Topic: Subtle Scam by Tommy
 Message: Posted by: Gorecki (Feb 25, 2011 10:54AM)
I've been experimenting with the principles contained in this clever ebook, and I thought I'd share some of my thoughts on the subject in the hopes that other practitioners will chime in with their own ideas.

1. THE "ANY CARD AND ANY NUMBER" SELECTION

In my experience, spectators tend to select a number somewhere in the middle of the offered range (I often get 25, 26 or 27).
Couple that with the fact that you have a 50% chance of the selected card currently resting in the lower half of the deck, and you've got some long and repetitive dealing ahead of you.
(Those who know the effect will understand what I mean.) For that first sequence, Tommy says that should you run out of cards, you simply ask the spectator to gather up the deck and start dealing again. And I'd like to avoid that if possible.

So while it is true that the spectator can select ANY number, it is preferrable (because of the reasons highlighted above) for the spectator to select as high a number as possible.
That will limit the amount of dealing you'll need done.
For that reason, I've started presenting the opening selection of a card and a number differently. Instead of saying "Name any card and any number," I say something along the lines of "Mentally select a card, any one in the deck, and select a number from 1 to -- well, you can go all way up to 52." (With a subtle emphasis on "up to 52.)
This tends to steer the spectator into a higher range, and I'll often get a number in the 30s or 40s.
This takes a lot of the dealing out and makes the effect more to the point.

2. THE OSE TRIPLE CUT & WHY SHOULD IT MATTER THAT THE MAGICIAN NEVER TOUCHES THE DECK

Right before spectator 1 counts down to his selected card (at his selected number, Tommy suggests using the Ose Triple Cut, and proposes having it done by the spectator so that the magician can claim (rightly so) that he never touched the deck up to that first revelation.

There are two things to discuss here.
First, the Ose Cut. It's certainly an effective move, but it's at its best when performed smoothly, with good rhythm and precise moves.
If you have this done by the spectator, you lose the rhythm and the precise moves, essentially because the poor guy is afraid to mess it up and wants to make sure he's going what you want. That makes the cut less deceptive -- still viable, mind you, but less deceptive. I've had spectators question the Ose Cut when they did it themselves, but NEVER when I perform it.
So I much prefer to perform the cut (or any other false cut) myself. (And that's if you feel you do need a cut there, which you may not.)

Which brings us to the second point: the magician never touching the deck.
This seems to be a prerequisite for a lot of people looking into ACAAN effects, but I honestly fail to see why.
It's all about what the spectators believe. In the particular case of Subtle Scam, what happens if I take the deck and give it a "cut" before I hand it back to spectator 1 so that he can deal down to his chosen position in the deck? The worst that can happen is that spectators will think I've somehow positioned the right card at the right spot.
Think about it -- if a spectator thinks my cut put the right card in the right spot, it means he believes that I have the ability to know exactly where the chosen card lies (in a shuffled deck) AND that I am able to cut exactly the right amount of cards required to put that selected card in the selected position.
Now how is that a bad thing? Nobody (all right, very few people) will believe you actually have magical powers. But they can very well believe you have the abilities I've just described, and that makes you a legend -- a lot more than some alleged mystical powers would.

Plus, your cutting the deck gives them an out that takes the heat away from mathematical considerations. And what's more magical (again, in the spectator's mind): that you've mathematically maneuvered things to that his card falls in the right spot, or that you can take a shuffled deck and instantly cut any card to any location without even looking?
 Message: Posted by: BMWGuy (Feb 25, 2011 12:55PM)
I used to use Subtle Scam all the time, since I didn't have a memorized deck available, but now that I have memorized a deck, I have been killing with Alain Nus version of Any Card....I use my own random stack, and I also perform

Mnemonicosis by Tamariz
Weighing the Cards
Plus any other memorized deck work.

When no memorized deck available, subtle Scam is the way to go!

Alex
 Message: Posted by: InfinityDream (Feb 25, 2011 01:22PM)
A clever use of Subtle Scam is using it as out in psychological ACAAN version.

About the Tommy's ACAAN using the Memorized deck I suggest also to see Final Cut, Duplicity, Mixed Revelation
and Chaos ACAAN (This last one is another good one that you can use as out)

-Antonio
 Message: Posted by: gh256 (Feb 25, 2011 06:23PM)
I was going to post another topic regarding Tommys work but thought I might as well post here.
Looking on his site he has many ACCAN's Subtle Scam being one of them as well as Beyond Reloaded and Destiny 2.
I was just wondering which one is the best and if any is worth getting. I was confused at what would be the best thing to try from there.
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Feb 25, 2011 07:11PM)
[quote]
On 2011-02-25 19:23, gh256 wrote:
I was going to post another topic regarding Tommys work but thought I might as well post here.
Looking on his site he has many ACCAN's Subtle Scam being one of them as well as Beyond Reloaded and Destiny 2.
I was just wondering which one is the best and if any is worth getting. I was confused at what would be the best thing to try from there.
[/quote]

My suggestion in descending order of preference: Subtle Scam, Dark Thief & Entanglement, Beyond Reloaded and The Magician Dream.
However, all these pdfs are a collection of ACAAN plot that use different methods to reach the climax.
I don't suggest Destiny 2 because you may not like it.

MP
 Message: Posted by: gh256 (Feb 25, 2011 07:19PM)
Just out of interest why would I not like Destiny 2, the videos on the page seem quite good?
 Message: Posted by: CardWiz (Feb 25, 2011 10:00PM)
Some of this Tommy's methods are quite difficult, rely on several outs, or require actions that may not seem logical to an audience.

His recent work has been better, however, and has gained him a good reputation that the Destiny titles may have tarnished, because although many have benefited from these works, others have negativity critiqued them.

It is a rare talent to be able to come up with as many solutions as Tommy has in regard to ACAAN, but all of his works reflect his creativity, and "thinking outside the box" does not always mean 100% practical material.

CW
 Message: Posted by: ronzo (Feb 25, 2011 10:41PM)
When I read Duplicity I said: Wow! This looks like just about the perfect ACAAN--well, double ACAAN--and a huge scam to boot.

Deck is on the table in its box. A couple of cards and numbers are named. Spectator opens box and counts. The cards are at the numbers! No fooling around! No sleights. No gimmicks. No math or watching the count or sidesteps. This seems to be genius.

I immediately started to devote my spare time to memorizing a deck. Just to do this.

It seems like a throwaway effect--just a page or so of writing. Was anyone else stunned by this, or am I nuts?
 Message: Posted by: KyleMacNeill (Feb 26, 2011 03:32AM)
Lots of people love Duplicity, it is so clever! :)
However, many people may've enc ountered it earlier when Stephen Tucker did a similar thing I believe?

But I love it :)

Kyle
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Feb 26, 2011 04:23AM)
[quote]
On 2011-02-26 04:32, KyleMacNeill wrote:
Lots of people love Duplicity, it is so clever! :)
However, many people may've enc ountered it earlier when Stephen Tucker did a similar thing I believe?

