The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » Fast Si Stebbins Setup (2 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
bdekolta
View Profile
Inner circle
Texas
1637 Posts

Profile of bdekolta
Quote:
Bdekolta, apparently you aren't familiar with the effect.

I'm not going to argue with you here. I am familiar with what you are doing. There are ways to avoid what you want to avoid. I still maintain that a little girl noticing red/black did nothing to harm your effect. You did look up the Erdnase reference right? I think I'll bow out now.
wsduncan
View Profile
Inner circle
Seattle, WA
3618 Posts

Profile of wsduncan
Quote:
On 2008-04-21 16:26, Cohiba wrote:
I'd be interested in hearing how to disguise the red-black condition when dealing face up.

Well, you could simply take the cards one under the other to spell the words and drop them into piles then return the piles in the necessary order.

Of, if you must deal face up manage the spelling by adding a couple of extra cards and do a double deal once or twice.
ASW
View Profile
Inner circle
1858 Posts

Profile of ASW
Cohiba - yes I'm familiar with the Nikola effect. Personally I would use it with my mem deck, not a Stebbins set up. I'm not sure it would be noticed unless you read the cards off in a flat monotone. If you interspersed it with patter about psychic abilities and blah blah, it would break it up. Anyway, it was merely a suggestion.
Whenever I find myself gripping anything too tightly I just ask myself "How would Guy Hollingworth hold this?"

A magician on the Genii Forum

"I would respect VIPs if they respect history."

Hideo Kato
MueCard
View Profile
Inner circle
2481 Posts

Profile of MueCard
Quote:
On 2008-04-21 23:07, Cohiba wrote:
Quote:
On 2008-04-21 16:34, ASW wrote:
You could use Nikola's cunning method to get into a stacked order. It's an effect in itself.

I don't think you could get away with this with Si Stebbins. I think the cyclical nature would become apparent.

An idea to that problem:
You can leave out a card, and name to one after next, and call it then, and place it in its right position.
Cohiba
View Profile
Special user
Michigan
747 Posts

Profile of Cohiba
Quote:
On 2008-04-23 08:03, MueCard wrote:
Quote:
On 2008-04-21 23:07, Cohiba wrote:
Quote:
On 2008-04-21 16:34, ASW wrote:
You could use Nikola's cunning method to get into a stacked order. It's an effect in itself.

I don't think you could get away with this with Si Stebbins. I think the cyclical nature would become apparent.

An idea to that problem:
You can leave out a card, and name to one after next, and call it then, and place it in its right position.

That's a good idea Mue! A bit more mental effort, but that would most likely take care of the problem.


Quote:
On 2008-04-23 04:51, ASW wrote:
Cohiba - yes I'm familiar with the Nikola effect. Personally I would use it with my mem deck, not a Stebbins set up. I'm not sure it would be noticed unless you read the cards off in a flat monotone. If you interspersed it with patter about psychic abilities and blah blah, it would break it up. Anyway, it was merely a suggestion.


ASW - you are probably right. I originally was going to make the same suggestion, then decided against it due to the cyclical nature of Si Stebbins. A good performer could probably pull it off, especially if using the tactic suggested by Mue.


Quote:
On 2008-04-22 14:57, bdekolta wrote:
Quote:
Bdekolta, apparently you aren't familiar with the effect.

I'm not going to argue with you here. I am familiar with what you are doing. There are ways to avoid what you want to avoid. I still maintain that a little girl noticing red/black did nothing to harm your effect. You did look up the Erdnase reference right? I think I'll bow out now.

Sorry Bdekolta - I'm not trying to be a ****. I did look up the Erdnase reference - but I'm not sure if it's the one you're referring to. The one I saw that sounded like what you were referring to was on page 11 (at least in the Revelations version). If there is something other than that that you are referring to, would you mind posting a page (or section) reference?

Also - I really do appreciate your input! If in the end we decide to disagree, that's fine. I heard a quote once that said that you can't learn anything from someone who agrees with you. I may very well be missing something here, and though I'm stating my opinion, I'm open to learning, for sure.
Thanks!


Quote:
On 2008-04-22 23:01, wsduncan wrote:
Quote:
On 2008-04-21 16:26, Cohiba wrote:
I'd be interested in hearing how to disguise the red-black condition when dealing face up.

Well, you could simply take the cards one under the other to spell the words and drop them into piles then return the piles in the necessary order.

Of, if you must deal face up manage the spelling by adding a couple of extra cards and do a double deal once or twice.

Duncan:
The effect is strong - a completely free selection is tabled face down, unknown to all. You then state that you are going to determine their card by spelling from the deck. To be even more fair, the spectator can choose whether you deal with the deck face up (from the face) or face down (from the back). The effect works either way. You then say the first question will determine the color of their card. You spell "color", and the card that lands at that point is the color. You then go through three more spellings, each one getting you closer to the answer, until the last one you reveal the mate to their card. They turn their card face-up, and all the predictions are correct.

