|
|
Go to page 1~2 [Next] | ||||||||||
kobil123 New user 2 Posts |
Hello my friends!!!
I had seen the NFW trick and I bought it. But I don't know how to count the first 4 jokers. Please, if anyone knows how to count them, please tell me how to do the count. Thank you very much, Kobi |
|||||||||
Mano Inner circle 1028 Posts |
You can do a hamman count or a DM count which is Daryl Martinez count, I usuaaly do the DM count but the brother John hamman count is just as good.
Mano. |
|||||||||
Michael J. Douglas Inner circle WV, USA 1645 Posts |
Hey Kobi,
Welcome to the Café. Please introduce yourself in the "Our New Arrivals" section, and be sure to read the "Café Rules and Etiquette." If you actually have the effect, you'll see that a count is included in the instructions. However, it's not needed. Best
Michael J.
�Believe then, if you please, that I can do strange things.� --from Shakespeare�s �As You Like It� |
|||||||||
kobil123 New user 2 Posts |
Hello!!!
Thanks for the help. I saw in the instructions the Elmsley count but it won't work in this case. I heard about the Hamman count but I haven't heard about the DM count. Can you tell me how to do it or where I can find the instructions for this count? Thank you very much, Kobi |
|||||||||
Roland78 Special user Torino, Italy 567 Posts |
If the count is in the instructions, then it will work...
Anyway you don't need to show 4 face up jokers. I never do it. Just say: look, here I have 4 jokers (first count). As you can see one of them is face down... And go on with the effect. Dave |
|||||||||
joseph Eternal Order Please ignore my 17407 Posts |
I always show the 4 Jokers...Learn the false count...It's very easy to do with the small packet...
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Einstein)...
|
|||||||||
Mano Inner circle 1028 Posts |
I personally think that it is better if you count 4 cards,the effect is stronger that way.
mano. |
|||||||||
tomrav Regular user Middlesbrough,UK 167 Posts |
Yup...If you add the count it makes NFW more impressive. If the spectator knows that s/he's seen the four jokers at the start of the effect, it makes the transformation to aces even more impressive.
I'm pretty sure it's an Elmsley Count you need, as taught (excellently IMHO) in Card College Volume 2, |
|||||||||
garcia00 Elite user 443 Posts |
The instructions for NFW details how to show the 4 jokers in the advanced handling section. It gives no name for the count, but it seems similar to the Ascenio Spread, in that you are pushing cards about from the bottom of the packet.
This one has been on my desk for a year or so, till I get time to learn to display the 4 at the beginning. I think the trick is kind of weak otherwise. Something out of the Mentzer booklet might be a better substitute. That was the path I was planning on at least. |
|||||||||
docelk Veteran user St. Pete, FL 362 Posts |
Not showing the four face up jokers at the beginning is somewhat weak for me. If you add one joker, the guarantee joker face up on the bottom of the stack,(this gives you 6 cards instead of 5 to start)--- do your regular elmsley count, the four face up jokers will show. The guarantee joker will then be second from the top (face up).. Show it, pull it out, and explain that it is the guarantee joker, the joker that the card company puts in the deck to warantee it's product and you don't need it for this trick. Then remove it, set it aside, explaining that four jokers minus 1 is 3. Then begin the trick, and show that you still have four jokers, but one has turned face down. Why, because he's the joker, and he can.
Then continue.
Life is a test. It is only a test. If this had been a real life, you would have been given further instructions on where to go, and what to do.
|
|||||||||
garcia00 Elite user 443 Posts |
Interesting idea, thanks.
|
|||||||||
DaveM Special user Germany 788 Posts |
I spent the extra time learning the beginning count. I personally feel that showing four FACE-UP Jokers at the beginning is imperative. Not doing so...I felt like I was shortchanging the overall effect.
I didn't buy NFW to only perform it at 95% of its potential. Dave |
|||||||||
clamon86 Special user 508 Posts |
I have been doing NFW for quite sometime, and I happen to disagree.