But I love it :)

Kyle
[/quote]

Yes, but the Tommy's effect is super clean, you don't need to touch the deck ever or to perform anything.

MP
 Message: Posted by: gh256 (Feb 26, 2011 05:48AM)
I might give Subtle Scam a go first then.
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Feb 27, 2011 04:43AM)
About Duplicity ACAAN in Inner Thought section I posted just my idea in order to
have a perfect ACAAN with probability > 1/3.

Try to give a look.

MP
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 13, 2011 12:25PM)
Does anyone mind if I boost this back to the top of the pile?

Just lately I've become a bit of an ACAANoholic and checked out quite a few.

Barrie Richardson Impromptu Card at Any Number has always been in my set list but its always irked me a bit that its only "A card at" and not an "Any Card at."

I was a little sceptical at first when I read the Subtle Scam threads that surely, it can't be up to much for a dozen dollars. But when I read the comments form a few 'names' I just had to take the plunge.

Well, I can honestly say that, at just over seven quid, Subtle Scam has to be the most amazing value for money that I've spent in my relatively short magical journey. The e-book is a mine of information and it is updated FREE when Tommy thinks of anything worth adding! I'd have expected something of this quality to have been at least £25-£30. I even wrote to Tommy and told him so.

If there are any others, like me, who are unsure about this - than put your doubts to one side. At this price, its a no brainer! I could understand reservations if it were \$50 - but this is a steal.

I played with all the options that Tommy goes into in such detail with in this well presented 20 page (when printed double-sided) ebook.

I settled for the Subtle Scam Variant - Reverse Order and ran it past the Ultimate Critic. She gave it a staggering 8/10 and said it should go straight into the routine as the opener!

It's a thing of outstanding natural beauty in mentalism and belongs here in Penny - but as its a card effect, I'm gonna trawl the Workers to see who using which version.

I'm really pleased with this purchase. It's not often these days I get over-excited by something new (well, new to me.)
 Message: Posted by: JRediens (Mar 13, 2011 02:59PM)
Where can I get this ebook?

Thanks
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Mar 13, 2011 03:07PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-13 15:59, JRediens wrote:
Where can I get this ebook?

Thanks
[/quote]

or on Lybrary.

MP
 Message: Posted by: Amirá (Mar 13, 2011 03:11PM)
Effects are EFFECTS . They don't need to be real.

What´s the difference between " ANY CARD" and " A CARD" in the mind of an audience if a competent performer creates the a false reality of that ... ? NONE.

If you cant create the "Any Card" real situation, CREATE the memory of that.That's how I play the ACAAN in real performances. After the performances the simple recapitulation of events are created by my participants :
"I thought of a card, he names a number. The card was in that number".

Hands off.. Hands on... Only bothers to performers.
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 13, 2011 03:14PM)
Thanks for that Amira. I can now do both. Okay?
 Message: Posted by: Amirá (Mar 13, 2011 03:47PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-13 16:14, Roger Kelly wrote:
Thanks for that Amira. I can now do both. Okay?
[/quote]

Hehe... Say thanks to Berglas , not me :D
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Mar 13, 2011 04:06PM)
False reality or memories works well if the audience don't try to back track on the secret.
If you believe the audience is not so smart to don't see the differences you make mistake.

If the performer touches the deck the audience will say that this is good trick and perfomer is a really good magician

If the performer doesn't touch the deck ever the audience will say that this is impossible: It is a miracle or he uses a stooges.
(Look the performance of Marc Paul on Youtube)

Tommy is created this routine Subtle Scam works well without you need to touch the deck ever.

Virtually, you can perform this effect via webcam also, but the deck is not your hand, but in spectator hand from the other side the webcam.

This is the difference (obvious that this is just my opinion)

MP
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 13, 2011 04:09PM)
Nicely put Enter!
 Message: Posted by: Thomas Cooper (Mar 13, 2011 05:35PM)
Making sure that a spectator believes you are not using slight of hand is VITAL to me. That's the difference between me and a Magician. A Magician can touch a normal deck of cards and make it turn from a red backed deck into a blue backed deck and then make your name appear on a card and then throw that card to the ceiling where it sticks!
Impressive, and fun to watch. But its not life changing, and that's what I want to be. Occasionally, when I am on my top form, I will have a spectator shiver, back away or stop breathing - that's when you know you are doing it right. I have never seen such reactions from a coin matrix or a card on ceiling.

The more you can make them believe that you are reading their mind, the more you get such reactions. I don't know why; I guess its because people want to believe in the impossible, and with magic we all secretly know its not real; but with mentalism (GOOD mentalism) they can suspend their disbelief if they see something impossible under such impossible conditions. This is why not touching the deck matters - this is why I love my gimmicks.

You must deceive to make them believe, you cannot simply entertain.

Theo
xx
 Message: Posted by: Steven Keyl (Mar 13, 2011 07:52PM)
Theo, so it is your belief (and probably the belief of many on this forum) that a magician's performance is trivial and trite. Perhaps entertaining but no more. Whereas a mighty mentalist engages the specatator in a profound experience that a mere magician could never rival.

This is the type of head-in-the-sand argument that makes me smile. I've seen magic so wonderful that it engenders in the audience a true sense of wonder and awe. I've seen mentalism so bad it would make a 4th grader chuckle.

The question isn't magic vs. mentalism. It's about the quality of the performer, the quality of the material, the mindset of the audience, and how can one reach into the mind of the spectator and take them somewhere they didn't think they could go.
 Message: Posted by: Lord Of The Horses (Mar 13, 2011 08:19PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-13 20:52, Steven Keyl wrote:
Theo, so it is your belief (and probably the belief of many on this forum) that a magician's performance is trivial and trite. Perhaps entertaining but no more. Whereas a mighty mentalist engages the specatator in a profound experience that a mere magician could never rival.

This is the type of head-in-the-sand argument that makes me smile. I've seen magic so wonderful that it engenders in the audience a true sense of wonder and awe. I've seen mentalism so bad it would make a 4th grader chuckle.
[/quote]
But your example does not help pulling the head off the sand.

The real comparison could only be between two very good performances.

If one use the one bad and one good example, the bad one is implicitly always the loser.

It's like a coin flip in which, if heads they win, if tails you're gonna lose.
 Message: Posted by: Sariel (Mar 13, 2011 08:36PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-13 20:52, Steven Keyl wrote:
Theo, so it is your belief (and probably the belief of many on this forum) that a magician's performance is trivial and trite. Perhaps entertaining but no more. Whereas a mighty mentalist engages the specatator in a profound experience that a mere magician could never rival.[/quote]

I am puzzled then at the majority of magicians wanting to perform more and more mentalism in their acts versus a low ratio of mentalists eager to include some dove vanish or cigarette manipulation in their acts.
 Message: Posted by: Amirá (Mar 13, 2011 08:42PM)
My ACAAN inspired from Tommy is this :

I use a variant of his Subtle Scam mixing it with Destiny ,Destiny 2 add a few things from his Magician Dream, using the idea of ACAAN of demand BUT changing the last part for Perfect ACAAN of Demand.
For the first part I use the Mixed Revelation and for the revelation of the number I use Final Cut - ACAAN and for the number Dream - ACAAN .
If that subtle move from Lucifer - ACAAN doesn't work , I use The Eyes of Darkness sleight in conjuction with Beyond Reloaded.