An easy solution is just not to offer the face-up or face-down deal. On the other hand, I've done it face-up many times and never was caught. So, it's not that there's not a way around it, it's the added element of the spectator choosing that makes the trick even more impossible.
bdekolta
View Profile
Inner circle
Texas
1637 Posts

Profile of bdekolta
I was vague on Erdnase for two reasons - my copy isn't at hand! and the whole chapter is worth studying. I'm specifically referring to his notation of what completely puts the audience at ease.

Based on the effect you described I would just force the card and use three bottom deals and skip the stack altogether.

And again I don't think you were caught. Yes the deck is alternating in color but that really doesn't explain anything does it? So assign meaning to the alternating colors and go on. That's what my original comment would be doing.

Good luck.
Steven Youell
View Profile
V.I.P.
3866 Posts

Profile of Steven Youell
Quote:
I think using SSS as your MD would be very powerful. However, certain MD effects that require calling cards would be apparent if this was your stack.

You are incorrect. It's quite easy to call the cards without anyone knowing it's a Si Stebbins stack.

In over 30 years of magic, I've never found an audience member that knew the Si Stebbins Stack. If you're working for magicians, then I can guarantee you there are still at least 6 different ways to do it so they won't have a clue.

Quote:
You can't be completely free in showing the cards.

Once again, you are incorrect. Which leads me to your next statement:

Quote:
I personally haven't used SSS too much...

Gee, I wonder it that could be causing the problems you mention above...

Steven Youell
Cohiba
View Profile
Special user
Michigan
747 Posts

Profile of Cohiba
Steve, I know you use the SSS as your MD, and I'm sure it serves you well.

I just would like to clarify a few points in which you seemed to misunderstand my meaning (at least that's what it appears from your paraphrase of my comments).

My point about having a lay person catch on to the stack when calling cards was not that a layperson would know the stack. It was that they might catch on to the repetitive nature of the suits. A couple of posts above gave some good suggestions for a way around this - and I agreed.

I understand how a SSS spread can be shown face up, but it really can't be shown COMPLETELY freely. I know that in general you can work around this, but if you were COMPLETELY free, magicians would pick up on it. A stack such as Aronson's or Mnemonica won't be picked up unless the person is familiar with that stack. Even a layperson could notice the cyclical nature of SSS if you left the spread face up on the table, or did an effect where they had to examine the cards.

Finally, while I haven't used the SSS too much, I am not a rookie magician by any means. Other than the one problem of a bright eyed spectator once catching the red-black alternation, I've never had any trouble with the SSS. I was merely trying to give some thoughts to ponder concerning Frank's plan to use it as his MD, since it is a somewhat significant commitment.

When Frank mentioned there were ways to spread the SSS face up without looking suspicious, I assumed I knew what he meant. Maybe there is a technique that I am unaware of. I also would like to hear about the 6 different ways to disguise the stack from magicians when calling the stack (ways other than discussed in this thread). Can you point me in the right direction?

Thanks!
Maestro
View Profile
Special user
799 Posts

Profile of Maestro
Quote:
On 2008-05-02 14:40, Steven Youell wrote:
Quote:
I think using SSS as your MD would be very powerful. However, certain MD effects that require calling cards would be apparent if this was your stack.


You are incorrect. It's quite easy to call the cards without anyone knowing it's a Si Stebbins stack.

In over 30 years of magic, I've never found an audience member that knew the Si Stebbins Stack. If you're working for magicians, then I can guarantee you there are still at least 6 different ways to do it so they won't have a clue.

Quote:
You can't be completely free in showing the cards.


Once again, you are incorrect. Which leads me to your next statement:

Quote:
I personally haven't used SSS too much...


Gee, I wonder it that could be causing the problems you mention above...

Steven Youell


I had a friend that noticed the stack after seeing 20 of the cards "1 by 1", which is necessary for a certain trick I like from Scotland Up Close (the spec is thinking of a number, and they have to "mentally note" the card at that number). He is also an engineer, and knows a bit about card magic, do you think that's why he noticed it?

Any advice would help, thanks!
Steven Youell
View Profile
V.I.P.
3866 Posts

Profile of Steven Youell
Quote:
My point about having a lay person catch on to the stack when calling cards was not that a layperson would know the stack. It was that they might catch on to the repetitive nature of the suits.


I understood your point. You are incorrect. If the stack and the audience is handled right, they will not catch on to anything.

Quote:
I understand how a SSS spread can be shown face up, but it really can't be shown COMPLETELY freely.


This statement makes no sense whatsoever. It's like saying "if you are palming a card, you cannot show the palm of your hand COMPLETELY freely."

What the heck does it mean to say that you can show a deck spread on the table face up and the audience won't detect the spread-- but if you show the deck COMPLETELY freely, they'll detect a mathematical pattern?


