(Close Window)
Topic: Ring On Stick
Message: Posted by: Zombie Magic (Feb 27, 2012 06:02PM)
Michael Skinner had said Ring On Stick is the greatest magic trick ever created. He'd put it up against anything else.

Interesting.
Message: Posted by: volto (Feb 28, 2012 04:44AM)
It's simple, it's personal, it's very magical and it's extremely practical. It's worth carrying a wand for, on its own. Mr. Skinner's version is excellent.

The big question is, ring on string, or ring on stick? They share a lot of advantages. I think ring on string has more opportunity for the audience to be involved (holding or knotting the string, or even 'doing' a penetration themselves in Leveridge's finale). You can do a few other effects with string, too. But there's a lot of bits of business and other general effects that you can use a wand for that you can't do with string, e.g. silk through wand, flipstick, wand vanishes e.g. Vernon/Mora spin, strike, push through etc. And that's before even considering the advantages of going to your pocket for a wand.

He's probably right. :)
Message: Posted by: NikolajSkou (Feb 28, 2012 10:31AM)
Where should I learn it? Skinner?
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Feb 28, 2012 02:08PM)
[quote]
On 2012-02-28 11:31, NikolajSkou wrote:
Where should I learn it? Skinner?
[/quote]

Where should you learn it?
In the privacy of your dwelling or home.

Skinner?
As everyone knows or should know, this refers to Michael Skinner a famous magician.

This also refers to making a purchase, as it is not available otherwise.
One such place you can purchse the DVD that teaches this routine is here:
http://www.penguinmagic.com/p/S4308

------------------------------------------------------------

Ring on stick is not a trick you put together and run out and do for people. You have to learn it of couse, but it requires a lot of practice before being presented to an audience. To make it a great trick, requires timing and perfect handling.

Although a person with little knowledge of magic can do it, it is something altogether different to perform this effect. Knowing how to handle the spectators and what to say and when to say it is the critical parts of this trick. Smooth handling with a desire to create magic is necessary as well.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Feb 28, 2012 06:10PM)
There are probably 50 or more different references I could list for this one trick. I think every magician of note has a pet version and at least half of them put it out there.

Skinner's is a nice routine. it is pretty straightforward but it is not the cleanest to my way of thinking. it requires an extra something to pull off.

Frankly, I would advise checking out Ron Bauer's "The Cursed Ring". it is a ring on stick (OK, ring on pencil) that requires nothing extra and is multi-phase. Ron's manuscript gives you a script, the handling, bits of business, and presentation advice. You get so much more than just the basic handling of the trick.

You can check it out at:
http://www.thinklikeaconjurer.com/all24rbps/cursed/index.htm

Bill is right, this is a performance piece that requires practice, rehearsal, and then performance before some real people to get down pat. The "moves" are fairly elementary and well within the scope of the rank beginner but the trick is a choreography of movement and timing. Ron's little booklet will walk you through it clearly.
Message: Posted by: SpellbinderEntertainment (Feb 28, 2012 11:56PM)
Charlie Miller, Charlie Miller, Charlie Miller.
(and maybe the Bev Bergeron take on the Charlie Miller routine.)

So straightforward, so magical, so entertaining, so clean.

I first saw him do it when I was ten, he taught it in a lecture when I was 15,
I used it for years and years as a reputation maker.

That's my bet on Ring on Stick anyway.
Magicallly,
Walt
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Feb 29, 2012 05:25AM)
Charlie Miller's routine is really a version of Bev's Routine. The subtleties that Charlie used and taught were developed by Bev. Bev and Charlie roomed together in the 50s and Bev showed the routine to Charlie and they both worked at cleaning it up. Frankly I don't know how easy either is to find. Bergeron put his (including the history) on a video tape called "Bev Bergeron on Tape". it is one old video that should be re-released on DVD.

I know the Skinner version is easily found as is the Ron Bauer version. Ron's is still cleaner than Skinner's. Ron Bauer's is a version based on the Bergeron/Miller routine.

