AmazingBoy, the first effect from the trailer is a simple divination effect called 'Divination' and can be found on page 79 of Mnemonica. The second effect is 'Any Card at Any Number' and can be found on page 82. They are the first two tricks listed in Chapter 6. They can be done with any memorized deck. Have fun!

Well, I forgot to mention that I was looking for the last effect of the demo video. thanks for your reply ! So in this case it would be the trick on page 82 and beginning of page 83 as I just read it, using the pass. but it is far from the conditions in the video :
in the video I think he is not using the pass (I guess since it's usually really quick but here he doesn't use any misdirection or large motion to cover his pass.). second, if he was using a pass he actually never looked at the cards after hearing the card and number so how could he know where to execute his pass ? third, he cuts the deck BEFORE asking for the card and number. finally, spectators don't tell out loud their choices directly and there seems to be no move after revealing what they chose.

all those conditions just don't fit in the solution you directed me to, and actually this is why I'm still riffling thru my book ^^
Am I totally wrong ? Is this demo fake ?
anyway thanks for helping me thru this.

The handling in the demo is not the exact handling from the book but it is the same effect. In fact, the book's version is better since you don't openly fan through the cards and cut them during the performance. Focus on the book's handling and not the one from the video and you'll be better off.

I think the video looks like your typical misleading sales pitch thing. Stating that the book contains effects that can be done even with a borrowed deck or a shuffled deck for instance, is more than a little misleading IMO.

Yes, there is content of that nature but the entire premise of the book is work done with a deck which cannot be borrowed there and then and fairly shuffled. It is misleading to anyone who do not know how a memorized deck works and may believe that they will have more freedom with those things.

Having said that, estimation cutting, sneaky invisible glimpses and improvisation are strong elements in Tamariz' magic. I don't think he himself ever performs many of the effects like they are written up.

There is a Spanish edition of Mnemonica which comes with a DVD in which Tamariz demonstrates 15 of the best effects in Mnemonica. No explanation, just performance so that the reader can get a clearer idea of what it can look like. But I suppose that doesn't help you much.

I'm reading Mnemonica myself now BTW.

No, I have to disagree with this.. here is why :
the effect in the book and in the video are not the same, in the video it is presented as a mind reading effect (he says it), this is why the cut is fairly open, like if he was estimating things. in the book it is more like a miraclulous coincidence since the performer supposely doesn't do anything to the cards. also it looks like the performer in the video (and if there is no pass) can even give the cards to the spectator for the countdown. anyway ignoring this last point, I was looking for the method for this particular effect in the video, which is not a regular ACAAN, but just a twisted one, mind-reading like. now, to my eternal question ^^ : is this REALLY in the book ? does anyone have an idea ?

and thanks for your advices


to Amazing Noobini :

thanks, I like your point. In fact I'm really wondering if this trick in the demo exists.

Not to sound like a broken record, but yes, it can be found on page 82. It sounds like you are confusing the presentation with the effect. Whether it is presented as a feat of mindreading or as a coincidence the effect is the same--spectator #1 picks a card, spectator #2 picks a number. You hand the deck to someone who counts down and finds that the card matches. But the effect in the demo is right out of the book.

You can choose to present this any way you like. Mindreading, coincidence, ESP, thought projection, psychological influence, etc. If you're asking if that particular presentation is in Mnemonica, then no, but the effect is spelled out clearly.

And of course, I agree with Noob as well, he implies that everything can be done with a shuffled and borrowed deck as well, which is only partially true.

Watch again the video, you'll see that the performer knows the number and the card only AFTER all the moves have been made. this is why it's not the method from the book !

if there was a pass or something like this, he would need a peek or to riffle through the deck to find where to do his pass but he doesn't look at the cards, there is the countdown directly.

I just watched the video again, I realised there might be a non continuous shot, the cut would be at the beginning of the countdown when they zoom in. if so, you're right.

talking about p82 :

any advice for the "riffle the deck to find the card at that position (the JS)" part ? how to include this in the routine ? how to do this when the point of a pass is to be done invisibly ?

and thanks for insisting steven, it was useful and polite so no worry

Ah, I think I understand the issue better now. Your issue with the video is that it is much "cleaner" looking than the description in the book. If you notice after the number is announced he riffles the deck. Presumably, this is the point at which the p*** is made.

