I know this has been discussed before but I can't find anything that directly asks the question:

Which of the three do you feel is the strongest effect and why?

IMO, Vernon's "Twisting the Aces" is not as 'magical' as, say, the "Asher Twist." Even a good Elmsley count doesn't hide the fact that you're "doing something" with the cards. How does the McClintock stack up?

(I know it's a subjective post, so please add WHY you perfer one over the other.)

Thanks in advance!

The Asher Twist looks great but the angles make it impossible to do under all circumstances. I think Vernon's is still the best and most magical of those. Especially if you do that Elmsley-Count-in-the-spectator's-hand move (forgot what it's called, anyone know?) for the final reversal. I have to say though that once you learn Guy Hollingworth's Waving The Aces (in conjunction with his Quartet gimmick) you never really feel the need the do any other versions. I mean - the cards freakin' turn around WHILE SPREAD OUT! AND it's not even hard to do. AND it plays to a large audience. AND the final change is jaw-dropping. Can't beat that.

Hmm...

I'd have to agree with Marko that while the Asher Twist is visually stunning, it is most definitely not angle-proof and therefore limited in which performance circumstances it is usable. The Elmsely move you're referring to is Paul Gordon's ITHEC (in their hands Elmsely count) which is based on a move of John Bannon's and I believe Michael Close's. There was some debate that Mr. Gordon's method was no different, i never paid much attention to the debate though.

Hollingworth's Waving the Aces is a masterpiece. I do not own the Quartet gimmick nor have I seen it so I can not say much about it. I never bothered to learn the alignment move, just something that never 'clicked' with me. I have my own version of Hollingworth's Waving the Aces which i've titled "out-waving the aces," not because I think it is better, but because the aces appear outjogged from the packet. It uses a move I believe to be original with me which I've aptly titled "the unaligned alignment move..." I've had good success with this trick in restaurants and may publish it in the near future (along with other material of mine...)

I have not seen or heard of the McClintock version so again I can not say much about it.

Jeff

As far as Twisitng Effects go, I would have to say that Hollingworths second version of Waving is the best followed by We'll Twist by Derek Dingle.

I'd characterize McClintock Twist as the Asher Twist at chest level. It is very visual and has the same kind of (but not the same) angle restrictions as Asher's... but Reed could speak to that better than I.

If I were performing for more than 3 people on a regular basis I think of those two I would prefer Reed's but I would work on Hollingsworth's waving the aces at chest height.

But I don't agree with the original premise concerning the Elmsley count and I do Vernon's original with a change... I think what the original really lacked was a final climax... so the cards are counted into a spectator's hand. When she counts them out the final ace, the ace of spades, has turned face up. I do agree that the original is not as visual as some of the modern versions (which have tempted me) but I also know that the magic takes place in the spectator's mind... so I've avoided the temptation, for now.

I perform the Twisting the aces routine and I beleive it is the koolest of the three. Every time I show my freinds on of the routines they seem to get a better shock out of it than if I do one of the other ones

I have also done Marlo's Pure Twist which is quite visual also.

Jim Molinari

Waving the Aces via quartet is going into my routine soon. I have been working on it for quite some time and have finally gotten it to performance perfection. I do Twisting the Aces to amuse myself and use it as an introduction to the elmsley for my "students".

Jakks

Do twisting the aces! Even though it is not visual, think of the key points

-No real tricky handling
-No angle problems
-Can be done with less skill
-makes you focus more on the plot than the method
My opinion is Vernons first, then Ashers, then Reeds.

Not visual, Gryphon? Wow...I beg to differ. Twisting the Aces is a classic plot. First time I saw it, it stunned me, and that sense of amazement has continued every time I perform it.

This takes nothing away from Lee and Reed...but I think they would tell you that while their effects are quite good, they would defer to the Professor.

I was so blown away the first time I saw twisting the aces I paid $40 for a video that taught it & only a couple other tricks on it. It was the first "real card trick" I ever learned as a magician & I still get blown away by its visual changes to this day.

I think everyone who has posted has done so with good reason.

IMO,

For the professional performer who wants to get booked again then "Waving the Aces" with "Quartet" is by far the one to practice.
I don't think I have to list the good points about this trick but I will do so to remind myself how much of a genius Guy Hollingworth is.

1. The cards are spread out as fairly possible and the the card visibly turns over.

2. There are virtually no fishy moves in the whole routine.

3. There is a suprise in store for the spectator(s), the entire faces of the four aces are seen clearly at the end.

4. There are several versions so it can be done close-up for one or two people or it can be done for a whole room of people and everyone can see clearly what happens.
Also, in a pinch it can be done with a borrowed deck.

5. The gimmick is nice to work with (no sticky tape, flaps or rough and smooth, et, et ,et) and can also be used in other routines for an entirely different purpose, it is also easy to add or ditch to the packet/deck. Although a clean method is a little more difficult depending on your skill level with cards.

6. It has everything a good trick should have, a certain plot, it's easy to follow, it has a good climax. Aside from that it is also visual and has a completely unexpected ending.

Of course there are son many other good points to the trick, also no trick is completely perfect. So here are a couple of bad (I don't think they make the trick bad but just a few elements that make a miracle that this trick doesn't have, et).

1. It takes a lot of practice (especially if your not a card freak) to do the routine smoothly and effortlessly. But then again this could be looked at as a good point if you like something to practice and it will feel that little more special as you know not just anyone can buy the trick over a counter at a magic shop, you probably also get a feeling of accomplishment when you do master the move/routine.

2. It all happens in the magicians hands, again this isn't a bad thing but the most powerful magic you can do is magic that happens in the hands of the spectator. I also don't think it applies to this routine, especially when presented as parlour magic. But I said I would mention a few points that make a miracle that this routine doesn't have.

3. The cards can't be cleanly handed out and examined, you must dispose of the gimmick before they touch the cards, if you have them examine them. However, if you have some master method of ditching the gimmick then this "bad point" is eliminated. But again this brings us back to the technically demanding issue, it is up to you whether practice is worth the effort to eliminate this "bad point". But if you find an easy method of diching the card cleanly then that really does eliminate this "bad point".
If you don't mind sharing your ideas on how to ditch the gimmick pm me and we can have a chat.

Well, I could go on forever about the nuances of this routine. But overall it is a miracle. It doesn't look like slieght-of-hand, nor trick cards, it looks like real magic. As I said, if you want to get booked again use this over "Twisting the Aces".

I won't bore you with all the good and bad points about the following three, I'll just give a quick opinion on them as I'm sure all of you are fully aware of the good and bad points.

"Twisting the Aces".
This is a nice thing to do if your just jazzing and you might-as-well learn it anyway as it is fairly easy and will give you a rest from the "Optical Allignment", also it is good preactce for the "Ghost Count" which might come in handy in other tricks.
It is much more practical than the other routines as it is fairly easy and can be done with regular cards as well under almost any close-up conditions.

"The Asher Twist".
Much more visual then "Twisting the Aces" and much more difficult too. It can only be done close-up for one or two peopele (which was probably Lee's intention) standing in a certain position as the angles have to be taken care of.

"The McClintock Twist".
Is a beautiful routine, and has so many good points.
Some might say it is more for the flourishy magician or sleight-of-hand artist.

IMO, "Waving the Aces" is best for most people (magicians and laypeople), it has so much more then the other twisting effects, but depending on your style, and what you want to to and who you will be performing for and under what conditions you might want to learn one of the others. Or in your opinion, you might just think that routine is better.

I think most twisting effcets have the basic requirements for a good trick. Good, simple plot that is easy to follow and has a definate climax. As for a trick being easy and/or ungimmicked/impromptu and/or visual, those are just other things that make a trick even better.

IMO, it goes,

"Waving the Aces",

"The McClintock Twist",

"The Asher Twist",

"Twisting the Aces",

But remember, there are more than just twisting effects and card effects out there, as you're probably aware.

Take it easy,

John.

P. S. That last bit doesn't mean that one can't entertain with just cards.

My favorite twisting routine is Hollingworth's Waving the Aces, too. (With or without Quartet)

Denis

The Asher/McClintock approach really looks visual when performed well. It's interesting that the method used is exactly what spectators would have to think the method might be viz. "you're turning the cards over so fast I can't see you do it." Lee tends to perform it at a rapid pace which reinforces this notion (although it looks great in his hands). I think that Reed's routine (at least when performed by Oscar Munoz) is done slowly and this makes it seem more magical to me.

I have found that using an Ace, two, three and four instead of four aces, clarifies the effect. Who can remember exactly which suit already turned over. With ace, two, three, four, the specs anticipate what should happen and then there it is - it happened again.

If you really want to twist your brains out, try Racherbaumer's "Omni Twist." First each of the A, 2, 3 and 4 turn over. Then two cards at a time turn over twice. Finally, the spec names which of the four cards she wishes to turn face down and it does twice. Finally, that last face down card turns out to be a previously chosen selection! It's a killer. I do all the time. The only other person I've ever seen do it is Martin Nash.

Mike