I remember that Don Bowles used to say that he could hit any town with nothing but a 10 spot in his pocket and the suit on his back and get work as a magician picking some stuff out of dust bins and from he five and dime. He said give him a coffee can and 6 half dollars (misers Dream), a pencil or dowel and a borrowed ring (ring on stick), a hank of clothesline (used to be cotton rope at 50-cents for 50 feet at the five and dime back then) for the cut and restored and Prof. Cheers (with a a pair of scissors), and a man's white handkerchief and he could do 30 minutes of solid, entertaining magic. He said that every magician should know a ring on stick routine.

One of the versions that Don performed that was very open looking and clean used a small "Ellis" ring. Now there is a little remembered prop.

Bottom line is that any of the versions mentioned are good in terms of handling. I'd say find one, learn it, and turn it into a great piece of magic and maybe even into your signature piece. It has that potential.
Message: Posted by: SpellbinderEntertainment (Feb 29, 2012 01:03PM)
Hi Harry!

<grin> Bev swears it is HIS and he taught Charlie. Charlie swore it was HIS and he taught it to Bev. Iíve heard it from both of them face to face. We'll never know, but the final result is genius.

Yep, Bev's video is now on DVD, and Charlie had a complete handing in the Magic, Inc. Lecture Notes (when he was living on their sofa.) Charlie *may* have taught it on one of Steven's tapes, but I can't quite recall.

I saw Charlie do it with the cardboard tube off a wire coat hanger taken from a motel, tale about on the spot magic!

I've not seen the Bowles, would love too!

Magically, Walt
Message: Posted by: Sealegs (Feb 29, 2012 01:22PM)
I'm a huge fan of Mike Skinner and think he was one of the greatest close up performers I have ever had the pleasure of spending time with. (albeit unfortunately a very short time)

It's rather odd then that this effect that has never done anything for me and indeed I think has some inherent weaknesses.

The appearance of the ring on the stick/wand can't help but include a moment which has the participating spectators thinking that the ring was simply being covered by the magicians hand. Of course this doesn't explain how the ring got on the stick but that doesn't really matter. It's the kind of thing that a spectator feels is a partial solution to the mystery of the effect and this inevitably undermines it.

Another thing I don't like about the effect is that during it the magicians hands tend to be tied up with holding onto the stick usually in an unnatural way. For example while the spectator grasps the ends of the stick. If the spectator has hold of the ends of the stick why does the magician still need to hold onto it? The answer is they don't... or at least they shouldn't have to.... but because they do have to it looks suspect. Those suspicions are given validity at the moment the ring 'appears' on the stick.

So a suspiciously held wand/stick has a ring appear where it was being held suspiciously. This cannot be ideal.

Like I said... it leaves me cold.

I'd be genuinely interested to know what is was/is about this effect that had Mike Skinner saying that he thought it the greatest magic trick ever created.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Feb 29, 2012 01:29PM)
Walt,

Yep that is the story I got from both. LOL!! I've seen Charlie do the cardboard tube on the coat hanger thing too. It was at a lecture in California.

I'll have to search for the notes and the DVD.

Don Bowles version was more like Skinner's.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Feb 29, 2012 03:34PM)
The late Scottish magician Ron Wilson also did this effect with a natural wood dowel and a finger ring. I seen a video of his performance, I believe, at a magic convention. Very well received.
Message: Posted by: SpellbinderEntertainment (Feb 29, 2012 04:24PM)
Sealegs!

I WISH you could have seen Charlie Miller do this.

He looked like (and was not) a clumsy pawed man, this deceit worked so much to his advantage with slights!

He also was a master at looking innocent, nonchalant, and casual, and maybe a tad distracted.
All this times I saw this for lay and magi, never once would those teeny (to his performance) be an issue.

And his off the cuff humor would distract people at questionable momentsÖ always.

Magically,
Walt
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Feb 29, 2012 04:28PM)
@Sealegs, Skinner believed that the ring on stick was an anytime, anywhere, type of trick. He thought it could be done entirely impromptu if needed. He also believed that it always created mystery and was a good vehicle for entertaining an audience.

It is one of those tricks in the right hands. Bev Bergeron's handling does not come across as having an awkward placement of the hand and if fact his patter/chatter/banter and quickness of doing each phase of his routine distracted one from feeling that his hand was there for more than a second as the ends of the stick were being grabbed by spectators. The couple of times I saw Miller do it was about the same. There were no pauses in the routine that would have pointed out the hand placement. It seemed that you grabbed the ends as he was removing his hand.

