Bob,

I did not mean to put you off, especially when I think that your idea of using the Alan Warner trick is excellent. I just meant to call your attention on issues that might come up – as experienced by a few fellow magicians of this board.

As often, simple “fixes” are best.

A robust script which foresees possible issues and how to prevent them is crucial, even for self-workers.

For example, on the second run, tell your spectator to deal slowly and stop dealing before s/he gets to the 1st card. It’s easy to justify whether you have one or two participants. Say that you do not want to undo the previous participant’s choice, or the current participant’s previous choice. That sorted the issue for me.

For the second issue, yet again an interesting script which focusses interest on something different than the procedure itself will resolve this.

Just to let you know, I never got any issue with G.T. since I started using a decent script – and that was decades ago.

I have been busted more often on sleight-of-hand effects than on G.T., for sure

Finally, I checked my (computer) notes and there’s a handling I came up with at the time. I realise now that I tackled both issues by changing the handling (there’s no reason why one should slavishly stick to the two deals). I am not saying my alternative handling is better though.

I could PM it to you if you were interested.

Something funny regarding the 1st issue:

For recalcitrant specs who deal very fast (wrong crowd, maybe), just tell them to say aloud, on each card dealt, something that fits your presentation, for instance “Fate or free choice, that’s the question!” (This is a Simon Lovell idea, but what he asked the participant to say, was something else ) That should slow them down. I’m half kidding, but if you were to use a shorter text (said aloud or silently), it will stop the people from dealing long runs and it might enhance your presentation.

Thanks for all this, Claudio -- very helpful. I definitely like the idea of "not messing up the other spectator's choice" (or, for one participant, "your other choice.") To make sure spectators deal slowly, I might simply say, "slowly deal the cards"! (In another scenario I thought of asking the spectator to listen for the genii in the room, who would signal when to stop. One wouldn't want to deal so fast as to miss the genii's signal!) Thanks for mentioning that you liked the Alan Warner idea. I appreciate your close reading.



I'm definitely interested in studying your alternative handling -- you're generous as always.


You aren't the first person to tell me (in effect) that I need to perform and get busted. Fear of getting busted is a major factor that keeps me from performing much. (The other factor is time, as it is for most of us.) Still, I clearly need to perform more often in order to experiment with the possibilities of script, and to see what works for me, and, of course, for my audiences.


Bob

The basic premise of Gemini Twins is a card matching one. You can present it as something YOU can do or as something THEY can do.

Go to a used book store and check the esoteric section for a book with a title like How To Develop ESP. Carry that book, a notebook, a deck of cards, and a pen. Have one or two other self working ESP tricks ready. An impromptu OOTW would be a good one.

The book does two things. It is a prop to justify procedure and it allows you to claim this is an experiment, rather than a trick.

If you get someone who deals it wrong and messes it up, he just doesn’t have the ability. In other words, although all the success goes to the participant, all the failure does, too.

Patrick

Interesting idea, Patrick. Let me mull it over. So if I understand your idea correctly, the idea would be to present a short series of tricks, all of which tested the spectator's "intuition" in the occult sense of the term. If one trick in the series went wrong, it wouldn't matter, it would be just part of the test -- thus taking away my fear of messing up a trick. Is that what you had in mind?


In the scenario I just described, no one fails, not even the spectator. We're simply mapping out the geography of their psychic powers.



Bob

Here's a related question, folks. I'm wondering how people efficiently spread through the entire face-up deck to find the mates of both the top and bottom cards. I guess you could spread through the whole deck quickly so as to note both the top and bottom, and then spread through a second time to find the mates; is that too much time spent looking at the deck? Would it look suspicious?



Another thought I had was to fan the cards in a pressure fan or something, so that the whole deck was exposed (to the magician) at once; it would then (I hope) be fast, and involve little physical manipulation, to spot the mates. I don't know how to make a fan (not even of any kind, as Oscar Wilde would say), but it's on my list of things to learn.


Thanks,


Bob

Hey Bob,

I'm unable to answer your questions. But I will take the time to highly praise your taste in theater. However, Algernon, rather than Jack has always been my mentor and not just in magic, but in life...

Thomas Henry

Bob, what books are you studying? These questions are answered in most books that teach a “Gemini” effect. Spotting top and bottom is instant on the first spread. Standard technique which Id be willing to share with you.

To Thomas: Ha ha, thanks for making me laugh. Given that you're well-informed, you're probably familiar with another Oscar Wilde quote: "Be yourself: everyone else is already taken." I don't know where it comes from, but I found it in Greg Chapman's book on card magic, Details of Deception. Oscar Wilde is great, isn't he? .



To Magicfish: The only book I've been using (and the only one I know about for this trick )is one of Karl Fulves's books on self-working card magic He doesn't address the questions I've been asking.



. I gather from what you said that there's a whole family of Gemini tricks -- something I didn't realize. I'd certainly be interested in the techniques you mentioned (and, to the extent that you have time, any references you recommend for Gemini-type tricks). Thanks for your generosity.



Bob

Here’s how I extract the pairs for the reveal when I have plenty of table space (I doubt it's original):

I ribbon spread the deck face down, straight or in a half-circle. I then gather the cards on both ends of the pairs by forming two packets. Then, I coalesce the cards between the pairs to form a third packet. Finally, I pick up the three packets to leave only two pairs on the table. It’s got a nice theatrical feel about it.

There are indeed multiple versions, or rather elaborations on the G.T. theme. Here’s a short list of some of them.

Thanks, Claudio, and everyone:



I'm pretty excited about this trick now. Between the handling you just described, another handling that magicfish and I talked about privately, and all the other advice you, Mr. Woolery, and others have given me, I now feel that I can go ahead and learn the trick and use/adapt all these great ideas.



At this point I've got four tricks that I'm working on (one of which I've shown a few times):



1. Fatima at the Wizard's Castle (my story to go with Nick Trost trick);



2. Color Monte with a somewhat altered story (must perform to see how well it goes over; many thanks to DollarBill for help with this);




3. Red or Black -- Which? (also Trost; my thanks to Steven Keyl for teaching me this one); and




4. Gemini Twins (really two tricks because of the preface with Alan Warner's Mini-Mental).



This is a good feeling -- a year ago I was working on card handling and sleights and thought I might never perform any tricks. Currently it's just a matter of finding the time to rehearse the tricks enough and then I'll have a nice little set to perform. Meanwhile I'm continuing to work on sleights, mostly EC and Biddle Steal at this point.


As for the "short list," Claudio -- Wow! For now I'll avoid looking at it a second time, for fear of giving in to my tendency to want to learn *everything*! (At least the list didn't turn me to stone. I looked at a few of Lawrence O's amazing lists and froze solid with desire and paralysis; my wife had to thaw me out with her hair dryer.)


Bob

P. S. Trick#1 is the one I've performed; it's adapted from Trost's "Sub-Trunk Mystery" on one of Colombini's DVD's and on the second posthumous Trost collection.



P. P. S. To Steve Keyl: I discovered that another of Colomibini's DVD's has "Red or Black." This was a big help because I'd misremembered one seemingly minor step and always had one black card in the red pile.