The best possible test a system can have is by as many regular individuals as possible. One way to test a card table move is to perform it in a card trick, if you get nailed doing so then at least they are not going to shoot you. The problem with that is that you would get a repution as a magician and no one wants to play cards with a magican. So you would have to do the magic in disguise. So if Erdnase was a magcian and a cheat then he was most likely a clown.

:clown:

Or... During a game, imitate the movement of the move without actually doing it. For palms you can just go ahead and palm it without actually going south. I've done this a handful of times to test the waters.

I tried that but they were convinced I had palmed a card and shot me and then they found out I was innocent.

:)

If it looked bad enough that you got caught doing a move you never did, then you deserve it.

IMHO it's a very freaking bad idea to perform card tricks around the card tables. I fully understand guys doing it and, myself, it's years I suffer when I see guys demonstrating horrible automatic card tricks lol.

But as you pointed out, you get a "reputation" the split second you say "hey mates, just have look at this". It's hard to see all those people not worshiping your deuce or your stacking capabilities but, IMHO, if you want to make money, big or little, the best is to look like what you should look like in order not to be spot: a simple card player.

Erdnase? He wasn't a clown at all and his book is a mere piece of history both for cheats and Magicians (even if seriously outdated today). But he wasn't a professional card cheat. No way. No one will ever convince me. Suffice to read his overhand stacking methods for 4+ cards or his comments on the riffle or his three cards monte act or or or...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chung_Ling_Soo

Maybe when he got home, he got changed and went out and played poker with an American accent. Maybe he would not show a deuce but use it secrectly in both worlds. Ching Ling Soo was not an honest character and who knows if William Ellsworth Robinson was not Erdnase? However even magicians can get shot if they make mistakes, as this case proves. And the moral is maybe, when you are looking down the barrel of a gun, what's the difference?

:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-yeL-68E58

I guess a good way of telling if your stuff flies at the table is if you make it home in one piece after the game
Maybe wear hockey goalie gear for the first couple of tries, then as you get better wear less padding.
(kidding of course)

Here is my opinion, for what it is worth.

First of all, there are three areas that people experiment with.

The first area is to demonstrate moves to others to show them what you can do with the tickets. You can determine how well you do the moves by the reception you get from your demonstration, both to laymen and other magicians/card enthusiasts. If you do this, then you are pretty much prevented from hustling games and using your moves under ‘fire” in your local area (and maybe other areas), once you reputation gets out, and it will eventually. For those who like to learn and demo moves, your demonstrations will tell you how well you do this “move” type work. Since one makes his own rules while demonstrating, this does not in any way tell you if you can get the money because in a game the situation it is different and you must abide by the “game” rules, not yours. Demoing moves just tells you how deceptive your move is in a demo context, nothing more.

The second way is to make either splash moves (dummy move simulations) or actual moves in a game from time to time. This is one step up from method one, whether you are running up a couple of cards and then aborting, or palming at random, or peeking, etc., without actually going for the money. It is doing a move in a vacuum and you can abort at any time, do the move completely on the offbeat when it would not matter, on the showdown of the hand where everyone is looking somewhere else, trying a move from time to time in a low stakes game where the people are not paying attention and so on. This is okay but does not really tell you how deceptive your work really is although it may give you a very slight idea of how it feels working a game.

The third way is to go for the money. This is where you find out the importance you placed ONLY upon the deceptiveness of your move has much less relevance. It is nowhere the same as simply doing a move, as in situation 1 or 2 above. Now you must go through the whole sequence of going for the money. For example, if you are going to muck, then the first thing you have to do is steal a desirable card when you receive it - no ifs, ands, buts or maybes. Now you have to go to your “bug” to stash the card, not when everyone has gone to the men’s room, but now. You also have to be set up to clean up the card if you have to. Then when you are in the pot and get the hand where you have to muck in your stashed card, you have to do it. You can’t call time out. At this point you are not just someone watching, you are part of the action. Then after you muck in the card, you now have to clean up the dirty card – and you are playing the hand at the same time. Here you are dealing with a myriad of conditions and factors other than the deceptiveness of the move. You are looking at timing, grift sense, shade and many other factors. You are also nowhere as calm as you were practicing on the kitchen table.

I know most on this BB feel the deceptiveness of the move is the be all and end all of the procedure and if they are good enough with their move they can get fool everyone and get the cash. To prove their case they can play around with the move as in situation 1 or 2 above. There is nothing wrong with doing that as it can be a lot of fun. But in my opinion, that is not even close to the reality of the situation and tells you very little although I am sure some DVD trained manipulator who has never been there will disagree because he really knows, in which case I happily acquiesce to his superior knowledge and ability.

Man, they're gonna sentence you to death here. You have the choice, stake or quartering?

That is one very, very insightful post!

If you don't know immediately, upon looking in the mirror (or on camera) whether or not a move will fly, then you really don't know your business well enough to try it in a game.