I never saw Skinner in his prime. The few times I saw him was after his illness and he was not as sharp (reportedly). His video tapes unfortunately were made after his prime and his illness and, as good as they are, they do not reflect him as good as he was. But at least we have a record of some of his work.

This trick, like all tricks, thankfully doesn't suit everyone. it is another case of horses for courses.
Message: Posted by: Opine Traveler (Feb 29, 2012 04:35PM)
[quote]
On 2012-02-29 14:22, Sealegs wrote:

The appearance of the ring on the stick/wand can't help but include a moment which has the participating spectators thinking that the ring was simply being covered by the magicians hand. Of course this doesn't explain how the ring got on the stick but that doesn't really matter. It's the kind of thing that a spectator feels is a partial solution to the mystery of the effect and this inevitably undermines it.

Another thing I don't like about the effect is that during it the magicians hands tend to be tied up with holding onto the stick usually in an unnatural way. For example while the spectator grasps the ends of the stick. If the spectator has hold of the ends of the stick why does the magician still need to hold onto it? The answer is they don't... or at least they shouldn't have to.... but because they do have to it looks suspect. Those suspicions are given validity at the moment the ring 'appears' on the stick.[/quote]

All this is quite true when your timing's off. In actuality, your hand holds the stick by its center, the ring is apparently in your other hand. You extend the stick for the spectator to take the ends, but even before they get that action completed, your attention has shifted to the other hand, and you're displaying the ring there. So, it's not a matter of, "Why is the magician still holding onto the stick?" but more that he simply never quite moves his hand away, and since it's not important in the least, no one notices, because the ring in the other hand has the focus now. It's also vital that this hand isn't wrapped around the stick as if grasping it still, but the fingertips are just resting on the stick, as though the hand is simply in repose, and the wrist is broken with the hand completely relaxed.

I've seen Michael do the trick numerous times, but always with a straw. This impromptu feel give the trick great power. Of the various times I saw him do it, it never once failed to get a scream. Not just a good reaction, but an actual scream.
Message: Posted by: SpellbinderEntertainment (Feb 29, 2012 04:58PM)
WHY IS CHARLIE AN ALL BUT INVISIBLE GREAT IN MAGIC?
WHY A PERPETUALLY UNSUNG HERO IN OUR CRAFT?

Here are some good possible sources for
Charlie Millerís phamlets, leactue notes, and articles:

--Byron Walker's Magic Books
POB 3186
San Leandro, CA 94578
byron.walker@comcast.net
510-276-1854
http://www.byronwalkermagicbooks.com

--Aladdin Books
406 E Commonwealth Ave
Fullerton, CA 92832
(714) 738-6115

--H & R Magic Books
http://www.magicbookshop.com

--AND From a Cafť Search ó read the WHOLE thread.

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=81150&forum=134

Paul Chosse / Posted: Aug 22, 2004

Charlie was actually quite prolific. Magic Inc. published "An Evening With Charlie Miller, "Black Art Well Tricks", "Charlie Miller on the Card Index", "The Charlie Miller Lecture Notes", "Charlie Miller's Diminishing Cards", and "Charlie Miller on the Malini Egg Bag".

Ken Brooke published, along with props, "Ken Brooke and Friends on the Malini Egg Bag", which was Charlie's routine, as published by Magic Inc., with MUCH more detail, Sid Lorraine's illustrations, and tips from many folks who Charlie taught the routine to, and who worked on it and offered their subtleties. The Brooke manuscript was 14 pages of illustrations and another dozen or so of accompanying text - very detailed!

Charlie contributed material to several magazines, most often to Genii. In the early sixties he published his "Ring On Stick", and "A Handkerchief Penetration", in Genii.

In 1965 he began "Magicana", a monthly column that included his own material, as well as contributions from friends that he deemed worthy.

"Magicana" was the centerfold of Genii for two decades, and included the "Trick of the Month" followed by "Intermission", Charlie's soapbox. There was as much magic in the "Intermission" as there was in the trick section, some months' even more. And Charlie commented on the passing scene, magician's dress, language, ethics, presentation, reminisced about magicians' of yesteryear, etc. "Magicana" would be a fine book by itself!

