Hi fellow magicians.
First off, I'm not entirely sure if I'm starting this new post off in the right place/forum/section or whatever, so I'm depending on you kind folks to correct me if I am making a mistake. Anyway, here goes:

I'm wondering if any of you, like me, have become fed up with all this ACAAN fever that's persisted for so long now. I honestly can't understand what all the fuss is about! Personally I think a PCAAN beats an ACAAN hands down every time. PCAAN's have in my opinion, far more to offer in the way of suspense and amazement than ACAAN's do. The best PCAAN performance that I have ever seen is 'Open Prediction' by Tomas Blomberg ... I was just completely blown away, and I have not been able to figure out how it's done, although I have heard mention of something called the 'Cool out move' and that may be how it was done, but I can't see any move in the video, and it's been driving me nuts! I really would like to know what this 'Cool out Move is The performance that I'm referring to is on Youtube, but I'm not sure if I'm allowed to put a link to it here. You'll have to excuse me, but I am a new member, and I do not want to break any rules or ruffle anyone's feathers. I'll have a look at the rules later on to find out about this, but in the meantime I'll restrict my post to just text. I definitely will post the link later if I discover that it's ok to do that.

Back to ACAAN... I realise that some people out there have invented ingenious methods to satisfy all the rules bar one, namely, the magician must never touch the deck, and I give credit to them for being so clever. There are many others out there with slightly different methods [I'm talking one deck methods here] ...that are also amazing!. [give credit where credit is due] But all that's going on here is simply that a 's*****d' deck is manipulated in such a way as to place the target card in the exact position that it needs to be. that's it ... s***k, manipulate, and count. There are other methods out there, and some of them are very good, but follow the rules less than the aforementioned.

Maybe in the future we will have 'Nano' material based cards that will have the ability to change their faces and backs by using some sort of polarizing system down on the nano scale ... maybe such cards could be constructed to react to certain frequencies and literally change their appearance on demand. That way you would have a deck of cards that would respond to a signal from the performer and readjust itself accordingly. Imagine being able to have 52 people pick 52 different cards, and another 52 people pick 52 different numbers,then spread the cards, and bingo! .. every card in exactly the right place! And being able to say things like: ''And what colour would you like the back of your card to be sir!? Lol.

With PCAAN's there are many ways to accomplish the effect of which there are some that still completely fool me .. I just have no Idea how they are done. I'm able to perform versions like 'Boris Wild's Perfect Open Prediction'... Insane, Grail, and even impromptu versions of them [which I prefer] but there are still ways of doing it that are a complete mystery to me, and I'm glad about that ... I can still be fooled, and it really does look like magic to me.

I'll end on a sad note: Technology is getting so good now, and is advancing at such an exponential rate, that the above mentioned nano tech will emerge sooner than we think, and advanced technology like that will, as someone once said 'Be indistinguishable from magic!' So make the most of it folks, ... real magic is on its way, and everybody will be able to do it. Let's enjoy our humble sleight of hand, and our gaffs, and gimmicks while we can, because I've a feeling it's not going to last.

WillMagicMan.

Nice post WillMagicMan. I have also wondered about such technology where cards morph into any card on demand. I agree it will be possible in the near future. However, I am not too worried about technology taking over all areas of magic completely.

It seems to me, WillMagicMan, that you are preoccupied mostly with why the method of PCAAN > method of ACAAN. One can certainly argue that, but I fail to see how the argument put forth suggests one is a better effect than the other for our audiences. In fact, one could even argue that the nature of an open prediction lacks the initial mystery that ACAAN does, and thus could be reduced to a puzzle. Personally, I think both can be equally entertaining, suspenseful, etc. but it is up to the performer to frame the effect properly with the right premise and presentation.

As for technology, I've heard that argument for ages about every aspect of magic ever since I was a kid. You know what's amazing - technology still hasn't made magic obsolete. In many ways it has made it even more relevant today than it has ever been. Even if such nano tech for cards could be developed, it would have its own set of problems (cost, energy usage, etc.), and in fact could be negated as a potential method very easily (e.g. use a borrowed deck of regular playing cards). It would certainly be a much longer time than you may think before such technology would even become commercial, much less commonplace. And this being said by someone who is extremely optimistic about the rate of change going forward!

Hi sgtgrey,
A Good post from you indeed. Thanks for taking the time to respond, I do appreciate it.

With a good PCAAN, Say an impromptu version with a borrowed deck for example,it's great being able to make the following statement to a spectator: ''The card that I have openly predicted will be the card in the deck that you arrive at by dealing to any number that you choose, and I mean any number'' Now unlike an ACAAN where they themselves choose any card,they are now being told that they have no choice, and that no matter what number they call, and no matter how much they exercise their free will, they are condemned, and totally under your control, doomed to land on a selection made by you and not them. I think that the psychological aspect of these circumstances is stronger than in ACAAN. You see, with ACAAN, the spectator could be left thinking that they themselves caused the result to happen, because you let them know that everything was up to them, it was their choice, and that somehow they were in complete control. They may even think that they did the magic themselves and not the magician, or even that the whole thing was just a coincidence! Whereas in PCAAN, you the magician are demonstrating your magical influence over cause and effect in the universe, and you ability to command the future. LOL.

Please do me a favour sgtgrey and check this out: 'Open Prediction' - Tomas Blomberg .. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAOLBQ4jweg and please let me know what you think.

Regarding your take on the rate that technology is developing. You could well be right about that. Even so ... the inevitable will arrive, and all that we see around us now shall become redundant. Like they say ..'Out with the old and in with the new' and unfortunately, that includes us!

Lets face it ... millions of dollars/pounds/ are being invested in invisibility technology, cloaking devices etc. That means that one day a magician will be able to appear on stage as if out of thin air! But then again ... so will everyone else! .... How sad.

I suppose I'm sounding like a pessimist ... but to be honest, I don't feel like there's much to rejoice about right now ... I'm saddened to think that one day there will be no magic left in the world, and nothing will be sacred.
WillMagicMan.

I'm not sure PCAAN is stronger than ACAAN. both of them have a build up but the latter has a "double punch" feeling. I spent a good amount of money until I finally understood the key to what I wanted, and I'll share with you:

If you don't set your criteria you will never find your "grail".

That's it. There's something quite calming about knowing you've finally got what you want... for many reasons, but the main ones are:

1- You don't have to search anymore.
2- You can focus on it to get better and better at it.

I also have an open prediction as a "grail", but honestly, the ACAAN has a special place in my repertoire. Here's what I do and with my set of criteria:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5hEh2rkDso

Though this one has fooled magicians, I use another one specifically for that purpose. Both personal variations. Those are the only ones I'll ever need.
Whenever I have the time I'll upload my preferred OP.
Personally I don't like technology/gadgets. There are few exceptions that are worth it imo. Even with technology growing fast, being able to do things without the need of technology is an advantage to not be underestimated.

Cheers

Max Hazy

+Max Hazy

Good points there Max. And that's good advice regarding setting one's criteria. I watched the video of your ACAAN performance .. I'd actually seen it before .. just a few days ago as it happens. It looked like the perfect performance to me .. in fact it kind of looked too good to be true. Sadly it's so easy to fake something like that, not that that's what you did, but such a perfect performance can give cause for disbelief. I'm not saying that you faked it, but I have doubts about your claim to being able to pull it off 100 percent of the time. If that is true then surely by now you would have been inundated with calls from magicians from all over the world offering ridiculous sums of money to know your secret because you didn't touch the deck! Anyhow, I hope I'm wrong and you really can do it.

I'm looking forward to seeing your upload of your favourite Open Prediction effect ... as I've stated on this topic, Open Predictions and PCAAN's are my cup of tea, and I prefer them to the old boring ACAAN's. Did you check out the video link I posted above earlier on .. Open Prediction by Thomas Blomberg? It's the best OP I've ever seen.... in fact I'm beginning to have my doubts regarding its authenticity ... like your ACAAN ... I can't observe any moves whatsever ... and cards don't move around by themselves ........ so what is going on here? Am I being fooled legitimately, or am I being taken for a fool along with many others. ah well ... I don't suppose I'll ever find out either way.

Thanks for joining in with us here .............. WillMagicMan.

I just wanted to add a little analogy regarding the future redundancy of magicians. Consider this: In the 80's and through the nineties, and even into the early 2000's, computer techs were looked upon as wizards. I myself was involved in a small computer repair business, so I know what I'm talking about here. There weren't that many of us around, and so we had the run of the mill so to speak. But where are we now? ... redundant ... that's what we are now ... services no longer required. We saw it coming and were powerless to do anything about it. We can't halt progress ...it stops for nobody. Computers don't break down much these days, maybe only when they get really old and past there best before date, but in general they just get replaced by a new machine, and the old ones end up in the landfill. Hence the computer repair guy isn't required any longer.

Another example is the humble car mechanic .... Because cars and their engines [Which are more increasingly becoming hybrid power chains] have evolved so much ... we don't really have mechanics these days ... we have parts replacement guys ... they just plug in a laptop, run some diagnostic software and the faulty part shows up, gets removed and is replaced with a new part ... that's it . .. what happened to the guy in the dirty oily overalls who used to be able diagnose faults just by listening to the engine? ... well he no longer exists! He's been replaced by that laptop I mentioned, and where there used to be a guy who had served a five year apprenticeship since leaving school there is now a young kid who has had maybe a 6 months course under his belt and that's it.

So I do believe that magic is under threat. The moral here is .. 'Make the most of what we have today, because tomorrow will soon be here, and what we have now will be gone forever'.
WillMagicMan.

Will, if you want to know how to perform Thomas's Open Prediction, I suggest you buy his book (still available) Blomberg Laboratories by Andi Gladwin. Excellent book, well worth the money.

I watched the effect online, and yes it's genuine, but bear in mind it requires two sleights.

It's very well executed by Madison Hagler, but I prefer effects (OP or ACAAN) where there's no or minimal handling of the deck by the performer.

Yes, I am well aware of Thomas' OP as I own the book, and agree with Claudio. As for your comparison - unfortunately you are equating effect with premise, as your last comparison was between two PREMISES, one for OP and one for ACAAN. I have also seen ACAAN with the premise of two people showing their connection to one another, one on incredible coincidence, one on mind control and forced will (similar premise to the one often used for OP), etc. Similarly, OP can be a presentation of forced will ("you WILL stop at this card, because you can't choose"), precognition ("I saw the future and knew you'd stop at this card"), suggestion ("I will use my powers of subtle persuasion to cause you to stop on this card without you noticing"), etc. It really is the premise and presentation that make the trick connect with the audience. Otherwise, both tricks are simply some person dealing through a deck of cards to a number (defined or not) and coming to a particular card (defined or not) that has in some way appeared to be pre-determined. So again, I can see both being impactful for an audience, depending on how they are presented. Personally, I use ACAAN effects more, but that's b/c I have particular set of criteria stemming from my character that make it a better fit.

If you want to get REALLY crazy, you could mix the two - make ACAAN an OP - e.g. you could frame it where the spectator naming the card is actually sizing up the other spectator and pulling one out of a deck as a prediction of where the other guy will stop. I won't give any further details, but there are ways to make this work both in method and in theatrics.

Lastly, on tech - my point has nothing to do with the pace of technology (although I think in many cases, such as your suggested nano tech and invisibility cloaks are further off than you'd think) - in fact, many people today already think such technology is possible - they expect it! So why is magic relevant even today? It's because the "secret" and the "trick" are not what makes magic tick - it's the subversion of peoples' expectations. As long as we can do that, we will continue to flourish as an art form - my simple example was just that even if such technology were widely known and available, by canceling out their use as a method you could still perform the same miracles as today. In any case, I know I'm not alone in thinking this - I've read great articles from Penn and Blaine regarding the relevancy of magic in a technological age. Unfortunately, I can't find the former, but here's the latter: https://www.economist.com/news/21631803-......ts-david

Anyway, I think I've more than said my opinion, so I'll leave it at that from here on out.