Any move too "iffy" for immediate decision is for the " James Bond Wanna Be, Day Dreamers".

Dowser, that's a tough call.
A move mey appear sloppy when you're burning your hands, from a magic standpoint.
But during the excitment of a game a lot of stuff can get obfuscated with the right timing and cover. It's more a case of having the grit to confidently pull it off more than how beautiful it looks. Some tables I've been at where the dealing rotates, many of the players were more concerned with the burn cards than the shuffling etc.
'Course I'm often wrong.

Marshal, I agree with that and I think that is pretty much what Cag is laying out in his post too.

It's not the move it's the tell.

[quote]On 2012-03-08 15:45, AMcD wrote:


I’ll take both. I like my steak medium well and it is okay if the chef cuts it in quarters.

To Magic Marshal, The Dowser, M for Magic and tomski192:

Yup! That pretty much says it all and sums it up nicely.

I was going to add another category in my original post and write that the ultimate test was to demo the move on YouTube and pretend to be a real hustler, but because of AMcD’s concern for my continuing good health, I discreetly refrained from saying that – or did I just say that?

Hmmm…

There are moves that look so bad they would crack a mirror, yet fly like a dream due to the timing of their exucution. You can't get everything from a mirror as they say, such as timing and so on. You can't beat live action experience but you also can't afford it to not work the first time. The problem is not only getting your fingers broke but a losing your reputation. The poker world is a small world, even getting nailed for a little cheating can go a long way fast and get exagerated. There are lots poker players that can do a card trick and the poker players don't talk about them and put them in a black book. Kids do card tricks, my eight year old grand son can do a card trick. “Watch him, I have heard he can do one of there card tricks. He must be one of them there city slickers.”

Tommy wrote Mar 8, 2012

Sure you can. In my opinion that is simply a theoretical argument not justified by my experience.

You got to get prepared as much as reasonable beforehand and then simply do it. There is no way around that. You have to do it, Period. The alternative is not to do it at all. When properly prepared you can always stop and abort if necessary. If something is not right, you usually get many indications before any possible “blow” to the play occurs.

If you cheat games long enough, especially with moves, and move around to different games at some point you will get nailed no matter how much experience you have or how good you are. If you are very good you may only get heat or maybe a knowing smile from another hustler. That is why most people, no matter how skilled, don’t cheat. They are scared sh-tless of getting nailed and make continual excuses why they don’t try. I have seen some relatively unskilled guys use moves you would not believe and get it on over and over again just because they put their head down and had the balls to do it. So the argument you can't afford to get caught does not stand up because if you cheat you can get caught at any time.


There are card tricks and there are card tricks.

Many square john people know some type of card trick or two. But are we talking about just simple card tricks or tricks that even children can do? No, of course not. What we are talking about is doing a card trick or demonstration which obviously takes practice and skill to do. That is not just a run-of-the-mill card trick.

But everyone is entitled to his opinion. But I have never seen a good hustler who was looking to cheat a game do a card trick at the table before, during or after the game. To me, that would be totally moronic. That is so obvious it is not even worth discussing further.

No "you" are talking demoing skill, I am not saying that. I did not say demonstration. In fact I said to Arnold, no, you don't demo a deuce, you use it secretly. Magicians don't demo moves like you keep saying, that is exposure and not magic, that is a juggling act, not a magic act. When you do magic trick the spec does not know what skill has been used. If you demo seconds, middles and bottoms and do all that crap then sure that will make them worry. The poker players are not going to worry about someone doing a card trick. Moreover you are not even showing it them at card games but people, in a bar or whatever. That is not going to spread like wildfire in the poker world like it does if and when some poker player is caught cheating as I know it does. They will not talk about some kitchen table game antic perhaps but I am talking about the casino poker crowed, who all know each other more or less. Poker players do nothing but talk about each other and if something happens in poker like cheating and you are a player then you soon get to know about it. Once a thief always a thief. That is rep you have if get nailed and that is what I meant about not afording to get nailed. I did not say you could aford to try that is ome more crap you made have made up. The fact of the matter is a cheat can do a card trick and its no big deal. You make out out that doing a trick is the end of world for a cheat. I think you are right if you do it in the totally moronic way you are talking of doing it.

You really talk gibberish.

Yes, if someone is caught cheating the word will get out. So? That is an occupational hazard for those who cheat, although I have seen people and teams that have operated for years and have not been caught. Seems like you are talking about rank amateurs.

You really struggle with this stuff and gyrate in and out on the subject matter because you have never been there and try to make it seem that you know. It is so obvious by the things you say and the way you say them that you don't. You just don't have a real clue and seem incapable of grasping anything outside of you narrow, blinded, unknowing viewpoint

As I said in my above post, “I am sure some DVD trained manipulator who has never been there will disagree because he really knows, in which case I happily acquiesce to his superior knowledge and ability.”

I have no more time for this bizarre silliness. If you have something valid to say, I will respond. Other than that, you just are a rambling waste of time.