Hi,

I was playing around with Twisted Sisters, and I came up with this count. I'm pretty sure it has been invented already, has anyone ever seen it?

Here it is - http://media.putfile.com/I-dont-know-the......-help-me

Hi, Never seen that before, but I would stick with an elmsley for the mentioned effect I didn't find that very convincing.

J.

I have never seen it either.

But I agree with "The Hitchhiker", I would stick with an elmsley count, they accomplish the same thing - except an elmsley looks like you are actually counting the cards. That move in the video looks like you just did a "Move", which would probably be counter-productive for the routine. As any suspicion of a move or fakery diminishes the overall impact of the magic.

My two cents on the subject. Kudos for using your head and trying to come up with something new though! Don't ever lose the desire to try a figure out your own way!

I agree, looks too movey!

Seek out Marlo's "OPEC" count and adapt it to your handling, if your desire is to count the cards and end up back at "Ghost Count" start position without resorting to a "Jordan Count".

FWIW

Cheers!

The beginnin part of showing a face up card is to show us the condition of the cards, and real part for audience start after squaring the cards.

Don't watch the beginning part, but watch the part after the cards are squared. You only showed back of 3 cards. If your purpose is that, you are doing it right. But it never substitute for Elmsley Count.

Hideo Kato

Here is my advice...stick with the Elmsley. It's more convincing IMHO. Hideosan is correct in his observation, I only saw the backs of 3 cards. With the Elmsley you display 4 backs if performed with correct technique. The answer to your question is I don't know what sleight that is...yours I quess because I've never seen it until now.
Cardamagically,
<<<KRaZy4KaRdZ>>>

For some more inspiration, check out the Siva count, by Jack Avis.
Also, look into some of the discussions about not doing a count at all for this particular routine. See if it works better for your audience without.

C.Landels,
You have received great advice on your creation.
I will also agree that I felt that I only saw three cards.

The video camera is a great tool to critique yourself and your friends at the magic café will keep you on the right track.

Keep working those cards,
John

I don't like it at all sorry. there is absolutely no sense in it at all. I don't comare this to an elmsley like the others did. I just analysing this move. it is a stupid thing. this sounds hard I know and I don't mean to attack you. it is just regarding this thing I wouldn't even call a move.

Ease off the caffeine big fella!

Cheers!

Here is one for you.
Do you feel an emsley is more convincing than a hammond count?

If performed correctly both are convincing as eachother - they serve a different purpose in anycase.

I think they are both very good and versatile. We need to remember why we are counting through the cards as well, ie the motive. Not just a move for the sake of it.

The term count is unfortunate when attached to the Elmsley and Hammon displays. It puts magicians in a frame of mind from the beginning that they are suppoesd to be counting the cards.

It's actually fairly rare that you would need to actually do a false count, something like the Biddle Trick is a good example. More often than not what you are doing is a false display, concealing some cards while showing others etc.

If the terms Elmsley Display and Hammon Display were adopted more I think it might be better. But the term False Count has made it';s way into the DNA of card magic, like the phrase Color Change which is also not a great description for what's actually happening.

As for the sleight that started the thread, I think there is perhaps a reason why it has never (that we know of) made it into print. But it's by experiementing and hitting on these duds you discover the real gems.

-Rd

I can't agree more with this quote thorough my experience of witnessing working of great creators. As I was Tenyo's creator, I know how Sugawara, Kondo, Suzuki, Shimomura was struggling with thinking, making prototypes and testing their brainchildren. I also know how Dr.Sawa created his masterpieces after struggling with so many ideas. (He is my very good friend and I have stayed at his house for several occasions to have sessions).

For a magic creator, thinking out many ideas is priority. But next important ability is his insight to decide which ideas to be published, or released, or posted (for example, in Magic Caf$B!&(B).

There were some prolific creators who did not have this insight. Recently I knew I had been one of such ones, so I changed my way of working.

Hideo Kato

P.S.
Third important ability for a magic creator would be his capacity of hearing and absorbing other's opinions. I hope the OP has this ability.