|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
the fritz Special user 647 Posts 
|
Greg,
I could see this as a contribution to a periodical since it relies solely upon Curry's subtlety. Or possibly it could be included on a DVD with some other effects as Jay Sankey did with his effect "Lottery," which uses the same Curry subtlety for half of the method. Did Curry invent the S.S. or was it already in use for a long time and he just applied it to his "Swindle of Sorts?" Those who already know the S.S. will obviously know exactly how your effect is done, but those who don't will wonder how on earth you could've predicted the outcome with ten cards. If that were me, I'd be tempted to spend a measly five bucks to learn the secret. I still think it would be a great "contribution" item. |
|||||||||
Greg Rostami V.I.P. Skynet will become self-aware in 2871 Posts
|
Thanks fritz,
I'll keep that in mind. Greg Rostami |
|||||||||
|
Gianni Special user WILMINGTON, DE 993 Posts
|
I want to point out something based on my experience.
I once performed the Curry switch in a routine, and I did the dealing in a parlor setting. Afterwards, a spectator approached me to say that he determined that the switch really did not alter the dealing of the cards. Of course I was very impressed with the spectator's observation skills. But here is the point. If an astute observer can determine in a parlor setting that the cards are not being switched, imagine how much greater the possibility if a spectator is actually the one handling the cards, and does the dealing through 3 consecutive hands. Gianni |
|||||||||
|
bik0z Regular user France 108 Posts
|
Greg,
I just realize that you did not mention it would no be necessarily released as an eBook (PDF). Of course, it could be sold as an instructional video (as The Fritz mentioned). (If this is the case, please make it viewable on any platform, with no useless and excessive protection.)
My English sucks, I know it. It's probably better than your French anyway...
|
|||||||||
|
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts
|
Much as I liked the effect on the video, it took me about 10 seconds with a deck of cards to confirm my suspicions.
Nice effect maybe if you have something strong to immediately follow it. I think Curry knew that too, hence the name.
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
|
Greg Rostami V.I.P. Skynet will become self-aware in 2871 Posts
|
Hi Gianni,
Ironically, when I used to do the trick with me doing the swindle, astute spectators would discover the secret. But, ever since I've had the specs do it, I haven't been caught yet. You must understand; the programming at the beginning of the routine is very important. Second, I ask the spectators to look at me while I say "Deal or Switch" . . . the spectator's attention is on my voice, not the cards. Hi landmark, So far no one has ever talked to me after a performance where they tried the experiment themselves to discover the method. If you know the secret, I suggest you try it on some people . . . I promise you; you'll fry them. In the mind of the spectators, there is no explanation other then the fact that you can see slightly into the future . . . I've had people come up to me after that performance and ask me "What do you feel when you see into the future? . . . What do you see in your minds eye?" Thanks for watching guys, Greg Rostami P.S. My wife has seen me do that trick over 30 times and she didn't have a clue until I told her the secret. |
|||||||||
|
bik0z Regular user France 108 Posts
|
I wouldn't worry too much: the method is obvious only to everyone who knows the trick.
But yes this kind of routine requires good audience management, so that they trust what they see (or not) and don't ruin the effect.
My English sucks, I know it. It's probably better than your French anyway...
|
|||||||||
|
Picard Elite user 412 Posts
|
Greg, thanks for sharing the video of your performance.
