(Close Window)
Topic: Setting Up For John Bannon's Dead Reckoning
Message: Posted by: panimen (Aug 15, 2007 06:39PM)
John Bannon's "Dead Reckoning" is a wonderful effect, but I am always discouraged to add it into my routine because of its setup. The fact that it's a large stack doesn't bother me but rather it's because I find it quite difficult to arrange during a routine. Culls and other forms of separation take a longer time because it's difficult to quickly identify which cards belong to the stack. Those of you who use this trick should understand what I mean.

I know that I could resort to using the effect at the beginning of the routine or executing a deck switch, but I want to try my best to stay clear from those solutions. Also, I don't want to have to memorize the stack because my memory skills are not the best, I already have a memorized deck to worry about, and it seems like such unnecessary effort for a single trick.

Does anyone have any suggestions of arranging the stack in an impromptu situation during a routine? Also it would be very convenient (if at all possible) to be able to obtain the stack from new deck order or Juan Tamariz's Mnemonica order.
Message: Posted by: Andy the cardician (Aug 22, 2007 12:01AM)
That is an interesting challenge - Mnemonic to Dead Reckoning . . .
Message: Posted by: Bill Hallahan (Aug 31, 2007 11:28PM)
With minimal setup, you can easily perform a version of the routine that will be as strong as the original version 50% of the time. The other times it will still be a good routine.

Using a regular a 26 card deck, put the "special card" at the same depth from the top as the normal version. Use the "Queen of Diamonds" instead of the "Nine of Diamonds" later in the routine. The participant's card will end up at the same position as in the regular Dead Reckoning routine. (You can do all of that with the regular version of the routine too. Also, with the regular version and this version, I drop the deck on the dealt cards after the spelling demonstration before I proceed).

Tell the participant to spell slowly. Do the regular ending of the routine, but don't indicate what the outcome will be. Then, before revealing the card, ask them what it is. If they say one of the cards that works, then reveal the card as usual. If they say another card, then you can do one of two things.

You say, "I needed you to spell the card long enough so I could read your mind and figure it out. That's why I stopped you now" and then:

(1) Reveal the card.

(2) Or, put the card back on the deck, do a DL, and then pretend you stopped on a random card since it doesn't matter if you know the card. Do any type of change to apparently turn the wrong card into their card.

50% of the time, it will come out at strong as the original routine. The other outcome is still a seemingly impossible card location.

If you really need to perform impromptu, what I wrote above will work. I strongly recommend the original version if you can do it. If you aren't performing that routine first, you can still do a deck switch and perform it later.
Message: Posted by: lumberjohn (Mar 13, 2008 09:26AM)
Pick up Kostya Kimlet's Roadrunner Cull DVD to learn the RR multiple card cull. With it, you can cull half the deck in under ten seconds. The only challenge then is knowing which cards to cull. You really only need to remember two sets of values: those for the diamonds and those for the clubs. For hearts and spades, you simply leave behind the diamond values. Work on this for a couple hours and you should have it down pretty well. From that point, you have a stunning effect that can be set up in under 20 seconds with a quick run through the deck (to make sure all the cards are there), right under the spectators' noses.
Message: Posted by: S2000magician (Mar 15, 2008 12:39AM)
If you put pencil dots in the corners on the back of each of the target cards you could do a face-down upjog & stripout (tell the audience that as a kid you thought that this was a great improvement on shuffling, until you realized that it's a lot more work and gives the same results) followed by a false shuffle or two (much more efficient, you remark, continuing the theme) and you're set.

It might work.
Message: Posted by: Magicmike1949 (Mar 30, 2008 08:39AM)
Deck switch.
Message: Posted by: Axelchen (Mar 30, 2008 05:46PM)
Hello panimen!

ok, I will try to give some first-mnemonical-aid (whatīs a quick cull if you donīt remember what cards to cull,he? :bg: ).
how about that:
I can remember such things much better if I see some structures that can reduce the amount of what I have to remember. so here is a structure:

1) diamond is the exception, all other suits start with a 3.