Just a joke . Even if you don't like Tommy´s work you have to admit that this guy rocks in naming tricks.
 Message: Posted by: Steven Keyl (Mar 13, 2011 10:06PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-13 21:19, Lord Of The Horses wrote:

But your example does not help pulling the head off the sand.
The real comparison could only be between two very good performances.
If one use the one bad and one good example, the bad one is implicitly always the loser.
It's like a coin flip in which, if heads they win, if tails you're gonna lose.
[/quote]

That is exactly my point LOTH. An excellent performance can have a profound impact on a spectator whether it be traditional magic or mentalism.
 Message: Posted by: Thomas Cooper (Mar 14, 2011 09:09AM)
I will defend my post by pointing out that several Grand Illusion magic routines have made me cry before (Flying, Portal etc) but I have never really believed in them, and I've never seen the stop breathing moment. I think mentalism can have the advantage of believability that magic can never really have. that's the power of a strong mentalist.

Theo
xx
 Message: Posted by: Amirá (Mar 14, 2011 09:15AM)
I don't think that in Mentalism you need to create a suspension of disbelieves,in my opinion that happens in Magic.

In Mentalism you are performing something REAL, so you don't need to suspend his disbelief, rather create awareness in their believes.
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Mar 14, 2011 09:31AM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-14 10:09, Theodore Fraser wrote:
I will defend my post by pointing out that several Grand Illusion magic routines have made me cry before (Flying, Portal etc) but I have never really believed in them, and I've never seen the stop breathing moment. I think mentalism can have the advantage of believability that magic can never really have. that's the power of a strong mentalist.

Theo
xx
[/quote]

...and how you do you link that with ACAAN? Do you have a good method that uses psychological techniques to reach the climax? Well. Here, you have a method that works without any psychological techniques and without any sleights and it is better than any psychological techniques that you can think, because the psychological techniques are not 100% sure fire and you need to use multiple outs or magician choice to have a good ACAAN. Aside this,
ACAAN is something goes over of any psychological techniques (you don't have to force anything... if you force the number or the card you have a CAAN).
If you try to create a false reality (you have just an illusion of ACAAN, but it is not a real ACAAN again)

ACAAN is Any Card At Any Number any other interpretation is not ACAAN. (Ex. Your video is a really good effect, but it is not an ACAAN)

Just my opinion.

MP
 Message: Posted by: Sariel (Mar 14, 2011 11:34AM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-13 21:36, Sariel wrote:
[quote]
On 2011-03-13 20:52, Steven Keyl wrote:
Theo, so it is your belief (and probably the belief of many on this forum) that a magician's performance is trivial and trite. Perhaps entertaining but no more. Whereas a mighty mentalist engages the specatator in a profound experience that a mere magician could never rival.[/quote]

I am puzzled then at the majority of magicians wanting to perform more and more mentalism in their acts versus a low ratio of mentalists eager to include some dove vanish or cigarette manipulation in their acts.
[/quote]

And more ...

A magician will look at a mentalist act and think, "Hmm, how can I put a book test between my cards across and three fly coin routine?" But a mentalist will never think, "Hmm, how can I put that cool coin matrix between my bank nite and drawing dupe routine."

So I disagree with you Steven.
 Message: Posted by: Steven Keyl (Mar 14, 2011 01:30PM)
You've already made that clear. You've now done so twice. However, your view of a modern magician is so intentionally obtuse that it warrants no response. Thank you for your input.
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 14, 2011 03:02PM)
I'm predominantly a card magician but I enjoy mainstream comnmercial mentalism and I just luuuuurve mentalism card effects. Five of which begin my card set. But I don't profess to being a mentalist in the sense that you 'serious' guys are. Subtle Scam suits my purposes down to the ground - and its hands off. Beautiful!
 Message: Posted by: Thomas Cooper (Mar 14, 2011 03:05PM)
Does anyone have a video demo of subtle scam? It'd be good to see.
 Message: Posted by: Sariel (Mar 14, 2011 03:36PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-14 14:30, Steven Keyl wrote:
You've already made that clear. You've now done so twice. However, your view of a modern magician is so intentionally obtuse that it warrants no response. Thank you for your input.
[/quote]
So if you cannot defend your poor argument because statistics are confirming what I say (magicians jumping on the mentalism bandwagon like flies) you resort to ad hominem attacks?

Then the only one being obtuse here is... YOU!
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 14, 2011 04:21PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-14 16:05, Theodore Fraser wrote:
Does anyone have a video demo of subtle scam? It'd be good to see.
[/quote]

Theodore, Not too sure that is a good idea mate. I might be wrong, only Tommy can comment for sure, but a dem-vid might blow the gaff!

Honestly - just shell out on it - you won't be disappointed. But a word of caution. The performance, in my humble opinion - blah - aint anywhere near as impactive as your video. But it's a sound investment (for seven quid!!) on an alternative. (I have to say, I don't know the mechanics of your excellent AOCAAN performance nor do I seek it - but if it is confed and pre-show free, I'd stick with that and market it!)

But you won't be disappointed with this. If you're ever 'darn sarf,' we'll exchange notes and I'll give Tommy the seven quid! ;)
 Message: Posted by: Thomas Cooper (Mar 14, 2011 04:28PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-14 17:21, Roger Kelly wrote:
[quote]
On 2011-03-14 16:05, Theodore Fraser wrote:
Does anyone have a video demo of subtle scam? It'd be good to see.
[/quote]

Theodore, Not too sure that is a good idea mate. I might be wrong, only Tommy can comment for sure, but a dem-vid might blow the gaff!

Honestly - just shell out on it - you won't be disappointed. But a word of caution. The performance, in my humble opinion - blah - aint anywhere near as impactive as your video. But it's a sound investment (for seven quid!!) on an alternative. (I have to say, I don't know the mechanics of your excellent AOCAAN performance nor do I seek it - but if it is confed and pre-show free, I'd stick with that and market it!)

But you won't be disappointed with this. If you're ever 'darn sarf,' we'll exchange notes and I'll give Tommy the seven quid! ;)
[/quote]

Haha, it took me two minutes to translate 'darn sarf' :P

AOCAAN is a nice effect, and yes it is stooge and pre-show free (I refuse to ever use either of those methods, they arn't me), but the gimmicks are quite bulky and its more of an occational peice than a standard effect. I believe the reason Osterlinds Penny bend and The Berglas effect are so infamous is because you only occationally see them. If I perform this effect on demand it demeans it a lot - plus it means I must carry the gimmicks constantly.

I am still interested in all types of ACAAN, because AOCAAN only works because its a formulation of 7 different ACAAN methods. Therefore if I can discover a new method to add to it, to make it more beautiful or more practical... then its worth buying :)
Now I wish I had money in my bank :(

Theo
xx
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Mar 14, 2011 04:32PM)
In my opinion a demo video has only one purpose: To give a chance everyone to realize the secret. For this reason, many people don't create a demo video.

