The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » BCS idea! (1 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
7th_Son
View Profile
Elite user
Australia
437 Posts

Profile of 7th_Son
Quote:
On 2005-09-16 07:54, KiKi wrote:
After each person looked at his card to remember, another person gather the cards and put them with the rest of the pack into the box. you ask each spectator who is thinking of a card to stay up. then you start the `calling`!


I don't mean to sound like a wet blanket, but isn't there a chance that someone is going to forget their card? And the more people involved, the more likely someone will forget? That's the only weakness I can see.
"Here's to our wives and girlfriends...may they never meet!" - Groucho Marx
Decomposed
View Profile
Eternal Order
High Desert
12020 Posts

Profile of Decomposed
7th Son

I was thinking the same thing. I'd just have each spectator hold onto each card and hide it (or turn your back to them, wear blindfold etc). Have each spec visualize the card in their mind while you attempt to gather a visual.

I sense the JC coming from this direction (over my left shoulder etc). Who has the QS? I sensed it was here etc. Also, since 5 or so are playing, there may be mixed signals of what you receive etc...
KiKi
View Profile
Inner circle
GERMANY/ Hannover
1141 Posts

Profile of KiKi
I don't mean to sound like a wet blanket, but isn't there a chance that someone is going to forget their card? And the more people involved, the more likely someone will forget? That's the only weakness I can see.


[/quote]
I think that can happen in every cardeffect! even if 2 or 3 spect. forget their cards, you succesfully read the rest of the spectators cards. and maybe if someone forget their card and you name it, it comes back into their mind. if you feel uncomfortable with this method, it`s ok that each spectator keep their card. why not? I never tried it out, but I will. and when a lot of spectators forget their cards, I will change the method, that everyone keeps the card in their pocket! kiki
Stuart Cumberland
View Profile
Loyal user
289 Posts

Profile of Stuart Cumberland
I'm not knocking any suggestions here, but I feel that--without having tested it yet--the strength lay in the above-board fairness of the test. The fact that the spectator selects a bunch of cards, hands them out, collects them and puts them in his pocket is a VERY powerful part.

The beauty in R.O.'s BCS is that it looks exactly like... a shuffled deck. They can examine it until they turn blue.

*MY* personal criteria is to not use props. *IF* a prop must be used it must be in a challenge fashion OR taken OUT of play a.s.a.p.

I love Richard's idea with the giant cards, but for ME, it is drawing attention to them.

Kiki's original concept is amazingly powerful and clean. At least, to me.

I'm absolutely confident that doing it without knowing who has what, and narrowing down one or two who you CAN tell, will have a massive impact to the audience.

(And, in case anyone thinks that I'm knocking Richard, I'm NOT. His Radar deck routine is powerful *because* the deck is out of play, and he's reading their thoughts. That is huge, IMHO. Not knocking here, just brainstorming folks...)

Here's a favorite line of mine that I have used for years. It's funny to me because it erases an action that the audience blatantly witnesses! When you have the spectator remove the bunch, you cut and do the "dirty work"... turn your head and say "I don't even want to TOUCH the cards... put them in your pocket." Of course, you are saying this while TOUCHING the cards, but after you'll discover that they won't remember you handling them and they WILL remember you emphasising that you didn't want to touch them. I always have to resist cracking up when using that line, but it's miraculous in its impact.

This is fun. It's rare to find such a productive thread without egos flying about or nasty comments being made.

Best,

SC
Stuart Cumberland
Josho
View Profile
Special user
Albany, New York
763 Posts

Profile of Josho
Another thought: once the spectator has taken a bunch of cards, BEFORE YOU HAVE THEM MIX THEM, have them take the first card and put it in their pocket UNSEEN. Then the spectator hands out a couple more cards. As an afterthought, say, "Did you mix them? Make sure you mix them before you hand them out." That way, you know exactly who the first three cards went to, and you save those for last, calling out the specific card for the specific person...with the unseen card in the first spectator's pocket used as the VERY last one, a real capper.

--Josh
Decomposed
View Profile
Eternal Order
High Desert
12020 Posts

Profile of Decomposed
Josh,

I really like the idea of the spectator putting the top card in his pocket.

