Hi folks,


The Background: The trick is "The Sub-Trunk Mystery," in Trost's Subtle Card Creations 2, p. 465. Also, Colombini demonstrates and explains Trost's trick in one of his inexpensive DVD's, now available as a download from Lybrary.


The handling is based on Al Leech's "Ace Sandwich," in Card Man Stuff and also in The Complete Al Leech. Leech's effect also inspired Lorayne's "One-Eyed Jacks," if I remember correctly.


Trost has turned Leech's trick into a story trick, an enactment, with a deck of cards, of the stage illusion, "The Substitution Trunk Mystery," in which the magician locks his assistant into a a trunk and sits on top of it. A curtain is drawn and almost immediately reopened, and now the *assistant* is sitting smugly on the trunk, while the magician is found to be locked in the trunk.


My question: At one point the deck has to be turned face-up, which seems illogical because it now becomes unclear whether the top of the trunk is represented by the top of the deck, or the bottom. Maybe it's a subtle point that will fly by people (so far it has when I've performed it), but for me it takes away a bit of the sparkle of the trick.


So... I wonder if someone who knows any of the tricks I've referenced can think of a way to achieve the same effect without having to turn the deck over. I've put some thought into this, but so far haven't arrived at a solution.


Thanks so much for any help people can offer.


Bob

This effect is identical to Lorayne's One Eyed Jack Sandwich, although it isn't mentioned in the Trost book. Perhaps a case of independent invention- Ill give Trost the benefit of the doubt. I like Trosts presentation and usage of the 8s to represent the cuffs. Adding the Halo Cut makes it better.
I thought the same as you with the top and bottom anomaly- but as you said, laymen don't seem to care

Yes, I wondered about the resemblance between the tricks, too, but I suspect they both got the idea from Al Leech. The tricks are not quite identical, since in Trost's version the spectator doesn't choose a card. Trost credits Al Leech, and I remember that Lorayne mentions that someone showed him a similar trick and he (Lorayne) improved it. I'm guessing the "someone" was Al Leech. Lorayne named the magician, but I don't remember who it was or which book the trick was in.


Given that laymen don't seem to care when you perform either, maybe it's a non-issue. Still, if someone can think of a way to do this without turning over the deck, I'm interested! I'll think some more myself, too.

I haven't questioned the Leech influence.
My question is Trost's failure to mention the previously published Lorayne trick.
And yes, they are virtually Identical. It matters not that the stranger card is selected nor appointed.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, magicfish.


I realize that in magic you're an expert and I'm not very experienced, but my views are shaped by my many years as a mathematician. There's just too much out there to expect every mathematical researcher to be a historian of mathematics -- though of course we try hard give credit where it's due -- particularly when we're basing our work directly on that of another.


From what I can tell, magic is a *much* younger field than math, but magic is still so vast that it's too much to expect creators of magic effects to catalog every instance of a trick that's similar to his/her own. That's my two cents, anyway.

See you,

Bob

Hello Bob,

I use "The Sub-Trunk Mystery" in one of my various three-trick sequences I told you about.
The premise is telling the spectators that the world of circus and magic have often met: the Sub-Trunk ("Il baule a Scambio", in Italian) trick is often performed in circuses (I myself remember seeing it when I was small).

I say that it was invented by Houdini. So I take out the KC, QD and the two black eights and put them face down on the table.
I then proceed with the trick as in the book. After having "buried" a handcuffed Houdini in the "trunk" (the pack), the pack is in dealing postion in my left hand.
I pick up the last card, turn it over and introduce it as Bess, Houdini's wife.
As I talk I move my hands a bit (being Italian this is common and does not arise suspicion), and while LOOKING at the audience I simply place "Bess" at the bottom of the pack and immediately turn over the whole pack.
Only then I call attention to the card saying that she's still standing on the trunk. I explain that usually at this point some kind of cover is needed (time misdirection that helps forget the position of the deck).
I then end the trick, but rather that using the method in Trost's book, I simply perform a bottom slip cut with the pack face up, turn it over and immediately with a flourish (see Card College 2, page 395 for a simple one) reveal Houdini escaped from the trunk. Then I spread the cards and show Bess, handcuffed in the centre of the pack.

In case you're curious I follow this with an Elevator Cards trick (a plot usually attributed to Marlo - you can see Card College 1, page 123, but I don't use the glide to get into position though). I actually introduce the Ace, Two, Three and Four of Spades as four brothers of an acrobat family. The Four, the youngest, performs first, while the Ace (the elder and more expert one) always gets the final applause.

Once the trick is over, I say that the Four, jealous, would want to perform for last....
I, therefore, pick up the cards and perform "The Ambitious Ghost Revisited" (a version of a classic by Jennings - I think) and which I found thirty years ago in a Linking Ring.
The finale sees the black Four actually transformed in an enraged Red Four, after realising that yes, he was the last to perform but at that point he had no number to present.
If you know the trick this makes sense: the Ace, Two, Three are, one at the time, place at the bottom of the small packet, raise to the top and are then placed on the table. You end up with one card in your hand, the Four. But being alone he's got nothing to show and therefore (in my story) he leaves the stage red in the face!

