|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..6..9..12..14~15~16~17~18..27~28~29 [Next] | ||||||||||
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts |
Another very nice review from pro performer David Alexander. David was the protege to the great Spanish magician, Frakson. I copy his review here, with his permission:
There have been a few classic card plots or “problems” as they are sometimes called, that have held the magic community’s interest for a long period of time. Two immediately come to mind, primarily because the two foremost exponents of the effects have kept their methods private. Any Card at Any Number aka “The Berglas Effect” is one and the other is best known as 51 Faces North made famous by Stewart James. While David Berglas has performed his version of ACAAN for dozens of magicians, Stewart James, ironically, is on record as having performed 51 Faces North just twice for magicians. The former’s plot is in the title and the latter is a simple plot with a stunning effect. If you don’t do it, you should. In the classic definition of the effect a prediction is written and, if desired, revealed. From a shuffled deck that can be borrowed (and even incomplete) a spectator is instructed to start dealing cards face up one at a time. At some point they may set one card aside, face down and unseen and then finish dealing through the rest of the deck looking for the predicted card. It is not seen. The tabled card is revealed and it matches the prediction. The magician touches nothing except writing the prediction which is held by a spectator. The effect is stunning, especially when done for magicians. Stewart James, legendary creator of magic, devised a set of criteria that raises the effect to miracle class and claimed to have a method that satisfied all of his conditions. He published a number of solutions but never THE solution, apparently taking that method with him to the grave. Over the years some of magic’s cleverest minds have set themselves the task of solving the problem with varying degrees of success. The latest entry into the scant literature on the subject comes from Thomas Baxter, a well-posted professional magician and mentalist who lives in Canada. (In the interest of full disclosure, Tom is a close friend, but our friendship does not color this report. Tom did not ask me to write this review. I like the product and as such, others should know about it before it becomes unavailable.) Tom wanted to research and publish a history of this fascinating effect but decided to do more. He invited people to send him their solutions, but rather than give a free ebook for every submission (which might prompt less than quality creations to get a free book) Tom chose to reward those he selected for inclusion by conducting a contest. Nearly 100 creations were submitted from all over the world. Appropriately, 51 were chosen. The premise is simple: the ones that were chosen are entries in a contest where the winner will receive $1,000, the winner being chosen by the buyers of the book. Each buyer gets one vote. Only buyers of the book can vote and all votes will be checked for legitimacy. It is a clever premise that has proven its value as it has attracted a wide variety of quality ideas with contributors ranging from amateurs only in magic a few years to well-known and highly successful professionals with decades of experience. Tom includes three of his own ideas, but as editor and publisher, he is NOT eligible to win. The 51 solutions range from an out-of-the-box thought experiment by an amateur who conceived, but did not actually build, what might be the most expensive trick deck in the world to more practical ideas and routines from the likes of Michael Weber, Marc Paul, and Barrie Richardson. All the solutions are clever and all have varying degrees of practicality and appeal. Some are marvelously complicated and others quite direct. The entire 200-page book makes an interesting read, both for the history of the effect and the performing material. There are stage versions and impromptu versions of the effect as well as self-working versions. Literally, there’s something for everyone in this collection. As editor Tom also resolved a pet peeve of mine: the clear explanation of unfamiliar sleights. Tom includes descriptions of the needed work when it is something out of the ordinary. Besides a detailed bibliography of previously published solutions Tom closes the book with his thoughts on the publication of what is claimed to be Stewart James’ “real” solution. Tom’s take is interesting and he makes a strong case for his opinion. Like his previous offerings this ebook will have a limited availability. If you have any interest in this effect you would be wise to buy it now before it becomes unavailable. It’s only $35 by PayPal and you can only get it from Tom. Full details on how to vote are included with the purchase. http://www.thoughtcontrol.ca/TheOpenPredictionProject/ David Alexander
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
Davit Sicseek Inner circle 1818 Posts |
I thought the vote was for best effect/individual contribution rather than for best contributor, taking into account multiple submissions?
I can't recall which page the guidelines were set out, so apologies if I'm mistaken - but either I'll state my opinion. I think the prize should go to the best single take on the effect.
Send me the truth: davitsicseek@gmail.com
|
|||||||||
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts |
Davit: I have no record of you having bought The Open Prediction Project. Did you buy it under a different name? This process is only open to those who legitimately purchased the e-book.
- entity
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
Davit Sicseek Inner circle 1818 Posts |
I realise the voting is only open to purchasers. I'm requesting clarification on the criteria for voting - perhaps as a secret purchaser, perhaps as a potential purchaser or perhaps just as a nosey parker
I've had a busy night, so not looked through this thread to remind myself of what was mentioned earlier, in which case I am simply showing myself to be a fool. I was under the impression that the prize is to be awarded to the best submission. Until this point I assumed that submission=one contributed effect. If contributor A has 20 votes for a single submission, but contributor B has 11 and 10 votes for two submissions. I think the person with 20 votes for a single effect deserves the prize, rather than the person with 21 votes split between two. I guess there is an argument that multiple submissions have in themselves been of greater contribution to the project, along with the fact that two strong routines from a single author could split their votes and decrease their chances of winning. Horses for courses. A tough one. Basically I see good arguments in favor of either approach. I was just surprised, either due to my eagerness to assume, or simply because I wasn't paying attention.
