I am a hobbyist who as yet does not perform. However, card sleights fascinate me so that I approach the subject as a pupil, meaning I will search sleights on DVDs, internet or in books. Usually each sleight is accompanied by a trick that illustrates its use. My question is how to find or develop additional tricks that allow me to expand my use of new sleights.

My two approaches I've come up with are:
1) Find tricks I like and try to substitute or add a new shuffle or cut, or whatever.
2) Look at material known to not be sleight-intense (e.g., Harry Lorayne) and try to invent ways to add a new sleight or two.

If you have additional comments or suggestions it would be greatly appreciated.

Hey there TeddyBoy,

Your question is a good one and I hope you don't mind if I offer a bit of advice too?

Sleights are fascinating for a myriad of reasons and I love learning new sleights and new approaches to sleights I already know. As far as incorporating sleights into an existing routine, one of the most important lessons to learn is Vernon's maxim of analyzing a routine and, like Occam's Razor, actually simplifying the routine. Vernon makes a useful distinction between "easy" and simple." Darwin Ortiz also writes about this as have many of the greats. Sometimes the simplest method is not easy at all. Adding a sleight for its own sake or just to add it because you like it may detract from the effect. Even though you don't perform, I think it's still very important to understand how method and effect are inextricably tied together. Perhaps let's explore a few ideas?

1. Does the sleight help to make the effect stronger?

2. Does the sleight appear motivated? (This really extends to any overt or covert action).

3. Is the particular sleight the best sleight for the effect?

Sleight of hand is a means, not an end. It's very easy to get caught in the thinking that sleight of hand is the be-all and end-all in magic. Some of magic's most powerful routines are knucklebusters and some have no sleight of hand at all. Most importantly, the audience should not be able to tell the difference between sleight utilization and none at all. Larry Jennings' great routine "Impossible" is a sleightless routine and it is very strong. Larry Jennings - and all of the masters - hone their effects with Vernon's maxim in mind. If you study Impossible. you will see that adding a sleight would most likely detract from the effect.

Marlo's classic Estimation Aces uses one sleight and one non-sleight technique. There more sleight-intensive ways to accomplish the same effect but, are those approaches stronger? By adding one sleight you could perhaps make if feel stronger for you, but, for audiences, what they remember is the impact the routine had on them. I sometimes add a sleight to the Marlo routine that allows a spectator to freely shuffle the deck and then I can dead cut to the Aces. After experimenting and years of performing this routine, I've found that when people talk about what they saw me do, it's the same whether I shuffle or they do, namely, that I dead cut to the Aces! So, I decided to dispense with having the muggles shuffle. I thought I was strengthening the effect when in reality, I was adding nothing at all to the effect.

Now, having written all of this, I am not saying that sleights should never be added because the routine is "perfect." Magic evolves and while there is only a limited number of effects, there are countless methods. Best to read Roberto Giobbi's thoughts on this.

One of the great eye openers for me was studying the magic of Stewart James. James remarked that he would use more sleight of hand if he found more sleights that he felt were useful. James did not specialize in intricate, finger-destroying sleight of hand, but, some of his routines are among the most powerful and most performed pieces in all of magic.Ted Annemann wrote that for him, effect was everything and method be ***ed. While there is room for debate in this, Annemann, a master for certain, understood that method must enhance the effect.

As for Harry Lorayne, don't underestimate his sleight of hand skills - may his memory be eternal. Lorayne also worked to simplify. He never performed with his own cards, yet some of his routines required fairly involved setups. He would set up while performing! This takes incredible skill and supreme audience management.

I promise I will answer your question, but please allow me a few more thoughts.

Michael Close has written that he feels that very few magicians actually perform a double lift well. This sleight, which is incorrectly labeled a "beginner's sleight - has undergone a LOT of study through the years. If the sleight was so easy, why would so many of the masters devote considerable amounts of time to refining it? Trust me, Michael Close would judge my double lift BARELY passable and that would be if I bribed him to say so. Marlo, Vernon, Jennings - titans of the art - wrote tons of material exploring this seemingly simple sleight. Learning a sleight and mastering it are two very different things.

