The Magic Caf
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » Shuffling after a control (4 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

jedybg
View Profile
New user
Bulgaria
5 Posts

Profile of jedybg
Hello magnificent magicians,

Do you shuffle and/or cut the cards after a control has happened? What are your thoughts?
( For the purposes of this discussion by control - I mean any control that does not include shuffling/cutting in itself e.g. shift or a top change )

Here are my views on both.

Shuffling:
- Seems fairer ( the card is really lost )
- Adds time misdirection after the control
- The shuffling time could be filled in with patter and the audience can relax ( the card replacement is on-beat )

Not-Shuffling:
- More magical ( especially after a change - spectators just saw the card in the middle )
- You can table the deck for the same time-misdirection
- Easier to trace back the steps, since a simple cut is enough to get the card in the correct position
- Could be faster which is better for louder or distracting environments

I, personally don't do a lot of shuffling unless it makes sense with the patter.

What do you guys think?

PS: I do perform standing up in walk-around situations.
Rupert Pupkin
View Profile
Inner circle
1441 Posts

Profile of Rupert Pupkin
Context is everything. It all depends on what trick you're doing, and what the desired effect is.
jason ladanye
View Profile
Loyal user
254 Posts

Profile of jason ladanye
Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I59K0oyZa-Y

I shuffle here after a control because of the climax. Enjoy the effect:)
Vlad_77
View Profile
Inner circle
The Netherlands
5829 Posts

Profile of Vlad_77
Quote:
On Sep 9, 2016, Rupert Pupkin wrote:
Context is everything. It all depends on what trick you're doing, and what the desired effect is.



I couldn't have said it any better. In fact, I daresay that Rupert's words would do much to end the silly debate of suffling/not shufflin after a control.
marc_carrion
View Profile
Special user
637 Posts

Profile of marc_carrion
Quote:
On Sep 9, 2016, Vlad_77 wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 9, 2016, Rupert Pupkin wrote:
Context is everything. It all depends on what trick you're doing, and what the desired effect is.



I couldn't have said it any better. In fact, I daresay that Rupert's words would do much to end the silly debate of suffling/not shufflin after a control.


+1
tomd
View Profile
Special user
740 Posts

Profile of tomd
Good question, here is what I think:

If I want a spectator to really believe the card is in the middle, I don't shuffle after a control.

If I want the spectator to really believe the card is lost somewhere in the deck, I have them shuffle the cards after their selection is put in the middle (Palming off the card when handing them the deck).

It took me a few years before I could restrict myself to either of the options above. You don't need to do this, and I am only strict in this manner because the effects I perform require a "hands off" presentation. I compared the reactions I was getting from constantly handling the cards to only handling the deck when needed (And spent weeks working out how I could justify it) and I never looked back. A couple of personal benefits from practicing this approach include streamlining which controls are practical for all situations and that could be justified, and gaining the confidence to jazz on the spot to make the situation as fair as possible (Like handing them the deck, letting them select, sign, and place the card in the middle themselves, and from there I have to find a way to gain control of the card without raising suspicion).

There are plenty of effects that have a build in justification for shuffling a deck yourself after controlling a card, e.g. finding a 4 of a kind. I don't perform effects like this, so I presumed reducing the time I handle and shuffle the cards could only add to the magic. It all comes down to what you perform, and what you want the audience concluding about you when you leave.
jedybg
View Profile
New user
Bulgaria
5 Posts

Profile of jedybg
@Rupert,

Context is everything, yes. And I'm talking about the instances in which it doesn't require a shuffle, nor it denies it.

@jason,

Great routine! I do agree with your approach with the shuffle since this seals the thought of a shuffled deck before the productions of two four of a kinds.

@tom,

I'm currently thinking the same thing. Although, I'm currently testing adding a riffle shuffle after a shift to make the routine harder for backtracking.
tomd
View Profile
Special user
740 Posts

Profile of tomd
What is the routine? An ambitious card routine or something else?
marc_carrion
View Profile
Special user
637 Posts

Profile of marc_carrion
Quote:
On Sep 9, 2016, jedybg wrote:
@Rupert,

Context is everything, yes. And I'm talking about the instances in which it doesn't require a shuffle, nor it denies it.