2) hearts and spades are identical; I īm thinking in clusters of 3: 3,4,5,_,7,8,9,_,J,Q,K

3) for clubs I remember a connection to the basic hearts/spades-structure: first group of three starts with 3, second group of three starts with 7 (plus the 8, because it is the second group, so I have to use two figures) and finally the middle value of the last group of three (Q)...ok, itīs not thaat clean, but perhaps you have a better idea.

4) for the diamonds I remember just two numbers , 16 and 12 (A,6;_10,2)

sounds too complicated? I donīt think so. basic are the pattern of three, that covers hearts and spades, then I can pick the clubs from that pattern...and..ok...perhaps someone can come up with something more impressive for the diamonds..
I think it will work for me (perhaps you ask me again in three weeks...:juggle:)

any thoughts?

best regards

Axel
Message: Posted by: EdgarWilde (Apr 5, 2008 03:32AM)
Switch the deck. why cull such a large stack?
Message: Posted by: Cain (Apr 5, 2008 09:38AM)
It's not at all difficult to separate the cards because there are clear patterns, as noted above. While practicing "Dead Reckoning" I became adept at separating the cards, which allows for some really cool tricks (a very clean version of "Neither Blind Nor Stupid," "Prediction Shuffle bored").
Message: Posted by: Turk (Apr 6, 2008 06:26PM)
I like Bill Campbell's idea of pencil dotting the cards and then doing a 26 card strip-out. Likewise, I like Bill Halahan's suggestions and I'm going to have to play around with his ideas.

I was reading Simon Aronson's "FlashSpeller" (in his "Try the Impossible" book) and I had an "Ah-Ha! Moment". Using Simon's methodology in "FlashSpeller", you no longer have to start with a setup deck nor do you need to have a crib sheet nor do you have to "brute force" memorize the 26 cards. If you get comfortable using Simon's methodology, you can easily "see" the cards you'll need and, with careful judiciousl use of which card tricks you perform prior to "Dead Reckoning", I can see being able to accomplish the stack is a series of small prior steps.

I dunno. Maybe using "FlashSpeller" is not practical but I'm going to play around with it a bit and see if I can get it to "play" in this regard.

Best,

Mike
Message: Posted by: H2Odesign (Apr 10, 2008 06:47AM)
[quote]
On 2008-04-06 19:26, Turk wrote:
I was reading Simon Aronson's "FlashSpeller" (in his "Try the Impossible" book) and I had an "Ah-Ha! Moment". Using Simon's methodology in "FlashSpeller", you no longer have to start with a setup deck nor do you need to have a crib sheet nor do you have to "brute force" memorize the 26 cards.
[/quote]
For a couple years I have carried around a combined list of the 26 cards in DReckoning and their Aronson Stack value with their "Flashspeller" value, attempting to make a transtion from the stack to the DReckoning set-up and I too have decided on the deck switch solution with a twist.