To be able to do this, at the very beginning of the routine I place a red four at the top of the deck. After the first two phases, it is still there and, before the third trick starts, it is switched with the Four of Spades, leaving you "clean" at the end.

Hope this helps and/or inspires you

Mark

"...magic is a *much* younger field than math."

I doubt that.

Hi there, Mark,


A really interesting post. I really like your idea of tying together three tricks by using a circus theme, and I enjoyed hearing that you saw "Il baule a Scambio" in a circus as a boy. I'm guessing that the Marlo routine (third in your set) uses Marlo's plot that is sometimes called "Ambitious Classic" -- a small packet version of the Ambitious Card. I have the World's Greatest Magic disk about that, so you're inspiring me to look at that.


I especially appreciate your detailed description of how you handle Trost's trick. I talk with my hands (not of Italian descent, though ), so the way you turn over the deck might work for me. I've noticed that I don't talk with my hands when I'm practicing/performing magic -- probably because I feel self-conscious. But here Al Schneider's advice strikes me as helpful: practice till you're bored and then practice some more; after a while you're not paying attention and the moves become your own. Your natural gestures and quirks of speech kick in.


Thanks as always for taking the time to write at length and with useful references.


Gosh, I've got plenty to work on...!


See you,


Bob

"I then end the trick, but rather that using the method in Trost's book, I simply perform a bottom slip cut with the pack face up"
- a la Harry Lorayne in One Eyed Jack Sandwich.

"...Marlo's plot that is sometimes called "Ambitious Classic" -- a small packet version of the Ambitious Card."

This is not Marlo's plot.

One thing to remember. Trost passed away in 2008. The book was published by H&R in 2009.

Thank-you Motown. I always appreciate your input. I must assume H&R utilized Trosts notes? Perhaps not. Anyway, I give Trost, and HR the benefit of the doubt. Some think it is the responsibility of our modern day digital archivists to set the record straight.
I say we do the work ourselves. Keep each other honest. Thanks again motown.

Magicfish, I’m in agreement that proper credit should always be given to those who did the work. There’s too many instances where this doesn’t happen and it’s on fortunate.

I'm still interested if anyone knows of other tricks in which a card sandwiched in the middle of the deck transposes with another card that was outside of the sandwich. I tried searching Denis Behr's wonderful archive, using "sandwiched transposition," and came up with 10 or so possibilities; unfortunately I don't own the relevant books and periodicals.


Thanks again,


Bob

See, for example, Kruugg the Bellhop.

You're too deep for me, landmark. Can you elaborate a bit?


By the way, I posed my question about the relative ages of math and magic in a thread called "Origin of Magic" on the Food for Thought forum. I gave a tentative definition of magic, and argued that modern math goes back at least as far as 300 BCE. I highly recommend the thread. I happen to know the guy who started the thread, and I can assure you he's a Deep Thinker.


Bob

Now that's funny!

Hi Bob,

This is my handling of Nick Trost's Sub-Trunk Mystery, without turning over the deck face up.

From the Vaudeville Deck, the following cards are removed:

• two black Eights (as handcuffs),
  
• the King of Diamonds (Houdini as the Escapist), and
  
• the Ace of Diamonds (as his Assistant).
  

The Procedure (no secrets revealed):

1. The Houdini Card (face-up) is sandwiched between the two black eights (face-down), as shown in the figure.
   
2. The three-card packet is squared and placed on top of the face-down deck (the trunk).
   
3. Handle the three-card packet in the similar approach as instructed in Nick Trost's Subtle Card Creations, Vol. 2 or Aldo on Trost Vol. 2.
   
4. Introduce the Assistant Card and place the card on top of the face-down deck (the trunk).
   
5. Handle the Assistant Card in the similar approach as instructed in the materials.
   
6. Spread the deck in the hands until the Assistant appears.
   
7. Tell the spectator to remove the Assistant and the adjacent cards (face-down handcuffs) from the deck (to free the Assistant).
   
8. While the spectator is distracted, secretly palm the Houdini Card and produce it somewhere from the pocket or the magician's wallet.
   

According to Google, the earliest evidence of mathematics is around 3000 B.C. whereas the earliest evidence of the cups snd balls is around 5000 B.C.

Thanks so much, Sam, for taking the time to think of this solution and write it up. This goes very well with mlippo's story, which I like. Part of the charm, for me, at least, of Trost's story is that the magician ends up being locked in the same trunk (deck) that he had locked his assistant in. This is especially important to me because (I now confess) I've changed the story, too! In my version, the deck is the castle of an evil wizard who throws a young girl, Fatima, into a cell in his dungeon. By the end Fatima has escaped and locked the wizard in the same cell -- so that, in true "thriller" fashion, not only does she escape but the evil character meets with his downfall.


Another issue, at the moment, at least, is that I don't feel that I can add palming to the sleights and tricks I'm already working on. Learning to palm will probably be a long project for me.


Perhaps you can think of a different handling? -- you seem to be good at it. Only if you're interested, of course.


I appreciate all the help you're giving me.


Regards,


Bob