Send me the truth: davitsicseek@gmail.com
|
|||||||||
bugjack Inner circle New York, New York 1624 Posts |
How many different contributors contributed to the book?
|
|||||||||
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts |
I believe that there were 35 different contributors whose material was chosen, with a total of 51 different solutions.
- entity
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
Patrick Redford Inner circle Michigan 1751 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-12-19 18:58, will4gzus wrote: Thanks for the comments on Advantageous. It's a routine that I've held close for a long time but this seemed the most appropriate place for it to be published. I find that it meets all the conditions originally laid out by Mr. James and can be performed under virtually any conditions. It's one of those routines that plays much better than it reads. When I perform it, I feel like I'm doing something real - because I am : ). Thanks again, it's very much appreciated. -Patrick |
|||||||||
Picard Elite user 411 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-12-20 14:40, Patrick Redford wrote: Actually, your effect "Advantageous" does NOT meet all the conditions laid out by Stewart James. It does not meet these conditions: -7. It is described as a prediction at the time of writing. The prediction is the name of a card. It is known to all before the first card is dealt. -9. No alternative meanings or effect. -11. When the spectator starts dealing, the performer does not know where the predicted card is. It would not help to know with this method. Nor does the performer know the location in the pack of any other card. -13. The spectator deals straight through from top to face, the only variation is when he leaves a card face down. (sometimes he will not have to leave a card face down in your effect) -14. It is not a once-in-a-while trick. If the instructions are followed, it cannot fail. -15. The cards are never handled by the performer from first to last, at any time before, during or after the trick. Although it's not even an open prediction I liked it and will try it out for sure! |
|||||||||
will4gzus Veteran user 311 Posts |
Actually, Advantageous does meet step 13 and 15 quite easily. There are many effects in the ebook that do not meet all of the conditions listed by Stewart due to card handling, shuffling, etc. This one does not require the cards be touched to determine the prediction because that is the way I did it each time I have performed it this weekend, and it has yet to fail me at all. Any of the effects that have a hands off approach requires some degree of spectator management cause if an incomplete deck is being used the performer will have to know if the predicted card is in the deck. I think you will really like the results when you try it, I know I did
|
|||||||||
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts |
Stewart's fabled "conditions" were set forth for his description of 51 Faces North, his ultimate version of The Open Prediction. All together, Stewart created 83 different Open Predictions, only one of which adhered to his conditions -- 51 Faces North.
- entity
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
Patrick Redford Inner circle Michigan 1751 Posts |
-7. It is described as a prediction at the time of writing. The prediction is the name of a card. It is known to all before the first card is dealt.
The prediction may easily be shown to everyone but the dealer. Theatrically this is more interesting anyway. -9. No alternative meanings or effect. The effect comes to a close the same way each time: The card openly predicted is the card they stop on . -11. When the spectator starts dealing, the performer does not know where the predicted card is. It would not help to know with this method. Nor does the performer know the location in the pack of any other card. While I do know where the card is, I honestly have no idea where the card is in relationship to where they are dealing. This is simply because I can't count in my head and speak at the same time. Perhaps others are more able to do this (this is why there is a key card involved). -13. The spectator deals straight through from top to face, the only variation is when he leaves a card face down. (sometimes he will not have to leave a card face down in your effect) This may easily be done. -14. It is not a once-in-a-while trick. If the instructions are followed, it cannot fail. This effect is also not a once-in-a-while trick. I used to close my set with this effect when performing in restaurants. I wouldn't dream of closing with something that is going to fail. -15. The cards are never handled by the performer from first to last, at any time before, during or after the trick. There is a bit of handling involved but most of the time it's sleight free. I suppose it all comes down to how you interpret the conditions set forth. Either way, for me, it gets the job done and feels like you're doing this sort of thing for real. Again, because you basically are. Thanks for the compliments as well. Please do give it a try! -Patrick Redford |
|||||||||
Picard Elite user 411 Posts |
Just to clear up any possible misunderstandings; I don't care at all about meeting ALL of the conditions (although it's a nice mental exercise trying to work it out), I just wanted to correct your very brave statement that your version does meet them all.
If we were to literally (and not creatively ) adhere to Stewart's conditions your version does not meet a few conditions as I pointed out. Still, that does not mean (and I didn't mean to imply) that it's weaker then some that meet (almost) all of them. It's in fact one of my favorite effects from the e-book and one I am sure will have a great practical value to me. (as has had for you) |
|||||||||
DT3 Inner circle Hill Valley 1920 Posts |
Man...this is such a difficult decision! There are so many wonderful contributions within the pages of The Open Prediction Project.
