(Close Window)
Topic: Push Through Block Transfers
Message: Posted by: James F (Oct 27, 2007 02:13AM)
I'm curious as to where I could read up on block transfers using Pull Through shuffles. I'm not sure as to what is the accepted best method for doing them. The method I came up with is simply this:

Cut top packet to right, shuffle X amount of cards on top of right hand packet. As the packets are pushed together, the left forefinger is touching the top cards of the left hand packet. Just prior to the ring fingers starting the angling action the left forefinger pushes its cards to the right, adding them to the opposite packet. They are then pushed through and stripped out.

It's kind of like doing the vernon shuffle but in one continuous pushing action that ends with a push through and strip out. I can't really think of any other way to add the cards to the opposite packet, but if there is a better method I'd like to know where to learn it. Thanks.

James
Message: Posted by: Ben Train (Oct 27, 2007 06:46AM)
The first book of the Marlo Shuffle Trilogy discusses some great ways to do this, but in conjunction with a strip-out. I use it in a fantastic routine by David Ben.

Since this is in the cheating section, my question is- what application does this have to a hustler? I realize what it accomplishes, but I also realize that if one simply wanted to stack a deck there are far simpler ways (now, if the slug was becoming heavy, as it does when I do demos sometimes, I use this rather then zarrowing under x cards, but otherwise...?) Does anyone know of any uses for this, and if it is ever used, at the card table?

Again, I know what it can achieve (though I'm sure I'll learn more applications over my lifetime), and I know that a clever cheat can use just about anything, but does anyone know of this being used at the table?

Thanks guys!
Ben
Message: Posted by: bishthemagish (Oct 27, 2007 08:25AM)
Allegedly - Or perhaps according to Vernon Old Dad Stevens used his block Transfer cull now known as "The Stevens Cull" at the card table. He was semi retired when Vernon met him and the story is in the last book of the Vernon Chronicles.

The cull was written up in the book Revelations - this was the Expert at the card table by Erdnase with Dai Vernon's comments on the side. Plus a short section on modern day improvements that was at the end of the book.

I use the Steven's cull or perhaps my slant on the Stevens cull a lot in my card work and published my cutting the aces routine using it on my first DVD. People in magic have said that the written explanation of the Stevens cull in the book Revelations is incorrect. However I have found it very useful in many ways and has a lot of nice uses in magic.

I hope this helps.
Message: Posted by: Ben Train (Oct 27, 2007 10:01AM)
Hi Glen,

We may be in disagreement here, but I don't think the Steven's cull, as described (or any variation that I have read) can be described as a block transfer. The target cards are blocked off, not transfered.

The block transfer I was discussing above is a false shuffle, where a small group of cards is transfered from one half to the other. A good example of a transfer move (though, in conjunction with a cutting sequence rather then a shuffle) is to set up for a zarrow/Steven's shuffle- perform a slip cut, placing the packet on top of the deck, maintaining a break. Nothing has happened, but the top card of the pack is now in (or on top) of the lower half. It has been transfered.

The only time I really use such a move (transfer with a shuffle) is when I perform the aforementioned David Ben routine, in which I perform a false shuffle but the top 4 cards are transfered from the top of the deck to the bottom half.

I would love to know what applications other people have for this!
Message: Posted by: bishthemagish (Oct 27, 2007 10:28AM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-27 11:01, Nordatrax wrote:
Hi Glen,

We may be in disagreement here, but I don't think the Steven's cull, as described (or any variation that I have read) can be described as a block transfer. The target cards are blocked off, not transfered.
[/quote]
That is fine Ben - but I look at things differently than most people. I look at it from the point of view that it is all table shuffle work. And depending on what the need is - the push through shuffle and the pull through shuffle are transfer shuffles where the deck half’s are transferred during the shuffle.

In my opinion the cull came after the push through and pull through shuffles and it is a variation adding a block. The block is transferred in the shuffle and used depending on the need of the card worker.
[quote]
On 2007-10-27 11:01, Nordatrax wrote:
The block transfer I was discussing above is a false shuffle, where a small group of cards is transfered from one half to the other. A good example of a transfer move (though, in conjunction with a cutting sequence rather then a shuffle) is to set up for a zarrow/Steven's shuffle- perform a slip cut, placing the packet on top of the deck, maintaining a break. Nothing has happened, but the top card of the pack is now in (or on top) of the lower half. It has been transfered.
[/quote]
In my opinion the Vernon Triumph shuffle is far better than the zarrow. This is another false shuffle that can be used to cull cards (I have a method of my own) and also stack cards - as I have written up in the secret sessions section of the Café and in one of my blog books.

In this case the transfer of cards or a single card is on top of the shuffle usually the cards transfer from the left half to the right half depending on if the card worker is left handed or right handed.

The reason I think the Triumph shuffle is so great is because it is a false shuffle as the cards are stacked the stacked cards go deeper into the deck. As they go deeper the staked cards can be accidentally lost. The Vernon Triumph shuffle being a false shuffle does the job quite well for magic that is.
[quote]
On 2007-10-27 11:01, Nordatrax wrote:
The only time I really use such a move (transfer with a shuffle) is when I perform the aforementioned David Ben routine, in which I perform a false shuffle but the top 4 cards are transfered from the top of the deck to the bottom half.

I would love to know what applications other people have for this!
[/quote]
I have used the table shuffle work for many years and I keep finding more ways to use it. I used it to cold cut the four aces one at a time from a shuffled deck as in my cut the aces routine on DVD -1. I also use it to bring the four aces to the top after doing the Marlo shift using the plunger.

After the shift - split the deck into two halves and table shuffle and it is easy to spot the aces and Stevens cull them to the top of the deck.

Besides that it can be used to cull stack cards on the fly from a shuffled deck.

Yes some of the shuffles are very different but in my opinion they all sort of lead back to the same ideas and are variations of an idea.

Just my opinion.
Message: Posted by: Ben Train (Oct 27, 2007 10:48AM)
Hi Glen,

as I mentioned in another topic, I have your dvds (including the one where you discuss your interpretation of the Steven's cull), your lecture notes, and I have read your blog, so I am familiar (on some level), with your work.

I hope you won't mind me clarifying some things. I have respect for your work and hope to learn from you.

[quote]
On 2007-10-27 11:28, bishthemagish wrote:
That is fine Ben - but I look at things differently than most people. I look at it from the point of view that it is all table shuffle work. And depending on what the need is - the push through shuffle and the pull through shuffle are transfer shuffles where the deck half’s are transferred during the shuffle.

In my opinion the cull came after the push through and pull through shuffles and it is a variation adding a block. The block is transferred in the shuffle and used depending on the need of the card worker.
[/quote]

Again, I'm not sure I agree. A strip-out shuffle, be it a push-through or pull-out, doesn't transfer anything. That is the idea. A block or single card transfer can be added to the process, but it is a different tool used in conjunction.

[quote]
In my opinion the Vernon Triumph shuffle is far better than the zarrow. This is another false shuffle that can be used to cull cards (I have a method of my own) and also stack cards - as I have written up in the secret sessions section of the Café and in one of my blog books.

In this case the transfer of cards or a single card is on top of the shuffle usually the cards transfer from the left half to the right half depending on if the card worker is left handed or right handed.
[/quote]

I'm not sure this is the right place to discuss the merits to one versus the other (as the original post pertained to block transfer work. But, in fairness, the Zarrow can be, and is, used to stack AND cull cards, sometimes both at the same time. The zarrow IS a form of block transfer though.

[quote]
The reason I think the Triumph shuffle is so great is because it is a false shuffle as the cards are stacked the stacked cards go deeper into the deck. As they go deeper the staked cards can be accidentally lost. The Vernon Triumph shuffle being a false shuffle does the job quite well for magic that is.
[/quote]

I'm not sure I understand. Can you elaborate?

All the best,
Ben
Message: Posted by: bishthemagish (Oct 27, 2007 12:12PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-27 11:48, Nordatrax wrote:
Again, I'm not sure I agree. A strip-out shuffle, be it a push-through or pull-out, doesn't transfer anything. That is the idea. A block or single card transfer can be added to the process, but it is a different tool used in conjunction.
[/quote]
You don't have to agree.

A push through shuffle the way I do it the top half is cut to the left. Then the riffle shuffle and then the push through. Then after the push through the half that is on the left is transferred to the right. And the half that is on the right is transferred or pushed through and is now on the left.

