I'm working on an impromptu sponge ball routine using paper napkins. I'm putting together elements I've learned from Pat Page, Greg Wilson, and Steve Dacri. I'm looking for advice on one phase of the routine. Here are the steps of the routine:

1. I ball up one napkin, while spectator balls up a second napkin. Also, I have two additional balls hidden that spec doesn't know about (eventually they will know about the 3rd ball, but not the 4th).

2. False transfer one ball, and place "one" in spec's hand. Big reaction.

3. Do 10-count business in my own hands, both forwards and backwards (a la Steve Dacri).

4. Now here's where I'm looking for advice. I want to introduce the 3rd ball. I can think of two ways to do this. Either place "one" in spec's hand, but actually place three. Or else one ball is sitting in view on the table, and I rip the second ball into two balls. Which of these two things will be more magical for the spectator? I'm leaning toward the one that happens in their hands, but something similar already happened in step 2. Please let me know what you think. If I do opt for the ripping move, I could still do a one-in-the-spec's-hand-becomes-three thingy later, but by then they've already seen three balls, so there's less amazement I think.

5. For those that must know, I'm thinking to end the routine with two-in-the-hands-one-in-the-pocket a couple times, followed by disappearance of all three balls. That's a total of 7 magical moments in the routine, which seems about right to me.

Any input on the routine will be much appreciated, and especially on step 4. Of course, this could be done with normal sponge balls too. Maybe this post belongs in Secret Sessions, but I don't think I've given anything away that anybody able to comprehend this post couldn't figure out pretty quick. If necessary, I'm sure this post will be moved.

Rip them apart, saw them apart, it's all the same. It's all how you sell it.

It's not that "magical" to rip a napkin in half... unless you plan to open them up and show both whole again.

Stuper1,

Your routine sound like a good plan, so far.

Here's an idea to get you away from going back to the spekkie's hand right away. I know that you want to utilize the strong aspect of "magic happening in their hands", but this might make the tension build a bit more before you do that, and have a nice payoff. Timing is everything! It also gives the routine a nice tempo build.

Do the first three phases as you have them written. After what you have listed as phase 3 above, propose to vanish the balls. Vanish the first with false transfer. Immediately pick up the second ball to duplicate the vanish, but the ball doesn't disappear. Jokingly grab the ball and put it in your pocket to make it "disappear". What you have actually done is begun the process for perpetual production of balls from the hand, by taking advantage of the first ball (now secretly palmed)... which has supposedly already disappeared. You with me??

The cheap laugh sets up the kill phase when a ball suddenly reappears in the hand that is supposedly empty. Reaction pause from you.

Two or three more repetitions of this (putting the "extras" in your pocket) could ultimately lead to 3 balls in play and visible to all. Just take advantage of your justified actions. Follow me so far??

Vary the pacing as you go, to speed things up through a couple repetitions, but pause nicely when three are visible (you'll have to work out the exact series of mechanics to accomplish this... not a big deal). Remember... the audience should think that your pocket is getting full!

"Ok... I'll keep two."

Now you are into the 2 in the hand, 1 in the pocket phase. Repeat this no more than twice... and then hand the spectator what they think is 2 (actually 3). Openly burn the last visible ball in your pocket... and leave it. Nice pause point. Let them remember their own hand.

When they find 3, you say something like, "I told you."

Now... a similar sequence to finish... false transfer 2 and openly place the last in your pocket, ditching all. Hand them the "last two"... BOOM! GONE!

If that doesn't get a great reaction, I'll come and eat those paper balls.

Afterthought: If pocket management can be achieved, having a different colored ball pop up during the perpetual production phase could be really funny and surprising.

~michael

Michael,

Thanks for your ideas. I like where you're going. I'm a little lost, though. Can you be a little more explicit (maybe in a PM) on the part where "the ball suddenly reappears in the hand that was supposedly empty", and then 2 or 3 more repetitions to get 3 balls in play and visible to all?

Stuart

No, I meant as if you were pulling the ball into two halves, which are basically whole napkins, as in the sponge ball move.

I understood that. I just wanted to point out to him that if he didn't open up the napkins the spectator could have just assumed he ripped one in half.

Have you ever had a spectator think he knows the trick, and rip a sponge ball in half?? I have.

stuper1, I PM'd you.

Does anyone have an opinion on my original question:

Which will be more magical for bringing the third ball into play:

a. Having the spectator find that one ball has turned into three in his hands, or

b. Having me rip the second ball into two balls, followed at a later phase by the spectator finding that two balls have turned into three in his hands.

If you care to respond, please keep in mind the beginning and ending phases of the routine, which are described above.

Thanks!

HIS HANDS? Try to make it HER HANDS... much better. I thinnk Michael answered it well.

I agree

Michael.

Very generous as well.

Ron

That's why I have patter that tells them that it doesn't work on every ball and keeps the balls out of the hands of the spectators, during the fake explanation. Patter has to be written to get the spectators to follow instructions, without confusion, and to get them to behave. I've had things go wrong and had close calls, like everyone - usually results in a change in presentation. Most of the time, I anticipate problems, now.

It's nice to know this hasn't fallen on all deaf ears. Maybe I should have just answered the question as asked, especially since it was asked again. In that regard, which is better?? It doesn't matter... which ever one gets you the best reaction. Try them both and figure it out.

Pete, you are correct as usual that it is better in the hands of a woman than those of a man. Let's keep it a secret as to why!

Thanks guys!

~michael

Michael,

I'm sorry if it sounded like I didn't hear your response. As I said in my PM to you last week, I think your ideas are excellent and well explained, and I will be working on them. In the meantime, I posted my original question again, simply to see whether anyone had a strong opinion one way or the other.

Thanks again for taking the time to help.

Stuart

No matter what you do, it is going to take "time in grade" to make this routine appear to be magical in any case. The biggest advantage of sponge balls over rolled up paper napkins is that sponge expands quickly after it has been gripped. A rolled up napkin may or may not expand quickly, depending on how hard the spectator has gripped it.