On 2011-07-11 12:32, markthorold wrote:
From watching the video the dirty appears to happen @ 1:01 and looks very much like a traditional method in my honest opinion .If the ad states otherwise I'd question it.
Regards Mark

On 2011-07-13 18:23, DekEl wrote:

I agree. It just looks like a multiple out system. Frankly I'd rather use Christopher Dee's 50-20; it's impromptu.

On 2011-07-15 17:59, Don Dasher wrote:

Quote:

On 2011-07-13 18:23, DekEl wrote: I agree. It just looks like a multiple out system. Frankly I'd rather use Christopher Dee's 50-20; it's impromptu.

I've just received this. It's a new method. The ad speaks the truth. No multiple outs, 100% accuracy.

In my opinion this is huge, it could be applied is so many ways I literally got goosebumps when I watched the instructions.

DD

On 2011-07-16 05:19, Quinn wrote:
Both the video and the description make it seem like he's simply come up with a playing card-compatible version of an established principle that usually wouldn't work with playing cards, but is typically used with business cards, post cards and other things -- which, incidentally, are far more natural, congruent and believable for this purpose than playing cards. I mean, if you're writing a prediction of what someone is about to say, why on earth would you use a playing card rather than on a notepad, business card, or random scrap of paper? Because you're a magician, and you therefore suffer from an unfortunate mental condition that compels you to use playing cards for every slightly conceivable function, from a surrogate notepad to a flyswatter to toilet paper?

Anyway, if it actually is something more than an eXpertly adapted rehash of a known principle to a new writing surface, someone please let us know. And if that's the case, then let me repeat the obvious question: can it be used with something more congruent than playing cards, i.e. a writing surface that a normal person who isn't afflicted with a debilitating playing card obsession might use?