The gypsy thread routine done with dental floss was originally created by Lonnie Chevrie. The husband and wife team that emyers99 refers to is Tom Jones and Rachael Wild. Tom Jones independently came up with the idea of using dental floss in the Gypsy Thread routine. I learned it from Tom Jones at his lecture a few years back. He said that he contacted Chevrie after finding out that that they both had independently come up with the same idea for using dental floss (Lonnie discovered the floss use first, though) and that Lonnie accepted his explanation of independent creation and gave Tom his blessing to continue to use the floss routine and teach it at his lecture.

As to Vraagaard's opinion that Dragon Thread is better, I would have to disagree. I use Gypsy Floss in my restaraunt work.

You can show your hands empty at the beginning, middle and end of the routine. The container that dental floss comes in is a perfect way to carry it. When you use dental floss, people easily identify with it, as it is a common object. Also, the fact that it is dental floss opens up so many patter possibilities. And using floss makes doing the routine very easy (read - wax!).

Doing the routine twice in a row is guilding the lilly. If done correctly the first time, the Gypsy Thread routine is amazing. Repeating it just makes no sense.

This is not to say that the Dragon Thread routine is not very good. I know the basics of how it's done and after watching the demo, it looks to be an excellent routine. I just don't think it's better. In fact, I think I would give a slight nod to Gypsy Floss. IMHO.

The *External String* (IIRC the title correctly) from Maximialian Londono, developped way back in the late 1970s or so, reinvented as the Dragon thread,in the late 1990s or so, is IMHO a very strange handling!

*Plugging* pieces out of an almost rolled up ball and as in the Dragonthread, first rolling a piece of thread into a ball and plugging pieces out therefrom is not only illogical but neither an elegant handling!

Maybe the inventor used to be a chicken plugger ?

The standard, age old handling of the hinduthread is not only logical, but also elegant.

What could be more natural than taking/breaking the thread needed from a spool containing it?
Or for that matter from a box with dental floss?

It has been used in this form by a lot of great performers like Al Baker, Fred Kaps, Marconick, Ali Bongo, Piet Forton, Ricky Jay, Hans Trixer, Pat Conway..the list could go on and one.
The list also includes Lonnie Chevrie, despite of he does use Dental floss (Sorry Lonnie )

All these performers did know exactly what they did, and they displayed a great and elegant piece of magic using the classical handling...

Saying all this, the more ppl are doing the Dragon-thread instead of the classical handling, the more happy I am..
I think this says it all..so, I'll not argue anymore re what I think is best.

Let me tell you ....
Of course the Dragon thread..
Do it, use it.. be happy...

I would love to see a great performance of the hindu/gypsy thread. Meassuring from the different posts it seems like the sentiment is that this version of broken and restored thread is the strongest.

I'll start to look into the different sources.

regards

Jan

I'd like to add to this thread concerning the hindu thread or gypsy thread trick. I have personally seen Werner Seitz perform his routine using thread pulled from a spool. It is a beautiful thing. Elegant, deceptive and logical are three words that come to mind. Werner knows what he is talking about. Listen to him. At the conclusion of his routine his hands are obviously empty. A great touch. If you were looking for a classical presentation of this classic effect and you saw him perform his routine, you wouldn't want to do it any other way.
Lonnie Chevrie

Thanx Lonnie, I really hope, some of the guys listen..after all I advised they should use the Dragon thread handling...

I think the "breaking"/shredding of the thread in Dragon Thread looks completely false. Try to break/shred a piece of embroidery thread and it looks nothing like "fluffing up" an already broken/shredded piece of embroidery thread. Does anyone else think the same?

The documentation that started me performing this effect is contained in "Classic Secrets of Magic" by Bruce Elliott.

Bill

Very interesting!
That particular routine is NOT contained in my copy of "Classic Secrets of Magic" by Bruce Elliott, neither in anybody elses copy

Nevertheless get that boook..it is a *classic*.

Werner,

If I'm mistaken, sorry. I will go home at lunch and check my copy. I would have sworn it was in that book.

Bill

Baker's "Hindu Thread" and Londono's "Eternal String" are great. I use both tricks.

Roy Bensons unique and inovative BOWL routine is there...and a lot of other great routines, but NOT the Hindu-thread..
Actually I checked his other books and I didn't find it in any of them, I only have 4 diff. of them, so he might have published more..

Werner,

Oops, I made a Boo boo. I fear I'm growing too soon old, and too late smart. I got my references mixed up. The Gypsy Thread Routine I meant to refer to is printed in "The Fine Art of Magic". Authored by George G. Kaplan, Published by The Fleming Book Company in York, Pennsylvania, USA in 1948. The routine is found starting on page 305.

Bill

No problem...
Well, my main consideration was, If soembody gets a recommendation re a certain routine is in a certain book and rushes out to buy it and that routine isn't there..
in case of any recommedation re anything published from Bruce Elliot, one should rush out and get it, weather the mentioned routine is there or not, so no harm done.

It's good though, that recommendations re certain routins being in certain books are correct..that was my main concern..

My next was, if the 'ol memory didn't work here either anymore, because the second I did read that particualr routine was described there I said *no* to myself.

Nevertheless I rushed off to check it..one never knows, it is so many years back I did read through that Elliot book..
Not enough hours a day, because one should reread it, like one should reread so many others of these classical books...

Inspired by this thread I re-studied the handlings of both the Dragon Thread and The Gypsy Thread (3 variants Outlett, Burger etc.) Now there is probably a tendency to over analyze things but it seems to mee that there is pros and cons of both routines

Dragon thread:
Handling flaw: Why show a piece of string, and then roll it into a ball and from this position starting to tearing it into pieces. That seems to an unnatural way of breaking any thread.
Advantage: You can at several times during the routine show your hands completely empty, which is a major advantage.

