The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Deckless! » » Deceptive variants of flushtration count? most deceptive all-alike counts? (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

Bob G
View Profile
Inner circle
1424 Posts

Profile of Bob G
Hi people,


I'm looking forward to learning Daryl's Odd Quad, but, even in Daryl's hands, the flustration count doesn't look very convincing to me. I feel like, rather than being convinced that I'm seeing several cards that are the same, I'm being confused several times in some way that I don't quite understand.


I know there are zilliions of alternatives -- Orion, Rumba, various combinations of multiple lifts, but last night I discovered that there are also variations on the flushtration count. Jon Racherbaumer describes one, by Marlo, in two different places -- Kabbala and Counthesaurus. (The descriptions are more or less identical except that the latter has pictures.) Has anyone tried this move or seen it performed? Is it convincing? Is it an improvement on the standard handling? It intrigues me because for some reason it uses the three-way move; it frustrates me because I find the instructions hard to follow.


More generally, what all-alike-type counts do people find the most deceptive? Can you provide sources to clear instruction?


Many thanks,


Bob
peppermeat2000
View Profile
Veteran user
352 Posts

Profile of peppermeat2000
I have doing Odd Quad for a few years now and really enjoy the simple and easy to follow routine...it gets great reactions! That being said, I hear what you are saying regarding the flustration count. For some reason it can look totally convincing in one persons hands and not so much in another's.


My thinking is that, as magicians, we see through moves more so than an average spectator. Magician friends have told me I do a convincing flustration count, but I've done Odd Quad for laymen and would be a liar if every now and then someone blurts out that I've shown the same back during the card count. However, these same spectators still scratch their heads when the reveal is made at the end of the routine.

Currently I mix up my counts with a flustration and Rumba throughout the routine. I perform it rather fast paced yet give the spectators enough time to see the backs of the cards during the counts. It also helps to have really diverse back designs when you do the kicker. I used to use four different colored bicycle backs. Currently I use cards from four different brands each with colorful and unique designs. I think once the spectators see the cards displayed at the end, they tend to forget about how the cards were counted.
CardGuyMike
View Profile
Regular user
108 Posts

Profile of CardGuyMike
I think in general the Flushtration count should be avoided as a primary convincer that all cards have the same back or front. A well constructed routine gives other convincers, either explicit or implicit, that the cards are the same. The Flushtration count is generally best used almost on the offbeat as a secondary convincer that the cards are what the spectator already believes them to be. However I think for most laymen, the Flushtration count can be more deceptive than you think. Your presentation and body language should be relaxed. You should project that of course the cards are the same, and you should not project any whiff of over-proving or sneakiness. I have seen some magicians rush through the Flustration count so quickly that you barely get to see the cards you are being shown. This can raise alarms if it doesn't fit the presentation.

I think this goes for several other counts such as the Rumba Count, Olram subtlely, and Rhythm Count as well.
Bob G
View Profile
Inner circle
1424 Posts

Profile of Bob G
Thanks for all these interesting thoughts, guys. I agree, Peppermeat, that how convincing a sleight is depends on who's doing it - a sober thought for someone like me who's still in the Beginner range. (It's also cheering to hear that you've had good experiences performing Odd Quad.) I know I need to work on being casual, and I hope that a big part of that will be simply learning the sleights so well that I can let my hands go to work while I talk.


Daryl, in his Encyclopedia of Card Magic, does what I think he calls the diminishing lift display -- essentially a combination of DL's and TL's, along with an ingenious switch at the end. It's the most convincing "all-alike" display I've seen. Then again, I saw it done by *Daryl*, so who knows how it would look in *my* hands...?

Bob
peppermeat2000
View Profile
Veteran user
352 Posts

Profile of peppermeat2000
I sometimes feel vulnerable when showing backs of cards one at a time to prove the backs are the same...wouldn't a more natural way be to fan them ALL face down at the same time??? I think laymen give us a lot of leeway when we use sleights like diminishing lift displays or flustration counts.
Bob G
View Profile
Inner circle
1424 Posts

Profile of Bob G
CardGuyMike,



I just reread your interesting post about body language, etc. One sentence caught my eye, and I wondered if you could give me some examples: "A well constructed routine gives other convincers, either explicit or implicit, that the cards are the same."


I don't know how easy it is to give tips in the abstract, so, if you thought it would help, you could describe convincers you might use for Daryl's Odd Quad, one of the tricks I'm working on.


Thanks,


Bob
CardGuyMike
View Profile
Regular user
108 Posts

Profile of CardGuyMike
Bob,

There are many routines out there that use the flushtration count as a primary convincer, and I'm certainly not going to pretend that I know better than Daryl. I just wouldn't use too many of them together in a show. Off the top of my head, Paul Gordon's Corner of Piccadilly is an example of a trick that, towards the end, uses the flushtration count to show that all of the faces of the cards are the same, but it's done casually at at time when the spectators already believe them to be the same. What really gives me pause is using it at the start of a trick, particularly if it is not followed up with other convincers.

With Odd Quad, there are other subtle convincers. The packet initially shows a red back (and lay people aren't used to a packet of cards with different colored backs). Also when he gathers up the unselected cards, once again that packet shows a red back. He also does the flushtration count in a bit of a non traditional way that makes it more deceptive.

If you like Odd Quad, check out John Bannon's B'rainiac. It's a somewhat similar effect that is more deceptive and packs a bigger punch in my opinion.
Bob G
View Profile
Inner circle
1424 Posts

Profile of Bob G
Thanks, Mike! Much appreciated.


Bob
dpe666
View Profile
Inner circle
2888 Posts

Profile of dpe666
In my personal opinion, Tommy Wonder has the best and most convincing handling of the Flushtration Count.
Bob G
View Profile
Inner circle
1424 Posts

Profile of Bob G
Thanks, dpe666,


I looked around and found that someone on the magician's forum attributed Wonder's FC to Eddie Teytlebaum (sp?). Wonder apparently uses it in his Wild Card routine. Do you know where I can find a description of the move?


Bob
dpe666
View Profile
Inner circle
2888 Posts

Profile of dpe666
It is on one of the "Visions of Wonder" videos by L&L Publishing. An excellent set.
Bob G
View Profile
Inner circle
1424 Posts

Profile of Bob G
Thanks.
dpe666
View Profile
Inner circle
2888 Posts

Profile of dpe666
Anytime.
Bob G
View Profile
Inner circle
1424 Posts

Profile of Bob G
I looked at the explanation of Tatelbaum's variation on the flustration count on Tommy Wonder's DVD. It goes by so fast that I couldn't follow it. But -- in case this might help others -- I found what I'm pretty sure is the same move in Apocalypse Vol 6 -- called the "Flustered Count" (cute, no?).


I'd had the Wonder disks for a while but hadn't watched them. I'm really enjoying them. Wonder was a charming man, wasn't he. And I enjoy the interaction between him and Maven.
Mr Salk
View Profile
Elite user
Tied to
493 Posts

Profile of Mr Salk
Quote:
On Sep 26, 2019, peppermeat2000 wrote:
I sometimes feel vulnerable when showing backs of cards one at a time to prove the backs are the same...wouldn't a more natural way be to fan them ALL face down at the same time??? I think laymen give us a lot of leeway when we use sleights like diminishing lift displays or flustration counts.


You ARE vulnerable if you are showing the backs to PROVE sameness...you are not vulnerable if simply flashing the backs while absently counting or showing cards.
.


.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Deckless! » » Deceptive variants of flushtration count? most deceptive all-alike counts? (0 Likes)
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2019 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.25 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