|
|
iwillfoolu Special user Upstate NY, USA 746 Posts |
Hi all,
I recently bought Joshua Jay's DVD set. I use a MD and was very interested to hear about his work. I was listening very intently and he mentioned that he had a method to correct his estimation if he is of by "1,2,3 or 4 cards in either direction" I watched the DVD set twice over and the section on MD 4 or 5 times. He never metions the work. Am I missing something? Is this in his book or can somebody please PM or email me the little tidbit I am looking for? I already know about how Mike Close corrects for errors but as always I am looking for different methods. Thanks Joe |
Daegs Inner circle USA 4291 Posts |
Email him
|
magiczim New user Philly 67 Posts |
He is very good at getting back to you fast, with all the help he can. very reliable source of help on his stuff
"We live within the recreation of others" - René Lavand
|
iwillfoolu Special user Upstate NY, USA 746 Posts |
I emailed him as suggested above. His reply was quick and as per his request (he is out of the country) I am posting the reply here.
Joshua Jay wrote the following as a reply to my question. Hi guys, You both wrote on the same day and asked basically the same question, so I hope you don’t mind me copying you both in on the same email. Also, someone informed me that there’s a post on the Magic Café asking the same thing. I’m in Brazil right now and my email access is limited, so can one of you kindly post my response for all to see, as I think it will clear things up. Yes! Lots of people have written to me about this, and I guess I just plain forgot (or it got edited out, or something…). But here’s a brief overview. I have special work I put in my mem. deck as explained on Vol. 2. This work allows me to break the deck into “sections” that are much more manageable and easier to estimate to, while at the same time not interfering with faro shuffles (like a corner short might do). The work is invisible. Someone names a card and I execute a riffle pass. Any pass will work, but I’m careful NOT to overtly cut the cards. This is not a display of skill. It’s far more powerful than that. This is displaying a named card on top of the pack (or, as we’ll see…on the face). For more on my theory here, again see vol. 2. Using my work (and doing this “jazzing” effect thousands of times) I can almost always estimate dead on. You will, too. It’s not difficult to get within a couple cards of the named selection when you can reduce the range you start from (with my work it’s always less than thirteen instead of entire deck). But what happens when you miss? You can be off my as many as four in either direction. If it’s second from the top, double lift. Third from the top, triple lift, fourth from the top, triple lift and a break under the fourth card. Now I do DeSouza’s shapeshifter or any other color change. What about the other direction? Show it on the face. If it’s second, third, or fourth from the face, I do a classic pass with the top few cards to produce the selection, like in a color change. I keep hearing from some magicians that the classic pass should never be used as a color change. They say it’s a ***ization of what should be a secret sleight. The theory is basically sound, but results prove otherwise. People gasp at this “color” change, and with this few amount of cards (and a fast pass), it does NOT look like you’re cutting the cards, but rather that the card MELTS into another. It’s always worked for me. All of these “outs” are about as strong as simply revealing it on top. Even when I hit directly and the named card is on top of the deck, I’ll often do a double lift to show the WRONG card, and then turn the double down and deal the top card into my hand. Then I’ll make the card change into the one the spectator thought of...again, this is simply “jazzing.” So, what if you’re off by more than eight? You won’t be. Trust me. If you’re attempting to use the work I suggest on vol. 2, it means you’re proficient with cards already. Further, my jazzing requires heavy use of a pass, sometimes under some scrutiny, and I believe that anyone doing these sleights will have no trouble (perhaps instantly) estimating as described. It’s not as hard as it looks. I’ve coached dozens of magicians on these jazzing techniques, and all of them can produce a named card within a couple seconds now. It’s my opener virtually all the time. Now a few comments to reiterate a point I think is important and overlooked. I mention this in detail on vol. 2, and few have commented on this. Perhaps it’s just a preference thing. I believe the strength of finding a thought-of card (versus a selected card) is diminished with repetition. I notice that when someone names a card and it instantly becomes the top card of the pack, I get gasps. But I used to get greedy and want that moment over and over. So I would ask EVERYONE at the table to think of a card, and I would find each one in a different way. I noticed that after the second, third, and even fourth named cards, the impact was greatly diminished. This is NOT an effect that begs repetition. The repetition tips the method to a degree, and makes the trick less unique. When you find more than one thought-of card, I think the hodge-podge “jazz” feeling becomes apparent, and I think this is a bad thing. What we’re doing is “jazzing,” but I think that should be part of the secret, not apparent. Anyone who tries this type of work will quickly notice it’s almost impossible to do another trick afterward (I thought it impossible to follow at first…now I think the Haunted Pack is the only thing I do that gets a better reaction). It’s so easy to try and expand upon it, but I believe we have to practice restraint. It seems like a waist to switch in a deck in a carefully prepared order a thirty-second trick. The inclination is to do more with it…but I’ve come to realize less is more here. By doing less, we leave them with this impression. “He showed me a card and changed it instantly into the one I thought of.” I hope this was helpful. As I said to both of you, I’m in Brazil for the month working on some projects, and my email access is limited. Thanks to both of you for writing. Best of luck with it. Josh Thanks Josh, for both the quick reply and for helping take some of the mystery out of a memorized deck. Joe |
Daegs Inner circle USA 4291 Posts |
I just wanted to add in that +-4 is VERY large...
I can get +-1 usually with no work in the deck just pure estimation, at the very worst(less than 5% of the time) can get +-2. |
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » Josh Jay's missing work on MD?? Where did it go? (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.03 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 < |