But if they mix them, how do you know which spectator has which card?
Brian Turntime
View Profile
Special user
671 Posts

Profile of Brian Turntime
I think he meant that you allow for the first two to be distributed in order off the top, and the remind spec to mix. Then you do the card call, and return to the individuals whom you know matched with specific cards.
------

Last night I stayed up late playing poker with Tarot cards. I got a full house and four people died. - Steven Wright
Decomposed
View Profile
Eternal Order
High Desert
12020 Posts

Profile of Decomposed
Ohhhh thanks Brian.
Woodfield
View Profile
Special user
740 Posts

Profile of Woodfield
How would you fill the dead time while the guy hands out the cards
and then goes back and collects them?
-Woodfield
KiKi
View Profile
Inner circle
GERMANY/ Hannover
1141 Posts

Profile of KiKi
Quote:
On 2005-09-18 08:23, Woodfield wrote:
How would you fill the dead time while the guy hands out the cards
and then goes back and collects them?
-Woodfield


a good question! when the spect. hands out the cards, I would tell -everybody who got a card already, please look at it and try to "burn" (can`t find another word in english) it into your mind. like when you close your eyes you can still see your card! at that time the cards are all handed out. now I would say: does anyone have their card in mind? ok, please collect the cards, and I want everybody who have a card in mind to stay up, close your eyes and try to picture the card in your mind! at that time the cards are all collected.
I will try it like this! just a suggestion! best kiki
Dave_J
View Profile
New user
30 Posts

Profile of Dave_J
The BCS and Richard's blindfold would be the perfect combination. Don't even bother having the cards mixed. If you're wearing a blindfold you can't see anything anyway (!) Tell the spectator to hand the cards out. As Richard noted, they will probably do it from the top, keeping them in order. You'll be able to see who gets what card and then you can do your reveal by pointing in their general direction.
D.Paul
View Profile
Loyal user
228 Posts

Profile of D.Paul
I agree with Dave asking the spec to reshuffle the cards after you have just shuffled and cut them is just over kill. Its the same as asking the spec to cut the cards over and over again, once is enough I think its pointless more than once and if anything brings heat on the cards and makes them want to shuffle them fully.


Darren
7th_Son
View Profile
Elite user
Australia
437 Posts

Profile of 7th_Son
Quote:
On 2005-09-16 07:54, KiKi wrote:
after the spectator pulled out a bunch of cards, I tell him to shuffle the cards and distribute the cards among the audience.


I really want to try this, but I have a question. I'm sorry if this is a silly question, but I'll ask anyway.

How would you know how many cards to call out?

If the spectator pulls a bunch of cards, and hands them out to several friends (while you are blindfolded or have your back turned), you don't know how many cards to call. Right?
"Here's to our wives and girlfriends...may they never meet!" - Groucho Marx
Dave_J
View Profile
New user
30 Posts

Profile of Dave_J
Quote:

I really want to try this, but I have a question. I'm sorry if this is a silly question, but I'll ask anyway.

How would you know how many cards to call out?

If the spectator pulls a bunch of cards, and hands them out to several friends (while you are blindfolded or have your back turned), you don't know how many cards to call. Right?


Well, the blindfold is not what it seems. In other words, you can still see. If you simply have your back turned without the blindfold, you have the people with cards stand and then you turn around. Either way you know how many people have cards.
sinnead zenun
View Profile
Elite user
Mt. Makiling
408 Posts

Profile of sinnead zenun
Quote:
I really want to try this, but I have a question. I'm sorry if this is a silly question, but I'll ask anyway.

How would you know how many cards to call out?

If the spectator pulls a bunch of cards, and hands them out to several friends (while you are blindfolded or have your back turned), you don't know how many cards to call. Right?

Well you can always tell them to get only five or six card. instead of a bunch Smile
having an assitant might help too... ???
Al Straker
View Profile
Grammar Host
Australia
1119 Posts

Profile of Al Straker
Congratulations Kiki, you have really started something here and I really like the your idea.

There is a way to do this without ever touching the cards. Have you seen Marc Spellman's 'The Glimpse'? With this tool you could start with a boxed deck on the table, turn your back, give all the instructions and have the remainder of the deck boxed again. After stressing that the cards are completely out of sight, you could then turn back and gesture for them to give you the box and in the act of putting it away get all the info you need (it would take only 2 seconds). I'm sure with a bit of misdirective patter at the moment you handle the card box for a couple of seconds they will completely forget you handled anything.

This is a strong idea!!

Cheers,
Al
Al Straker
Resident Mystery Entertainer at Multiple Venues
Music & Mentalism Specialty Act 'Completely Mental'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyGhApqnG7I

(Old clip, show has changed quite a bit since then!)