Then sometime last year, while watching David Regals David Regal - Premise, Power & Participation Volume Two, it occurred to me to combine the Prophecy Pack with Dead Reckoning so that I can switch in the "double" stack.
Using the "normal" appearing half to pull off DReckoning, I then head right into the great prediction of a randomly dealt card to force one of 50-"50" forcing side.
But I went one further: the force card is also in the DReckoning stack, giving me an extra card in the Prophecy Pack to force.
It's a great combination of two great effects.
So switch is what I do!
Message: Posted by: panimen (Jun 17, 2008 06:25PM)
Thanks to everyone for the suggestions.
After performing Dead Reckoning for quite a while now (you can tell by the lateness of my reply), I've come to realize that my initial problem only required experience to solve. Even though I wasn't too familiar with the stack at first, the fact that I'm only a hobbyist allows for informal, relaxed situations where I can simply cull the cards in front of the spectators as slow as I need to. They just assume that I'm playing around with the deck, and a simple false shuffle effectively reinforces that nothing fishy has happened.
After performing many times, it became easier to recognize the necessary cards (from culling them and from spectator's selections). I may not be able to immediately name every card in the stack, but I am familiar enough with their faces to be able to cull them fairly quickly. I'm sure that mnemonics and visual aids would greatly improve this, but the bare necessities merely require experience to become familiar enough to perform the effect.
Thanks again for all your replies.
Message: Posted by: SpringBizkit (Nov 10, 2008 09:37PM)
Do this!!
have someone pick a card from the shuffled deck, and then use green's angle separation to go through the deck and separate the stack as you try and "figure out" what card they have. I do this when I need to separate the 1-26 and the 27-52 of the mnemonic stack.
once you get the stack down easily, it'll take you no time to separate the stack. give it a shot, the culling doesn't take as long as you think, and you're doing it at the same time as a trick, making the audience not so bored, but maybe building some suspense (as long as it's not like 5 minutes..)
Message: Posted by: lumberjohn (Feb 25, 2009 09:14AM)
First, cull all Hearts and Spades to the back. Then, cull all A, 2, 6, and 10’s except Clubs. Move the A, 2, 6, 10 of Hearts & Spades from the back to the face. Finally, cull the 3C, 7C, 8C, and QC to the back. These three passes take me about thirty seconds.
Message: Posted by: Chancho (Apr 29, 2013 06:18PM)
This is one of my favourites because shuffling both halfs makes it appear so fair. From my experience though, the spelling isn't the part that really impresses. When it's not possible to setup cleanly, any cards can be used with the same method. That gives you a number of options to turn it into something just as impressive and spelling free. Given the reset the original is a really clean one to repeat but spelling the example more than once comes across badly.
Message: Posted by: Turk (May 16, 2013 12:46PM)
[quote]
On 2013-04-29 19:18, Chancho wrote:
This is one of my favourites because shuffling both halfs makes it appear so fair. From my experience though, the spelling isn't the part that really impresses. When it's not possible to setup cleanly, any cards can be used with the same method. That gives you a number of options to turn it into something just as impressive and spelling free. Given the reset the original is a really clean one to repeat but spelling the example more than once comes across badly.
[/quote]

Chancho,

First off, welcome to the Café. I was impressed that for a first post, you made such an insightful comment on one of the great effects out there. I was especially taken with your "Given the reset the original is a really clean one to repeat but spelling the example more than once comes across badly." comment. Such comments demonstrate that you really apply a meaningful and discriminating thought process to the magic you perform.

Currently, I segue from "Dead Reckoning" into another effect that destroys the deck set-up and, for other reasons, has become my closer.

In my quest for following the "Rule of Three", I am still on a hunt for a [i]related[/i] effect that I can perform either before "Dead Reckoning" (or immediately after) that preserves the "Dead Reckoning" deck set-up and allows me to segue into my aforesaid "closer". I've struggled with this thought process for months and, as of yet, have not come up with a suitably-related effect that can be incorporated into a "Rule of Three" effect. AAARGH!!

That said, I am not easily discouraged and so I'll continue my Don Quixote quest and, hopefully and eventually, discover that illusive third effect.

Again, welcome to the Café.

Mike
Message: Posted by: landmark (May 16, 2013 02:12PM)
[quote] Given the reset the original is a really clean one to repeat but spelling the example more than once comes across badly. [/quote] Good point as Turk indicates, but I don't think that is too much of a problem. Just make sure there is something different about the second demo as compared to the first--perhaps the first time, the cards are dealt face down, the second time--"let's try it a little differently, deal the cards face up, like this..."
Message: Posted by: Turk (May 21, 2013 09:06PM)
[quote]
On 2013-05-16 15:12, landmark wrote:
[quote] Given the reset the original is a really clean one to repeat but spelling the example more than once comes across badly. [/quote] Good point as Turk indicates, but I don't think that is too much of a problem. Just make sure there is something different about the second demo as compared to the first--perhaps the first time, the cards are dealt face down, the second time--"let's try it a little differently, deal the cards face up, like this..."
[/quote]

Landmark,

I like your idea of dealing the cards face up as a second phase! And, by doing so, this might be just what I have been looking for to put together a three phase routine...part of which involves performing Dead Reckoning. That is: Phase One (A Dead Reckoning dealt face down) followed by Phase Two (A Dead Reckoning dealt face up) followed by Phase Three (my "deck stack destroying" phase that completes the performance piece).

Thank you for the suggestion. I'm going to play around with this.

Mike
Message: Posted by: Danno83 (Jan 3, 2017 04:26AM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2008, Axelchen wrote:
Hello panimen!

ok, I will try to give some first-mnemonical-aid (whatīs a quick cull if you donīt remember what cards to cull,he? :bg: ).
how about that:
I can remember such things much better if I see some structures that can reduce the amount of what I have to remember. so here is a structure:

1) diamond is the exception, all other suits start with a 3.

