|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
Magicmagician83 New user 68 Posts 
|
Where can I find the technique for Lepaul's automatic jog control?
|
|||||||||
AMcD Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts
|
The Card Magic of Le Paul, written in 1949.
My 2 cents to handle **** guys like the one you describe. Papers. |
|||||||||
|
Magicmagician83 New user 68 Posts
|
I found it. That's not exactly what I had in mind though. It looks like with that, they can place the card on the lower half of the deck after you cut it. I am talking about letting a spectator insert their card into a fan or squared up deck anywhere they want as opposed to cutting and saying stick it back RIGHT HERE. I am sorry if I was unclear with how I wanted it to look.
|
|||||||||
|
jibgilmon New user 11 Posts
|
As a college student, I have large amounts of hecklers among my peers when I do my AC routine. To combat it, I do a diagonal palm shift, as suggested, but I pull the card down (opposed to pushing up) to get a break ABOVE the selected card. Then, I do a double undercut to put their card on top of the deck. Following, I push over two cards from the top as a single, and then push over another 3 or 4 cards. I then turn over this small packet and note that the card is not near the top (even though it is in fact on top), place them back, turn over the cards to show that it isn't on the bottom, and now I am left clean with their card on top of the deck.
I hope that helps a bit. |
|||||||||
jpleddington Loyal user Lewisburg, PA 294 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2012-05-22 19:53, Magicmagician83 wrote: If you're referring to the Automatic Jog Control, then it DOES involve allowing a spectator to insert a card ANYWHERE they want in a FAN and to push it FLUSH. (I'll often encourage them to push it in further than they have!) Not sure, then, what you might have been looking at.
philosophy & magic
www.jasonleddington.net |
|||||||||
|
Fin Veteran user 322 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2012-05-22 01:52, Magicmagician83 wrote: I heartily agree with some of the great advice above, particularly regarding the use of a cr**p or s**rt. Peter Cassford's "Miracles With A Short Card" dvd, Martin Nash's "Infinity" dvd and Jason England's "Dead Cut" tutorial (on Theory 11) include some wonderful applications and ways of instantly and easily controlling a selection while appearing incredibly fair and open. |
|||||||||
|
Steven Youell V.I.P. 3866 Posts
|
I started to post a really long response and then realized that most of it contained information on an article I'm writing... sorry.
But I will say that some of the solutions here are like using mortars to hunt deer! One thing you DON'T want to do is use the DPS or a full palm Side Steal, particularly with a trouble maker. My experience has been that if someone is a trouble maker, they are much more likely to look through the deck to make sure their card is there. And if they do that while you're holding out, what then? Stealing the card out and handing them the deck increases your risk. You want to reduce your risk. Sleights are not always the answer. Your primary weapon should be your brain, not sleights. So my first answer is: prevention. Your spectators should ALWAYS be convinced that they ARE putting the card anywhere they want. One way to do this is to give up on the idea of exact placement. LET them put the card where they want to put it. Then control it and then position it. The rest of my answers consist of about 12 unedited pages. They'll be in print soon and I hope some of you will find them useful. SEY |
|||||||||
eatonmagic Special user Orlando, FL 737 Posts
|
This is one of the reasons I fell in love with UCCU by Jeff Kaylor. Allows you to have one or multiple cards signed, selected and controlled. And the best part is that the spectator can shuffle as much as they like.
Also I would suggest reading or learning about good audience control. |
|||||||||
|
eostresh Regular user 108 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2012-05-22 21:57, Steven Youell wrote: DON'T is a pretty harsh statement. It obviously works for me and a few others. If they check the pack for their card go to the pocket(or Wallet). They don't know where you are going with the effect. Anyways, overall you have some great advice and good points. I'm just saying that in a situation like that you need to be able to jazz. I'm more comfortable in that situation taking the card completely out of control of a problem spectator. Once I do that then I watch them like a hawk and simply stay ahead of them. If I wind up going to the pocket(wallet) then my effect with that spectator is over. I have every justification to move on to a more cooperative spectator or, if the heckler is so bad he threatens sabotaging a whole set, I can thank the group for their time and move on knowing that I did my job. I showed them magic and didn't get busted while doing it. |
|||||||||
|
Fin Veteran user 322 Posts
|
How could I forget about the UCCU?! Amen Mr Eaton; the UCCU is awesome and is definitely a good option here.
|
|||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts
|
Suggesting or dismissing options is a waste of time without the appropriate data. Each effect has a certain number of natural suspicions about what makes it possible, and our job is to use methodology that eliminates those suspicions.