However, as you rightly point out, he doesn't peek at the deck to determine the exact location for the move. Your quote from the book is the easiest way to achieve the stated goal but there are ways to do it more cleanly (like in the video) that aren't necessarily described in this effect.

To quote Noobini, "estimation cutting, sneaky invisible glimpses and improvisation" are all trademarks of effects like this. As one of several possibilities (and if this is exposure please feel free to delete) you can do the math as per the book, estimate the cut and gain a peek at the bottom card. That will tell you if you are right on or if you are off by a card or two. If you are right on you can hand the deck to the spectator for counting. If you are off by X number of cards you can deal seconds or "deal none" to get the numbers to work out right.

Here's another possibility--do the effect with a marked deck. After you execute the p*** you will know exactly what card you cut to because you'll see the marks on the back of the deck. Then you won't need to gain a peek at any cards you can go right into the counting or (if you got it exactly) hand it to the spectator to count.

In the video, notice that he spreads a bunch of cards out just before the spectator picks the number. If he is working fast enough he can get a break as he's closing up the deck and then do the move. So in that case you wouldn't need to do a peek either. (Of course, if he has to get a break below let's say the 20th card, then this method wouldn't work unless you could cut dead on). This method, by the way, is a very nice handling.

In short, there are a number of different ways to achieve this effect and in general the cleaner it looks the more work and practice it will take to make it look that way. Also, take a look at his idea for false dealing on page 84--item D.

And, in looking at the video again, to do it as cleanly as shown you would have to be using additional principles not explicitly stated, so in that sense the video is misleading as well.

Sorry for the length of the post, but to sum up, yes I agree with you that the video shows a handling that is much cleaner than written up in the effect. However, with additional work as pointed out by Noobini, you can get it to look that clean.

The performer appears pleased after the first trick because he earned it. In the second trick he doesn't have the same reaction - almost like he feels guilty. I just thought that was amusing.

Steven, I don’t know what video clip you’re watching, but in the one the rest of us are viewing, it’s obvious that the magician does no moves after the spectators name the card and number. No peek, no shift, no counting, nothing. Clearly, the card is already in the right position.

His openly looking through the cards and cutting earlier couldn’t have anything to do with the method if he didn’t know in advance what card and number they were going to name. (It could be viewed as a presentational ploy: I’m going to divine what card and number you’re going to name by cutting the right card to the right position.)

There is nothing in Mnemonica that would allow you to do what appears on that clip, assuming that there is nothing else to the performance other than what is shown in the clip. There is, in fact, no way to achieve what appears on that clip--other than one time in fifty-two--unless there was more to the performance than what appears on the clip. (I’m sure that there was.)

Card tricks are my hobby for more than 40 years. The last two years I do nothing else than searching for the "Holy Grail" (the perfect acaan). You may say it has become an obsession and I think I am beginning to come very close to my goal.
One of the conditions for a 99,99% perfect acaan (the 100% perfect acaan doesn't exist, apart from 1 in 52 occasions statistictly) is that it is performed with a regular deck (of course stacked and memorized) and without any gaf card or locators.
I challenge everybody to repeat the second trick exactly as seen on the video for me.It is not possible. There must be parts that are not filmed.
By the way, Noobini wrote wise words a few posts ago in this thread.

I just sent an email to Penguin Magic:
"""""""""
Hallo,

I am Danny Crauwels from Belgium. I saw your advert for Mnemonica by Juan Tamariz (Book) and watched the demo movie on the same webpage.
I agree that Mnemonica is a fantastic book that is worth bying but…. the second effect on the movie is, in my humble opinion, misleading.
I challenge everybody to perform the SECOND trick on the movie for me in the same circomstances as showed in the movie. It is not possible !
There are cuts are parts that are not filmed.
No offence, just making a remark that is ment positively.
Greetings from Belgium,
Danny
"""""""""""""

Thanks to all of you, I think you got my point. and waterloophai, I'm interested in the replies you'll get ! post them here if possible.

cohiba : what you noticed is interesting, I also noticed that in some perfomances of acaan the performer seems relieved at the end, maybe due to circumstances he used to create the effect. berglas never shoes that in what I saw, doing this often would have trained him to control his reactions I guess.

For those who are looking for a peek for the trick page 82 of mnemonica I think I have a good one, very natural, combined with a type of pass that really looks like you're doing nothing but giving the cards to the spectator. Can I post it here ? (I don't exactly know the rules about that) or if anyone is interested just PM me !

Count, I am not saying that the video presentation is not doctored. I'm saying that at the point he riffles the deck at 2:22 is where 'the move' would normally happen. They obviously have the card and number arranged ahead of time.

I'm not defending the video--it's obviously doctored to show the cleanest possible verison of the effect. But I am saying you can do a clean version of ACAAN where the spectator would swear that it happened just like on the video.

Yes you're right with that, but there is always a hanky panky thing around live performances and filmed performances. some magicians feel right to edit their videos because it "must" look like what an audience will remember and not like the actual performance. I really don't know what to think here since it looks logic but tricky at the same time.

My belief is that they just had the spectators (Penguin employees) give the card and number that he was prepared for. Like Steven said, a well performed ACAAN will look almost identical to this - it should look the exactly that way to a lay person - ALMOST the same to a magician.

My observation earlier about the performer's reaction was simply that his reaction wasn't the same at the end of both tricks, which seemed to be a result of the "doctoring". The first trick he actually performed as anyone could perform it (no doctoring), and he seemed satisfied that he did it well. After the second trick, I believe the spectators were "in" on it, and so the performer didn't really do anything - he was playing to the camera. His reaction didn't seem to have the same satisfaction, because he knew he was cheating.

Yes, I thought a bit of that too when thinking of the doctoring. so my first understanding of your point was something else.

anyway, I'm learning mnemonica now. Using the visual method, old deck in the left hand, a bunch of markers in the right. thanks Tamariz !

Cohiba, I'm certain you are correct that the card and number were prearranged. And after watching it again I had to laugh because your observation was right on--he definitely was looking guilty.

Amazing Boy brings up a good point about videos in general. I think that if a magician is trying to get business for themselves then edited video footage is fine because the audience for the videos are laypeople.

When trying to sell books and DVDs, though, retailers should be held to a higher standard. I don't think that complete unedited footage is required for a given effect, especially if that footage might expose the method upon repeated viewings. However, and this is especially true of one trick DVDs, demos are so edited that they don't accurately reflect the nature of the effect.

I don't know how to delineate what the line should be, but I do know that many of the demos cross it. And they do so to make the trick look more impossible than it really is, rather than to just protect the method.

It's kind of odd to me that a book like Mnemonica would inspire the need to make a video at all. It kind of cheapens it. It's not exactly hipster street magic territory anyway. You have to be a pretty big nerd to read all of that book. As I said... I am reading it now.

A thorough description I understand, but a demo video? It's not a trick after all. Maybe it's just odd to me because nobody demos anything in my country, except really cheesy TV shop type product like knives you never have to sharpen and battery operated fishing lures.

To continue steven's point : we then enter the commercial view of magic, which seems to sell the magic and not the trick itself, which is kind of odd because we buy the trick, not the magic. one thing is sure and must be remembered to some shops : the magic is in the performer's hands, not in the trick we buy.
also, because this line is often crossed, we, performers comment things on forums like the magic café for a non profit issue, for the safety of our magic. and this is the good thing to do. in fact, I think things don't really need to be changed, it is just our part to be wise and think twice, as magicians should always do. but on the other hand, shops have to sell their products, don't they ? I would probably be tempted to do the same if I was running a shop.

for noobini's point :
It may be good, still, to do a video. for exemple, the corinda's demo video is just a talk by oz pearlman, no trick is done. Just the aura of the book is shown. So they could have done the same thing for mnemonica ! you're right, their demo is kind of stupid, as you said, this is not "a trick". and funny thing I just noticed : they show a few seconds our dear fellow performer Juan Tamariz. why the hell did they not show a performance from him instead of doing a doctored misleading demo ? Tamariz's performances shows easily how good his book is. *** penguin !