Mb, do you have a pdf written up on the Quick Pitch?

If the "Quick Pitch" is simply a variation of Dan Sylvester's pitch, should it be taught to those who have not purchased Dan's "Sylvester Pitch" DVD?

Jim

Good question Mac.

I think so, and it has been by taught by others as well in effects that they do, such as Gregory Wilson's popular coins across (and I don't think that it was even a "variation," but was taught as the Pitch itself, only it wasn't nearly as well done as what Sylvester first taught, IMHO [and if I'm remembering correctly]).

That aside, the original Sylvester Pitch '98 was done in the last century. My use of it, an admitted slight variation, was differing enough IMHO (as a sort of shortened update) in the way I used it and actual positioning of the coin, allowing for a more ready and natural hand position to use more as an everyday move. On top of that, the Sylvester Pitch is one of those moves that more so lays dormant to most people in an old VHS (I know, I know it's also now available on DVD - what ain't?), something that most now know not much of at all. Also the seeming difficulty of the move has steered people not close to it beyond the immediate visual recognition of how brilliant it is…So it is more so applauded than practiced.

I did reach out to Sylvester as to the move, and also always continued to give credit to him as to what I had done relative. I've actually done more to immortalize the move than most by keeping it relevant via some of my work, commentary as to the move itself, etc. I also/ almost always steer people back to the original work and its creator for the most expert instruction and advice as to the basic move…I did it again right here in this string, did I not?

I feel that the move is falling further and further away from us, a lot like sl**ving has. My humble offering as to it does not rob anyone of anything, on the contrary, it lends a gleam to what remains to me a real piece of magical gold. I'm just sayin', but I respect others opinions here as to the matter.

In the meantime, I don't really see too many people, if any, doing this move as Sylvester does it or the way I do it even…Hopefully, all this will strike up renewed interest about it, and then let people give credit where they think it ought to be behind searching it out and finding at least something tangible about it, not necessarily all the way back down the street and around the corner, but something maybe quite a bit closer that they may be better able to put their hands on, wrap their heads around, and perhaps I hope actually use.

I think that once a person publishes a move, anyone can use and teach it in the context of an original routine as long as they give proper credit.

Thanks Doc, that's a better answer than mine.

How about that... So once published any sleight or move is fair game? I learn something new every day. So I guess all that hubbub about McBride teaching Wayne Dobson's stuff was for naught. Likewise with regard to Craig Petty's Red.

BTW MB, I don't know of Gregory Wilson's use of the pitch in a Coins Across routine. Do you mean his 3/4 Coins Across? Also, not to be contrary but the only difference between your Quick Pitch and Dan's Sylvester Pitch is that you launch it from FP instead of Fingertip Rest. Or at least I think that's what it says in one or more of your published routines.

But that last paragraph is all by the by, since it's now OK to re-publish anyone's previously published work. (As attested to by the Doc).

Thanks.
Jim

Well, there is a fine line between something that is proprietary and something that is not. Back in 1985 when I filmed the videos for the Encyclopedia of Coin Sleights (called Master Coin Technique by Videonics), I had to wrestle with this very problem. I decided that I would not teach a signature move of a performer such as the Gallo Pitch, or Roth's retention pass, among others. The ones I chose were in my opinion smaller types of moves, if that makes sense, ones that were published in magazines or in the context of published routines. I had to make that call, and tried to be thorough but not step on anyone's toes. I believe Darryl did the same thing with his own Encyclopedia of Card Sleights. I had developed some routines with the Gallo pitch, that I taught in my routines in the Knockout Coin Magic videos/dvds. My thought there was that the Gallo Pitch had been published in Richard's Almanac AND Encore 3 (2?), and was fair game to print within the context of my original routine. Of course, the explanation was no where near as thorough as the original descriptions, and credit was given to both Lou Gallo who developed the move, and Mike Gallo, who taught me the move.
So getting back to the Sylvester pitch. It is taught on a video that is over 15 years old, so the move has been out there. I am sure many people have found uses for it, and developed routines for its use. Since the move was released to the public to both learn and use, it is fair game to teach it within the context of that routine. The description doesn't have to be as thorough as the original description, and credit needs to be given. I don't think the move should be taught in detail on it's own, unless the variation is so different that it warrants a separate description. Please note that this is my own opinion, and most prolific coin magicians who put out magic in books and dvds generally subscribe to the same ideas. As for other people getting flack for teaching other people's stuff, I guess it comes down to what they were teaching (proprietary or not), and the context of how it was taught. Remember that if we couldn't use anyone's move in our own routines, how could we ever publish anything and advance our art? I would have no problem with someone describing the R.O.P.S. move in their own routine for the same reasons.

Doc, MB: It is weird how some republishing of sleights and effects that others have originally published are accepted and others are blasted for it. I hear you about the "fine line" Doc, but so often I can't see that line in many of those effects. Maybe it's there and I just can't see it, who knows. Doc, you mentioned that "credit needs to be given", but in some cases I see creators - as well as others commenting on it - insist that permission is also required. Then again some don’t seem to require anything more than a mention of credit. It almost seems that individual creators feel it is their decision as to whether crediting or permission is required. Then of course someone always mentions how legally there are no such requirements but I won't go there for now; I'm referring purely to the ethical aspects.

MB: Please know that I'm not accusing you of anything improper at all, and I'm sorry if it looked or felt that way. Also, I believe that everyone in this thread who asked about your quick pitch already own Dan Sylvester's DVD, so no problem with anyone here at all. It's just a general question I have with regard to all republished moves like this. Every doggone time I read a few threads in the "Right or Wrong" sub-forum my head starts spinning when I subsequently read threads like this!!

I think it is impossible to know right from wrong in these matters without any rule book!

Alright - very sorry for this unscheduled station break..... we now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.

Jim

Before it slips away, I'f like to support the theme, "in the context of an original routine." -- but not in a limiting way.

The key is "routine" rather than "effect" or "sleight." The decisions to use a particular sleight should never be driven by a performer's fascination with the move.

The questions of, "What am I trying to accomplish here," and "where will the moment of magic be in their minds," etc. are more important than "where to learn a new sleight."

Certainly, an accomplished performer should have several ways of achieving the same results. Studying alternative methods has value in fueling personal creativity.

If one could "seek permission" of the one "owning a a sleight," that might ask, "why do you want to learn this?" or "what sleights have you already mastered?"

For me, too many performers are in the, "I am working on my second million dollars. I gave up on the first." thinking. Where is the magic? Why do you think you need this sleight?

I appreciate Doc's efforts to make available a compendium of good coin effects. I can't afford the series or have the time to watch them all. Can't do most of the sleights anyway.
His giving credit when possible can serve to pin the reader in the direction of "being in context" -- and that is good.

Mb's material is incredible within the context of his chosen audiences. Some of his sleights/methods are not the best in other venues. Attempting some of his effects helped me overcome problems with crippled hands.

Both have helped "keep magic alive" -- and that is "worthy of credit."

On the "credit" side, I give away hundreds of effects away each year, many of which include original sleights/moves. I do not desire credit for these, but do not want someone else to claim credit either.
They have unique names so that they can always be "in context" with body and arm motions essential to their use. This is why I require feedback" as a requirement for the gift.

Most of the communication of "this does't work" comes from those attempting to use the sleight "out of context." I can correct that with communications.
Some of my sleights resemble others out there, but are not based on them. I can clarify that. Whenever I discover a sleight I created has another name published elsewhere,
I readily give credit and give up my refinements -- for clarity and simplicity. I can discuss that also -- if given the chance.

But most requesters do not meet the ethical commitment made. (only about 27%) Those who do not meet his commitment have NO RIGHT to use my sleight for any purpose.

Yet, I would be pleased to see "my children" being performed in a competent way even without acknowledgement. Not sure what is "right or wrong" here -- appreciate J-Mac's dilemma.

I have several ways of accomplishing the same end results as "the pitch." Tell me a story as to why you need it and it is yours to learn.
Share with me what you learning in the process of mastering it and it is yours to use. Show me a video of you performing it in public and you can put your name on it.

Pay me for it and I might be able to by Doc's stuff Won't really matter though.

I will create new sleights snd effects just because I can. Creativity is its own reward -- and sorta magic without permission.

Before it slips away, I'f like to support the theme, "in the context of an original routine." -- but not in a limiting way.

The key is "routine" rather than "effect" or "sleight." The decisions to use a particular sleight should never be driven by a performer's fascination with the move.

The questions of, "What am I trying to accomplish here," and "where will the moment of magic be in their minds," etc. are more important than "where to learn a new sleight."

Certainly, an accomplished performer should have several ways of achieving the same results. Studying alternative methods has value in fueling personal creativity.

If one could "seek permission" of the one "owning a a sleight," that might ask, "why do you want to learn this?" or "what sleights have you already mastered?"

For me, too many performers are in the, "I am working on my second million dollars. I gave up on the first." thinking. Where is the magic? Why do you think you need this sleight?

I appreciate Doc's efforts to make available a compendium of good coin effects. I can't afford the series or have the time to watch them all. Can't do most of the sleights anyway.
His giving credit when possible can serve to pin the reader in the direction of "being in context" -- and that is good.

Mb's material is incredible within the context of his chosen audiences. Some of his sleights/methods are not the best in other venues. Attempting some of his effects helped me overcome problems with crippled hands.

Both have helped "keep magic alive" -- and that is "worthy of credit."

On the "credit" side, I give away hundreds of effects away each year, many of which include original sleights/moves. I do not desire credit for these, but do not want someone else to claim credit either.
They have unique names so that they can always be "in context" with body and arm motions essential to their use. This is why I require feedback" as a requirement for the gift.

Most of the communication of "this does't work" comes from those attempting to use the sleight "out of context." I can correct that with communications.
Some of my sleights resemble others out there, but are not based on them. I can clarify that. Whenever I discover a sleight I created has another name published elsewhere,
I readily give credit and give up my refinements -- for clarity and simplicity. I can discuss that also -- if given the chance.

But most requesters do not meet the ethical commitment made. (only about 27%) Those who do not meet his commitment have NO RIGHT to use my sleight for any purpose.

Yet, I would be pleased to see "my children" being performed in a competent way even without acknowledgement. Not sure what is "right or wrong" here -- appreciate J-Mac's dilemma.

I have several ways of accomplishing the same end results as "the pitch." Tell me a story as to why you need it and it is yours to learn.
Share with me what you learning in the process of mastering it and it is yours to use. Show me a video of you performing it in public and you can put your name on it.

Pay me for it and I might be able to by Doc's stuff Won't really matter though.

I will create new sleights snd effects just because I can. Creativity is its own reward -- and sorta magic without permission.

No problem Mac, I take no offense… Since I was never trying to hide anything, and tried to put forth the info as fairly as I could as to what I was doing. I never felt any deception or subterfuge in the matter, and don't think anyone else reading my work felt duped or misinformed about any of it - How could they?

Your point about exactly what I was doing would be classified as a "slight variation," (perhaps even slighter) exactly as I've always characterized it, and then always giving direct credit to Sylvester. Changing the position of the coin really does open some doors as to usage, and that's all I wanted to point out. I probably do this move better than most, and have a real feel for it as I use it in some of my work, and actually have made the move nearly every day for years now. With that, it is what it is…That is that it is a slight variation on the original move that I thought made enough of a difference to make it better known for everyday, more usable, and not something that was so much attached to Sylvester's brilliant routine, that people would only continue to applaud it but not use it much if at all (As is with his original move). I hope my Quick Pitch, in perhaps an abbreviated sorta way, makes the move more likely to be used…for anything where you need to make happen what I show you can be made to happen. Anyway, the proof is in the pudding (and videos) I've been making for years now.

And come to think of it... I think I might've started speaking about this thing from my old Short Pockets download, a long time back now, maybe even before that some. I remember I was playing with it and had come to use it to traffic coins around better, not as to Sylvester's routine but as to my own stuff. Still, and again, it all comes from Sylvester's explanation of the basic move(s) in his routine, first and foremost. While people might not do Sylvester's take on this, I think they might more probably give the utility-type/short-cut sorta "Quick Pitch" a whirl…Just a hunch. If you haven't, you really should…You'll love it!

And Doc, that's a good run down on all this credit and permission stuff…It would sure slow everything down as to the prolific progress we've seen, or something like that.

I also use the pitch , but I call it the crimp toss because it is I used from the crimp position
vinny

Might've been a bit off as to coins across, but Wilson is definitely the right man. Let's go back about a decade here for an initial blow-by-blow on this very topic…Everything is as it was, except now, YOU are there…

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......&forum=3

Very, very good technique.

I can confirm that he teaches the Sylvester Pitch (or his version of it) on his DVD "On the Spot" for use in his routine "Toll Free" (an impromptu Miser's Dream) and as convincer in his "Florida Keys" routine. (He does not use it in his 3/4 Coins Across - the active ingredient there is a lot of clever Goshman p****ing.)

And let me tell you, it is freaking awesome. When first learning it, I was scared of dropping the coins (I was always the non-athletic kid who couldn't catch stuff thrown to him,) but by now I've gotten pretty confident with it. It has a lot of possibilities, in addition to its sheer deceptiveness as a brute-force kind of move.

Not meaning to hijack this thread, but I feel the need to comment on the 'teaching of secrets' discussion above. Taken to one extreme, if all magicians kept every routine to themselves, in a single generation there would be no magicians left. The availability of DVDs, books etc. not only helps to propagate magic, it inspires the imaginative amongst us to modify or improve. Over time these changes are passed on in forums such as this or at conventions, in pubished work etc. This infusion of new ideas is critical for obvious reasons.

Back when I was a kid (we're talking the 70s) I had a passing interest in magic - but could find nothing except a few cheesy 'magic kits'. Today, with multimedia and the net, it's the polar opposite.

On the other side of this argument, is total openess - if I buy a DVD I can then pass on what I've learned.

As a programmer, I feel frustrated when I hear that my games/utilities are being downloaded free on pirate sites. so I understand this side of the argument very well. Doc's, Funsway's and Mb's responses, by their length alone, show how complex and 'grey' this area is. In the end, the individual has to decide for themselves how to handle requests for help from others, whether it's a simple FP, or something as advanced as the Sylvester Pitch. Personally I feel those who help new magicians should be applauded, whether I receive explicit instructions, or a title to look up online to purchase a DVD or book.

Would I be correct in assuming this question is near the top of the list of contentious issues, or am I wrong and the majority feel one way or t'other ?

I see what you did there ;> I remember that show. I'm that old. Walter Cronkite. Good show. Back when TV was informative.

Back to the subject.

The Sylvester Pitch would get my vote as the finest coin sleight of hand tool added to the coin worker's arsenal created in the latter half of the 20th century. It is sublime and invisible, uses amazing psychology as taught by Sylvester, and comes about as close to "real magic" as a bare handed coin technique can.

It is also quite different than anything else I've encountered.

Sylvester the Jester deserves great accolades, in my opinion, for this creation. It's a bit of a pity that his act is light hearted and zany while his pitch is such a wonderful, seriously inspired creation. If someone with a more reserved and appreciated pedigree like Fred Kaps had come up with it, I think they would be hallowed by the coin magi fraternity forever. Sylvester's frenzied approach masks a brilliant creation- he absolutely deserves wider recognition for what is really an instantly classic technique in our little art.

It is one of those moves that fits easily into routines in a variety of ways. Because it happens so far away from the action as an "in between" sort of move, and because it happens under the cover of reverse actions in Sylvester's hands, its such a covert enterprise that no one ever suspects anything irregular is going on.

I've been working with combining it with elements of what might be a distant psychological cousin to it- Down's "Eureka Pass" move, which uses similar cover in a different way. These two techniques or magical elements combine well into a routine where you are producing coins up close and casually while you are standing and moving, and together they can form a mindblowing mini-miser's dream out of your pocket.

I enjoy bare handed in-your face coin magic, and the Sylvester Pitch offers amazing opportunities for just this sort of approach.

I don't think the SP is so much difficult as it is terrifying. It is just so very bold, so impossible, naked, and yet so obvious once you are in on the gag. Once you have been amazed by the effect, and then learn how it works, your eyes want to pop out of your head in the fashion that would make Sylvester the Jester a proud poppa!

For goodness sakes, search out his DVD, good coin magic-loving folks.

Hare, I agree with everything you've said.

I've began implementing the Sylvester Pitch in to a One Coin flurry turned table-size Miser's dream and hope to be performing it live within the next couple of weeks. You're absolutely correct about the whole difficulty and it just being terrifying analogy. I'm getting the hang of it and I just want to get it smoother and feel more secure with it as I don't want to magically make a coin appear in someone's drink if you get what I mean. I'm extremely satisfied with this DVD and I think that you're right about the fact if someone with a different character came up with this, it'd be very popular.

Thanks everyone for all of the replies!

Yes, my old friend Hare here speaks the truth as to the move, and I hold the same sort of respect for it as he puts forth here.

I have often wondered why greater coin minds have not spoken more of this move, but I guess people have their favorites as to things. But you notice, no one ever says anything contrary to the greater points made about this move…Hmmmmmm. That's because it really is as astounding as is said in most cases. Again, it is well worth the time to learn and master. I use it a lot in the things I do, probably none any more fun for kids than to continuously (3-5 times) pull a half dollar from their ear…It just looks impossible, to the child, their parents and all who witness it. And that's just a simplistic usage of such a deeply psychological method and move.

*Funny, I think I read in the card forum here once, card guys there talking of the "genius" of Dai Vernon in his Twisting The Aces. While it is a very nice little routine (one I do quite a bit whenever I do a card trick nowadays), it pales in comparison to what Sylvester came up with in pitching a few coins back and forth. Honestly/Respectfully, I don't think there's much of anything in card magic that can compare, IMHO. The Sylvester Pitch and relative routines are as unique as they come, and I can only think of what Mickey Silver does with coins as a real contender.

Admittedly, there's a lot of nice stuff out there, but the use of these sorts of dynamic moves is on another level as to coin magic, and the proof is in the demonstration of what you see and don't see quite expertly all at once. Perhaps a stroke of "genius," but at the least it's absolutely amazing! All due respect to Sylvester The Jester…Here, Here!!!

Good luck with it Z.