Claudio wrote:

[Will, if you want to know how to perform Thomas's Open Prediction, I suggest you buy his book (still available) Blomberg Laboratories by Andi Gladwin. Excellent book, well worth the money.]

Hi Claudio,
Thanks for the advice, which I have taken on board, and indeed I shall be purchasing the book as soon as the opportunity presents itself. Here's the thing though ... even if I already had the book, I would still be trying to figure it out for myself until I had exhausted all possibilities [that I can think of] ... and then, and only then would I succumb to defeat and look up the secret. That's the sort of person I am, I enjoy challenging myself, it keeps the old grey matter busy and exercised!

I also lean toward effects where there is as little handling as possible required. thanks for participating in this topic.

WillMagicMan.

Sgtgrey wrote:

[If you want to get REALLY crazy, you could mix the two - make ACAAN an OP - e.g. you could frame it where the spectator naming the card is actually sizing up the other spectator and pulling one out of a deck as a prediction of where the other guy will stop. I won't give any further details, but there are ways to make this work both in method and in theatrics.]



Thanks for your input. You certainly know your stuff, and I appreciate your opinion regarding this topic. The above quote from your previous post seems to be similar to Peter Nardi's two deck version of the 'Grail Gold Edition' I really like that.


About tech: I believe that The tech that is available to us is at least ten years behind what actually exists. They [whoever they are] have to keep marketing the old stuff because they have so much invested in it, and they need financial returns. Just follow the money.

Kind regards ... WillMagicMan.

As for me, I much prefer an Open Prediction plot to either ACAAN or PCAAN. Why? Because there is no number named, no counting involved. The spec just stops dealing whenever they want. That, to the audience, seems less controlled and more open to a truly random choice on behalf of the spectator.

If they never name a number then no one, including the person dealing, knows when they are going to stop until they actually stop. When you get someone to "name a number" at that instant everyone knows exactly how far down the deal will go. It's the randomness of not knowing where the deal will stop that makes it more amazing, so it's an easier sell to the audience.

Of course, I do have multiple methods and presentations for the ACAAN plot, which I do enjoy, it's just that my preference is the OP.

+Steven Keyl

Bravo Steven. You are so right! The suspense in the OP that you describe is exactly why I think OP's are better than ACAAN's. I always try to imagine what is going on through the spectators mind as he/she deals the cards down face up. It's a wonderful effect, and what you describe is in my opinion the main reason why an OP beats an ACAAN hands down every time! I'm so glad that you have pointed that out to everyone. Well said Sir.

Kindest regards, WillMagicMan.

I think that it's the motivation for counting, in ACAAN, that's the key to its success. It must have a purpose and be suspenseful.

Here's Asi Wind's version:



I have seen (I can't remember where right now, but I'll look into it) a version of ACAAN where the number is not known to the performer. I admit it could add an extra level of mystery.

Willmagicman,

I saw the video you posted of the OP performed by Madison. It's absolutely perfectly performed and I don't think I would do it with such perfection as he does (it's not my style of doing things). I figured it out in a single watch and watched a second time to be sure. I can guarantee you that it is authentic.

Regarding the ACAAN I did, there are people who don't like it's method. There were people getting in contact to buy it from me but I don't sell because it's not "mine", it's just my version of things that are already in the market... the problem is that people are lazy to enhance it and make it their own. I'm also happy to tell you that it does indeed meets all of those criteria and even more (the other advantages I don't mention because it tips what methods could be used). It works 100% of the time. I'll pm you another performance of mine which looks exactly the same but different number and card were chosen.

Cheers

Max Hazy

Hi Max.
Yes Madison is super good at what he does. I wish I had your knowledge about card sleights and moves. It's awesome that you can watch Madisons video just one time and immediately figure it out! Excellent indeed. You are gifted and clever sir.