He contributed to "Chap's Scrapbook", a magazine put out by Frank Chapman in the forties, and has had items in other books. His cup and ball move is in "The Dai Vernon Book of Magic", and his "Cups and Bills" is most readily available in Bruce Elliott's "Classic Secrets of Magic". He wrote the introduction and did the cover art for "Scotty York on Coins" and the "Scotty York Lecture Notes".

I'm sure I've left things out, since I'm not in my study, and am doing this from memory, but there is an abundance of material, as you can see, if you want to look for it.

Oh yeah - Charlie was a major influence on Fred Braue, and "Expert Card Technique" is full of Miller material, attributed and otherwise. It is suspect, though, since Charlie did not disclose methods to Braue in many instances. What Braue wrote was what he thought Charlie was doing. So some of the material is correct, and some of it is not - figuring that out is fun!

The other thing that is interesting to note - Charlie was MUCH closer to Malini than Vernon ever was - the Malini book is not even close to what it could have been had Charlie written it.

And, Faucett Ross was Charlie's "uncle". They shared many things. I have a copy of letters from Faucett to Charlie, and from Charlie to Faucett, that span about thirty years - all chock full of magic! In fact, the Faucett side of the correspondence forms the basis for the Lewis Ganson book "The Magic of Faucett Ross". It is one of the most practical books of magic to appear in the 20th century.

And then there are the gambling stories. I have a copy of Bill Woodfield's gambling notes - it looks like it was Charlie Miller who invented the "Beanshooter"! Also, Charlie was quite a Gin player, and developed some "advantage play" methods for Gin that I have never seen in print anywhere.

You might want to consider the people who consider themselves students of Charlie's too - Ricky Jay (He dedicated at least one of his books to Charlie...), Persi Diaconis, Larry Jennings, John Carney, John Thompson, Michael Webber, etc.

Charlie was also one of the ten "Living Card Stars of the U.S.A., and counted among his friends legends like Paul Rosini, Jack McMillen, Jay Ose, Rolland Hamblen, Carl Stenquist, Francis Carlyle, and of course all the New York guys - Sam Horowitz, Jacob Daley, Dai Vernon,
Arthur Finley, etc. Knew Bob Thomas, better known as "Manuel, Master of the Mighty Dollar", Downs (Yes, T. Nelson, that Downs), and of course Max Malini, as I mentioned before. Let's not forget his friends Jay and Frances Marshall, who had a "Charlie Miller Suite" in Chicago, so Charlie always had a place to stay, Bill Dodson, Bill Gusias, the underground man, who made the best gambling holdouts ever, along with beautiful leather goods. And Charlie was close to Clark "The Senator" Crandall, the Derman boys, the infamous Carmen D'amico, Ed Marlo (of course!), and all the Chicago crowd. Milt Kort, from Detroit, told me great stories about Charlie's exploits with Ron Bauer whenever he came to Detroit, and Charlie was no stranger to the European crowd.

I guess I know a lot more about Charlie than I thought I did! Well, hopefully that puts a face to the name, and gives you some things to look for. Read the old magazines, talk to old-timers, you'd be surprised how highly Charlie was considered. In fact, I've said it before, but it bears repeating:

Charlie was the great under-appreciated, unsung, underground magician of the 20th century. He really could do it all. For real. Close-up, stand-up, stage, illusions (He did them for the 1939 World's Fair in San Francisco!), gambling (Both exposes and the real deal - Charlie played cards for money - and got the money!)

Well that's about all for now - hope this has been helpful.
Best, PSC
Message: Posted by: motown (Feb 29, 2012 05:11PM)
If you have access iGenii, you can find Charlie's routine in the September 1961 issue of Genii.

Personally, I've always preferred Jim Ryan's Ring on Rope to Pencil. It just seems even more amazing.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Feb 29, 2012 07:10PM)
Jim's Ring on Rope is a great routine as are any number of the Ray Grismer Ring on rope routines. Still the Ring on stick is something that can be done totally impromptu in many venues. Borrow a ring, borrow a pencil, pen or drinking straw and you have a minor miracle.
Message: Posted by: Foxbiz (Feb 29, 2012 08:16PM)
I only vaguely recall seeing Bev's routine in print... I think from a lecture note... but I have seen him perform it on youtube. A quick search will turn it up. It gives you the pacing and style for a great routine.

I use ring on/off wand with the help of an extra gaff and sometimes with a rope ala Darrell.

Lynn Fox
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Feb 29, 2012 09:01PM)
Walt great bio of Charlie. He is a legend to us old timers. I met him a number of times and actually saw him perform in Jaurez, Mexico in a night club (my dad took me) in the late 50s.
Message: Posted by: motown (Feb 29, 2012 09:06PM)
In addition to what Walt mentioned, years ago Steven's Magic put out a couple of video's of Charlie's material as part of the Greater Magic Video Library. If your interested, there available on DVD. His Ring on Pencil can be found on GMVL Impromptu #1, along with several other excellent effects from a who's who of magic.
Message: Posted by: Zombie Magic (Mar 2, 2012 09:09PM)
THANK YOU everyone for contributing to the thread. Some great history has been recorded for others.

Michael Skinner did his ring on stick for Frank Sinatra and Sinatra kept telling him "If I could just learn that one trick...".

Harry, thanks for the Ron Bauer reference. I love this series, but missed this one. It says

"Bauer's performance of this trick took in Vernon, despite the fact that he published the inspiration for it in Stars of Magic".

Here is Bev Bergeron doing the Ring on Stick:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHX_ru8HRSo

On the Stevens GREATER MAGIC DVD #20, IMPROMPTU #1 it says Charlie Miller does the ring on pencil.

Clarke
Message: Posted by: Opine Traveler (Mar 3, 2012 11:03AM)
[quote]Michael Skinner did his ring on stick for Frank Sinatra and Sinatra kept telling him "If I could just learn that one trick..."[/quote]

Indeed. In fact, Sinatra hired Michael for a party based on that trick alone.
Message: Posted by: 204rags (Mar 4, 2012 04:37PM)
I do not know about all the other guys who may or may not be first and formost with ring on a stick or who "invented" it. All I remember is seeing Johnny Platt do this effect back in the 1950's when he lectured in Charlotte, NC and to me the misdirection with a solid brass ring on a wand or stick is truly awesome and simple to perform. His lecture notes from Magic Inc. in Chicago might be one source to discover his method. When I saw him do it he used the solid ring from routines he was doing with an Ellis ring.
Message: Posted by: RS1963 (Mar 4, 2012 07:26PM)
[quote]
On 2012-02-29 14:22, Sealegs wrote:
I'm a huge fan of Mike Skinner and think he was one of the greatest close up performers I have ever had the pleasure of spending time with. (albeit unfortunately a very short time)

It's rather odd then that this effect that has never done anything for me and indeed I think has some inherent weaknesses.

The appearance of the ring on the stick/wand can't help but include a moment which has the participating spectators thinking that the ring was simply being covered by the magicians hand. Of course this doesn't explain how the ring got on the stick but that doesn't really matter. It's the kind of thing that a spectator feels is a partial solution to the mystery of the effect and this inevitably undermines it.

Another thing I don't like about the effect is that during it the magicians hands tend to be tied up with holding onto the stick usually in an unnatural way. For example while the spectator grasps the ends of the stick. If the spectator has hold of the ends of the stick why does the magician still need to hold onto it? The answer is they don't... or at least they shouldn't have to.... but because they do have to it looks suspect. Those suspicions are given validity at the moment the ring 'appears' on the stick.

So a suspiciously held wand/stick has a ring appear where it was being held suspiciously. This cannot be ideal.

Like I said... it leaves me cold.

I'd be genuinely interested to know what is was/is about this effect that had Mike Skinner saying that he thought it the greatest magic trick ever created.
[/quote]

I once had doubts about his effect myself and thought there is no way this can fly. But several years ago I decided to actually sit down and learn the effect from Stars of Magic.

The first time I ever performed it was for a co worker. I used his ring and a soda straw. When his ring was shown to be on the straw he stood there silent for a moment. I thought "Well now I know why I didn't like this effect, He knows what I did and it didn't fool him"......... After the pregnant pause he said "HOW THE *%&%( DID YOU DO THAT?!?" I knew then that I was so wrong about neglecting this effect and that any and all doubts about it were wrong.