MP
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 14, 2011 05:13PM)
Theodore

:) Cunning camera work then?!

No worries. Theodore, if you have to work under those parameters, then you MUST, at least, take a look at SUBTLE SCAM. Totally FASDIU! It might not be to your performance style, for sure, but I'm sure it is worth reading and finding out which works best for you. All you need is to 'manage' the spectators OR spectator and its, effectively, a self-worker and utterly hands off. (Though I DO handle the deck sometimes bit I certainly don't HAVE to!)

Also Tommy updates the pdf with new takes on it (via Library and his own site.) Anything he thinks worth adding is supplied free. There's another thread on this in Workers, which I began, where Picard, I think, has a good idea on it too. I dare say, once you have taken the plunge and witnessed its simplicity, you'll soon be contacting Tommy with your own angle.

In the old words of Nike, just do it!
 Message: Posted by: Thomas Cooper (Mar 14, 2011 05:36PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-14 18:13, Roger Kelly wrote:
Theodore

:) Cunning camera work then?!

No worries. Theodore, if you have to work under those parameters, then you MUST, at least, take a look at SUBTLE SCAM. Totally FASDIU! It might not be to your performance style, for sure, but I'm sure it is worth reading and finding out which works best for you. All you need is to 'manage' the spectators OR spectator and its, effectively, a self-worker and utterly hands off. (Though I DO handle the deck sometimes bit I certainly don't HAVE to!)

Also Tommy updates the pdf with new takes on it (via Library and his own site.) Anything he thinks worth adding is supplied free. There's another thread on this in Workers, which I began, where Picard, I think, has a good idea on it too. I dare say, once you have taken the plunge and witnessed its simplicity, you'll soon be contacting Tommy with your own angle.

In the old words of Nike, just do it!
[/quote]

No clever camera work :P

And if its only seven pound, I'll get it now I think. Sounds good :)
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 14, 2011 05:56PM)
Let us know what you think! I'd be interested to hear - even if its cynical.
 Message: Posted by: bobser (Mar 14, 2011 06:15PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-14 17:32, entermagic wrote:
In my opinion a demo video has only one purpose: To give a chance everyone to realize the secret. For this reason, many people don't create a demo video.
MP
[/quote]

I understand your thinking and in one way I guess I'd have to agree. However it can also do so much more I feel. It can show where hesitation, modulation and emphasisation can actually help the presentation greatly. It can show a magical moment, a eureka second or an Ahaa idea. I feel there's so much to learn from a video other than merely the method. And that means it can also help sales of course!
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 14, 2011 06:27PM)
Bobser - I agree wholeheartedly - but I'd be uncomfortable posting a dem-vid of this effect. I'll film myself rehearsing it tomorrow and see if my fears hold substance. I just have an uncomfortable feeling about it. It's a great effect, but it might not take an Einstein to reverse engineer it with todays video techology and that would be detrimental to sales in this instance.
 Message: Posted by: Steven Keyl (Mar 14, 2011 06:41PM)
Another reason to take a chance on this effect is that Tommy has updated it three or four times since it has been released and he has incorporated a number of variations. Not each variation will suit each performer equally but there is a good chance you will find at least one that you can use. Even if this doesn't become your primary ACAAN method it really is tough to beat in a situation where you're looking for a hands-off impromptu FASDIU handling.
 Message: Posted by: Thomas Cooper (Mar 14, 2011 06:49PM)
--Theo Fraser's 5 minute review--
The review where Theo half heartedly comments on something five minutes after reading it, often skipping large chuncks of text because he got either got bored or distracted by shiney objects; and therefore a review that should never ever be taken seriously by any sane human being. Opinions and thoughts are subject to change.

What I like:
- Gimmickless
- Borrowed, Cold Deck
- Back turned away
- No touching the deck

What I dislike:
- Shuffling the cards (YO RUINED MY STACK BOAY!)
- The unnatural dealing
- The possability of a vast amount of boring dealing

I will probably change my opinion on this, but I think this may well be the ACAAN I use whenever I do not have my gimmicks with me. Its not as "natural" or visual as AOCAAN and several of the "moves" will have to be justified using patter; but this is the first hands off ACAAN that is impromptu which I can honestly say I would ever even consider performing. I think with plenty of time misdirection it would be very deceptive.
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 14, 2011 07:03PM)
Yes indeed and horses for course and all that. In fact, you've posted pretty much what I though after five minutes. AND I hadn't change my mind after an hour. You've really got to read the book, cards in hand and uninterupted for an hour or two to appreciate the true value of this. Picard points out that you can dismiss ONE of the labourious dealings in the Reverse Variant. I do too but by a different method.

Theo, judging by bthe way you look at things, it won't take you long to grasp this and 'do something' about the dealing scenario. It isn't a problemt really. It can be made used to your advantage! Lets face it - if you can spin out your AOCAAN for 6 minutes - you aint gonna be phazed by this mate!

Let us know tomorrow! ;)
 Message: Posted by: InfinityDream (Mar 16, 2011 02:05PM)
Subtle Scam is the biggest mistake done by Tommy. He gives away something with big worth for few dollars. I read a lot and if you want some decent ACAAN effect you need to spend over 30\$. There are many posts about Subtle Scam, but inside the pdf there are many other good effect like Mind Scam or Duplicity (This is the cleanest effect that I have seen ever. It is like a double ACAAN: 2 cards, 2 numbers, the performer doesn't touch ever the deck and the cards will be at named number)
Only this effect worth the entire value of this pdf. Tommy, you are crazy :) and thank you to share with us your wonderful routines.

-Antonio
 Message: Posted by: Gorecki (Mar 16, 2011 03:34PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-14 20:03, Roger Kelly wrote:
Picard points out that you can dismiss ONE of the labourious dealings in the Reverse Variant.
[/quote]
True that, Roger.
And, as I pointed out in my original post, if you steer the spectator towards a higher number, you can considerably reduce the first instance of dealing with the original handling.

I also find a lot of occasions for interesting byplay with each spectator, and reminding everyone that I'm actually performing TWO tricks at once, and saying that two thought-of cards sometimes create some mental interference that I have to deal with...

Fun, fun stuff.
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 16, 2011 04:21PM)
Exactly Gorecki - never have two performances been the same. Duh! Of course they haven't - but you know what I mean. :)
 Message: Posted by: bobser (Mar 16, 2011 04:34PM)
I liked this a lot. In the right hands with proper working it's as good as anything out there.
Earlier this evening, either in this thread or another someone mentioned The Berglas Effect. There's no such thing. If you know what I'm talking about, great. if you don't, I can't tell you.
 Message: Posted by: Ben Harris (Mar 16, 2011 05:06PM)
Great to see Subtle Scam FINALLY getting the kudos it deserves.