Regarding you ACAAN performance: I'm sorry that I doubted you ... please accept my apologies. I'm so glad that it was genuine ... I now have even more food for thought. Thanks. I'm excited about you PMing me another performance with a different number and card chosen. I look forward to receiving that.

I came across one system for an ACAAN that used five decks! To me, that would be like using a sledge hammer to swat a fly! .... But hey . each to his own.
With warmth and kindness as always ........... WillMagician.

Claudio wrote:



Hi Claudio,

Thanks for the post and video link. I had already seen that performance and about two others by Asi Wind. But still thanks, as it could have been that I hadn't seen it. I think that Asi's version is one of the best out there, and I love the method too. He's a clever chap.

I'd love to see that performance you mentioned where the performer doesn't know the number. It's a funny thing that mentioned that, as a few weeks ago I was trying to come up with a version of ACAAN in which when the spectator is counting the cards down, say they picked number 26, as they are counting down, when they get say to about 10 or 15 or whatever, the performer stops them and asks them if they would like to change their number for a larger one if they wish! And if it was a face down count then they could be given the option of deacreasing their number as well .... plus, at the end all the cards can be turned face up for all to see that they are different.

Well mannered as always ... respectfully . WillMagicMan.

For ones where the number is not known by the performer - check out Max Krause's MACAAN, or the similar RACAAN from Greg Rostami - both use an "app" where the card and number are entered in to find the "odds" of that card and number being named in combination, and a secret peek by the performer. For truly not knowing, there are plenty semi-automatic versions out there that do this - e.g. Bannon's Collusion "CAAN"-Like effect, Penelope CAAN from Taylor Hudson's Improbabilities, some versions from Patrick Redford in Applesauce, I think there was one called Tango by John Carey as well, and who could forget Atlas' Crusade ACAAN (and the quite similar and possibly even better Cross Purposes by John Bannon again). Even CAANDY by Chris Mayhew is along those lines...I'm sure with some more thought I could name numerous others, but that gives a few to look at.

Btw - as far as OP's go - I heavily researched that at one time, reading just about every source I could get my hands on. My favorites as per my notes at the time were Boris Wild's Perfect Open Prediction when doing it as a showpiece (honorable mention to Johnny's Dilemma by Hector Chadwick from Thomas Baxter's Open Prediction Project), although another great effect that isn't quite OP, but has a similar feel for the comedy magician would be Perfect Opener from Doc Eason (I know, I'm blurring the lines here, but the effect in my mind has many similarities to an OP). For walk around, while it doesn't conform to OP rules per se, I feel Andy Nyman's Insane is about as deviously simple you can get with this type of effect. I also used to play around with an idea from Danny Garcia that was impromptu, but I personally never did get great reactions from it, just wasn't for me I guess. I also quite like for the impromptu versions of OP Thomas Baxter's Brrr and Aaron Enyeart's Path of A Sherpa from the OPP book. David Britland's Cardopolis also had some interesting info on that if you haven't read it already.

+sgtgrey

Incredible amount of research there sir! Your post is almost like a 'Who's who'? of the ACAAN and OP world, fantastic, and thanks for all that info.

I absolutely loved Boris's POP the first time I saw it, and still do, it's part of my arsenal of tricks. However in one version [not the impromptu one] I believe you end up quite dirty, but in my version of the impromptu one, I still end up a little bit dirty, but I just move straight onto a Triumph effect trick and that helps me to get rid of the dirt as it were. The reason I still end up dirty in the impromtu version is because I like to keep the risk down during the performance.

Regarding 'Insane' I love it ...... dirty as hell no matter which way you do it, but fantastic none the less. Also deviously simple like you say. I'm going to busy looking up some of the other effects you mentioned ... thanks again for sharing you research with us.

WillMagicMan.

This looks so clean guys. It' called Opening Time by the highly revered John Carey. I first saw this a couple of months ago and I really like it, It's self working.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEOREa6NZIw

Enjoy ... WillMagicMan.