Yiannis,
I bought this e book last night and have receipts from both your site and paypal but no download! I've sent you e mail and PM but had no reply from anyone. I hope this can be taken care of quickly!

Mick

Hi Mike,

I sent you the eBook earlier today. I hope you like it If you have any problems, PM me again.

Cheers!

Yiannis,
As I replied in PM, I did in fact get you eBook and it loaded just fine, THANK YOU!
This is my first go at dealing seconds and I find the instruction clear and concise and the method is working for me.

I've used this deal for about 30 years now, and, of course, one of the obvious adjustments is to make the top look just like the second. It doesn't really change the fact that the thumb doesn't move, but at least you don't see a change in thumb action ( or inaction ).

Very nice work, by the way, Yiannis.

Hey Yiannis, what's the timeline on your future releases?

This Second Deal manuscript setting the example, I'm definitely looking forward to reading them.

The problem with showing a sail in a video is that the camera needs to zoom out to see it, both because the hands move more and because you might want to show where the cards land. This makes the hands even smaller on video, where they're already greatly reduced in size, which makes it harder to see the most important part of the action. If you want to say "Hay, I bet you can't see anything!" then a video with a sail is great. If you want to say "Hay, check out the finer points of this deal." then dealing into a pile makes it easier for your electronic audience to see what you want them to see.

From this video, I can identify the dealing grip, the method that he uses for the take, the grip he takes the card in, and his timing. Since he is trying to point out that he is dealing Scott's seconds, these are all important things to show. Someone who's read Phantom or Phantoms will recognize these. From a wide shot showing him dealing cards out into hands, few if any of these details would be visible.

Oh, and nice deal, Yiannis. Nice video, too.

Andru

I haven't gotten a chance to read through this entire thread thoroughly, but am I the only one who thinks that dealing a no brief second deal is great for a demo but unnecessary at the card table?

I hate to be a stick in the mud, but I have seen some of the most deceptive strike seconds with an inch of brief! They key is timing the action just right; I could swear the cards were coming off the top.

Don't get me wrong, it's a very pretty deal Yiannis... but there is absolutely no illusion that the card is coming from the top. All I see is a dead card... and both layman I showed called it.

Best,

Grant

Well, you can join me. I wanted to buy this for no other reason than to put some money into the community, if y'all know what I mean. But I don't do seconds, have no desire to do seconds, and if I did do seconds I'd probably decide to move my thumb. So I decided to save my money. (Of course, I still might buy it eventually.)

Yiannis, you have my respect. I just don't see myself ever putting the work into learning this.

I agree with Clock in thinking that this is primarily a demo move. Does anyone here actually MOVE with seconds, and if you do, do you do Scott's second? And for goodness' sake, don't answer such a question in public. A PM will do.

I think one of the most interesting things about the whole Scott/Gazzo story is that this can be KILLER if you master it; but it's a specialty that takes dedication to master one very specific sub-category of card word. It may not be as ethereal as a middle deal, but it remains something for specialists who see the value in it. I don't.

(Of course, if anyone pays attention to me--and I hope they don't--they will have already figured out that I think the actual moves are the least important aspect of cheating.)

My issue with tiny brief seconds has always been just as Clock mentioned--no visible movement of the top card.

With a bigger brief and a nice retraction of the top card you get a great illusion of the top card being pushed over and dealt.

Anyway, W. Scott's phantom of the card table legend, that's just an other magician pipe dream, just as Kennedy's center deal.

I have exactly the same thing in mind.

:thumbsup:

I don't think the point was trying to get everybody to deal the Scott second......but in order to comment on it in a way that contributes to the conversation maybe a guy should know how it's dealt......or even be able to deal it.

Personally, I still deal the second I've always dealt.
I do find the combination of a small brief AND a moving card to be the most deceptive, so I was glad to read this.

Nicholas, Andru, Grant, thank you for your comments!

At the card table, if you are suspected of dealing dissonestly, the best second deal (whatever brief you are using) won't help you disguise the false movement of taking the second card.

With this deal, there is really no illusion of taking the top card, IF you know what to look for AND you stare directly above the deck AND you deal in slow-average motion (like I do in the clip).

Doc (who uses this kind of deal for cheating) has pointed out this issue by saying that you should not have anyone standing behind you and staring directly on the deck while you're dealing.

The Walter Scott's second deal is a very technical move and it's not suited for everyone. It's a great move for demonstrations and a reputation maker for the technically oriented magicians.

As Andru very eloquently wrote, the clip intended to show all the technical aspects of the Walter Scott's second deal. And for those who want to learn this deal, the eBook describes all these aspects in great detail.

Those who want to use it at the card table and have an issue with the illusion being produced with a tiny brief, if you master this deal it's very easy to adjust the brief any way you like.

Silverking, ghostpianist, the eBook on the Bottom dealing will be ready mid June. Greek dealing is scheduled to come out in August and the Center dealing a bit later on October. Around the same time, I will also publish my method in card memorization for cheating purposes.

Now you've got my full attention....