If you tell the guy "Put the card here." and he rebels, asking why he can't put it wherever he wants, then the solution isn't necessarily to turn around with a technique that allows him to put it wherever he wants, because it's just as likely that after you say "Put the card wherever you want." he might further rebel and say "I want to shuffle." etc. Coming at the effect from this point of view is usually a losing battle.
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
|
Steven Youell V.I.P. 3866 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2012-05-22 22:58, eostresh wrote: Not harsh, but certainly absolute. And I'll stick to it-- especially given the situation described. Quote:
On 2012-05-22 22:58, eostresh wrote: A solution that works is not always the same as the best solution. And making the assumption that since it works for you, it will work for the OP when you don't know anything about him is not really a good idea. Quote:
On 2012-05-22 22:58, eostresh wrote: I hate that term. It essentially means that you make up a solution as you go. I'd much rather have an overall strategy and rely on that first and use "jazz" as a last resort. Quote:
On 2012-05-22 22:58, eostresh wrote: I'm more comfortable in letting him do what he wants without missing a beat and then STILL finishing successfully. Once he's sure that there's nothing he can do to thwart you, he'll usually calm down. And if he doesn't, the crowd will usually turn on him and calm him down. Quote:
On 2012-05-22 22:58, eostresh wrote: I think completely differently. I don't think that's doing your job. I think that's letting one person ruin the show for everyone. It's also equivalent to allowing him to control the entire show. And if you're getting paid and do this, then I sincerely feel that you didn't earn your money. Quote:
On 2012-05-22 22:58, eostresh wrote: Really? That's it? That's your whole job? Show a few tricks, don't get busted and leave when the heat's on? We REALLY think differently. In my first set of lecture notes, I published an article called ProActive Control that covers this kind of stuff. It allows you to be almost bullet proof in terms of the situation mentioned. It doesn't require any hard Sleights and can be used by performers at almost any level. Admittedly, there were one or two situations it didn't cover and that's what I'm currently working on-- an update. SEY |
|||||||||
|
Vincero Veteran user New Zealand 379 Posts
|
You could start an overhand shuffle, then ask the spectator to "say stop at any time". When they say stop, let THEM place THEIR card on top of the portion THEY stoped you at. Continue the (jog) overhand shuffle control and bring it to the top, or wherever you need it. It's a simple solution and very convincing because the spectator feels like they are caling all of the shots. If I find an audience tough, or I'm unsure of how receptive they are I always break them in with this method. It's pretty much foolproof, at least for me anyway. It might be worth a try.
I would suggest working on your audience management techniques in tandem with finding a sleight that suits this frustrating situation. You can greatly reduce the risk of a confrontional attitude by learning about how to improve your raport with even the toughest of audience members. Many will argue that you can eradicate this problem all together with the correct management approach. Regards, Zac
"Which way I fly is Hell; myself am Hell; And in the lowest deep a lower deep
Still threat'ning to devour me opens wide, To which the Hell I suffer seems a Heav'n" -John Milton, (Paradise Lost) |
|||||||||
|
C Gibson New user 6 Posts
|
I am also in favour of the diagonal palm shift. Great move if, like me, you aren't the greatest at palming off the top. It does, however take a fair amout of practise.