There is no instances that do not require, nor deny it... the shuffle either makes the effect stronger or weakens it ALWAYS. So, you need to figure out in EVERY individual case. That's what context means.
jedybg
View Profile
New user
Bulgaria
5 Posts

Profile of jedybg
Quote:
On Sep 9, 2016, tomd wrote:
What is the routine? An ambitious card routine or something else?


Several quick routines in which the selection ends up being held by the spectator and the first phase of any of my sandwich routines ( I usually do 3 phase sandwich routines ). Finally, anything that consists of a selection and then one or a few color changes until it is finally revealed.
tomd
View Profile
Special user
740 Posts

Profile of tomd
Quote:
On Sep 9, 2016, jedybg wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 9, 2016, tomd wrote:
What is the routine? An ambitious card routine or something else?


Several quick routines in which the selection ends up being held by the spectator and the first phase of any of my sandwich routines ( I usually do 3 phase sandwich routines ). Finally, anything that consists of a selection and then one or a few color changes until it is finally revealed.


Personal opinion, but there have to be very specific conditions for you to shuffle the deck after a card control and for the effect to gain strength because of that process. Most of the time when a performer has a card placed in the centre (then Secretly controls it), and shuffles after, a spectator will acknowledge in his/her mind that they don't know where the card is, but the performer must, how can he otherwise complete the trick? They can then safety assume that the shuffling process has SOMETHING to do with what will happen next... Now that is an example where shuffling after a control doesn't strengthen anything, it gives a spectator an "out" for how you could achieved the impossible. And this is a prime example of weakening an effect, the performer already had the card controlled!! why then give them an out?!

I never perform sandwich routines, but I do love practicing them. I can only guess that your particular sandwich routine probably doesn't need a shuffle anywhere, and taking away any notion of moving cards around strengthens the end result. It's hard to view an effect from the other side of the curtain, but I am pretty sure its more impressive if a spectator thinks he "KNOWS" where the card is, and then it appears somewhere else sandwiched. Rather than the Spectator KNOWING he/she has no idea where the card is, and then it appearing somewhere else sandwiched. When you reveal the new location of their selected card, how will he/she replay the events in their mind?

If you shuffle, taking away their "Knowledge" of where the card is, then the shuffling process is the point in the routine that sticks out like a sore thumb. For a spec, that's is when you retained the card... they may not know how exactly, but you openly moved the positions of all the cards. Shuffling in this instance I don't think makes it harder to backtrack, it lessens the end result.

Plus when magicians shuffle the cards after a control, they tend to do an in the hand riffle shuffle with a bridge, and a couple of nice clean cuts. To you, to me, and pretty much everyone else on this forum that's nothing out of the ordinary.. but to a person who can barely hold a deck without playing 52 card pick up, like a lot of laymen, that shuffling process screams "I can handle a deck of cards very well". In turn, the leap of faith they make in the shuffling process being the key in the trick isn't such a leap anymore, the magician has clearly shown his ability to handle a deck of cards, and to them "He did a switch or moved it really quick". It may still be impressive, but my man, what would their reaction be when they "knew" where the card was and you show it is now somewhere else? Personally, that's where the power is in sandwich routines.
DaveGripenwaldt
View Profile
Elite user
491 Posts

Profile of DaveGripenwaldt
Frankly, I think shuffling and cutting directly after a card is replaced often reflects magician-think. We know how easy it is to keep track of a card in the deck, so we throw in convincers. But what does a true layman think? To him, why would putting a card in, say, the center with no shuffling after NOT lose the card?

Yes, there are times when shuffling adds to an effect…context and plot demanding it...but for the standard “pick a card…put it back” procedures, immediate cuts or shuffles make no sense to me since a layman has no reason to believe the original “put it back” doesn’t effectively lose the card right then.
Rupert Pupkin
View Profile
Inner circle
1441 Posts

Profile of Rupert Pupkin
Quote:
On Sep 9, 2016, jedybg wrote:
@Rupert,

Context is everything, yes. And I'm talking about the instances in which it doesn't require a shuffle, nor it denies it.


Then in that case you ask yourself two questions.

