|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 [Next] | ||||||||||
mroek Regular user 180 Posts |
One quick question: Is there any language specific stuff in this routine/effect, or can it easily be used in any language?
|
|||||||||
ed wood Special user 742 Posts |
Quote:
On Aug 2, 2018, PatrickGregoire wrote: Which number book is that in? |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Quote:
On Aug 2, 2018, mroek wrote: Any language is 100% fine. There is no dependency on verbal methods here at all. |
|||||||||
PatrickGregoire Inner circle 2239 Posts |
Quote:
On Aug 2, 2018, ed wood wrote: Volume 2 |
|||||||||
Nicolino Inner circle 2893 Posts |
Quote:
On Aug 2, 2018, Sudo Nimh wrote: I was expecting you to be. All good.
The Mati Envelope
A brandnew peek device for the working mentalist! Chance's Token Tarot cards in a scenic piece of mystery..... |
|||||||||
Nicolino Inner circle 2893 Posts |
Quote:
On Aug 2, 2018, PatrickGregoire wrote: Thanks for the hint, I just read it and had to smile.
The Mati Envelope
A brandnew peek device for the working mentalist! Chance's Token Tarot cards in a scenic piece of mystery..... |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Quote:
On Aug 2, 2018, PatrickGregoire wrote: With all due respect, I entirely fail to see at all how the Horowitz routine can even be compared to A Name and a Place or Geocache. You are using envelopes and a bunch of cards with designs written on them. You reveal the random design chosen at random (which have no significance or meaning at all to an audience member) and one completely random thought. The envelope MUST also be completely destroyed - fire is suggested. From a presentational perspective, where is the motivation for any of this and how are they even connected and why? And how would you go about dealing with that envelope that must be destroyed when fire is not acceptable almost anywhere these days? There are not even two thoughts being revealed here. Instead, it is the revelation of a randomly selected design from a pile of random designs (and the participant that chose it doesn't even get to see which design they chose!) and ONE thought about anything. If you want to reveal a meaningless random symbol that someone apparently chose and a random word without any motivation...then I guess this is great. But if this really were the "ultimate method" for A Name and a Place, Bob himself would have likely been using this. As it stands, I fail to see how they are even remotely related except for the fact that the *#!-ah#@d principle is being used. Unless of course, you are suggesting that instead of symbols, you have 'locations' or 'names' written on the cards instead. But even then, it really just doesn't add up very well at all. |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Just realized the typo I made in my last post: Should be "Horwitz" - not "Horowitz".
|
|||||||||
ed wood Special user 742 Posts |
Quote:
On Aug 2, 2018, Sudo Nimh wrote: Just re-read this effect and have to disagree. From the audience point of view these are very similar. Two items are thought of, one is destroyed. The mind reader knows what they both are. Sure there is no presentational motivation in the description but that's for the performer to create. Whilst the method of gaining one piece of information is completely different to the original name and place, and not as strong, it still uses #n# a###d. |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
But one item is NOT being "thought of" at all...and because this is the case, what exactly is the ability being demonstrated then? It certainly isn't "mind reading"...
|
|||||||||
ed wood Special user 742 Posts |
Sure, so one part is clairvoyance as opposed to telepathy. With a slight tweak both parts could easily be telepathy. That part aside, the audience are still seeing two seperate pieces of information put into envelopes, one envelope is destroyed etc. The similarities are fairly apparent. The differences only obvious to a performer. It's a nice effect, well worth a look as is a lot of basil horwitz work.
Anyhow, none of this is important as we're here to discuss your version. |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Quote:
On Aug 2, 2018, ed wood wrote: My thoughts exactly. You must be a mind reader! |
|||||||||
Nathan Alexander Inner circle 2021 Posts |
Does one have to have an understanding of what Geocaching is? Or is it easily explained to the audience? I ask, because as most magicians know, we sometimes have fake explanations and fake names of games/psychological method names/whatever and even though this is a real thing, after googling it I'm still slow in that I don't fully get it. But I'm also an idiot half the time (or so my yearbook inscriptions say). Will the audience that hasn't heard of this come to truly understand the premise easily for people like me?
|
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Hi Nathan.
