(Close Window)
Topic: Effects that stand up to repetition
Message: Posted by: scorch (Sep 6, 2005 07:56PM)
In relation to the recent thread about whether or not you should repeat an effect when asked, I thought it might be interesting to discuss which effects are those exceptional ones that are not diminished by repeating them. And I'm not talking about sucker or challenge effects where you change the method each time. I'm talking about effects that you perform from beginning to end, and repeat them verbatim to good effect. Are there routines that actually improve with repetition?
Message: Posted by: evolve629 (Sep 6, 2005 07:58PM)
The effect that I'm currently using that stands up to repetition is The Sweetest Sound by Scott Cram. Please check it out as it's impromptu and instantly reset, so you can repeat it at request.
Message: Posted by: Whit Haydn (Sep 6, 2005 08:56PM)
Chicago Surprise.
Message: Posted by: Mago Gregorio (Sep 6, 2005 08:59PM)
Where can I find "Sweetest Sound" by Scott Cram ?? Any book or DVD about it ?
Message: Posted by: ash_arani (Sep 16, 2005 03:34PM)
"Sweetest Sound" by Scott Cram is sold as an instant download at Penguin Magic...
Message: Posted by: Steve Suss (Sep 16, 2005 03:50PM)
Mr. Haydn I've heard great things about your Chicago Surprise. Is it written up anywhere or is it on DVD ?
Message: Posted by: Vandy Grift (Sep 16, 2005 04:03PM)
There is a manuscript for the Chicago Surprise. I don't know if it's still available but it's certainly worth looking for.
Message: Posted by: yentlswolfs (Sep 17, 2005 02:27AM)
You could do "The Trick that fooled Houdinii" over and over again.
Message: Posted by: MagicT (Sep 18, 2005 02:54AM)
The Trick That Cannoy Be Explained, and if you read Bannon's new book, "Dear Mr. Fantasy", the first trick in Chapter 2 "Line Of Sight (Control)" is a great trick to repeat over and over. You can also repeat the 6-Card Repeat. Ok that was a joke. Anyway, "Grab It" by Marlo (The Cardician-1953) is a cool trick worth repeating.

Message: Posted by: elmago (Sep 18, 2005 03:19AM)
Invisible deck.
Ghost glass. (A card revelation)

In my experiance, they get stronger with repetion.

Miguel Rangel
Message: Posted by: Larry Barnowsky (Sep 18, 2005 06:52PM)
I think you're looking for trouble if you deliberately repeat an effect using the same methodology. Effects I do where the method changes but the effect is repeated include Ambitious Card, Oil and Water, and Monte type effects. An exception, where the method can be the same each time, would be the 6 card repeat.
Message: Posted by: Amir (Sep 18, 2005 07:12PM)
Throw the cards at the face. Gets 'em everytime.
Message: Posted by: love2laugh (Sep 19, 2005 12:30PM)
Three Card Monte!
Message: Posted by: magicarisimon (Sep 19, 2005 11:24PM)
You can repeat any effect more than once if you know how to do it in more than one way. Especially if the second method counteracts how you do the first method. That way you can esentially repeat almost any effect more than once.
Message: Posted by: Dark (Sep 20, 2005 12:07AM)
Eight card brain wave can sometimes be stronger the second time.
Message: Posted by: magicarisimon (Sep 20, 2005 12:15AM)
Problem is you can't do 8 card brainwave a second time because what if the first time the color of the backs were blue and the second time the colors of the backs were red. You'd would look pretty dumb saying the first time "I have seven blue cards and a red card" and the second time saying "Now, without any change I have 7 red cards and one blue cards". People will begin to suspect. It also doesn't fit in with the prediction motif. You don't show one prediction and then say oh by the way that back is normal now and this other one changed color. But good thinking.
Message: Posted by: paisa23 (Sep 20, 2005 12:18AM)
Vodoo from Drawroom deceptions. I don't know if it is anywhere else.
And wouldnt ACR fit in here. isn't it an effect the lives on the repetition?
Message: Posted by: 1KJ (Jun 9, 2021 06:46PM)
To me, the formula for a repeat trick is something that is less about the trick and more about the interaction with the people. I think that one of the best is a drawing duplication routine, especially when you are prepared to use different methods if necessary, but if you do it after a LOT of practice, you probably won't need a second method. I have found that different methods aren't usually needed if the effect is done well. And, it's not easy to do it well. It takes a lot of practice and sales skills. Think of it like a new salesperson: If a salesperson starts by closing around 2 out of 10, if they work at their presentation, they may get to the point of closing 9 out of 10. It takes refining the psychological and physical skills. With drawing duplication, I think success comes from making it about the drawing, how you do the drawing, and more importantly, what you say and do after the revelation. What I do is to make the process of getting the drawing seem unusual, I typically break down a drawing into shapes. So, if they draw a dog, I'll draw a circle and show it to them and say "This isn't what you drew, but this is the first thing I'm getting", then a couple triangles, then a couple more circles, then tie them all together to look like a dog. I got that from drawing instruction where they teach you to break everything down into simple shapes. Also, I make my drawing look fairly different than theirs, but the same subject. For example, if they draw a large house, I might draw a small house. Finally, I start a discussion about what their drawing means and even an interpretation of how they transmitted their drawing to me. For example, if they drew a large house and I draw a small house, I might comment on how they have a lot of confidence, but they don't need to brag. That is why their own drawing was large, but when they transmitted it to me, subconsciously, they sent it to me smaller. I always keep it positive. If they drew a small house and I drew a big house, I will tell them that their small house shows a commitment to detail, they think in terms of the small details, and when they transmitted it to me, it was strong and powerful, so my sense was a large house. These techniques mean that rarely does someone comment about the method. So, typically I will use the same method. However, if I had to repeat after they questioned the method, I have three methods I use: A peak wallet, a center tear, and sleight of hand to manipulate their card in a group of blank cards. I do tell them that I can only see it if I am touching something they have done. I tell them that it's sort of like having a hound dog smell an article of clothing to find a missing person. However, if someone is questioning the method, then I am most likely to shift to something completely different. If there are others participating, I don't want to stop there if the others are having fun, but I will if the problem person persists. This brings us into audience management. If you want to learn about audience management, watch a comedian deal with a heckler. Specifically, watch a comedian who uses the rest of the audience against a heckler. That is the way to handle a "magic heckler". I will look at the problem person for a few seconds without saying anything, then turn to the rest of the audience and say: "You know, most people come to a magic show to live in a magical fantasy world for a few minutes, but some people are like a three year old who feels like they need to figure it out." Then, turn back to the problem person and say: "I tell you what, if you let the rest of the audience just enjoy the show, I'll give you the instructions at the end of the show." I don't wait for their answer, I then turn to the rest of the audience and say: "Does that sound good to the rest of you? Would you like for me to continue?"

Message: Posted by: salmononius2 (Jun 9, 2021 09:58PM)
The oil and water that I do sounds like it fits this criteria (Pennzoil and Water on the DVD Visu-Antics, which seems to no longer be available (and for good reason)). It's a six card version (three red/three black), and I usually do it after a full deck red/black separation trick.

The way it's structured, it's a rapid fire show the black cards, show the red cards, mix them, and they separate. Entire trick from beginning to end takes less than 15 seconds.

The method allows it to be repeated ad infinitum with zero change to the method. I usually do it two or three times before transitioning to the next trick in my set, but I've done it as much as 5 times in a row when the audience is right for it.
Message: Posted by: Bob G (Jun 21, 2021 12:04PM)
Steve Suss,

Last time I looked (a few months ago), Hadyn's Chicago Surprise was available as a package that included both a manuscript and a video -- both of them thorough and clear. It's on his website (or one of his websites.)

Message: Posted by: Nikodemus (Jun 21, 2021 08:32PM)
Bob - that question about Chicago Surprise was posted in 2005! But you are absolutely right - it is available from Pop H's website (& Penguin).

The original post was about repeating an effect WITHOUT changing the method each time. Generally that is regarded as a bad idea - so it's an interesting question.
It seems to me there are three problems (generally) with repeating the same method -
1. The spectator now knows what to expect
2. They are much more likely to be looking for clues to "solve the riddle" rather than just enjoy the effect
3. Many methods rely on apparently casual gestures etc to disguise sleights. The first time round these aspects of the presentation seem irrelevant to the audience, and don't register consciously. When they are repeated, their significance quickly becomes apparent. I guess these would be the "clues" I referred to above.

So that suggests a repeatable effect would need to be very direct and streamlined, in order not to "leak" information about the method.

Interesting that someone above mentioned Trick That Cannot Be Explained. That basically is jazzing (improvising) - so slightly different each time. I have heard it argued that you should never repeat a trick with multiple Outs. But actually I think you could with TTCBE - the fact that it differs each time would make it more baffling.

My suggestion would be some versions of Open Prediction which use a DF. At the end of the first performance you are nicely set up to perform exactly the same effect with a different prediction (using exactly the same method).