1. Should the audience think the card is unquestionably lost, and beyond any control on the magician's part?
2. Should the audience think there is a possibility the card could be manipulated by the magician?
2a. Does said possibility affect the desired effect?

If the answer to 1. is "yes," don't shuffle.

If the answer to 2. is "yes," and the answer to 2a. is "no," then shuffle your little heart out.

You could, of course, bypass all complications and just have the spectator shuffle.

R
Rupert Pupkin
View Profile
Inner circle
1441 Posts

Profile of Rupert Pupkin
Double post, whoopsy daisy.
Lance Pierce
View Profile
Special user
878 Posts

Profile of Lance Pierce
Rupert's first comment is the best reply, and it points out how flawed the original question actually is. It all depends on what you're doing at the time and what you need the audience to understand by the actions you do.

Even with that, there's one other thing that can be said, purely from a practical standpoint: A card can be brought to any position you desire with a shuffle, so to consider doing a control and then a shuffle seems -- in many contexts -- a complete waste of effort and time. What's actually at issue is whether the audience accepts that you completely lack control over their card. If they don't accept that, pick any control or shuffle you wish; you're just engaging in an exercise of hiding moves.
Shane Cobalt
View Profile
New user
91 Posts

Profile of Shane Cobalt
I think Lance nailed it really.

There is a lot to consider. Charles Jordan would say if you ask a spectator to shuffle the cards, it means the shuffling does nothing but create dead time.

If you are controlling a card it depends on the process. The diagonal palm shift is a great example. The irrefutable evidence that the selection is the in the center is within the procedure itself. Any shuffling by the magician at this point will point to that mixing action as the means for locating, moving, etc. the selection. A shuffle here is misplaced and detracts if done by the magician. Perhaps you could hand it out to be shuffled, but as Mr. Jordan reminds us, if the spectator is shuffling, the shuffle doesn't matter...

The last point I'll make is if you are controlling the card within the shuffle, you can certainly hold out the card while passing the cards to be shuffled, but all of this action seems superfluous. I'm simply providing a few examples with context. Rarely does a spectators shuffle improve an effect. There are notable exceptions where the method revolves around the spectator shuffle like Play It Straight Triumph, or Mind Mirror, or something with a more theatrical pacing like the card through handkerchief, where the action of shuffling and examining the handkerchief happen simultaneously and play off one another to block the trick well.
donny
View Profile
Loyal user
Colorado
263 Posts

Profile of donny
When you shuffle and cut, you're REALLY losing the card. duh. In favor of this are card people whom shuffle and cut prior to dealing. Actually don't you guys have to make a big impression on the spectator when you want them to remember the shuffle? So why the fuss, they'll remember what they remember.
It's not their senses that mislead, it's their assumptions.
jedybg
View Profile
New user
Bulgaria
5 Posts

Profile of jedybg
@Shane, Although the post, is mostly about the magician shuffling - I've had a great experience with the spectator shuffling after a selection has been made. I think the overall feeling of fairness enhances the effect greatly. Especially if the person is somewhat familiar with playing cards.

@donny, I've seen this a lot with card players - they never seem just happy with a card inside the deck. A feeling of completeness comes only after a shuffle.

I've been testing both scenarios with the Here then There effect. Here are some of my observations:
- Easygoing spectators are a freebie - shuffling or not doesn't really change anything
- ADD spectators are not a good crowd for anything time consuming 'hi-pass-change-bye'
- Card players overall seem to expect a shuffle and a cut to lose a card. Sometimes they really burn the shuffle which greatly enhances the effect, if I skip it altogether - I get the feeling they think I know the location of the card ( as far as they know in the middle ), which even though minor seems to have a negative impact on the performance.
- Hecklers love a super-fair shuffle. Does wonders! I'd let them shuffle if possible ( for the grumpiest ones I always let them 'Cut once' and they shuffle nevertheless )
- In the beginning of a performance - shuffling generally seems to work well. Adds a few seconds of chit-chat with some of the spectators, while the others burn a standard riffle shuffle.

I've tried several different settings and even asking the spectators ( after a peek ) whether or not should I shuffle and either not shuffling, shuffling or letting them shuffle.

This is all concerning effects and situations in which there isn't a strong cue in the situation or the effect.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » Shuffling after a control (4 Likes)
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2023 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL