Just got this nice wallet as a Father's Day gift from my wife. It's made by a friend of ours and I just never picked one up for myself.

I know there have long been triangular wallets out there, but I love the size of this. The flap goes all the way to the corner, which I have found allows for a nice bit of "friction" if you know what I mean.

Anyway, I put together a nice little three coin routine with it.

Would love for you guys to check it out!

<--- PRESS FULL SCREEN

Overall, I liked it. Simple, yet elegant. Nothing especially fancy or surprising, but cleanly done.

Thoughts: a touch after 0:37 there's this odd click - I think in the music, but it's at the time of your hand washing, and I couldn't help but think it sounded like a coin clinking on your ring.

Your false count is marvelously done, but it strikes me as strange that you do it twice, exactly the same, at the beginning and at the end. Maybe do one of them another way?

The display at the beginning of 3 coins is a bit rushed. I couldn't help but wonder at the end if I'd seen them all in the beginning.

I think this one is also helped a little by having some patter. Sure, it's clear enough from the motions, but a story motivates it a bit more, in my mind.

Thanks for taking a look!

You're right, there is no sound. It's only music.

And I'm doing that count for a reason. Look closely.

I thought I did look closely - in fact I called it a false count. There's something more to the count, even than that? :puzzled:

I guess my point is that it's like doing a long routine (say, cylinder and coins - which I bet you'd have fun doing/working on) and using the same vanish all four times. It works, but it's a little repetitive. I'm suggesting doing a different (false) count the second time to mix things up.

Then again, there is power in repetition...

I enjoyed it, Rick. Is the routine your own?



I've noticed that many (perhaps most) coin routines that rely on repetition do tend to do different moves that simulate the same thing. I don't know that the point is so much to break things up, but to not give the spectators a chance to catch you on the second or third time. On the other hand, sometimes the change is because the method requires something different.

That said, I recently read or saw something (and can't remember exactly - I will look for it) where it was suggested that if you're going to put a coin in your hand, the most natural way to do it would be to do it the same way every time.

Cylinder and Coins is a fun routine, but David Roth's version in "Expert Coin Magic" does use the same vanish for all but the final coin. https://youtu.be/GPrJL9BLpVM

Yes, Wilktone, there does seem to be couple of conflicting theories at play.

one is that successive/repetitive demonstrations will enhance anticipation and surprise for the final "cross-up" You want the observer to think they have figured it out,
so that the can get the triple endorphin rush from "Proving themselves right," astonishment, and Mickey's "Echo" where they realize they set themselves up to be astonished twice.

another view is that the first step is to get attention, the second to clarify focus and define the mystery, the third is to have their complete involvement in the anticipation, and then the "blow off."
This requires that each step be similar but slightly different in the reveal or timing even if the same method is being used.

another theory supports it is all about entertainment and skill demonstration with little concern about "must be magic" as an outcome.
The objective is to cram as many slights into a routine as possible, plus a couple of flourishes.

For me, the guiding approach should be audience engagement for the specific audience and setting. One's decision to do a coins across and approach used,
should be guided by what other effects come first and what will follow, plus the degree of respect, attention and experience of the audience as assured.

Thus, a different theory is that the task of the magician is to create conditions under which magic can happen -- and lead,
or to recognize when the ideal conditions exist -- and follow.

the ancient maxim is to never repeat a demonstration for the same audience. If you choose to violate this within an effect there should be a known reason and known desired end result.
Method is secondary.

There's no need to wax philosophical.

The count is simple and it works. The first time is not paid much attention since just a moment prior they saw three coins plainly laying in the wallet.

The count at the end happens after enough time has passed that it doesn't feel repetitive.

That is my thought as well, I didn't feel bothered by the same count as the second time.

BTW, which false count is it?



Sorry if you feel we hijacked your thread, but to me the theory is interesting and I want to hear why different folks come to different opinions about coin magic structure.

I found the source of what I referenced to above about repetition. It comes from Curtis Kam's "The Pocketbook." He wrote:



Not quite the same situation as using the same false count twice in Rick's routine, but maybe the spirit of it applies. I dunno, but again, I find it interesting and it seems important, but I'm not really qualified to judge.

Thanks again for posting your routine, Rick. It's inspiring to watch your videos. It makes me want to practice more.

Dave

David,

I take that as the highest compliment. Thank you.

I love theory too, but I just meant that we shouldn't be trying to dig too deeply. The quote from The Pocketbook is absolutely right on; and you can consider Curtis Kam an authority. Plus, doing this for non-magicians tells me it works when they're left shaking their heads.

Thank you again for the compliment and I saw you subscribed to my YouTube channel too. Stay tuned; my goal with that is to try and come up with original ideas, or twists and new ways to accomplish old ideas.

And if I can inspire someone along the way, that's great too. I would love to watch more coin magic from other people, so hopefully it also inspires people to record their ideas and share them.

Rick

Thanks, Rick. Again, what's the false count you're using?

Oh. Sorry I missed that at the top of your other post.

It's a 2 for 3 Himber count. I learned it in Doug Brewer's book. Jay Sankey also does a good job explaining it on his Revolutionary Coin Magic DVD.

That's what I thought. I've had trouble learning that one from Williamson's Wonders. It's also taught briefly in a couple of other resources I have. I usually work with half dollar sized coins, which might be harder for me than larger coins with it. A goal to shoot for.

Thanks,

Dave

I liked the delayed production of the coin from the sleeve. Something magical about the hesitation there. Maybe because it subtlly sets up the idea that there is nothing in the sleeve with the first two feints, and so the third time is a surprise.

Good stuff Rick, thanks for sharing. In particular I enjoyed your 2-for-3. Looks very convincing, and quite natural. Keep it up!

Thanks Landmark,

I felt like it added just a little interest.

And thanks scotchrocket, love that sleight, so useful.

I appreciate you guys checking it out.

Stay tuned and subscribe if you like.

Rick