In addition to learning many very different approaches to the classic card problem, many of the ideas in this book have already served as springboards for new and existing routines. I really love how international OPP is. Reading the bios before each creator's contributions made me feel like I was taking a trip around the world, learning approaches from Finland, the Phillipines, UK, Japan, Canada, The Carolina Low Country (twice!), Croatia, Germany, South Africa, Italy, and Spain. It was quite a whirlwind of a trip. All right. Here I go... I have been using #1 Fate by Mick Ayres for a long time now, and from dozens of performances I know that it plays just as strongly as it reads. One of my favorite anytime, anywhere, any deck routines. I really loved all four of Patrick Redford's solutions, especially #45 The O.P. Spread. I realized I don't have any of the other books Patrick has written, and after seeing how creative his thinking is, I am very excited to dive in his previous offerings. (Any suggestions from anyone on where to start?) Hector Chadwick's entry, while not a routine I see myself doing, taught me a lot about the presentational aspects of The Open Prediction...it's strengths and weaknesses. I also really enjoyed reading the thinking (would that be called mind reading?) from Hiro Okada. In his bio he mentions that he also writes mystery novels. I would love to read one, as it is obvious he has a real talent for building suspense. One of the most interesting things to me about this project is how many young creators (several still in school) offered up new and unique ideas. Reading their entries made me feel safe for the future of the art. And finally, I must officially vote. I am only voting for the sanctity of the project, and to make my own contribution in moving the process further. I really think each and every entry is a winner in its own way. My vote goes to #21 Impromptu L.A. Open by Oyama. It's so clean. So simple, and so direct. Thanks again to all who contributed material. Thanks again to entity for all the hard work, and thanks also to those who helped behind the scenes with research and other assistance. DT3 |
|||||||||
Oyama Inner circle Portland, OR. 1054 Posts |
DT3- Your vote means the world to me. It is a true honor to have your vote. Thank You.
Aaron
"it's better to live one day as a lion, than a thousand years as a lamb."
|
|||||||||
Magical Dimensions Inner circle 5001 Posts |
Ran into this and thought that I would share. It comes from the booklet,IMPOSSIBLE DREAM.......It sounds and reads very much like the open prediction. Has anyone read this and if so, has this idea been included in this magic Café project that this thread is all about?
EFFECT: Picture this. Whenever the whim to be wicked takes hold of you, walk up to a friend, the postman, or a total stranger with a betwixt look of horror and amazement on your face. You tell them about a dream you had a week ago concerning them and a deck of playing cards . You tell them, in lucid detail how you were at a bizarre carnival in your dream and they were the Fortune Teller at one of the booths. In the dream, your friend/postman/victim saw you and began wildly searching through a deck of playing cards, looking for something of immense significance. They tossed cards away until they found "The One", the one that would signify Your Future, and showed you this pasteboard prophecy and it's glowing visage drop-kicked your soul and you woke up in a cold sweat. You, not wanting to look like more of a fool than your friends already think you are, kept your dream to yourself, but it haunted you. That card, THE card, haunted you and now you feel, no matter how ridiculous, you must confirm your suspicions. Days after having the dream, you explain, you took a card from a deck at home that matched the card from the dream and have been carrying it in your wallet for good luck. Turns ou , ' been a crappy week for you, so now you suspect maybe the card isn't meant for you, but THEM. As you say this, you remove your wallet and lay it open in front of your "friend". You then produce a deck of cards and ask the "dreamt of" to deal cards from the top of the deck onto the table, turning them face up as they do. They are to keep doing this until they feel the urge to stop. They see all different cards as they turn them faceup and they can truly stop at ANY TIME. When they stop dealing, you spit your dentures across the room in a convincing display of shock and bewilderment. Your tell THEM to take the one card from your wallet and it is seen to MATCH THEIR UNDENIABLY FREE SELECTION! |
|||||||||
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts |
Magical Dimensions:
Lovely presentation. For an effect to be an Open Prediction, the predicted card must be named at the beginning of the effect. The presentation you quote from would work very well with Kolossol Killer, I think. - entity
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts |
Yay! Another vote counted. Great post, Don Theo!
We have: 1 Vote for Mick Ayres 1 Vote for Dominic Twose 1 Vote for Patrick Redford 1 Vote for Aaron Enyeart - entity
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
Patrick Redford Inner circle Michigan 1751 Posts |
It's a dead heat .
|
|||||||||
Magiguy Inner circle Seattle, WA 5467 Posts |
I may have it narrowed down to 12 (or 14?) items. Back to page 1 for a second blush, and I should have a vote to cast by early next week.
|
|||||||||
entity Inner circle Canada 5060 Posts |
Great! Keep those votes rolling in, folks. Fascinating to read the comments and opinions of those who have read through and tried out the various solutions.
- entity
email: tomebaxter@icloud.com
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » The Open Prediction (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..6..9..12..14~15~16~17~18..27~28~29 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.09 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 < |