The rest of your post makes no sense whatsoever, so just allow me to shorten things up for you:

If you know how to handle a stacked/memorized deck properly, no layperson OR magician will have a clue-- regardless of what the stack is. If you don't know how to handle a stacked/memorized deck properly, almost anyone can detect the fact that you're using a stacked deck.

It ain't the stack, brother-- it's the guy holding the deck.

As to rookie magician, that's a matter of opinion. I've seen guys who have been doing magic for 20 years that are rookies and I've seen guys who have been doing magic for 20 months that are on a professional level.

It ain't the time in grade, brother, it's the combat experience.

As to calling out the cards-- tell me the effect and I'll give you a way to do it.

Steven Youell
bdekolta
View Profile
Inner circle
Texas
1637 Posts

Profile of bdekolta
Quote:
It ain't the stack, brother-- it's the guy holding the deck.


Exactly.
Cohiba
View Profile
Special user
Michigan
747 Posts

Profile of Cohiba
The calling the cards effect that was discussed was the well known Nikola effect to set up a stack in front of the spectator. As I mentioned now several times throughout this thread, I can see how this could be done if you call cards out of order, etc., and vary pauses, comments, etc. I'd be interested in any other method you know of.

By completely freely, I just meant that anyone given a minute looking through the cards would see the pattern. It's easy to disguise a cyclical stack with an in the hands spread. This has the appearance of being completely free, but really isn't. In most cases, this is all that matters. However, this becomes a weakness in effects like Aronson's "The Invisible Card", where they are looking at the faces of all the cards, looking for their selection. Probably most people wouldn't catch on, but there are those that would. And I believe that is true regardless of performing level. If I'm wrong, then I'll be happy to learn something new and better myself.


Quote:
On 2008-05-02 17:52, Maestro wrote:
Quote:
On 2008-05-02 14:40, Steven Youell wrote:
Quote:
I think using SSS as your MD would be very powerful. However, certain MD effects that require calling cards would be apparent if this was your stack.

You are incorrect. It's quite easy to call the cards without anyone knowing it's a Si Stebbins stack.

In over 30 years of magic, I've never found an audience member that knew the Si Stebbins Stack. If you're working for magicians, then I can guarantee you there are still at least 6 different ways to do it so they won't have a clue.

Quote:
You can't be completely free in showing the cards.

Once again, you are incorrect. Which leads me to your next statement:

Quote:
I personally haven't used SSS too much...

Gee, I wonder it that could be causing the problems you mention above...

Steven Youell

I had a friend that noticed the stack after seeing 20 of the cards "1 by 1", which is necessary for a certain trick I like from Scotland Up Close (the spec is thinking of a number, and they have to "mentally note" the card at that number). He is also an engineer, and knows a bit about card magic, do you think that's why he noticed it?

Any advice would help, thanks!

I overlooked this thread. Maestro makes the same point I am making - when the effect calls for you to look through the cards (not in clumps, but each and every card), how do you disguise the stack? That's the same point I'm making, and the question I'd love answered.

Thanks!
Steven Youell
View Profile
V.I.P.
3866 Posts

Profile of Steven Youell
Cohiba-- Please PM me a description of the Aronson effect.

SEY
Maestro
View Profile
Special user
799 Posts

Profile of Maestro
Any advice for the effect I described here quoted two posts above?

Quote:
I had a friend that noticed the stack after seeing 20 of the cards "1 by 1", which is necessary for a certain trick I like from Scotland Up Close (the spec is thinking of a number, and they have to "mentally note" the card at that number). He is also an engineer, and knows a bit about card magic, do you think that's why he noticed it?


Just curious, I came across this thread from a while ago, and I like that trick but I'm reluctant to perform it because of being busted on the pattern. Also, this trick won't work with a stack other than si stebbins.
Jim Morton
View Profile
Veteran user
361 Posts

Profile of Jim Morton
Getting back to the original question, going from a randomly shuffled deck to Si Stebbins would be extremely difficult. Better to take the Occam's Razor approach: Search for something in your coat pockets while holding the deck and switch it.
Rhu
View Profile
New user
20 Posts

Profile of Rhu
Temporarily out of Order by Patrick Redford contains a direct method and a method which uses two effects to get you there...
Patrick Redford
View Profile
Inner circle
Michigan
1722 Posts

Profile of Patrick Redford
Quote:
On Jun 11, 2019, Jim Morton wrote:
Getting back to the original question, going from a randomly shuffled deck to Si Stebbins would be extremely difficult. Better to take the Occam's Razor approach: Search for something in your coat pockets while holding the deck and switch it.


It's actually quite simple to do so from a shuffled deck and even easier and faster from a new deck. I explore both ideas (and a couple deck switches) in my book Temporarily Out of Order. I hope this helps!
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » Fast Si Stebbins Setup (2 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2019 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.18 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