Jazz & Contemporary Musician/Composer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnN3JNmeKns

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU_zfOvpneA
RicHeka
View Profile
Inner circle
3999 Posts

Profile of RicHeka
Hello sinnead:I can speak directly to your question,since I performed my version of this routine(for the first time) last night.I was performing for 45 adults in a fairly noisey restaurant.Challenging to say the least.When I asked a spec. to grab a bunch of cards(say 4 or 5)he grabbed six(I was lucky to notice this{6})so I had no problem completing the routine.However,next time,to be certain about how many are grabbed,I will simply turn my back and ask the spec. how many cards he will be passing out.Another finesse point is to have all recipients of cards to stand,and if I call there card to say('Yes' or some other 'verbal' indicator) and sit down.(this way you alway's know where you are at) It's all about maintaining control,and all I can say The Magic God's were looking out for me,because all went well.My final effect was Giant B'Wave with the guest of honor displaying her great IMAGINATION.This,I performed as a magic/mentalism effect with the Elmsley count and it Killed! All the best. Rich
KiKi
View Profile
Inner circle
GERMANY/ Hannover
1141 Posts

Profile of KiKi
Quote:
On 2005-09-18 23:34, Al Straker wrote:
Congratulations Kiki, you have really started something here and I really like the your idea.

There is a way to do this without ever touching the cards. Have you seen Marc Spellman's 'The Glimpse'? With this tool you could start with a boxed deck on the table, turn your back, give all the instructions and have the remainder of the deck boxed again. After stressing that the cards are completely out of sight, you could then turn back and gesture for them to give you the box and in the act of putting it away get all the info you need (it would take only 2 seconds). I'm sure with a bit of misdirective patter at the moment you handle the card box for a couple of seconds they will completely forget you handled anything.

This is a strong idea!!

Cheers,
Al


hi al! of course you can use GLIMPSE. but I prefer to (false)shuffle the cards first, because spectators guess of a stack otherwise, or they ask if they can shuffle them. I just falseshuffle the cards, spectator takes a bunch, and then I give the rest to another spectator or the same. that's when I do the dirty work. the reason for handing the rest of the deck out is that I tell the spectator to look through the deck that there are no dublicates! the same method richard uses in his MIND MYSTERIES-BCS! that`s clean and convincing! best kiki
Al Straker
View Profile
Grammar Host
Australia
1119 Posts

Profile of Al Straker
Kiki I really like your thinking. I agree that shuffling first is a good throw off from the s****. There are some advantages to false shuffling, however, thinking like a layman for a minute IMHO the fact you touched the deck at all negates the value of the shuffle. The fact that you handled the cards at all is enough to create a reconstructable moment of doubt in the minds of laymen. As Ted Lesley says, in mentalism the effect is much stronger if the performer never touches the cards. If we could allow the spectator to shuffle before the effect, that would be perfect but now we are in the territory of deck switches.

Because we know the effect is done with a s****, we percieve the shuffle as important. From a layman's point of view, if they suspect a s****, the fact that you turned your back and 'never handled the cards' yourself is enough to cancel that theory. As long as they are clear at the close of the effect that all the cards are different, I believe the impossibility of the effect may be increased by appearing to never touch the cards.

You could still have them mix the cards they remove and they will recall that they 'shuffled the cards'.

The above are just my thoughts - I am constantly striving to make my show appear to be more a product of my mind's influence than my prop handling skills. Letting the layman do almost all the prop handling through the show is a very convincing way to present mentalism. People started to comment on this aspect of the show a lot so I decided to extend the idea, now it's almost an obession...

Love your work Kiki!
Al
Al Straker
Resident Mystery Entertainer at Multiple Venues
Music & Mentalism Specialty Act 'Completely Mental'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyGhApqnG7I

(Old clip, show has changed quite a bit since then!)

Jazz & Contemporary Musician/Composer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnN3JNmeKns

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU_zfOvpneA
KiKi
View Profile
Inner circle
GERMANY/ Hannover
1141 Posts

Profile of KiKi
Quote:
On 2005-09-18 12:46, D.Paul wrote:
I agree with Dave asking the spec to reshuffle the cards after you have just shuffled and cut them is just over kill. Its the same as asking the spec to cut the cards over and over again, once is enough I think its pointless more than once and if anything brings heat on the cards and makes them want to shuffle them fully.


Darren

maybe you are right! when the spectator shuffles the cards again it`s maybe to much. it just make sense in the original routine (calling the cards by richard o.), because the spectator have all the cards, and to destroy the evidence he has to shuffle them! so, if the spect. is not shuffling the cards, it`s easy to figure out who has what card!
AL wrote: ...you could still have them mix the cards they remove and they will recall that they `shuffled the cards`... that's also a good point! kiki
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » BCS idea! (1 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.19 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL