Is there a general consensus on what is the perfect prediction number (or range) for an Add-A-Number routine? I was thinking a number in the 1400's would do the job. It's obvious it should be higher than a 1000, but not too close to 3000.

If it's already been discussed just point me to the thread. I didn't know what to search for.

Thanks!
DeWayne

It seems to me that most modern performers use the Add-A-No. principle to generate a number that has significance for some other aspect of the routine.

For example, you could have the total match the birth year of a particular participant.

Or you could have the number turn out to be a phone number.

Or the number is the combination for a lock.

Or a page number of a book.

The possibilities are endless.

Presenting Add-A-No. for its own sake seems awfully old-fashioned nowadays.

Philemon as already explain everything
in one word, meaning.
To have a show intelligent.

I, too, agree with Philemon. The numbers should have some kind of meaning. Normally, people just glaze over once they sense math and numbers are coming, but if these numbers have some kind of meaning to them, it will pique their interest. Also, if you can manage to get the total of meaningful numbers to then mean something to all of the participants involved then you've got a great routine.

Jack Kent Tillar has a great Add-A-No routine in one of the early editions of Magick. I don't remember which issue it was off the top of my head.

-rob

I agree and disagree with what has been posted. It depends on what you're doing, it depends on your presentation and the effect you want the audience to perceive.

I've been doing this as my closer for years and it's gone through several incarnations. I used to have the number have meaning - typically the current date. But here's the thing - when you reveal the prediction matches the added numbers, you get a tremendous response. You're getting a tremendous response on the numbers alone. The fact that it's the actual date hasn't been pointed out yet. You could end it there. Introducing the fact that it's the date adds something to the effect, but I wouldn't say it takes it to the next level. It's like a kicker for a magic trick. You could have ended your cup routine with one giant final load, but you added a second one in as a kicker.

However this is all going off of the assumption you're using this as a prediction. I no longer do it as a prediction and in fact use it as a mind reading effect and do Dunninger's routine which gets me an even stronger reaction.

IMO (and it is ONLY my opinion), having the total be a "significant" number, like someone's birthdate, last 4 digits of their phone number, their street address, etc., strikes me as being far too contrived to be a "mere coincidence" and thus virtually announcing "magic trick." The effect, pure and simple, should be that you have predicted the total of numbers randomly chosen by others -- think about it! How much more incredible than that do you need to be? Does having that number then match the person's birthdate really make the effect any MORE incredible? I think it does just the opposite.

The only exception I can imagine would be if you then used the resultant number -- NOT AS A PREDICTION -- but as one way to force a page, line and word for a booktest using an otherwise ungimmicked book (e.g., if a 4 digit number, first 2 or 3 digits designate page, last digit a line or 3rd digit a line, last digit a word on that line). But if you do that, forget about predicting the number as doing both is, again, too contrived.

Has no one ever told you folks that "less is more?"

As re: the "perfect" number? There isn't any. If it matches your prediction it's a perfect as you can get.

I do not understand why it 'obviously' HAS to be higher than 1000.

It doesn't have to be over a 1000 to be effective.

In fact one of the most effective Add-A-No routines is The New Nile Divination where the amount is going to be less than 40. Max Maven has a bit of work on this on the Nothing DVD. However you can find this also in Annemann.

Ted is correct that it doesn't HAVE to be over 1,000. However, as a general rule, the prediction of a larger number (i.e., over 1,000) is likely to be perceived as being more impressive than predicting a smaller one (i.e., less than 100). There is no rational reason for this, but that's the way it is. Just like the fact that Terry Seabrooke's burned bill to wallet effect is the same whether done with a spectator's $1 bill or $100 bill -- but anyone who has done it will tell you that doing it with a $1 bill gets no reaction, while doing it with a $100 bill is considered a miracle.

Old-fashioned for who? Other magicians and mentalists perhaps see it that way but lay audience... I don´t think so.

Pete

Wholeheartedly concur with Pete. Any effect can seem old-fashioned if poorly presented, while even the oldest and most time-worn can amazing with a strong presentation.

My thinking was if you are asking three people to write a three digit number and one writes a number in the 900's he (or any spec after him)certainly would know that a prediction of 900 or less could not be justified. Am I not geting it?

Thank you ALL for your help with this.
-DeWayne

If you're having 3 people write down 3-digit numbers, then your target number should be somewhere between 1400-1600.

Hey DeWayne

You can use a calculator for all the addings...
The important part of the effect is the revlation.
The adding proces must be "not important" to the audience.

my 2 shekels

Lior

What Lior says is certainly true; however, it requires a specially gimmicked calculator. While this is not in itself a problem,you can save yourself some money by making and using the "Add-A-No" style switching pad described in Annemann's 1932 "202 Methods of Forcing" which is still in print and available at little cost from YFD. The great thing about such a pad is that you can make it yourself from the common spiral bound memo pads you find at the dollar store, any office supply store or the school supplies display at the local market or drug store for only a dollar or two and, unlike all such devices made for and sold to magicians (Kozar, "Add-A-No," magnetic locking pads, etc.) they are so common, familiar and innocent as to be above suspicion. I've been using such homemade switching pads in hundreds of performances -- for very sophisticated audiences -- over many years and have yet to have anyone question them or discover their secret.

Of course, the choice is yours, and if you'd rather spend $25-$100 or more for a gimmicked calculator or fancy switching pad instead of $2 and 15 minutes to make one that will do the job and last for 50+ performances, be my guest. The dealers will love you.

DeWayne
send me a PM and I will email you a PDF from my good friend Derek Horn on how
to gimmick a calculator.
You can use also any scientific calculator to force your number.

Lior

^ He's on commission

What made me ask the question sparse instructions included with the Kozar Pad I purchased here at the Café. You all have been terrific with you comments and help. Thank you!

DeWayne

I have been searching for this effect FOR MONTHS and I can't find it. I have seen FIXED numbers or products generated on DVDs and books. But may anyone please guide me to how I may use it for perhaps as my phone number or the spectator's number or so ?

I have seen this on TV before and boy was I mind blown..... A mentalist asked 3 spectators each to think of 3 a digit number and add them, and call the number, it was his actual phone number.

If it's in the books of mentalism I have been searching for a long time so please guide me to the resources of it or the DVD or so. Thanks a lot

How many old threads are you going to resurrect in order to answer the same question that you've ALREADY asked in two other threads that you started yourself?