If there are people who aren't familiar with what Geocaching is, yes, it is easily explained. This is covered in the pdf. Of course, the great feature here is that it isn't a hokey "made up" thing. People can check it out online and see for themselves. In fact, some people have even thanked me later for informing them about it and gotten into Geocaching after discovering what it is. I know a family that is actively doing it together as a fun "family activity" on weekends now because of the routine. It is virtually cost-less to get into (which is rare these days!) and is a heck of a lot of fun. Mind you, the version they saw was using Bob's method (but with this presentation) because I still hadn't hit upon my ideal solution for the method used in this at the time. |
|||||||||
Nathan Alexander Inner circle 2021 Posts |
Thanks Sudo, that's really cool to hear. It sounded really fun to me too, and I could see how it would be fun to do with my own kids. Congratulations, sounds like you got a big winner. Nice!
|
|||||||||
magicinsight Inner circle 4293 Posts |
Still did not receive link for geocaching or Things that Never Remain Forever Hidden. Hope yo get the links soon to start learning the handlings.
Michael
“Belief matters more than truth. Every moment, belief in imaginary things alters lives while truth sits unnoticed and waits.”
—Hakim, Loreweaver |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Hi Michael.
Yes, you did receive it but you obviously don't realize it. I sent it a long time ago. Look in your email - the same one that's connected to your paypal. And thanks for supporting my work! |
|||||||||
PatrickGregoire Inner circle 2239 Posts |
Quote:
On Aug 2, 2018, Sudo Nimh wrote: Here is an example on how to use the Horwitz method with the Geocache presentation: You explain that Geocaching is where someone hides an object in a little box and stashes it away somewhere in the world and it's up to others to try and find it with a GPS. You explain that you will try and find a spectator's mentally Geocached object. You have your helper write down any object they'd like to stash in the Geocache and they seal it inside of an envelope so there's no way you could peek it. You then hand them a stack of cards with random places in the world. They are all different and the helper mixes them face down and chooses one at random, sight unseen. They seal the secret location in another envelope to keep it completely secret. They mix the two envelopes and place them on the table. The spectator has now essentially stashed an object in a secret, random location. Your job is to find the object. In real life you'd use a GPS but in this case, you're going to use your mental abilities to figure out which envelope contains the location of the object. You wave your hands over the envelopes and claim that *this one* contains the location. You therefore ask them to stash away the object in the Geocache container and you set it aside. You wave your hand over the supposed location envelope again and then write something down. You open the envelope to see what the secret location is, seeing as nobody knows what it actually is, and it's seen to be, for example, London. You turn around what you wrote and it says "London". You've found their object! However, you now tell them that if you've actually mentally found the location of the Geocache, you should be able to take a peek inside to see what secret object they hid. You look at the helper, concentrate, and write something down. You ask them what object they hid inside of the container. Let's say they say "a cookie". You turn over what you wrote and it says "Cookie". To me, this presentation and handling works so much better logically but to each their own. I recommend buying Sudo's Geocache because it's a good presentational angle. P.S.: If you think about it some more, you'll realize that you could tweak it so that they write an object, seal it inside of an envelope and hand it to you to hold as they then pick a random location card and seal that as well. You would now be able to take the location envelope from them and hand them the object envelope and ask them to seal it inside of the Geocache container and go on to reveal the location in your hands and then the object. This, using the classic crossing-over envelope switch (whatever it's called). This way, you don't even have to say you'll only reveal one of the two pieces of information. You can specifically say "Here, pass me the location and you take the object and stash it in the container. I'm going to try and tell you the secret location you hid the container and then what object you placed inside." No need to mix the envelopes. |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Patrick, I get what you're saying but there's a few MAJOR fundamental differences here that are actually important...
Both Geocache and Name and a Place: "YOU think of one thing...and how about YOU think of one thing..." Then reveal both thoughts. Horwitz Routine: "YOU think of one thing....and YOU...Well, here, just choose a random card from among all these other random cards....BUT DON'T LOOK AT WHAT RANDOM CARD YOU CHOSE!..." And then reveal the thought and RANDOM CHOICE OF SOMETHING THAT THEY DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THEY CHOSE. Is it just me or does nobody else not see how fundamentally different these two things are? There's no way I'm trading a Ferrari for a Ford. My brain is actually hurting because I don't understand why you can't see the difference here. Not trying to be rude or insulting, but this is simply ludicrous. I'm wondering what Bob would say if you suggested the same thing to him were he still alive. |
|||||||||
jaizon Inner circle By time you read this I will have 1552 Posts |
It is clear that the Horwitz routine (while being okay) is not as good as Geocaching, but some will keep beating this to death (in a passive/aggressive way), for what reason I do not know. If you prefer Horwitz, go for it. I prefer Geocaching.
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Latest and Greatest? » » Geocaching by Sudo Nimh (90 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.05 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 < |