2) hearts and spades are identical; I īm thinking in clusters of 3: 3,4,5,_,7,8,9,_,J,Q,K

3) for clubs I remember a connection to the basic hearts/spades-structure: first group of three starts with 3, second group of three starts with 7 (plus the 8, because it is the second group, so I have to use two figures) and finally the middle value of the last group of three (Q)...ok, itīs not thaat clean, but perhaps you have a better idea.

4) for the diamonds I remember just two numbers , 16 and 12 (A,6;_10,2)

sounds too complicated? I donīt think so. basic are the pattern of three, that covers hearts and spades, then I can pick the clubs from that pattern...and..ok...perhaps someone can come up with something more impressive for the diamonds..
I think it will work for me (perhaps you ask me again in three weeks...:juggle:)

any thoughts?

best regards

Axel [/quote]

Hi Axel,

So I'm a little late on the scene now it's 2017. And really this is my second post on here ever. I've only recently discovered Dead Reckoning on John Bannons Move Zero DVD - I can't believe I have left it sitting there for so long. What an amazing effect.

However I was disappointed that John Bannon didn't go over the stack in more detail. Maybe my newness is the issue and lack of knowledge and understanding of stacks, but I literally had to go through and work every card out... which is good for the brain anyway.

But I think Axel what you have suggested for culling the cards is great and is definitely a worker. So I'll be working on this to memorise the stack. Thanks so much

Dan
Message: Posted by: avasatu (Jan 3, 2017 11:58PM)
I do this effect from a shuffled deck. Simply memorize the requisite cards, buy Kostya Kimlat's work on the Roadrunner cull, and practice it like mad. I wonder if you like the SD Plus effect from Simon Aronson's work, by the way ;)
Message: Posted by: Danno83 (Jan 5, 2017 04:13AM)
[quote]On Jan 3, 2017, avasatu wrote:
.... and practice it like mad.... [/quote]

I have managed to remember all the cards. My cull is taking about 2mins at the moment, my head is taking a while to catch up :-)
Message: Posted by: avasatu (Jan 5, 2017 03:13PM)
[quote]On Jan 5, 2017, Danno83 wrote:
[quote]On Jan 3, 2017, avasatu wrote:
.... and practice it like mad.... [/quote]

I have managed to remember all the cards. My cull is taking about 2mins at the moment, my head is taking a while to catch up :-) [/quote]

One way to practice culling half the deck (say, half of mnemonica/Aronson, or Dead Recknoning cards), would be the learn to cull the black and then the reds from the group (so two culls back to back). Once you can do each of these comfortably, you can combine them.

For example, I have been learning to cull a shuffled deck to Mnemonica, and right now I am at about 2:30, which I consider a decent time for doing it covertly. First I learned to cull the sub 10s, teens, twenties, thirties, etc. separately, then I learned to cull cards below 30 and above thirty, and combining the two actions is about where I'm at now. I think it's a natural progression to practice culling in this way.
Message: Posted by: pnerd (Sep 9, 2020 02:27PM)
[quote]On May 22, 2013, Turk wrote:
[quote]
On 2013-05-16 15:12, landmark wrote:
[quote] Given the reset the original is a really clean one to repeat but spelling the example more than once comes across badly. [/quote] Good point as Turk indicates, but I don't think that is too much of a problem. Just make sure there is something different about the second demo as compared to the first--perhaps the first time, the cards are dealt face down, the second time--"let's try it a little differently, deal the cards face up, like this..."
[/quote]

Landmark,

I like your idea of dealing the cards face up as a second phase! And, by doing so, this might be just what I have been looking for to put together a three phase routine...part of which involves performing Dead Reckoning. That is: Phase One (A Dead Reckoning dealt face down) followed by Phase Two (A Dead Reckoning dealt face up) followed by Phase Three (my "deck stack destroying" phase that completes the performance piece).

Thank you for the suggestion. I'm going to play around with this.

Mike [/quote]
May I know why exactly you want to repeat performing Dead Reckoning?
.