Gypsy Thread:
The handling seems more natural since you show the thread and break it piece by piece one at a time into several pieces. Then you roll every piece but one into a ball. However, whats the rationale for leaving one piece of string in one hand and rolling all the other pieces together in the other hand. If it was real magic you would roll all the pieces into a ball, so also here there is one unlogical flaw. This is tried to be covered by attaching the ball to the piece of string, but still it's equally unlogical when you think about it.
Disadvantage: It's considerably more difficult to show your hands COMPLETELY empty through-out this routine .

So I prefer the Gypsy Thread because of the more natural handling of breaking the thread, but I prefer Dragon Thread from the point of being able to show your hands empty in several phases of the routine.

Now we can analyse the naturalnéss of the handlings back and forth, but the only real question is: How will a lay audince perceive the handling. I believe showing your hands empty several times is extremely strong from an audience point of view (Dragon Thread) but I love the fact that the Gypsy Thread allows the spectator to help you break the thread (e.g by burning it with a cigarette) which is also considerably strong.

My take is, this is strong close-up magic, and I think both effects can be played extremely strong to any audience. Whether the one is better than the other seems to be an academic discussion. Both handlings has advantages and disadvantages over each other - I guess in the end it all comes down to the performer.

I've been doing the Dragon Thread for a while. In the coming period I will do the Gypsy Thread instead and see which one I'm able to get the best reaction from. I'll let you know how that turns out.

Thanks a lot for your valuable input.

Jan

There is one more to study..have a look at Daryls handling in *Fooler Doolers* Vol. 2.
He does exactly what you aim for..he rolls all the threads into a single ball and place it on a specs hand..and he shows both his hands unmistakenly empty..
So, it all out there, with all the variations one can ask for..

Hi Werner, Thanks. I just ordered Lonnie Chevris's handling as well, but I'll definately get Daryl's handling also. It seems that Daryl's handling then erases the small flaw, meaning that the Gypsy Thread will be my preferred choice.

Brilliant, I just love studying magic.

What is the real advantage of showing your hands empty while doing the gyspy thread (or gypsy floss in my case) versus showing them "completely empty" when doing the dragon thread? It seems to me that the hands are shown empty in the spectators mind and that the "completely empty" point is somewhat over proving it.

Incidentally, rolling all the pieces into one ball would make it much harder to seperate the string and find the ends so that it may be unraveled and show restored. The more elegant solution is to leave ends so that you may so the restoration in one smooth flowing finish. I did gypsy floss for a couple of particularly sharp and annoying teenage girls yesterday and it was one of the few tricks that they were totally impressed with.

Your mileage may vary.

On which of Lonnie Chevrie's DVD's or books is this routine on?

Brian Cooper

I have a question for those of you who may be more knowledgeable in the various handlings than I am.

It seems to me that every handling that I've come across requires the broken/cut pieces to be rolled up in a ball. Is there another handling where after the magician has broken/cut the thread, instead of rolling them up into a ball the magician just flicks his wrists and the individual broken/cut pieces become one again? The reason I ask is that I've been doing my version and after I break the thead apart, I restore it without the rolling into a ball. The individual pieces are seen to be broken until the last second and then, they're back together. I'd like to know if it's an original handling or if others have done this.

To all, In case you are interested I just posted my ditch of the dirty ball in the secret sessions under Werners original thread:

Just having received the Lonnie Chevrie DVD yesterday I studied his difference in handling compared to Eugene Burger, Gary Ouellet, McComb, Alain Choquette, Kirby Van Burch etc. (still waiting to receive Daryl’s routine). Lonnie Chevrie uses the dental floss thread with wax and it clearly gives an edge. Let me explain: One minor flaw has always in my opinion been attaching the ball to the middle of the last thread. The logic questions to ask is 1) Why not crumble all strings to a ball, why holding one string back? 2) When you hold one string back and crumble the other strings to a ball, then what is the reason for attaching the ball to the middle of the last thread and how can it possibly hang there (by magic of course).

Lonnie Chevrie does attach the ball to the last thread like everybody else, but using waxed dental floss compared to regular thread he actually provides a possible reason for why the ball can hang onto the thread – not by magic, but by wax (and this is good because we do not in this routine suggest magic before the final revelation - everything untill the revelation should IMO be logic and unsuspicious handling of the thread). And that actually resolves one part of the flaw – how the ball can hang there – and it also implicitly covers the reason why we hold one thread back and crumble all the others into a ball – simply because we need two ends to hold on to for the final display. So I’m clearly in favour of using dental floss thread waxed for this routine.

Another great part of Chevries handling is that he attaches the loose ball to the thread by transferring the ball to the middle of the thread in his right hand, and then he takes the ball into his left hand (including the prepared ball) to show it to the spectators on his left side (This is exactly similar to Michael Wongs way of transferring the balls in the Dragon Thread, and is a great way of transferring the balls and automatically hiding the dirty ball). Only at this moment does Lonnie Chevrie pick up the end of the thread displaying the ball sticking to the middle. To me that seem to be the absolute best handling of transferring the dirty ball and displaying the ball on the middle of the thread. This is far better than the Ouellet method used by most magicians.

Also Chevries preparing of the ball and the fact that he uses waxed dental floss gives a 100% sure-fire method to avoid that the prepared ball gets entangled into itself before the final revelation.

This is a brilliant effect, and Lonnie Chevries handling is by far the best I’ve seen so far. Highly recommendable. Werner thanks for pointing me to Lonnie Chevries handling - I see your point.