Benny
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 16, 2011 05:07PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-16 17:34, bobser wrote:
In the right hands with proper working it's as good as anything out there.
[/quote]

Bobser - it should be the Specs hands - no?
 Message: Posted by: Gorecki (Mar 17, 2011 10:46AM)
This morning, Tommy performed a variation of Subtle Scam for me -- over chat.
It was a LOT of fun. :)

I don't know if he plans on publishing the material, but if he does, I suggest you keep an eye out for it!
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Mar 17, 2011 10:59AM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-17 11:46, Gorecki wrote:
This morning, Tommy performed a variation of Subtle Scam for me -- over chat.
It was a LOT of fun. :)

I don't know if he plans on publishing the material, but if he does, I suggest you keep an eye out for it!
[/quote]

Via Webcam?

MP
 Message: Posted by: monello74 (Mar 17, 2011 11:23AM)
Hi all,
Thank you very much for all your post, I am very glad to see that you like a lot my Subtle :)

Just for clarification, because I received immediatly many mail.
I performed for Gorecki a variant of Subtle Scam showing him how you can perform it also on the chat (No webcam only text chat). The deck was in his hands I just instructed him to name a number and to think a card looking throught the deck.
He counted at his named number and his thought of card is there...

The effect was just a demo, the info about the effect are already inside pdf. Use the mind and I am sure you will find a similar method.

The method is not for sale and it is not a bonus, because everything is already inside the pdf.

Thank you again

Bye
Tommy.
 Message: Posted by: Amirá (Mar 19, 2011 09:00AM)
Did you know that Tommy had demos of his work?

"Impossible ACAAN"

http://vimeo.com/21223006
pass:tommy
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Mar 19, 2011 04:25PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-19 10:00, Amirá wrote:
Did you know that Tommy had demos of his work?

"Impossible ACAAN"

http://vimeo.com/21223006
pass:tommy
[/quote]

The audio is too low.

MP
 Message: Posted by: Amirá (Mar 19, 2011 04:29PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-19 17:25, entermagic wrote:
[quote]
On 2011-03-19 10:00, Amirá wrote:
Did you know that Tommy had demos of his work?

"Impossible ACAAN"

http://vimeo.com/21223006
pass:tommy
[/quote]

The audio is too low.

MP
[/quote]

 Message: Posted by: InfinityDream (Mar 20, 2011 05:51AM)
[quote]

This morning, Tommy performed a variation of Subtle Scam for me -- over chat.
It was a LOT of fun.

I don't know if he plans on publishing the material, but if he does, I suggest you keep an eye out for it!

[/quote]

He performed this one also for me.
The is really good. I didn't see ever something like that over chat.

Great job again.

-Antonio
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 20, 2011 06:00AM)
They say never work with children or animals.

I think I should add aged parents to that list. I performed this to my dear old Mother the other day and after carefully and slowly explaining what was required, I eventually asked, "Okay, now name a card..."

I knew it was going to be a long night.
 Message: Posted by: Gorecki (Mar 21, 2011 10:45AM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-20 07:00, Roger Kelly wrote:
They say never work with children or animals.

I think I should add aged parents to that list. I performed this to my dear old Mother the other day and after carefully and slowly explaining what was required, I eventually asked, "Okay, now name a card..."

I knew it was going to be a long night.

[/quote]

This is hilarious, Roger. :)
 Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Mar 21, 2011 10:58AM)
I don't know I think Rogers missed an opportunity for a great effect --- count down to 46 then count 48 49 etc and show that there is a card missing at the 48th position...

I might market that!
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 21, 2011 11:20AM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-21 11:58, mindpunisher wrote:
I don't know I think Rogers missed an opportunity for a great effect --- count down to 46 then count 48 49 etc and show that there is a card missing at the 48th position...

I might market that!
[/quote]

I want 50%! :)
 Message: Posted by: Tom G (Mar 21, 2011 12:17PM)
As Theodore's post mentions there could be a lot of dealing. My thought is once the card and number are named, if the deck
is handled after that point for anything other than counting down to the number chosen, it would take a fairly dull spectator
not to know that "somehow" the card is being put into position.
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 21, 2011 12:21PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-21 13:17, Tom G wrote:
As Theodore's post mentions there could be a lot of dealing. My thought is once the card and number are named, if the deck
is handled after that point for anything other than counting down to the number chosen, it would take a fairly dull spectator
not to know that "somehow" the card is being put into position.
[/quote]

I thought that too at first, Tom - but one of the 'dealings' is being executed by way of explaining the other part of the effect (ie the Thought of Card) to the second spectator. I think sometimes WE worry too much because of what WE know to be the truth. I'll run it past my bro this week and see what he says. He's into magic too and he'll give an honest opinion, and he's sharp as a needle. If it gets past him, I think I'm safe. If not - I'll have a re-think.

Anybody else come accross this as a concern?
 Message: Posted by: monello74 (Mar 21, 2011 01:06PM)
[quote]

As Theodore's post mentions there could be a lot of dealing. My thought is once the card and number are named, if the deck
is handled after that point for anything other than counting down to the number chosen, it would take a fairly dull spectator
not to know that "somehow" the card is being put into position.

[/quote]

If you want, change the first effect or change the entire routine.
I wrote Subtle Scam a while ago and I didn't stop ever to find methods to improve it.
In my current version, a spectator just think of card and just think of number (Any number and Any card and he doesn't reveal the card
and number ever before he starts the couting).

However, the current Subtle Scam is already good, because the audience view point is:
Think of a card and a Perfect ACAAN and in my opion is the impact is really good.

Apologize, if I don't share any other update about my pdfs, but I am very disappointed to see my work sold by illegal dealer.

This is a shame.

Bye,
Tommy.
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 21, 2011 02:12PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-21 14:06, monello74 wrote:
... but I am very disappointed to see my work sold by illegal dealer.

This is a shame.

Bye,
Tommy.
[/quote]

That truly is a shame Tommy. If it's eBay - you can report it - for what it's worth I don't know. Sorry to hear that Tommy after all the hard work you've put into it and the amount of satisfaction you have given to the community.
 Message: Posted by: Picard (Mar 21, 2011 06:36PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-21 13:17, Tom G wrote:
As Theodore's post mentions there could be a lot of dealing. My thought is once the card and number are named, if the deck
is handled after that point for anything other than counting down to the number chosen, it would take a fairly dull spectator
not to know that "somehow" the card is being put into position.
[/quote]
I have to agree with this.
I even eliminated one dealing out of 2 (it's not completely hands-off then) but it still doesn't feel natural.
Ideally, as you've said it should be instantly counted down to the chosen number once you get both pieces of information (card and a number). While it might pass by some spectators I wouldn't feel comfortable doing it as written to certain people.
Still, Subtle Scam has inspired me in a way to develop something of my own. Tommy has put a lot of thought in it and provided many variations to the original routine, so I do not regret buying it. Btw, already from the description of the effect I sort of had an idea how this might be done, so the add was completely fair. I guess I just expected a bit too much.
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Mar 22, 2011 01:18AM)
[quote]

.....

I even eliminated one dealing out of 2 (it's not completely hands-off then) but it still doesn't feel natural.

