Could someone please tell me what it looks like? Is he going to publish it?
I have heard there is another magician who can do it. Do you know, by any chance, who it is? Many thanks for any information and help.

Neal

I believe Derren Brown is the other magician, however; I'm pretty sure this ended up being a hoax.

I think, in the end, the trick was 'exposed' as being a trick table.
i.e. A folding table, the type you take on picnics.

Derren's was a hoax.

Sam Haine's effect is for real. Ask Eugene.

Alian,
Could you please share your knowledge with us? Many thanks.
Neal

Do you really want to carry around a fake table? I think there are probably better things to get excited about.

If you like the idea of bending things with the power of the mind, you can't do much better than Banachek's "Psychokinetic Silverware" video. If you want to do something a little different, you might also want to look at Ted Lesley's "Bending Glass"!

Love, Pandora

The Sam Haine effect is not a faked table.

Sam should be able to say more about this. I cannot say much more.

If you did a small search, you would find all the information you need.

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......forum=15

Lee

Sam's effect is real; though I can say no more here.

Mental Wires,
Allen

Greetings,

My illusion is real. (What a sentence that is...) I have performed the table leg bend as a non-performance piece around a dozen times. It doesn't play well as part of a performance but works as a demonstration of mind-abilities.

The table leg bend idea is originally Derren Browne's so I am not in a position to release my version. It would be questionable at best and theft at worst. Regardless of where one falls on that issue, I personally am not comfortable distributing this secret.

One note if you pursue your own version: I did this once with a gentleman's wooden cane. Bad idea. It took an hour and a half plus finding a pool table to roll it on to convince him that I had restored it to the original shape.

TTFN,
Sam Haine

Am I missing something here? Regardless of whether or not DB's illusion is (was?) a hoax, conceptionally, the illusion could be created by utilizing Ted Lesley's "Bent Wine Glass" principle.

As for Sam Haine's reluctance to release his version (because: "The table leg bend idea is originally Derren Browne's so I am not in a position to release my version. It would be questionable at best and theft at worst. Regardless of where one falls on that issue, I personally am not comfortable distributing this secret."), I would respectfully suggest that adhering to that principle (it's someone else's idea) would prevent anyone from coming up with his version of Matrix, 4 Ace Assembly, ring off rope, mental predictions, telekinesis effects, etc.

However, if Sam is reluctant to release his version because he doesn't want to share, well, that's an entirely acceptable reason and rationale.

I would think that *IF* Sam ever wanted to reveal details of what he came up with, this would hardly be the place for it.

I concur. This is definitely not the place for disclosure.

As Sam clearly stated, he is personally "not comfortable distributing this secret." I think he made his position on the distribution of the information abundantly clear regardless of any one else's personal feelings or opinions.

Mental Wires,
Allen

HI Turk,

I am not sure it can be called the "Ted Lesley bent glass principle." Ted's subtlies and hands off aproach is terrific. The subtleties of other glasses bending in the audience. However, if we are talking about the same thing (not so sure we are in all cases) then it could be called the "Geller bent nail principle" or even further back in Jinx it could be called the "swizzle stick" principle.

Just wanted to set the record straight on that as now day so many credits go to the wrong place, I have been guilty of that myself.

Thanks, Banachek. I have the Jinx series and I'll look up the Swizzle Stick effect in that series. As far as saying the "Ted Lesley Wine Glass" principle, I agree, it is much safer to always say something like "the principle used by Ted Lesley in his Wine Glass effect". That would cover all the bases.

I just received your Psycokinetic Time and Psychokinetic Touches and Psychological Subleties. I have read the first two manuscripts and enjoyed them immensely. Very bold; very practical under the right settings. I look forward to reading and analyzing the material in Psychological Subleties. I am also going to order your radio broadcast shows CDs. I plan on playing them over and over again as I daily travel about in my car.

Thanks for the correction--and thanks for the superb materials.

Turk

Hey, Mystic1, Hunter and Allen Gittleson. I concur with your thoughts in this matter. I apparently did not make my prior post clear.

I was respectfully suggesting that if Sam's reluctance to reveal the bent table leg was because it was originally Darren Brown's "idea" (as opposed to revealing his METHOD) then, I felt that magic might not progress very far if an idea could not be expanded upon by others.

Banachek makes my very point by pointing out that the wine glass effect was not Ted Lesley's but was the Geller bent nail principle and, even further back, the swizzle stick effect out of the Jinx). Certainly, we would would not see any videos or effects where a later magician would demonstrate his "improved" handling of "XYZ's effect".

Now, as to using the same method, that is a different story and I wasn't certain if Sam's reluctance was based upon his using DB's method or just DB's idea. I was trying to differentiate between the two--and I was hoping that Sam would clarify the reason for his reluctance. (Note, I say "hoping" because Sam has no obligation to do this, but such clarification would assist me in understanding his reason for his reluctance).

And finally, not only did I state that my thoughts were "respectfully suggested" (in an interest of promoting a dialog about the "idea v method distinction"), I even closed by suggesting that Sam has an absolute right not to reveal any effect or method if he doesn't wish to share.

No disrespect was intended. I was just drawn up short as I contemplated the potential ultimate effect on magic in general if Sam's reluctance to discuss an idea (versus a method) was extended and carried to its logical conclusion.

Certainly, I am not in favor of revealing any method, and, in fact, I try very hard to use an alternate method and different presentation when I purchase an effect.

Again, no disrespect intended. I apologize if any of you (or Sam) took my comments the wrong way.

Turk