To complete the shuffle I do up the ladder in the LePaul Book.

Now in my opinion the cull was added later and that is that a brief or a block step was formed and used to cull certain useful cards. The block or brief is put in before the push through - so in my opinion the brief or block is transferred in the push through and used according to the agenda of the card worker.

A matter of opinion.
[quote]
I'm not sure this is the right place to discuss the merits to one versus the other (as the original post pertained to block transfer work. But, in fairness, the Zarrow can be, and is, used to stack AND cull cards, sometimes both at the same time. The zarrow IS a form of block transfer though.
[/quote]
That is fine Ben. For those that like and use the Zarrow shuffle.
[quote]
The reason I think the Triumph shuffle is so great is because it is a false shuffle as the cards are stacked the stacked cards go deeper into the deck. As they go deeper the staked cards can be accidentally lost. The Vernon Triumph shuffle being a false shuffle does the job quite well for magic that is.
[/quote]
Well Ben most table riffle stacks that I have used start with the stacked cards on the bottom of the deck. One by one they are cut to the top and stacked in turn. The problem with the riffle shuffle stacks as I see it. Is that once you stack an ace or another card depending on the cards you choose to stack. Lets say it is the four aces.

After the first ace is stacked the second ace is stacked. Lets say it is for a game of poker 4 hands. After the second ace is stacked that puts the first ace eight cards down. When the next ace is stacked the first ace is 16 cards down.

As each ace is stacked more cards go on top and the closer the first ace gets to the center of the deck and the possibility with other stacking methods where they do not use a false shuffle. The chance the card worker might lose one or two of aces that were stacked - increases with each shuffle.

Using the Triumph shuffle for stacking because it is and can be a false shuffle solves this problem.

I suggest you check out my Triumph stack and take a look at it.

Good luck.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Oct 27, 2007 04:08PM)
What determines a transfer shuffle is the result not what occurs during the process. If every card ends up in the same position that it started from, then the result is nothing has passed from one place to another. When we are speaking of a transfer shuffle we are talking about the deck ending up in a somewhat different order are we not. Otherwise we are talking about all shuffles as cards pass from one place to another during “the process” of all shuffles.

i.e.

If I cut the deck in half and do a one card cover Zarrow then the cover card ends up in a different position from where it started and thus it has moved, in relation to the original order of the deck and that is the result. That card has transferred from one place to another.
If on the other hand I did an original Zarrow the deck would end up in original order and no transfer has resulted.

So it seems to me.

To avoid confusion lets say what I think we are talking about here in this topic is a shuffle that results in the deck ending in a somewhat different order than it started from. Rather than a full deck blind shuffle.
Message: Posted by: bishthemagish (Oct 27, 2007 06:19PM)
So Tommy in your opinion would the Steven's cull be a block transfer shuffle or a brief transfer shuffle?

In my opinion it would be a block transfer shuffle but it is OK with me if others do not agree.

Just an opinion.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Oct 27, 2007 06:51PM)
God knows. :) I think I understand Glen. Thinking about it now I think your right, as the process describes the shuffle and not the result. Ie an overhand shuffle decribes the process and not the result of it and so on.
Message: Posted by: James F (Oct 27, 2007 09:45PM)
I want to stack the flop (12,13,14 down) and am having trouble due to shuffling the stock as it gets larger. It's also noticeable that many cards are not being shuffled. I'd like to use the pull through false shuffle so I can shuffle this block of stacked cards because the packets will later be stripped out anyway. But I need to keep the newly added cards on top of the deck so I need to transfer those to the other packet (the original top). Hopefully that makes sense. I can (and do) do this with the zarrow. (push the packet back under the cover cards, thus adding however many cards on top of your stock while keeping the previously stacked cards in position) but I don't feel my zarrow is good enough to use at a card table.

Hope that clears up what I'm asking. I want to know the best way to get the added cards from the left hand packet pushed over onto the right hand packet so that after the strip out they have been added to the top of the deck.

James
Message: Posted by: Ben Train (Oct 27, 2007 09:58PM)
James,

the answer to your question is in the Marlo book I mentioned.

Tommy/Glenn,
by your definition, a real shuffle can be classified as a transfer-type move. As can removing the deck from the box. The goal of the transfer-type moves is to move one or more cards from a specific location, to another specific location. A Steven's shuffle isn't that. There is no transfer being used.
Message: Posted by: JasonEngland (Oct 27, 2007 09:58PM)
Ben,

Cut and run.

J
Message: Posted by: Ben Train (Oct 27, 2007 10:10PM)
Hey Jason.

That's what I do. But, I figured for explanation purposes I would describe it differently. Interestingly, I described the full box cut with the single card transfer first, then deleted it all to describe something a little more simplistic. I cant think of a clear description of a transfer move then a slip cut.

Ben
Message: Posted by: jcards01 (Oct 27, 2007 10:24PM)
Marlo has some great work on this subject as mentioned above. So does Fulves.

Terminology. A block transfer is the act of transferring one card or a block of cards from one half to the other while riffle shuffling the cards.

A 'push through' or a 'pull through' is a false shuffle and not a block transfer.
A 'strip out' is a false shuffle and also can be used to 'block transfer' a card or cards.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Oct 28, 2007 07:18AM)
Glen has work that helps with the problem of stacking deep. As he said “I suggest you check out my Triumph stack and take a look at it.” It’s cool and definitely worth knowing. Once you get it you will see it opens up other roads so to speak at least I found it was so.
Message: Posted by: bishthemagish (Oct 28, 2007 09:32AM)
Hey Thanks Tommy for the nice things you said about my Triumph stack. There was a time that I did not consider the Triumph shuffle a block transfer shuffle. Later after talking with another magician about it. And his opinion it was. I agreed and now I consider it a block transfer shuffle.

I have never read the Fulves - Marlo work on Block transfer shuffles.

But I use my Triumph slant and my slant on the Stevens cull quite a lot in my shuffle work.

Thanks again Tommy.
Message: Posted by: Magic Fred (Oct 31, 2007 03:23AM)
Have to agree totally with Tommy (as usual). Pay close attention to everything put out by Mr bishthemagish. He has made some awesome contributions to the gambling fraternity and his work on all this "block transfer" stuff is revolutionary.
Message: Posted by: James F (Nov 3, 2007 08:59PM)
"The first book of the Marlo Shuffle Trilogy discusses some great ways to do this, but in conjunction with a strip-out. I use it in a fantastic routine by David Ben."

Thanks for the reference, but as you said here, it is used with a strip out. I want to use pull/push through shuffles. Is it similar enough to help me with the problem I have? I've been playing around with this a lot and am really having trouble coming up with an effective and consistent and fast way of transferring the added cards to the other half of the deck.

I have read about the triumph stack but do not use the triumph shuffle, only push through shuffles. I never really liked the triumph shuffle. Perhaps I do it wrong and have never seen anyone do it right... but I never get that "the cards got squared at some point" feeling with the it. Thanks for all the replies.

James
Message: Posted by: Ben Train (Nov 4, 2007 12:00AM)
Although I've added all I feel like adding to this conversation, I will clarify one point-

David Ben's routine uses a push-through, not a strip-out. At the time I preferred the strip-out (and for many applications still do), so I switched the shuffles so that I would be more comfortable.

There are numerous ways to do block transfers with a push-through.
Message: Posted by: bishthemagish (Nov 4, 2007 07:42AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-03 21:59, James F wrote:
I have read about the triumph stack but do not use the triumph shuffle, only push through shuffles. I never really liked the triumph shuffle. Perhaps I do it wrong and have never seen anyone do it right... but I never get that "the cards got squared at some point" feeling with the it. Thanks for all the replies.

James
[/quote]
Interesting - I just happen to be writing an e-book about the Triumph shuffle and block transfer methods. Such as culling, and cull stacking on the fly. I think the Triumph shuffle used with the Steven's cull makes culling that much cleaner. And in my opinion I think that the Triumph shuffle makes it easier and has the advantage of being a false shuffle. And that is an advantage in cull stacking on the fly as I mentioned above in the Triumph stack.

I am also of the opinion of having more than one way to cull cards is an advantage just as having more than one way to get a card to the top of the deck.

But each to their own.

Just my opinion.