(Close Window)
Topic: Ace 'Ace Cutting'
Message: Posted by: Hansen (Oct 27, 2009 06:18PM)
Ok, getting back on track...

I do love a nice bit of ace cutting, and, if Andy is to be believed (ordinary deck, no crimps, no slicks etc etc), I frankly have no idea how the hell this is done! It does look brilliant though. Possibly the best I've seen. Thoughts?

http://www.youtube.com/user/AndyHallCardMagic#p/a/u/2/VaLYLEzNA_8
Message: Posted by: Rizzo (Oct 27, 2009 07:38PM)
Very well done.Looks impossible.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Oct 27, 2009 08:36PM)
In God we Trust.
Message: Posted by: Maitre D (Oct 27, 2009 08:56PM)
Looks like a breather crimp to me.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 27, 2009 11:13PM)
I saw this when it was video when he first put it up and have been loosing sleep ever since! I'm certainly no expert on Ace cutting routines but the use of a breather doesn't seem to fit!

The guy does a hellava job negating every method I know of!
Message: Posted by: Maitre D (Oct 27, 2009 11:30PM)
How does the use of a breather not seem to fit?

Try it out. Make a breather crimp on 4 cards, shuffle the deck, cut to the 4 cards - piece of cake.

I'm neglecting to see any discrepancy that would indicate it's anything but a crimp of some sort.

I guess maybe the discrepancy is his claim that it's impromptu and doesn't use any crimps, but come on guys, you're smarter than that.
Message: Posted by: euro76 (Oct 28, 2009 12:09AM)
Wow it is very nice move.
Message: Posted by: kcg5 (Oct 28, 2009 03:27AM)
Andy is a great guy. Very good work. He is a member here.
Message: Posted by: AMcD (Oct 28, 2009 06:51AM)
Come on pals, many ways to do that! Breathers is possibly the easiest one.

You know guys, there are many possibilities to put a breather, you can use breathers on the fly for instance. Don't always think about the ugly version you can watch in Vernon's vids, there are very nice methods...

If you want, I can show you videos with absolutely invisible breathers (but I won't teach it).
Message: Posted by: tommy (Oct 28, 2009 07:20AM)
I think we ought not talk openly about how a magic trick is done.
Message: Posted by: AMcD (Oct 28, 2009 07:50AM)
It's not a magic zone here.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 28, 2009 09:54AM)
Ahhhh man, I'm feeling pretty embarrassed at the moment! I reckon this shows I'm no expert at crimpage either! Back to the books for me!
Message: Posted by: tommy (Oct 28, 2009 10:22AM)
So what?
Message: Posted by: AMcD (Oct 28, 2009 10:25AM)
So, when magicians wanna talk about magic tricks in a gambling area, no one knows what can occur lol.
Message: Posted by: Magic Marine (Oct 28, 2009 10:27AM)
[quote]
On 2009-10-28 07:51, AMcD wrote:
Come on pals, many ways to do that! Breathers is possibly the easiest one.

You know guys, there are many possibilities to put a breather, you can use breathers on the fly for instance. Don't always think about the ugly version you can watch in Vernon's vids, there are very nice methods...

If you want, I can show you videos with absolutely invisible breathers (but I won't teach it).
[/quote]
Is there anywhere in print or DVD that you can direct us to learn how to put in a breather on the fly in front of the spectators?
Message: Posted by: AMcD (Oct 28, 2009 10:46AM)
Nothing I'm aware of :(. Among the ones I use some have been grabbed "live" (true play) and one has been devised by myself.

If I remember well, some old magic books have a few pages on slick cards, breather and so on though. Say before 1960 :).
Message: Posted by: Magic Marine (Oct 28, 2009 10:55AM)
[quote]
On 2009-10-28 11:46, AMcD wrote:
Among the ones I use some have been grabbed "live" (true play)

[/quote]
Arnold,
For those of us who are only half smart (at best!), you mean you saw someone use it in a game or while performing effects and you deducted the method? If so, was it pretty obvious, or did you just get lucky and catch a flash?
Inquiring minds want to know!
Message: Posted by: tommy (Oct 28, 2009 11:53AM)
Well if that's what Armold means then Arnold is dreaming. :)
Message: Posted by: kcg5 (Oct 28, 2009 12:47PM)
[quote]
On 2009-10-28 08:20, tommy wrote:
I think we ought not talk openly about how a magic trick is done.
[/quote]


I agree with Tommy here. And for Andy's sake, if you think you have it, don't tip it.
Message: Posted by: Maitre D (Oct 28, 2009 01:41PM)
I disagree. The performer is claiming it's totally impromptu and is done with an entirely ordinary deck. In my opinion, by having that exaggerated disclaimer, it makes it acceptable to scrutinize what's really going on - he's basically asking for it. If he hadn't made that disclaimer, I wouldn't have bothered to say anything.

I guess a good analogy here is a video of someone walking on thin air and claiming it's gimmick-less and 100% impromptu - of course people are going to call shenanigans.

Needless to say, it was a fantastic performance.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Oct 28, 2009 01:57PM)
What if the Pope said that God owns everything, including intellectual property rights, so secrets don't really "belong" to anyone, and all should have equal claim?
Message: Posted by: kcg5 (Oct 28, 2009 02:08PM)
I think the method should stay secret, at least on this public site. If any one you want to talk about it further, maybe go to the more private site?
Message: Posted by: Maitre D (Oct 28, 2009 02:18PM)
I'll respect that.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Oct 28, 2009 02:56PM)
If
Message: Posted by: AMcD (Oct 28, 2009 03:13PM)
Lol, I didn't catch the move. Once, I had a weird feeling that something was happening... and the move was taught to me after :).

Good moves are hard to catch. Good moves are taught...
Message: Posted by: Hansen (Oct 29, 2009 01:59AM)
Hats off to Andy! It's a wonderful little piece, coupled with his characteristic amiable commentary. There's just something enviably appropriate in combining that accent with ace cutting! Maybe I've watched "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels" too many times, but you've got to like the chap!

If it is as we think it is, then the work is darn nigh invisible. And if it is truly impromptu (anytime, any where etc etc), then I'll put my hat back on just so as to be able to doff it again to Andy! Bravo! As something of an 'ace cutting' addict (or should that be 'tragic'?), this is something for a connoisseur to enjoy...

As someone more into the sneaky art of collusion, I admit I'm no expert on the more mechanical side of things. Mr Nash's Infinity is the limits of my on-the-spot-work know-how. Andy's certainly comes across far, far cleaner. Had me sratching my cranium anyway!

Once again, well done Mr Hall! Thanks for the entertainment.
Message: Posted by: The Dowser (Oct 29, 2009 07:46AM)
Whatever the method... cheating or no...that was a very impressive demonstration of cutting to the aces... or should I say bullets.
They looked like silver bullets to me... but I could be wrong.
Close is still wrong, right?
Dowser
Message: Posted by: Expertmagician (Oct 30, 2009 12:48PM)
Regardless, if breathers were used or not, it appears that there must have been some work placed in the aces to me OR work was in the rest of the deck and NOT the aces...

In either case, I agree that the type of work should not be discussed in a public forum :)

However, I thought he did a GREAT job in presentation and execution...I enjoyed the clip :)
Message: Posted by: awimagic (Oct 31, 2009 09:25AM)
Back when andy was on mvd he was gracious enough to send an explanation clip to those who wanted it and he is overall a great guy so one can drop him a PM at youtube to discuss this thing further ...
Message: Posted by: kcg5 (Oct 31, 2009 04:37PM)
Yes, he did, and yes, he is a great guy. But he doesn't show up on you tube that often, or here. He is very giving with his work.

mvd? magic video depot?
Message: Posted by: awimagic (Oct 31, 2009 06:33PM)
Yes sorry about that MVD stands for magic video depot ... at MVD andy was the star when it came to patter and presentation at least for me
Message: Posted by: splice (Nov 1, 2009 08:05AM)
I recall sending him a PM about this clip and receiving no reply.
Message: Posted by: kcg5 (Nov 2, 2009 01:28PM)
He only drops by here every once and a while
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 2, 2009 01:52PM)
I don't know how on the fly the "leaf"(?) crimp is but it sure seems like it would work well for a solution to Andy's routine! Now we just have to get Arnold to publish the work on his wicked cool crimp! ;)

MMc
Message: Posted by: Bret Maverick (Nov 2, 2009 01:57PM)
[quote] I disagree. The performer is claiming it's totally impromptu and is done with an entirely ordinary deck. In my opinion, by having that exaggerated disclaimer, it makes it acceptable to scrutinize what's really going on - he's basically asking for it. If he hadn't made that disclaimer, I wouldn't have bothered to say anything. [/quote]

Maybe I'm nit-picking here, but when I watched the video I thought that he described the deck - minus the four aces placed on the closeup pad - as being on-the-square, which indeed it most likely was, if only the aces were worked to accomplish the effect.

It's a magic trick, and careful selection of the patter to infer that NONE of the cards in the deck were worked at the time he was handling them (the deck was light four aces at that time) is an acceptable stretch of the truth by a performer in my view. Heck, many magicians lie outright to fool their audiences on YouTube.

Bret
Message: Posted by: The Dowser (Nov 3, 2009 12:45AM)
I believe his disclaimers... all of them. I also believe this secret is marketed by Lee Earle.
Message: Posted by: Bret Maverick (Nov 3, 2009 10:02AM)
[quote] From Andy's video: "four ordinary aces, there's nothing untoward about them – the deck is ordinary and you can hand them out for shuffling…the spectator can shuffle them…we’re not using any kid if stripper deck or anything of that nature either, and the faces of the cards are not treated with anything – it is a legitimate deck. [/quote]
[quote] By The Dowser: I believe his disclaimers... all of them. I also believe this secret is marketed by Lee Earle. [/quote]
Dowser,

I find your statement somewhat confusing and contradictory: on the one hand you accept the claims that the deck of cards used was “ordinary”…not “a stripper deck or anything of that nature either” and, on the other hand, you infer that the method used relied on a gaff sold by another magician. (I appreciate your not identifying the gaff that you suspect.)

Without going into details of gaffing cards that should not be posted on a public forum, as I stated above, the statement that the deck is legit in his hand at the time the aces are on the layout may be accurate (although a form of deliberately misleading magician’s patter if the aces are worked) and, while the allegation that it’s not “a stripper deck or anything of that nature” does not rule out a different form of gaffed deck, the effect as I viewed it does not require the gaffing of the forty-eight cards into which the four aces are placed.

Furthermore, the FACES of the cards may in truth not be treated with a foreign substance to aid in finding them as alleged (although the inclusion of the word “faces” rather than “the four aces” or “the four cards” does not preclude the treatment of the BACKS of the aces and raises suspicion, even though I do not suspect that the backs of the cards were gaffed by the application of a substance aiding in card location in this effect, despite the fact that the effect could be accomplished in that manner). The word "treated" is also open to many interpretations; I've used it as applying a substance, but a card can be "treated" in many other ways to affect performance.

While I understand Maitre D’s statement that: “If he hadn't made that disclaimer, I wouldn't have bothered to say anything” the disclaimer doesn’t bother me given that the video was posted on YouTube for the general public’s viewing – if Andy had posted the video in this Gambler’s forum himself for peer review and comment and offered to stand by his claim that the deck in its entirety was legit, he would be fair game for criticism.

I like to watch and listen to gifted magicians, and I don’t spoil my pleasure by scrutinizing the moves and trying to figure out how seemingly miraculous effects are achieved, a trap that many budding magicians tend to fall into (and I lesson I learned decades ago).

Bret
Message: Posted by: tommy (Nov 3, 2009 09:40PM)
Well he was not controlling them nor using any gaffs or anything like that. It was magic.........magicians can do magic you know.
Message: Posted by: Expertmagician (Nov 4, 2009 07:07AM)
While I may be wrong...I favor the explanation that there was "work" in either the aces or "Work in the deck" with normal aces.

That is my himble opinion for what it worth.

I hope that I am wrong...because I do like to be fooled :)
Message: Posted by: kcg5 (Nov 4, 2009 01:38PM)
[quote]
On 2009-11-03 01:45, The Dowser wrote:
I believe his disclaimers... all of them. I also believe this secret is marketed by Lee Earle.
[/quote]


I have no idea who "lee earle" is, but he isn't marketing any of the solution.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Nov 4, 2009 07:10PM)
[quote]
On 2009-11-04 14:38, kcg5 wrote:
[quote]
I have no idea who "lee earle" is, but he isn't marketing any of the solution.
[/quote]

Reminds me of something I heard a philosophy professor say once:

"I'm not sure what you're saying, but I disagree with you."
Message: Posted by: tommy (Nov 4, 2009 07:47PM)
I didn’t know my wife was a philosophy professor.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 5, 2009 07:46PM)
I didn't know our wives were so much alike!
Message: Posted by: The Dowser (Nov 6, 2009 08:57AM)
[quote]
On 2009-11-04 14:38, kcg5 wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-11-03 01:45, The Dowser wrote:
I believe his disclaimers... all of them. I also believe this secret is marketed by Lee Earle.
[/quote]


I have no idea who "lee earle" is, but he isn't marketing any of the solution.
[/quote]
If you don't know who he is, how do you know what he is "not" marketing?
Message: Posted by: Rizzo (Nov 6, 2009 09:16AM)
Now that's a very good point. Good catch Dowser.