I liked it, but I am afraid that the effect (as performed by you) might suffer from the "too impossible" syndrome. I felt that you were giving your spectator too much freedom in deciding whether he wants to stop and even whether he wants you or someone else to give him directions, AND above all he doesn't even have to follow them if he doesn't want too. And while all of that adds to the impossibility of the effect and will surely fool and amaze many people I am afraid that more observant and intelligent individuals might realize that it had to do something will the deal or switch thing, and not some kind of psychic influence of yours on their choice or your precognitive abilities (because spectator really has too much freedom in all of the choices). |
|||||||||
|
Greg Rostami V.I.P. Skynet will become self-aware in 2871 Posts
|
Hi Picard,
I agree with you. I have to first say that as impossible as it may be, I haven't been caught yet. But, the "slightly into the future" concept has another flaw. If I really could look slightly into the future then why couldn't the spectator just mix the cards and then reveal the prediction. Sometimes I use the premise of spectator has no choice . . . "I'm gonna put my hand on your shoulder . . . I will say deal or switch . . . you can either obey or disobey . . . but no matter what you think is a free choice, I'm actually forcing your every move by the way I speak and the way I touch." This way the individual steps of "Deal or Switch" are justified. And my hand on their shoulder is the "forcing power". This routine gives the spectators a false method. To be honest, I've tried both versions and for some reason people like the prediction premise better. Here is the reason why. If you tell them you're forcing their every move then they realize that the outcome is always the same (you force them to produce the final outcome like the original Paul Curry premise) . . . But, if the premise is prediction, then the outcome is different every time. Hence the reason why you write the prediction right in front of them; and at the end the prediction seems very random (in contrast to the original Curry 1-10 sequence that totally telegraphs the method). What do you think? Greg Rostami |
|||||||||
|
Turk Inner circle Portland, OR 3546 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2009-03-04 04:33, bikoz wrote: That might have been me. A friend of mine first showed me this trick he called "Duck and Deal" and told me that the effect was "right out of Scarne's". I tore that book apart and could never find the effect in that book (by that name nor by any other name. Years later, my friend admitted that he must have been mistaken because he could not find the effect in Scarne's either. As a footnote, many years ago,I do recall seeing a hilariously entertaining effect by Harry Lorayne which I think Harry might have called "Duck or Deal" At this point in time, I'm not certain either of the name Harry gave to the effect nor the actual video that the effect is on. I do recall a hilarious line by Harry that had me spewing Pepsi out of my nose and onto the keyboard. I don't want to give away the line (it's not mine to give or share) but suffice it to say that the term "dead duck" was part of the line and the line was so funny it jumps out of the presentation and slaps you up side the head and knocks you senseless. (Maybe that's why it's called "slapstick humor".) Gotta go try and find those old Harry Lorayne videos and, hopefully, find this effect without hours of tape viewings. Anyone here on the Café know which tape this effect is on? Any of you guys with the newfangled updated converted DVDs (with menus) know of this effect and which Lorayne video this effect is on?
Magic is a vanishing Art.
This must not be Kansas anymore, Toto. Eschew obfuscation. |
|||||||||
Harry Lorayne 1926 - 2023 New York City 8558 Posts
|
Turk, I perform/teach Deal and Duck on Volume 3 of my "Best Ever" 4-volume DVD set. (But I still don't know the "gaff" of Greg's routine. Best - HARRY L).
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]
http://www.harrylorayne.com http://www.harryloraynemagic.com |
|||||||||
|
bik0z Regular user France 108 Posts
|
Harry: how do you do? Please do me a favour: tell me if you do read every single post in the Café forum or if you use a robot that detects your name in new posts?
My English sucks, I know it. It's probably better than your French anyway...
|
|||||||||
|
Picard Elite user 412 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2009-04-18 15:52, Greg Rostami wrote: Greg, I agree that the prediction premise plays much better, at least that's what my experience has shown me, too. As you said, if you already announce that you'll try to influence their choices this could in fact telegraph the method or at least make them suspicious. I would pretty much keep it as it is in the video, with the exception that I wouldn't give them absolute freedom to do whatever they want to, because that too might telegraph the method. If they really can do whatever they want some people might start questioning the fairness of all of these choices they're presented with. It's all very relative, and it's not easy to say where the border between "impossible" and "too impossible" is. I would probably allow all the choices and maybe even when to stop with the process (that's a nice touch, btw). What I would definitely avoid is letting him decide who's going to give directions and especially letting another spectator give him directions because it might make it seem that he can do pretty much anything and that whatever is done doesn't really have any significance on the final outcome. But as I said it's all relative, maybe also dependent on the particular spectator(s). Luckily, my experience has shown that those who will try (and succeed) in reconstructing the method are in minority. Of course, with the original Curry's method it is much more transparent. |
|||||||||
|
Greg Rostami V.I.P. Skynet will become self-aware in 2871 Posts
|
Harry,
I'm sure you know the method to my performance, so I don't understand your question about the "gaff" of my routine? Hi Picard, I agree with your observation of not letting another spectator tell them what to do. This will lead to a false method . . . "the way he said 'deal or switch' forced me to do whatever he wanted". The spectators will still find this amazing. And, during the performance I must change my inflection of how I say "Deal or Switch" . . . that will add to this misdirection method. The question still remains . . . Do you guys think I should market my take on the Curry Swindle for $5? Thank you so much for your input, Greg Rostami |
|||||||||
|
Harry Lorayne 1926 - 2023 New York City 8558 Posts
|
Bikoz: I'm just fine, thanks. Yes, I do have a "robot" who fills me in on personal things. Problem is, I have to pay him the same as I'd pay a "human." (Sometimes he'll read/shout the post to me, and I shout back what he's to answer, and sometimes I'll "do" the answer or reply myself; according to my opinion of the importance of the original. See? Now you're clear on this utmost-of-;importance "thing." HL.
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]
http://www.harrylorayne.com http://www.harryloraynemagic.com |
|||||||||
|
Turk Inner circle Portland, OR 3546 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2009-04-19 10:13, Harry Lorayne wrote: Thanks for the info, Harry. It is much appreciated. It will save me hours odf reasearch. Had that info not been provided, I was starting to feel like a dead duck...if you know what I mean. Mike
Magic is a vanishing Art.
This must not be Kansas anymore, Toto. Eschew obfuscation. |
|||||||||
|
bik0z Regular user France 108 Posts
|
Greg: why not do the handling yourself and ask the spectator to tell you what to do, i.e. deal or switch? This way, you make a prediction and the spectator makes several choices.
You can even ask him if he wants to do it a second time, but I would not let him think you would do it 5 or 10 times. In all cases you should not let the spectator think that the person who decides what to do or that the number of times you mix the cards do not matter. That would kill the effect. From the spectator's point of view, both the magician and the spectator seem to have free choices, the actual handling of the cards staying in the background because you insist on its naivety at the very beginning of the routine. Harry: it's just that I have noticed that you often take part in threads (always bringing valuable information) after someone mentions your name or your work. I just wonder how you manage to read everything. I personally am not able to really follow more than 5 threads, e-mail alerts excepted...
My English sucks, I know it. It's probably better than your French anyway...
|
|||||||||
|
Harry Lorayne 1926 - 2023 New York City 8558 Posts
|
Greg: "Gaff" is just an old-fashioned way to say "method." It's been so long...but picked up a deck and, of course, I do know the "gaff" now!
bikoz: My name is like a magnet to my "robot"! He sees a post with my name in it and leaves me a note (or tells me about it if I'm available), then I either ignore it (rarely) or write, or shout out, a response for him to do on the computer. Occasionally, I'll handle it myself. And usually, not always (sometimes he finds a post from years ago!) I do it write away, because - I like to get simple things off my mind/chest/desk right away. HL.
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]
http://www.harrylorayne.com http://www.harryloraynemagic.com |
|||||||||
|
a brown 1968 Elite user 471 Posts
|
Hello Greg
Have you seen the version Mick Ayres has in one of his ebooks ?. He uses the same method to compare to a written prediction showing a random set of numbers. The difference between the two is mainly in the presentation and justification of the actions. The method seems mainly to be used with playing cards but it does have many more applications. Regards, Andy P.S For $5 that would be a good value ebook compared to many offerings on the market at higher prices. |
|||||||||
|
ejohn Special user Atlanta 723 Posts
|
Greg, Beautifully done! You can have my $5! John
|
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » All in the cards » » A Swindle of Sorts by Paul Curry (3 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Apr 17, 2009 06:15 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.05 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 < 
|