.....

[/quote]

All depends from your "presentation" to make it to appear natural or "super natural" LOL :D
Remember always the conditions: an untouched borrowed deck. no mem deck, "Any" card at "Any" number, no force or psychological
technique, only on deck, no switch, no stooges, no sleight of hands.
Nothing is better on the market also the "price" is a miracle.
Please, correct me if I make a mistake. Maybe there is something more clean than Subtle Scam the name
of this effect? Duplicity! But this effect is just a bonus in Subtle Scam.

The only thing that you can say is that this is not a direct ACAAN, but Subtle Scam is not an ACAAN effect: it is a mix of 2 routines
together and with a right "presentation" the ACAAN part looks like a miracle.

Nothing is better.

MP
 Message: Posted by: a brown 1968 (Mar 22, 2011 08:54AM)
Hi MP

You always focus on the conditions but these are conditions for magicians to meet as a challenge , I would argue the conditions are less important than both the entertainment value of the effect and the lasting impression the effect leaves in a spectators mind.

I am more concerned with the performing conditions and getting from A to B taking the shortest possible route .

For me conditions such as:

Being able to do the effect walk around or at a table
A borrowed shuffled deck
Can work for 1 or 2 spectators
Noisy background
So I prefer Richardson's . true not a perfect ACAAN but the spectator does not care .

I do like Subtle Scam but as mentioned already both bits of information are known to the performer well in advance of the outcome . The longer the delay the more people will figure out that this information is used by the performer to make it happen, the HOW they don't know.

Andy
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Mar 22, 2011 12:24PM)
Hi Andy,
in my opinion, if you don't see the conditions, Subtle Scam is not for you or any other
method, because Richardson's is already the best.

MP
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 22, 2011 12:28PM)
Hey - we can't compare Richardson's to Subtle Scam can we? Sure, Richardson's (Impromptu CAAN) is brilliant - but its vastly different to SS. In fact, I (sometimes) use them both in the same set, they're [b]that[/b] different.
 Message: Posted by: Picard (Mar 22, 2011 12:42PM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-22 09:54, a brown 1968 wrote:
You always focus on the conditions but these are conditions for magicians to meet as a challenge , I would argue the conditions are less important than both the entertainment value of the effect and the lasting impression the effect leaves in a spectators mind.[/quote]
This is an important point. I think we (magicians) are too concerned with perfect conditions. Original Subtle Scam is completely hands off, but the lack of directness is a problem. The only important thing is how the spectators are going to perceive it. With just a little bit of handling and proper presentation much more direct effect can be achieved which will be REMEMBERED as hands off by spectators (even though it's not 100% hands off).

AS WRITTEN Subtle Scam lacks directness, and the card and number are known waaay too long in advance. I do agree that great presentation CAN sometimes make up for weaker parts of any routine but I have yet to come up with such an ingenious presentation to make Subtle Scam something I would want to perform in front of my audience.
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Mar 22, 2011 01:12PM)
[quote]

AS WRITTEN Subtle Scam lacks directness, and the card and number are known waaay too long in advance

[/quote]

Too long in advance that the audience forget that they have already named...

Perform Beyond Subtle Scam and then let me know what the audience will say about the effect.

MP
 Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Mar 22, 2011 01:24PM)
[quote]

Perform Beyond Subtle Scam and then let me know what the audience will say about the effect.

[/quote]

This is [b]key.[/b]

Some of the labour involved in this effect had me serioulsy considering its inclusion - but when I saw the reactions - I was more than happy.
 Message: Posted by: Louis Cipher (Mar 27, 2011 03:47PM)
[quote]

This is key.

Some of the labour involved in this effect had me serioulsy considering its inclusion - but when I saw the reactions - I was more than happy.

[/quote]

Yes, the reactions... and I look also for the Simplicity and if you can perform it always with any deck and Subtle Scam requires just a borrewed deck.

(_Louis Cipher_)
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Apr 7, 2011 04:46AM)
Thank you Tommy about "TC ACAAN"

I like it a lot because: it is direct and fast.

1. Hand the deck the spectator.
2. Name a card and number
3. Count face-up the cards and the card is there.

Very very good impromptu method.

MP
 Message: Posted by: doriancaudal (Apr 7, 2011 06:08AM)
Congrats for your TC ACAAN Tommy :) I will use it, for sure!
 Message: Posted by: Mind_Magic (Apr 7, 2011 09:05AM)
Every time Subtle Scam is becoming better and better.
 Message: Posted by: InfinityDream (Apr 7, 2011 02:23PM)
This effect will be my ACAAN that I will use over and over.

Excellent work again.

-Antonio
 Message: Posted by: wilko7 (Apr 7, 2011 04:00PM)
Has there been another update? I havent recieved any but would love to if there is.
 Message: Posted by: monello74 (Apr 7, 2011 04:23PM)
Hi wilko,

if you didn't receive it yet, may you purchased
it from Lybrary.

So, you need to wait that Chris upload it on his website.

Thank you very much.

Bye
Tommy
 Message: Posted by: wilko7 (Apr 7, 2011 04:56PM)
Hi tommy.
I purchased subtle scam directly from you. You sent me out my copy, then re sent it because some people had reported that ic may have been corrupt.
Thanks
 Message: Posted by: monello74 (Apr 8, 2011 12:55PM)

I already sent it to you.

Please, if someone cannot see it because it is corrupted it could be useful
if he reports this problem to me on my e-mail address.

Bye
Tommy
 Message: Posted by: magicmind (Apr 8, 2011 03:18PM)
[quote]
On 2011-02-25 11:54, Gorecki wrote:
I've been experimenting with the principles contained in this clever ebook, and I thought I'd share some of my thoughts on the subject in the hopes that other practitioners will chime in with their own ideas.

1. THE "ANY CARD AND ANY NUMBER" SELECTION

In my experience, spectators tend to select a number somewhere in the middle of the offered range (I often get 25, 26 or 27).
Couple that with the fact that you have a 50% chance of the selected card currently resting in the lower half of the deck, and you've got some long and repetitive dealing ahead of you.
(Those who know the effect will understand what I mean.) For that first sequence, Tommy says that should you run out of cards, you simply ask the spectator to gather up the deck and start dealing again. And I'd like to avoid that if possible.

So while it is true that the spectator can select ANY number, it is preferrable (because of the reasons highlighted above) for the spectator to select as high a number as possible.
That will limit the amount of dealing you'll need done.
For that reason, I've started presenting the opening selection of a card and a number differently. Instead of saying "Name any card and any number," I say something along the lines of "Mentally select a card, any one in the deck, and select a number from 1 to -- well, you can go all way up to 52." (With a subtle emphasis on "up to 52.)
This tends to steer the spectator into a higher range, and I'll often get a number in the 30s or 40s.
This takes a lot of the dealing out and makes the effect more to the point.

2. THE OSE TRIPLE CUT & WHY SHOULD IT MATTER THAT THE MAGICIAN NEVER TOUCHES THE DECK

Right before spectator 1 counts down to his selected card (at his selected number, Tommy suggests using the Ose Triple Cut, and proposes having it done by the spectator so that the magician can claim (rightly so) that he never touched the deck up to that first revelation.

There are two things to discuss here.
First, the Ose Cut. It's certainly an effective move, but it's at its best when performed smoothly, with good rhythm and precise moves.
If you have this done by the spectator, you lose the rhythm and the precise moves, essentially because the poor guy is afraid to mess it up and wants to make sure he's going what you want. That makes the cut less deceptive -- still viable, mind you, but less deceptive. I've had spectators question the Ose Cut when they did it themselves, but NEVER when I perform it.
So I much prefer to perform the cut (or any other false cut) myself. (And that's if you feel you do need a cut there, which you may not.)

Which brings us to the second point: the magician never touching the deck.
This seems to be a prerequisite for a lot of people looking into ACAAN effects, but I honestly fail to see why.
It's all about what the spectators believe. In the particular case of Subtle Scam, what happens if I take the deck and give it a "cut" before I hand it back to spectator 1 so that he can deal down to his chosen position in the deck? The worst that can happen is that spectators will think I've somehow positioned the right card at the right spot.
Think about it -- if a spectator thinks my cut put the right card in the right spot, it means he believes that I have the ability to know exactly where the chosen card lies (in a shuffled deck) AND that I am able to cut exactly the right amount of cards required to put that selected card in the selected position.
Now how is that a bad thing? Nobody (all right, very few people) will believe you actually have magical powers. But they can very well believe you have the abilities I've just described, and that makes you a legend -- a lot more than some alleged mystical powers would.

Plus, your cutting the deck gives them an out that takes the heat away from mathematical considerations. And what's more magical (again, in the spectator's mind): that you've mathematically maneuvered things to that his card falls in the right spot, or that you can take a shuffled deck and instantly cut any card to any location without even looking?
[/quote]

There is a LOT of information above for prying eyes to just come here and read. Maybe this conversation should be moved to a better area? I am sure the other responses will be even more detailed. Keep the Curious...well, curious!
 Message: Posted by: Thomas Cooper (Apr 8, 2011 03:35PM)
TC ACAAN = best impromptu ACAAN ever made?
 Message: Posted by: JanForster (Apr 8, 2011 04:15PM)
I would like to say something to it but I'm still waiting for the update through Chris ((lybrary.com). But already until now Tommy's work is great. Jan
 Message: Posted by: wilko7 (Apr 8, 2011 06:22PM)
Thanks tommy. I got the update. Will give it a look when I get a minute.
Thanks again.
 Message: Posted by: Bosco J. (Apr 9, 2011 07:46AM)
Great update Tommy! This is a very nice impromptu ACAAN. You can borrow a deck and have the spec shuffle before and during the counting procedure.

Clever thinking! Keep'em coming!

Bosco
 Message: Posted by: monello74 (Apr 9, 2011 10:56AM)
I am very glad to hear that you like my impromptu ACAAN.

Please, let me know if it works well also for you.

Bye
Tommy.
 Message: Posted by: Louis Cipher (Apr 10, 2011 02:59PM)
Very clever method.

Thank you for sharing.

(_Louis Cipher_)
 Message: Posted by: Mind_Magic (Apr 29, 2011 01:11PM)
Tommmy removed some grammatical errors and a different explanation for OPARN.
 Message: Posted by: KiKi (Apr 30, 2011 05:10AM)
Me too,
just didn´t have time to read through it, but the layout looks great!
kiki
 Message: Posted by: John C (Apr 30, 2011 10:05AM)
[quote]
On 2011-03-22 13:24, entermagic wrote:
Hi Andy,
in my opinion, if you don't see the conditions, Subtle Scam is not for you or any other
method, because Richardson's is already the best.

MPnest
[/quote]

yes this is true
 Message: Posted by: Mind_Magic (May 29, 2011 05:15PM)
Just received another good update from Tommy.

Now this version includes the effect "The Ritual", It is good!

Every time Subtle Scam is coming better and better.

Thanks Tommy.
 Message: Posted by: Thomas Cooper (May 30, 2011 10:43AM)
If there is one ebook in the world which shows how useful the ebook can be, with its updates and downloads and added content, then its this one.

Thanks Tommy

xx
 Message: Posted by: Michael Daniels (May 30, 2011 11:05AM)
I agree Thomas. Ebooks are perfect for this. Lybrary has the right idea too with its Digital Shelf that gives permanent access to downloaded ebooks (and any updates).

And Tommy's "The Ritual" variant is very good.

Mike
 Message: Posted by: vinsmagic (May 30, 2011 12:58PM)
I wish Tommy would release the mother of all prediction effects
CRIMINAL INDUCTION
this is His best work period
vinny
 Message: Posted by: monello74 (May 30, 2011 04:06PM)
Thank you very much again.

... and as I have already done if I will have some new idea
I will share again with you. I will do it over and over... ;-)

Thank you very much for your support.

Bye
Tommy.
 Message: Posted by: will4gzus (May 30, 2011 07:35PM)
Tommy has once again produced a nice little hands off ACAAN. In "The Ritual" Tommy provides a basic presentation that lends itself to add your own twist to make it a very dark or whimsical presentation. One presentation could be from a dark ritualistic slant, complete with candles, pendulum etc. I don't think a presentation like this would detract from the ACAAN payoff. Or you could do a lighter presentation based on past loves, current love, etc. It can play either way. More solid thinking from Tommy, good job.
 Message: Posted by: Aaron E (May 30, 2011 09:00PM)
In anyones opinion..what is Tommys best work WITHOUT using a mem deck. I won't do an ACAAN using that method.
 Message: Posted by: InfinityDream (May 31, 2011 12:28AM)
Tommy, you are a very generous man.

The Ritual is very clever and I like a lot your mystical presentation.

Good job again.

-Antonio
 Message: Posted by: vinsmagic (May 31, 2011 12:58AM)
Criminal induction is his best work
 Message: Posted by: Aaron E (May 31, 2011 03:06AM)
Is "Criminal Induction" available?
 Message: Posted by: doriancaudal (May 31, 2011 03:15AM)
[quote]
On 2011-05-31 04:06, Cozmo D wrote:
Is "Criminal Induction" available?
[/quote]

No, not available at the moment.
 Message: Posted by: Aaron E (May 31, 2011 03:36AM)
Why?
 Message: Posted by: doriancaudal (May 31, 2011 03:42AM)
[quote]
On 2011-05-31 04:36, Cozmo D wrote:
Why?
[/quote]

Because the effect is very powerful of course :) He doesn't want everybody to know his method, and I truly approve him!
 Message: Posted by: doriancaudal (May 31, 2011 04:29AM)
I've got a message from Tommy, who cannot write at the moment on this thread:

Concerning Criminal Induction, he will keep the secret for himself. He doesn't try to sell it or to make money with this effect. So, he doesn't want anyone to talk freely about this effect on the forum. He could remove his video from youtube if everybody continues jazzing about Criminal Induction...
 Message: Posted by: vinsmagic (May 31, 2011 03:45PM)
Ok Tommy wants this to be like the Berglas effect, I under stand
bye
vinny
 Message: Posted by: IAIN (May 31, 2011 04:36PM)
[quote]
On 2011-05-31 05:29, doriancaudal wrote:
I've got a message from Tommy, who cannot write at the moment on this thread:

Concerning Criminal Induction, he will keep the secret for himself. He doesn't try to sell it or to make money with this effect. So, he doesn't want anyone to talk freely about this effect on the forum. He could remove his video from youtube if everybody continues jazzing about Criminal Induction...
[/quote]

stooges...
 Message: Posted by: Rus ANDREWS (May 31, 2011 04:48PM)
I've watched this video a dozen times now, and I cannot see how this is possible?