I have no idea what this is called but a guy taught me this fairly recently. You basically riffle down the deck and genuinely allow them to stop you anywhere. You then show them the card and as you go to replace the top portion on the bottom portion you use your fingers to slip the bottom card of the top portion (the spectators card) onto the bottom of the deck. This is very clean as it looks as though you are simply replacing the top of the deck on the bottom. No fancy moves really and the spectator feels like they know exactly where the card is. Failing all that a simple break then some cuts always seems to do the trick! (no pun intended) |
|||||||||
Brainbu$ter Veteran user Indianapolis, IN 326 Posts
|
The two controls I use are Le Paul's Automatic Jog Control
and the DPS, or Michael Close's faster DPS. For more misdirection on the DPS, riffle the deck for the return of their card, but always finish the riffle just before they can shove it back in. Do this once or twice before really permitting entry. Now they are so relieved they got their card in the deck that the DPS is more concealed. An easy and deceptive control is to dribble the cards into your left hand, requesting spec say "Stop." Then they put their card in, and you dribble the remainder over their card, injogging the card above selection by tilting the portion of the deck above selection downward (outer part of deck downward). The Convincing Control in Card College is also extremely, um, convincing, from Card College. As for me, I always use the automatic jog control then palm off top, or the DPS. |
|||||||||
|
eostresh Regular user 108 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2012-05-22 23:48, Steven Youell wrote: Good point. That would be more accurate way to describe it. And we may just fundamentally disagree about absolutism. Being absolute is generally destructive, in politics, in life, in performance. I have never once seen an example in my personal experience, in world history, in business, where being absolutist was a good idea. Short term gains can be appropriated but in the long run the lack of flexibility of an absolutist doctrine causes it to implode on itself. If you disagree with that, as it seems you do, I'm fair to let that one lie and just say, we have differing opinions on that. So from that philosophical difference is where I seem to differ from your opinions on the topic. If I were to look at the issue from your perspective, then I think all of your points are well made and totally valid. Quote:
On 2012-05-22 22:58, eostresh wrote: Quote:
On 2012-05-22 23:48, Steven Youell wrote: You got me here. That was something I hadn't really considered. My comments basically stem from my knee jerk reaction to absolute logic. I didn't mean to imply that he should do it because I get away from it. Mine is perhaps not the best solution. It is the best for me but you need to be good with a move to make it a "go to." If you are better with other controls and techniques that you'd best go with what you are best at. Not the "BEST MOVE," but the move that you are "BEST AT." If you suck at, or are just okay at, performing the "Best Move," then don't you dare use it when you are under stress by a heckling spectator! I think I am drifting off point here a bit. Basically, You are right. It isn't the best move and if I gave the impression that it was then that is my error. Quote:
On 2012-05-22 23:48, Steven Youell wrote: Jazz does have a structure and a strategy. It is all founded on the twelve bar blues. There is a basic strategy and structure from which you are free to "improvise" from. It does not mean you totally improvise what comes out of your instrument. This was more understood when Jazz and the Blues were more popular in the 20s and 30s, when Dai Vernon sort of adopted the philosophy for night club magic. So if you understand where it comes from then the proper use of the term "Jazz Magic" is probably not as offensive as you may think. If you use and understand the term then you realize that you do not "Make up the solution as you go." There is a structure that gives you the liberty to go in a different direction if you need to, or want to, but you are not venturing out there blind. Quote:
On 2012-05-22 22:58, eostresh wrote: Quote:
On 2012-05-22 23:48, Steven Youell wrote: Right….You can do that with a DPS. It is simply a different technique that accomplishes the same purpose. It has its advantages and disadvantages compared to other moves. Sure, if he goes through the spread He might notice his card missing, but he could just as likely notice a crimp. The pros and cons are basically a wash. Quote:
On 2012-05-22 22:58, eostresh wrote: Quote:
On 2012-05-22 23:48, Steven Youell wrote: Not so sure about that. You did magic for the heckler directly. I’m not advocating giving up here. I’m advocating directly engaging the heckler. If he/she turns on your side you continue on as planned. If they cause more problems you finish an effect with him(ending your engagement on a “win”) and direct your focus to another within the heckler’s group. That happens naturally with every close-up set I perform anyway. They will never have a clue that I minorly altered my set list to head off a bad situation. I don’t advocate leaving a group early unless the heckler really gets bad. Even then you don’t storm off in a huff. You finish after an effect, thank your audience and move on. No different than ending a short set early because the meal arrived at the table. In my opinion your walk around close up set should not be so rigid that you can’t end early or go a bit longer. It should be flexable. Frankly I thought I was spouting the “party line.” I didn’t expect that advice to be controversial. Quote:
On 2012-05-22 22:58, eostresh wrote: Quote:
On 2012-05-22 23:48, Steven Youell wrote: It is fair to chastise me for that. I grossly oversimplified that statement and deserve a smack upside the head! So to sum all that up, I’m 90% in agreement with you. My post was mostly my reaction to your “absolutist” comment about never using the DPS. That reaction I had goes back to more than just my experience in magic. My life experience, studies of society, history, and politics in graduate school, my former career as a wildland firefighter, and my experience in performing magic(admittedly likely less than your own) have taught be that the only absolute in life is that absolutism logic is bad logic. Lack of flexability, adaptation, and open mindedness is a weakness, pure and simple |
|||||||||
|
Steven Youell V.I.P. 3866 Posts
|
Esotresh,
I think we probably agree on most things, we're just victims of the deficiencies of communication on the internet. I used the word "absolute" as in "I am absolute about this opinion". I didn't mean I was stating a universal rule. My fault-- sorry for the confusion. Probably should have used "resolute". My main contention here is when people give advice without knowing anything about the individual or the specific situation. He could have tiny hands, he could have only ONE Card Trick to his name and doesn't want to learn a complicated sleight, he could have been doing something with Taro Cards (remember the location of the gig?), maybe he's working in a situation in which he can't cover the back left angle, etc. This happens all the time on the Café and I think can cause a good deal of problems. You can see me !@#$% about this all the time on the Café. In regards to holding out, I tend to think along the lines of Dr. Jacob Daley: Quote:
The great tricks are those combining a maximum of effect with a minimum of manipulative hazard. Ever since I read that, I've considered it advice for Sleight of Hand in general. If there's a way to do something that is just as effective and reduces the risk, I take that path without exception. Yeah, I can hold out. But I (and probably you) have a dozen other ways that would produce the same result from the audiences point of view, but reduce the risk, however small it may be. Risk is something that should ALWAYS be calculated before you take it if you have the time. Jazz? Admittedly, I know very little about music. But in regards to magic, you've been the only one I've heard say it has structure. Now that may be, but I thought I was going with the common definition in magic, which is not always the real meaning. If I understand your definition correctly, I like it better than how other magicians use it. In regards to the Heckler situation, you and I have different venues. I no longer do restaurant work so I don't have the option of leaving. I get paid for a complete set. I get paid for entertaining an entire group for a specific period of time. Additionally, I will use any means necessary to accomplish that-- including using self-deprecating humor. My preference is to first turn the heckler around. Second, turn the crow on him and third, use him for humor. I've only had to go to the third option nine times in 30 years. Funny enough, it's an approach I learned when I STILL did Restaurant magic. Here's a heckler story. Parlor show in the Castle. Billy McComb in the middle of the audience with a drink in his hand. For some reason there was a guy in the back row shouting what I think was "JAGERMEISTER" every five minutes. The third time he did it, I said "Sir, if you wish to communicate, you're going to have to use vowels..." McComb did a spit-take. the guys wife (who was drunk as well) slapped him on the shoulder and he shut up. Later he said "that was one of the best shut-downs I've ever seen." That was one of the proudest moments of my life. I sincerely believe that the resurgence of the DPS is starting to make it one of the most overused Sleights around and would suggest that if people are interested in those types of things, they should consider Mike Close's work on center steals as well. Additionally, Paul Cummins on the Deliberate Side Steal is phenomenal. Between all of those, I think almost anyone could find something that fits them. Finally, any magician who sees me perform will tell you I'm a freakin' wild man. I almost never have a set that relies on the same effect. I have two or three effects I do every time and then adjust the material to the audience as I go. I have to do this because my act is total chaos. And funny. Really funny. SEY P.S. Please PM me your email address. |
|||||||||
|
smudgedj New user Cochabamba, Bolivia 82 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2012-05-22 01:52, Magicmagician83 wrote: Some great advice here, but I'm lazy so I'd use a stripper deck and turn it before handing it over. |
|||||||||
|
eostresh Regular user 108 Posts
|
Steven Youell,
I really have nothing to add. Your points are well made and well informed. Indeed, I certainly will re-examine my reliance on the move. To be honest, it will be a while before I could limit my use, even if I wanted to. You spend two years working a sleight and another two performing with it and it kind of becomes second nature! But this has been enlightening to some degree, especially as I am now beginning to venture into a more "professional attitude" towards magic. One thing I will further comment on is the discussion of Jazz magic. On reflection I think that to the wider community of magic the term "Jazz Magic" is often used as an excuse, a carte blanche if you will, to "make it up as you go along." Freebooting your way through a set was certainly not original intention of the term. Perhaps it is time magicians re-evaluate how they use the term! Cheers, Erik |
|||||||||
|
Steven Youell V.I.P. 3866 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2012-05-23 22:02, eostresh wrote: Absolutely agreed. Having a playbook is quite different from making it up as you go. Check you inbox-- incoming. SEY |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » Best Card control technique? (2 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
Posted: May 22, 2012 11:25 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.08 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 < 
|