Insane, Sub Zero and now this:

http://www.seomagic-usa.com/catalog/prod......_id/1039

What was with the audio? I couldn't understand a word he said.

Also Astonish by Sollari. They are really working this method to death.

Coincidence Impossible. Insane. Astonish. And, Sub Zero? (I don't have this one.) All basically the same card trick with minor differences.

Personally, I think this is a great trick. I really like using the wine glass. And, I like the blank deck finish.

Can't think of a better method for the Open Prediction. This is one that I'll do.

Robert

I'll stick with Astonish by Bob Solari. Bob's came out first:

http://bobsolarimagic.com/shop/Astonish?......ory_id=0

Technically speaking Vallarino's first routine doesn't qualify as "Open Prediction".
Also the method seems very straightforward to be "new". I wonder if deep in some obscure publication this method was already described...

Raj Madhok outlines the principle in the 'Talk About Tricks' dvd set with Joshua Jay (Volume 2). If I remember correctly he credits the effect to someone else as well..

It is funny indeed to see everyone jumping aboard recently. I as well really enjoy the wineglass idea.

I instead like SubZero's idea of using a one way deck (jokers in particular). It justifies switching the deck at the end...

Personally, I prefer the examinable version seen on Doc Eason's bar magic series, Impossible Opener. Similar idea with only one easy "move" and using a one way deck at the end. As Paperinick says, it justifies switching the deck at the end, and you end clean and have no other gimmicks to worry about. That's my opinion, your mileage may vary...

Any review on this?

I do think Bob Solari came out with this first and it's only $17.50 instead of $30. Just add the wine glass and you have Coincidence Impossible, I believe.

Someone told me that this was originally in a Wayne Dobson book years ago, but I don't know that for sure. I do think that this trick was probably created many years ago.

It's almost embarrassingly simple to perform, but I think it's a "10". This will totally fool lay people.

Robert

Edit.

Hi Robert-

This does look great and very similar to Insane by Nyman.

Personally I wasn't 100% wild on insane as the move for me (simple as they are) was sometimes a little knacky.

Hence even though I have it I'm probably not going to use it.

I can see how Solari's version is done having wattched the video - this looks like it should be easy to make at home frankly.

I think with any of these the simplicity of the method & execution is what makes it best. I'm going to try to emulate the Solari idea this week and see how it looks.

The problem with any of these is that once you know the underlying gimmick, then the the method becomes pretty easy to figure out for a magician... although for laymen these should slay.

Hey Brett -

I like "Insane", but to me this version with the wine glass eliminates any possible weakness or awkward handling the Nyman routine might have had. It couldn't be easier with the glass. The cards line up perfectly and it gives the magician a reason to put the cards together - in the glass.

If you already have "Insane", then all you have to do is lose the envelope and get a wine glass. Maybe use different "stuff", too.

Robert

I disagree on Astonish being the same effect of Insane.
With insane you show the prediction face up from the beginning, which in my opinion is much more subtle than this...

In thinking this through I think that showing a full deck spread for the finale (showing all different cards) may play better than the blank "blizzard" ending.

Why?

With blanks it may put unwanted heat on the face up cards.

Good point. There are minor differences and subtleties in all of these tricks.

Brett makes a good point, too. I can see using a regular deck for this, but I do think the blank deck finish adds a nice additional kicker, and therefore takes attention away from the matching cards. But, I could be wrong.

Robert

Coincidence Impossible has already been released a few years ago ;-)

I thought it looked familiar. I don't know who actually came up with this method, but I kind of like J. P. Vallarino's take on it, myself.

Robert

absolutely right brett. it's not a good idea IMO to use blanks or
all jokers. it gives away the trick and heats up the suspicion for the
two cards in the glass.
after watching the second presentation, I knew immediatly how it works. I really think its better to use phoenix cards, cant go to much in detail because of exposure. then this one could probably fool magicians as well.

the method indeed is pretty old. there are many effects out there that a pretty
identical.

I would try the method with the wine glass on stage with the biggersized cards from
phoenix as well, so they will be seen for a larger audience as well.

the idea with the glass is very nice
I'll let you know how it plays as a stage act