Okay, enough rabbiting on my part! The answer to your question is:

Read and learn as much as you can. Card College and The Royal Road to Card Magic to name a couple, take the approach that is most similar to your question in that each teaches a sleight then provides applications/routines for each sleight taught. Just curious if you are familiar with the Mahatma control. A lot of people new to magic would dismiss this control because it just seems too obvious and too "easy." I am glad they do! It IS a very simple control and wow, is it effective! Yep, you'll master it in no time compared to a riffle pass - and there's nothing wrong with riffle passes - but, for the simple act of controlling a selection, sometimes the Mahatma control fits "better."

Let's veer off into coin magic. Bobo is essential study. Modern Coin Magic should be in your library even if you don't perform a lot of coin magic. Coin masters like Roth, Rubenstein, Harbottle, Latta, and more studied Bobo in depth. Sure you could jump straight into more modern sources, but, Bobo is going to give you the foundation and TONS of sleights to learn.

To end, you wrote that you do not perform. Does that mean you never show magic even to friends or family? If you never perform magic, how will you know that your adding a sleight actually enhances effect? Moreover, performing magic places you in an under-fire situation in which your technique and your performance skills need to fire perfectly. That top change you believe you have mastered may well need more work.

Please forgive me if my tone sounds condescending. It is not meant to be. Rather, I am merely trying to address the notion that, again, sleights are only a means. Magic is a performing art, whether you're a pro or you perform for just a few people for fun. If you concentrate only on acquiring new sleights and adding them to routines just for the sake of adding, your magic will suffer.

I hope that your journey in magic is fun most of all! It is a rare and beautiful performing art and most people have never witnessed professional calibre magic in their loves. Even if it's just for friends, you want to strive to create a memorable MAGICAL experience for them!

First off Vlad, welcome back!! Although we don't know each other I remember reading about your departure. I hope things are going well for you.

Second, your response is a brilliantly cohesive discussion about method and effect in card magic...with examples no less! Your knowledge and ability to relate it in a meaningful way is beyond anything I have any chance to acquire. First, I'm and old guy, 74. Further, it is likely my interest is a flicker compared to your burning passion. But now that I am, unfortunately, a widower, I have more time to put toward UNDERSTANDING magic.

It is ironic your reference of LJ's Impossible because I have been studying it. My "sleight change" I made was simply replace a corner crimp with Martin Nash's Infinity Breather Crimp. Not conceptually brilliant of course, but it helped remove my concerns and dislike for corner crimping.

There is a tremendous amount of thinking of which a hobbyist like myself is ignorant. I will start with reviewing Ortiz's Strong Magic and finishing Designing Miracles. Darwin was probably my main source of material and knowledge. To be honest, reading magic books cover to cover takes forever; it's difficult. I mainly focus on tricks I think are interestig to me and try to reproduce them without looking beneath the surface. I will work on modifying my approach to card magic.

Thanks again for your impactful response.

Your passion burns as brightly as mine Teddy. Reading magic books cover to cover isn't always necessary. In fact, in volume 3 of Marlo's Magazine, Dave Solomon talks about how best to read Marlo. We all know that Marlo's prose is dense and sometimes a bit, ummm, verbose. Solomon actually suggests jumping around!

You know, I thought of another interesting example I wanted to share. Let me say out of the rip that I have loads of respect for Paul Gordon. He is a working pro for more years than I've been around this rock of ours. That said, there are times when he attempts to re-engineer a routine to make it more impromptu and it's been my experience that this sometimes just doesn't work out. Case in point is Darwin Ortiz's Psychotronic Card from Cardhark. This is a powerful routine but, because of the structure of the routine, it is essentialy a two-deck routine. Paul created a version for one deck titled Psychotronic Rides Again. It's a good routine, but, there is an impossibility factor in Darwin's original that is missing from Paul's variant.

Now, on the flip-side, there is a routine from Apocalypse by Richard Vollmer called Poor Man's Monte. It's based on a Trevor Lewis move. It's a GREAT routine, but, the cards cannot be examined in Vollmer's routine as it is writen and ignoring Lorayne's "afterthoughts." Paul Gordon paid attention and created the wonderful Corner of Picadilly. A simple and motivated switch in Gordon's routine allows for complete examination if the cards and you can even leave them as a souvenir. This is a case of adding in one little thing that heightens effect. When someone tries to reconstruct the routine with the cards, they will find that it's impossible.

Thank you for asking after me, things are better now! May the memory of your wife be eternal and let's please keep in touch/keep this conversation going!

I cannot remember if I have avoided Psychotronic Card because of the setup or if I just have not got to it yet. But I will try check out these examples you refer to. Your knowledge is mind-blowing. I can count the names of card magicians I know on two hands. Your knowledge is truly awesome.

BTW, I got on to this wave by starting out establishing an arsenal of a few false shuffles and cuts. These would likely be easier to insert into a routine without changing much...or so I think. Learning these new moves was a turn-on.

Cards slights are not in my interest horizon, but anything that Vlad offers is ..

carry on!

Hey Teddy, I am passionate about sleight of hand myself. While I may not be the best when it comes to executing them, I make sure I have a couple that I can do really really well and which are also practical in any trick. For example, I really enjoy the Top Change. As such, whenever I find a new trick that requires a switch, I replace the original taught method with a top change. It's just a little game I play but which has brought me a lot of pleasure in the long run.

Same goes with forces, color changes or false shuffles. I have a few I really enjoy using in my weekly performances, but I also have sleights that I just enjoy practicing. From now and then I slip a technique I have been practicing for a while to see how people react to it. Can be a pop out that uses less finger movement or a shuffle that uses optics more than mechanics.

Either way, my steps are:
- I find a new technique I enjoy
- I practice it until I understand how it works
- I play with it every time I'm in the metro, bus, waiting in line or the such
- I record myself in front of the camera, maybe make a video with it for social media (this might see the light or day or not). Recording helps me better sometimes than practicing in front of a mirror.
- When I can perform it 7/10 times really well, I try it out in an actual performance.

I'm not always super rigid about this whole process, and sometimes end up using a technique very fast in a performance, but having a structure which I can follow when I'm lacking in discipline is really helpful.

My two cents ^^

Scooter, that is impressive, especially using a camera. I have thought of getting a camcorder but first I have to get over my stage fright. I'm phobic about screwing up, however I am working on it. But the camera could be a big help. Plus, pulling it off well 7/10 times seems like a reasonable cut-off. Thanks.

Just to address stage fright and fear of screwing up. The more you put yourself in that environment and risk failure the more you will overcome it. PROVIDED you practice as much as you can and learn/evaluate your performances.

Taking risks when you've done all you can to the best of your ability will serve you well to enjoy not only yourself but more importantly bring enjoyment to your spectators.

" The only thing we have to fear is, fear itself " quote from Franklin Roosevelt, president of the US during WWII

I think every great performer has experienced nervousness.
Research shows that the more practice you have in a skill the less its performance is affected by the stress response.

Thank you David and Critter. I have overcome some kinds of stage fright in the past, e.g., lecturing medical students on anatomy. I think you are correct that the key is to practice more. But I love learning new sleights and tricks much more than practicing and practicing the stuff I encountered; it is almost a mania. But, I think that may be because if I practice properly, I will feel I have to perform it...then the circle starts over again. But I am trying to focus on practicing.

PS the only audience I felt OK with was my wife who unfortunately passed away eight months ago.

I'm sorry for your loss.

VERY sorry on the passing of your wife. A loss of someone who was such a part of you. She still is a very important part of your heart and memories. I'm glad you are engaged and showing interest
in this wonderful art form than can help you a little and will eventually push you into bringing joy to others.

I once spoke with a stage magician who confessed, "I don't feel fear anymore when I go on stage. I know everything will go right." afterwards expressing that he misses feeling challenged and the emotion that comes with it.

I believe fear can also be a beautiful thing. It can show you that you're doing something that will push you forward, make you a better _____ (fill in the gap).

I taught myself to enjoy fear more than to try and get rid of it. When I go out and perform I still get the stomach butterflies and the head fogginess, but I smile all through it because I know it's a sign that I'm doing something out of my comfort zone. When they fully go away it's a nice feeling as well, but after a while I start adding new elements to my performances so that I feel challenged once more.

p.s. My sincere condolences for your loss.

I'm an extremely socially anxious introvert with a speech disorder. I got into performing arts to conquer my fears. I did not conquer my fears, but I learned that I can do stuff EVEN THOUGH I am afraid and most people will like it.

Someone asked Tom Cruise if he's not afraid of doing the stunts that he does in his movies.

He said, "I am. But I don't let that stop me."

Your reply reminded me of that