For those of you who know me and my work, you already know that I usually do everything I can to avoid having to use false moves in my routines. However, I will occasionally use a tabled pull-through shuffle (never for magicians -- only in front of lay audiences).

I don't claim to be the ultimate master of this technique, but yesterday I filmed a brief video detailing some of my personal touches to the technique that have helped me tremendously. I thought I'd share it here, in case anyone finds something useful to them.

https://youtu.be/vKOtRBOswRk

Ben, the condition of the cards is almost irrelevant (within reason) when it comes to the brief and the strip out. Whether using a Push Through or a Strip Out, you can separate the packets with a tiny brief if your fingers are positioned correctly. If viewing the deck from the spectators angle sat directly in front of you, most people have their 3rd fingers fingers in this condition:

----- / (for some reason this forum won't let me post a back slash, but the illustration is the fingers angled towards the center of the deck, instead of straight vertically)

For the packet removal to be reliable, you simple have to have your 3rd fingers in this condition:

|----- |

Other than that, you would be better served to do the Push Through with the little fingers for all the reasons you stated in your video regarding cover. As for speed being a tell, I don't agree with that, the tell is rhythm and tension (going slow and then fast, pushing lightly and then gripping tightly).

For the fine brief and slow type of push through, I consider Jason England's tutorial is the best.
For the faster paced type, Forte's GPS demo is probably the textbook quality.
All else that is needed is practice.

I'm not here to debate. I'm just sharing what I feel has helped me. I acknowledged in my video that lots of people have their own ways of doing this. I'm sure yours is great.

Ben

My mistake. I thought we were on a discussion forum.

You are incapable of discussion.
@Ben, thanks for sharing it with us. I know you wouldnt do it if it wasnt working well for you.
Well done!

Some good tips!

Technique definitely depends on the state of the cards and shuffling a much smaller packet into a larger one is something I've had to do with very worn decks before now.

I also agree with your point on speed not necessarily adding deception; I've seen some shuffles, that happen at speed and with little cover, that don't give time for the packets to look like they're squared up, the spectators eyes easily follow one packet straight through to the other side. Though, as you also note, with the misdirection of addressing the spectator at that point, this can be passable.

However, one time I would certainly say that speed is needed, is with the up-the-ladder sequence.

I'm generally not a sleight of hand magician, and 99% of the time I have no particular use for false shuffles. I do know several (and have even created some), but almost never use them in my active repertoire. Most of my material permits genuine shuffles.

It's not my intention to make my card handling look "professional", like a formal casino-style shuffle. When I do use the tabled pull-through, I want it to look casual, and approximately commensurate with the way I handle cards in general. I don't try to make it look like cards are completely unfamiliar to me (as some mentalists do), but I also don't want anything I do to look too practiced. This informs some of the choices I make.

For example, here's a false shuffle I created:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ra2dkuiq95bb4x......mov?dl=0

@ TH10111

Hi TH10111. What do you think of the push through Forte demo'ed in GPS. It's fast paced, and it's very deceptive I think. Though no apparent squaring action is in the sequence, it does look like a simple cut.

Hey Simon,
I am a fan of Forte's fast style, and with his shuffle there is sufficient cover to hide the push through.
However, I typically prefer a moment to be left with the packets squared at the front, but yet to be pulled. In other words, the visible central section of the long side of the deck appears square. Obviously this requires good covering of the protruding ends of the packets, but, if anyone is burning the pack, they will see a 'squared' deck.
This slight pause also separates the riffle action from the strip out action, which then makes it harder for a spectator to associate the two and figure out what's going on.

@ TH10111

I agree.
I usually use the slow fine brief version as Jason England taught. But I like Forte's push through a lot, and I think the fast paced one may fit better in a gambling demo sequence better.

I would agree that a fast paced style and confident attitude may be better for a gambling demo in an act where you are trying to convince the audience that you are some kind of highly skilled card sharp.

But in a real game, looking too skilled with the deck will just draw attention to yourself, and misdirection is less readily available, so a slower paced shuffle with these added convincers may be preferable.

In magic looking less skilled with a deck of cards can also be desirable; in the classic pick-a-card-loose-the-card-find-the-card plot, if you display a high level of skill, then the spectators will attribute this miracle to that skill. Whereas, if you show no ability with the cards, then the spectators are more likely to experience that feeling of wonder, which magic is so well known for.

I guess overall, as with most things, it depends on what you're aiming for and your personal style.

Not sure why the discussions about the second video got deleted.

Nice work Ben Thanks for posting

Because the second video was so nice and clean it had to be hidden. Really, I liked that shuffle. Nice work Ben

Hi Ben,

Question about maintaining the thickness of the packet on the left after pulling out on the right.

If you really undercut after a genuine shuffle, the top half would drop to the table and be about 26 cards thick. Wouldn't it be better to simply let the left packet collapse? It should look like the upper packet dropping to the table and thus simulate the real shuffle.

Mike

I don't usually perform table shuffles however I found your video very interesting and helpful thanks for sharing.

I've tried it both ways. I prefer to not allow the collapse. When the inner end collapses more than the outer end, I personally think it weakens the illusion. When a pack of cards is cut, the cards comprising each block remain parallel to each other. Plus, it contributes to further airation and is yet another measure one can take to prevent binding.

I think the post with the video link is still there. I wasn't aware that posts were deleted. Exposure, maybe?