I think that the beginning count makes the effect stronger at all. For several reaons. - when you take out the cards and starting counting 4 jokers, because the amount of cards you have isn't a crucial part of the trick, it calls attention to the cards. - because the trick of cards turning face-down is so strong, when you first count them, it a different one of tricks that can be boring"I have one, two three for cards..." the see you have jokers - why should you have to prove that you have 4 jokers, 'don't run when your not being chased - the hammon, D.M. count at the beginning is hard to make look good and smooth, and I don't feel there's a point to it - if you say that you have 4 jokers, and simply take out the packet and they see a joker, there's not reason for them to think otherwise, they you do your first count, and the see 3 face-up jokers, and 1 face-down card anyway, that's the convincer. - NFW is supposed to be a fairly quick trick, adding an extra counting sequence at the beginning take more time, its one more count that you have to learn make look good and focus on -its like when you show 3 coins, in your hand or on the table, and then count them one by one only to then go into a 3 phase coins across -unless there is a secret move that you have to doto get set-up, then maybe an intitial count is good, otherwise I think it adds nothing at all, except makes the trick longer, and lets the audience know that they are seeing 4 cards. "Yup...If you add the count it makes NFW more impressive. If the spectator knows that s/he's seen the four jokers at the start of the effect, it makes the transformation to aces even more impressive. " Why does the amount of cards make such a difference. They have no reason to suspect anything in the beginning, and you cleanly show only aces/blank cards at the end. If the audience is focused more on the amount of cards then what has acutally taken place, and the fact the that they all change at the same time and not one by one, make is not related. just me two centavos. Posted: Aug 13, 2006 7:39pm ------------------------------------------- ****Correction***** I have been doing NFW for quite sometime, and I happen to disagree. I don't think that the beginning count makes the effect stronger at all. For several reasons. Sorry. |
|||||||||
Mano Inner circle 1028 Posts |
Clamon86, if you can't do The DM or hamman count, I suggest you practice it, because either one can be done very smoothly; now if you can show 4 jokers,why not show them? It is completely normal that if you have 4jokers as you say you do at the start of the trick and you have a way to show them, once again why not? There's not doubt it is more fair and the effect is stronger to my mind; I used to do it the way It says in the instructions,but as my technique improved,and some colleague suggested that I try the DM or hamman count, I did just that,because I never liked the way it says in the instructions and I always want to improve and come up with new ideas; Now my handling of NFW last 5 minutes including Patter, I showed it to some members and they liked it and asked me for my handling, so you can do the same and not just stick to what the instructions says.
clamon86 wrote: the hammon, D.M. count at the beginning is hard to make look good and smooth, and I don't feel there's a point to it. How can you say that, just because you can do them smooth,you assume they worthless, come on. Mano. |
|||||||||
waltsal Loyal user 278 Posts |
Clamon86 is absolutely correct. The spectator has no clue what you are going to do and has no reason to fry the cards. NFW is a knockout It's hard to improve on an uppercut to the chin.
|
|||||||||
Mano Inner circle 1028 Posts |
Hey waltsal,
I think it would sounds better if you say that you agree with clamon86; but that does not mean he is absolutely correct. nobody is right and nobody is wrong; It all come to choices, if you guys like the trick the way you do it,that is fine and vise versa. peace out there. Mano |
|||||||||
garcia00 Elite user 443 Posts |
I don't like the hamman count for this application. Might be just me.
Back to the drawing board. |
|||||||||
Michael J. Douglas Inner circle WV, USA 1645 Posts |
Besides the reasons outlined by clamon86, let me explain the main reason I don't care for a "proofing" count -
There's a big incongruency in the handling of the counts. The bulk of the routine uses the Elmsley Count, and it looks nothing like any applicable count to show four Jokers. If you're "just showing four Jokers," it makes no sense to change the handling on the second count. Unless, of course, the "magic" lies in the way you hold the cards....and it somewhat does! Maybe I'm over thinking it. Maybe it's "magician's logic." But, as Mano said, to each his own. Best
Michael J.
�Believe then, if you please, that I can do strange things.� --from Shakespeare�s �As You Like It� |
|||||||||
clamon86 Special user 508 Posts |
Manolotjda- I very much respect your opinion. After reading your response to my post however, it seems like you have turned your version from a 30sec trick into a whole piece of magic and everything which is great.
This was your response to one of my statements: "How can you say that, just because you can do them smooth,you assume they worthless, come on. " I can do the hammon count but I don't really use it for most of the card effects I perform. I do not think the move is worthless at all. In fact done properly the count can very much enhance an effect. However in this particular trick of NFW, I do not think it makes it stonger, and as I said before calls attention to the amount of cards rather than the magical effect. The example I gave with coins across. Why count the coins on the table if your going to do an effect with them anyway, which clearly shows the amount of cards you have, unless you are vanishing the cards and are doing it one by one so you want to make a point how many you started with, which in this case is not so. "I think it would sounds better if you say that you agree with clamon86; but that does not mean he is absolutely correct. nobody is right and nobody is wrong; It all come to choices, if you guys like the trick the way you do it,that is fine and vise versa. " This I very much agree with. For anyone who thinks otherwise, I am simple stating my opinion from my experience and what I have seen. Lastly, I would be interested in seeing your handling, it sounds intriguing. When I do the entire effect it lasts less than a minute. The way I do it, its more about the cards and the magical things that occur, and how they can turn over one by one with no funny movements, and its all very open. I have different ways of changes the cards to aces for different situations. But for me the effect is quick and magical. You have only a few cards and so much magic is happening, the only downfall though is that because its only a few cards the spectators want to examine more.(but that's another discussion). just my two centavos |
|||||||||
clamon86 Special user 508 Posts |
Magis6- you're reasoning may be alittle more subconscious to spectators, but I think the grip changing is more of magician's thinking as you said. Just like the different phases of NFW, between spreading and counting, I don't think changing the grip really adds or takes away anything.
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » First 4 jokers counting in NFW (0 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 < |