I have a variation of this called psychological one, which is exactly the same effect only I can't see how this can work with the spectator shuffling the deck??

It can't be done.

I'd like to be proven wrong but I just can't see how that part of the effect is possible unless it's pure luck

Just my opinion

R
 Message: Posted by: monello74 (May 31, 2011 05:46PM)
@IAIN:

You are free to believe what you want, I don't have to prove anything. This effect is not for sale.

@RUS:

If you don't see a solution, after you have seen it many times, don't prove that it is impossible.

I have seen your pyschological one, I believe it can be done also with a deck shuffled.

I repeat again, you don't have to prove anything, because I don't sell it, so you are free to believe
that this effect is fake, that I use stooges or actors or it is just pure chance (i.e that I performed this effect many times,
until it appears as you see inside the video).

This discussion here is off-topic on this thread (This thread there was a discussion on Subtle Scam)

Bye
Tommy.
 Message: Posted by: Aaron E (May 31, 2011 07:52PM)
Ok. We will start another thread.
 Message: Posted by: vinsmagic (May 31, 2011 07:56PM)
LOL
 Message: Posted by: Dr. Eamon (Jun 1, 2011 10:16PM)
I just wanted to buy SS, then I saw Criminal Induction ( Open Prediction ) and changed my mind...

Now I will buy ACIAB (any card in any banana)

:)
 Message: Posted by: Dr. Eamon (Jun 9, 2011 03:27PM)
Jun 8: I read another topic on SScam and just wanted to see what it was… I should have trusted my instinct after watching Criminal Induction.

SScam is not a pipe dream or just another `try to be´ Berglas effect, but a working idea. Would I ever present it, no. But if you don´t mind the time it takes for the spectator to count all the cards on the table, and maybe even twice, go ahead.

In my version (a variation of RR hands of ACAAN), they shuffle, call a card, call a number, and they count to that number and find there card. Bang!

I have many other ACAAN that I liked but SScam is not for me. I like to hit them fast, simple and easy to follow without death spots in the presentation…
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Jun 9, 2011 03:45PM)
[quote]
On 2011-06-09 16:27, Dr. Eamon wrote:
Jun 8: I read another topic on SScam and just wanted to see what it was… I should have trusted my instinct after watching Criminal Induction.

SScam is not a pipe dream or just another `try to be´ Berglas effect, but a working idea. Would I ever present it, no. But if you don´t mind the time it takes for the spectator to count all the cards on the table, and maybe even twice, go ahead.

In my version (a variation of RR hands of ACAAN), they shuffle, call a card, call a number, and they count to that number and find there card. Bang!

I have many other ACAAN that I liked but SScam is not for me. I like to hit them fast, simple and easy to follow without death spots in the presentation…
[/quote]

Did you try it in real world? Maybe you can change it a bit in order to have the version that fits your requests using the SS method. Anyway inside this pdf there
is not a single solution, but many effects and the cleanest is Duplicity and nothing is so clean and direct (It is not ACAAN effect but a double ACAAN).
You cannot compare SS with The Berglas Effect. The Berglas Effect is just the effect "Perfect ACAAN" and not the method used to perform it.
In this terms also S.S. could be the Berglas Effect.

MP
 Message: Posted by: Dr. Eamon (Jun 9, 2011 10:02PM)
Hi MP,

Sorry for the confusion, I meant Criminal Induction was a attempt to make a `Berglas effect´, (a perfect effect), SS really can be done, but just not my thing, I don´t want to try it in the real world for the reason I wrote.

Tommy really did some clever thinking especially with Duplicity I agree but I like the simplicity of the effect I do, that´s still closest to the perfect effect. To be honest now I do mine, without the shuffling at the beginning. As I started doing it, I did let them shuffle first, but later I decided it was not necessary and I was just overdoing it by letting them shuffle. It keeps it simple and clean and very easy to follow.

I did try Duplicity on a friend, and he was very amazed but I like the other presentation more…

Best,
John
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Jun 10, 2011 04:40AM)
[quote]
On 2011-06-09 23:02, Dr. Eamon wrote:
Hi MP,

Sorry for the confusion, I meant Criminal Induction was a attempt to make a `Berglas effect´, (a perfect effect), SS really can be done, but just not my thing, I don´t want to try it in the real world for the reason I wrote.

[/quote]

The Berglas Effects is an ACAAN, Criminal Induction is an Open Prediction and the performance is always the same. The Berglas Effect looks like a perfect ACAAN always, but the method is always different.

With SS you can build The Berglas Effects. I believe you can do also something better than it and easily using a variant of SS. (Inside the pdf there is just an example how you can build a strong effect starting from SS idea. All you need to do is using the same idea to build your perfect version)

[quote]

Tommy really did some clever thinking especially with Duplicity I agree but I like the simplicity of the effect I do, that´s still closest to the perfect effect. To be honest now I do mine, without the shuffling at the beginning. As I started doing it, I did let them shuffle first, but later I decided it was not necessary and I was just overdoing it by letting them shuffle. It keeps it simple and clean and very easy to follow.

I did try Duplicity on a friend, and he was very amazed but I like the other presentation more…

Best,
John
[/quote]

I would like to see or to read a description about your effect. If you want, contact me via pm.

MP
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Jun 11, 2011 12:32PM)
Do you know Tommy? Who is really Tommy?

;)

MP
 Message: Posted by: R.E. Byrnes (Jul 12, 2011 07:20PM)
"With SS you can build The Berglas Effects. I believe you can do also something better than it and easily using a variant of SS"

I believe you are fantastically mistaken. the lavish praise for this is baffling
 Message: Posted by: entermagic (Jul 13, 2011 01:08AM)
[quote]
On 2011-07-12 20:20, R.E. Byrnes wrote:
"With SS you can build The Berglas Effects. I believe you can do also something better than it and easily using a variant of SS"

I believe you are fantastically mistaken. the lavish praise for this is baffling
[/quote]

For me The Berglas Effect is a cleanest ACAAN that you can see.

In SS the ACAAN part is always as clean as possible like The Berglas Effect.

Have you always the same thing with The Bergls Effects? The answer is already in
my question: The Berglas Effects and not The Berglas Effect then you have different
effects then I am right.

Purchase the Berglas book and try to see if I am right or not, I wrote this a very long
time ago.

MP