer DOES what LOOKS magical, then the performer has no reason to act as if there might be anything in their hands OR to fidgit, they would just move on to the next part of the routine.

Two items to address here;

1) When you make a coin vanish, does it really seem to be gone, or is it just a momentary surprise where the audience is eager to backrack?

2) If you really could use magic, how would it look? Is this what you are presenting?

Over to you. It's your magic.

Amen Curtis.

There really is a big difference between a transfer/aquitment and a handwashing. The former, is usually done for a specific reason...such as getting coin(s) from one hand to another such as in Ramsay's Coins and Cylinder. The hands come together only briefly and with proper misdirection, they never appear to come close to each other. The latter (handwashing) is usually a continual rubbing action to try to convince your audience that you have nothing in your hands. Usually the only personed fooled by this action is yourself. With handwashing, you generally accomplish one thing and one thing only...to show how clever you can hide a coin(s). As the old cliche goes...don't run when you're not being chased!

Mike

I agree with Curtis insights.

There was a phase I went through a few years back in my coin magic where I really overused handwashing. It was a time where I was studying many ways of showing my hands front and back empty.

Lately I find I never really do them much any more, though I do use transfer aquitments like Mike mentions above.

SO for all us not yet coin professors I would like to ask a question.

A handwash is pretty clear to me. It's "show your hands empty while they are not", and agreed it's probably strongets before a production and not after a vanish, unless the vanish is complete of course (topit, sleeving or whatever). But remember as in all magic, if you establish to show your hands clean, then the spectator will wonder when you start the next effect and don't show your hands clean. It's like don't establish to get things examined in the beginning of your act, if you don't want things examined in the end of your act (well I went out on a parralel). Best ways to show your hands clean in magic is to use simply natural movements. In coin magic that would probably mean tossing the coins from one hand to the other and simply holding one coin back. Normally the spectators will assume the throwing hand is empty, and with some subtleties like the Ramsey or even a thenkai pinch the hand can be shown even more empty. But in most cases the tossing action seems to be enough, since its a natural movement, and a lay person will not expect that you are able to hold a coin back.

On to the question: Whats a transfer aquitment, and where (which effects) can I study these. Is a transfer aquitment like Chris Kenners intro to "Menage a trois" or Daryl's introduction to Three Fly III, where they show 4 coins as being 3, meaning they show 3 coins by constantly transferring the 4th coin??

Ahhhh as much as this question is a golden opportunity for Obscure Reference Man, I'll try to get in a word here first. I can't speak for the "professors" here, but I understand a "transfer acquitment" to be a technique that "acquits" i.e. shows your hands empty, in the act of openly transferring something the audience is aware of from one hand to the other.

The "Utility switch" you've described is a good example, and a good technique. Generally, it hides one coin, but it can and has been used to hide more. See Andrew Galloway's "Ramsay Legend" and the "Coins in Hat".

The transfers I had in mind allow stacks of coins to shuttle from hand to hand unseen. See Jack Chanin's "One to Six", Arthur Punar's "Eureka routine" for examples in Bobo's MCM. Or a personal favorite, Gary Kurtz's transfer in the opening of "Trio" in his "Unexplainable Acts". It comes after the production of the first coin. If you can't get the book, I describe the move in "Fists of Fury", it's the first stack transfer in "Beijing Coins Across".

And to throw OCM a bone, have a look at Dr. Sawa's "Slot Machine" that appears only in an old issue of Genii. It's a terrific example of an effect based primarily on a transfer acquitment.

Okay, that's a start. Happy hunting.

And Ramsay's Cylinder and Coins feint qualifies as a transfer aquitment because he leads the audience to believe he is stealing a coin away from his one hand, while actually doing the opposite to setup a very nice empty hand show.

So it is an open steal of nothing (thus the feint).

Doing a Bill the Cat impression for a moment...AcKKKKKK! The Ramsay bit is not so easy as you might imagine if you truly care to work on it.

First you have to create a moment where;

1) You seem to take a coin into your hand (you did not)
2) Then remembered you need to steal the coin out
3) Then did a ham handed steal (okay... no comment about how your steals look more like veal than ham )
4) Then you notice that someone is looking at you like you did a ham handed steal ( okay... check your audience most of the time forks, look for rolled eyes or a glazed over look )
5) Then... POLITELY addressing someone as if they were suspicious, you smile, and show your hand empty. NOW FOR THE TOUGH PART

You do in internal emotional shift here, making light of the suspicion of that audience member, and in your most relaxed and jovial mein/demeanor...
you state the obvious "If it's not here, it's gotta be here" and when you get to that second "here" you slap your hand and then move that hand further to your left as you continue with the magic

Questions?

BTW, John Carney and Geoff Latta can speak for themselves. I'm interested in YOUR experience on this stuff.

Jon,

Is your post directed at me or is it rhetorical?

I don't follow the steps you outlined above. I have modified it to suit my purposes.

I don't think it necessary to “challenge” audience the way you suggest. In my usage it is very straightforward and matter of fact. I don’t ask for people to play the “guess what hand” game, I agree that would be tedious. I find the sequence better served as a statement.

“Most people think I use some fancy move to steal the coin away and then try to get rid of it, I do not. I keep it over here. Watch. Well, until that coin vanishes as well.” In the time it takes to say those lines, the whole thing is over with and you have managed to show an empty hand, and empty palm, and the other empty hand.

I just went and watched the Carney, Latta, Conover, and Galloway videos in my library for a quick refresher of them using the moves. How I prefer to handle it is more along the lines of Carney, however I do have some specific differences which I will detail in the not too distant future…

Dan

Having seen some folks hack their way through some of the Ramsay material, I'm full well aware how difficult it is to get the acting side of the presentation from the text as written. Hence I posted some of the scripting.

No need to take any of the commentary personally. If you have that display and transfer sequence working... good for you. I spent quite a few years taking a Downs type approach till I finally just tried the acting side. When I saw a film clip of Ramsay ... it was a great ahah moment where I saw the guy had a sense of humor. His tricks almost require you to put your personality in front of the magic.

I didn't take the commentary personally, I just wasn't sure if it was diected toward me specifically or not. Hopefully my commentary provided a little more detail behind my thoughts on it, whether they are right or wrong...

Best,

Dan

Publically available Tim Conover video's or a private capture?

Publicly available Tom Foolery performance.

Tom Foolery performance?
Thanx..I've to check via a goggle search..didn't know there where any tapes around others then Tom Mullica's(L&L/Stevens) own ones..
If I don't find a source, I'll PM you re where you think a copy can be available from..
Edited:
Ahh, already found it, Meir...
Thanx for the tip..I'll order a copy..

I'll refer my friends Curtis and Jon to their copies of Tubthumping, pages 16 and 17.

I'll stand with Mike and Paul on this one. Multiple coin aquitments need not look or feel like "hand washing" and can be both natural and contextually appropriate.

Of course, that's just my opinion, and nobody asked me...

:)

You mean I've got to go back and actually READ "Tubthumping"? Geez Bill.