It is an effect that really floors the spectator. They really have no clue as to how it is done. Learn it and try it. wait better yet. Forget what I said. It's a terrible effect leave it alone and let us losers that perform this keep fooling ourselves;)
Message: Posted by: Magic-Daniel (Mar 5, 2012 04:28PM)
I have never performed ring on stick or ring on rope, but I would think, that ring on stick is a lot stronger to a lay person. Just by the fact that you can use his ring and for that matter, his pencil, straw or anything....
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Mar 5, 2012 11:57PM)
[quote]
On 2012-03-05 17:28, Magic-Daniel wrote:
I have never performed ring on stick or ring on rope, but I would think, that ring on stick is a lot stronger to a lay person. Just by the fact that you can use his ring and for that matter, his pencil, straw or anything....
[/quote]

Depending on the ring on rope trick you master, it is possible with shoe laces, string, or decorator rope. The ring can be borrowed as well if that is your routine.

You could even do an extended routine combining the two. The bow and arrow effect does just that, you shot the ring from a rope/string to the stick.
Message: Posted by: RS1963 (Mar 6, 2012 11:11AM)
[quote]
On 2012-03-05 17:28, Magic-Daniel wrote:
I have never performed ring on stick or ring on rope, but I would think, that ring on stick is a lot stronger to a lay person. Just by the fact that you can use his ring and for that matter, his pencil, straw or anything....
[/quote]

I ever since I had started using ring on stick felt it's a stronger effect than Ring on rope, string etc... Main reason being. the wand, pencil, chop stick is hard solid object. In the spectators mind it is harder for their ring to end up on the stick then it is a piece of rope. I have nothing against ring on rope, shoelace etc.. effects there are some very good ones out there. I don't feel that they can beat ring on stick however.
Message: Posted by: Vraagaard (Mar 7, 2012 12:24PM)
Mchael Webers routine is really amazing, practical and in the hands of the spectators. I assume its on his lecture notes

Jan
Message: Posted by: RS1963 (Mar 7, 2012 12:46PM)
As far as I know the Ring on Stick that Michael Weber uses is not in any notes. It is however in his book Lifesavers.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Mar 7, 2012 01:10PM)
Frankly all ring on/off stick routines are amazing, practical, and in the hands of the spectators. It is the being in the spectators using a borrowed ring that makes it so amazing. Weber's handling is pretty much standard for a ring on stick. He adds one subtlety that is a small improvement or change to the Skinner handling. Unfortunately Weber only gives one phase of what should arguably at least a two phase routine. He does say that you can get that second phase from the Vernon handling in the "Stars of Magic" write-up.
Message: Posted by: John Long (Mar 13, 2012 07:48PM)
[quote]
On 2012-02-28 19:10, Harry Murphy wrote:

Frankly, I would advise checking out Ron Bauer's "The Cursed Ring". it is a ring on stick (OK, ring on pencil) that requires nothing extra and is multi-phase. Ron's manuscript gives you a script, the handling, bits of business, and presentation advice. You get so much more than just the basic handling of the trick.

[/quote]
The routine is nice, but it has only two phases, and the first is more of a joke than magical (but it does add to the second phase). I would have preferred more phases, as in Bev's version.

John
Message: Posted by: Zombie Magic (Mar 15, 2012 08:28PM)
I've been watching Charlie Miller teach this on video. He says he has heard about the trick and asked Max Malini about it. Charlie didn't think it was that good, until he tried it. He has some nice touches on it.
Message: Posted by: Sealegs (Mar 23, 2012 02:48PM)
The video of Bev Bergeron was very interesting to watch. He certainly has the pacing and scripting such that the action carries the routine along. One doesn't end up with any opportunity to dwell on any of the handling very much which is how any routine should be structured.

But (there's always a 'but') Bev's routine still has a physically awkward moment in it, that is repeated, where he has to use his left hand (which is 'holding' the ring) to reach over his right hand to indicate to the spectator where to hold the stick. At this point the other end of the stick is being held by the other spectator so Bev's right hand is effectively 'unnecessarily' (and awkwardly) holding the stick. A more natural action would be to let go of the stick with the right hand to indicate to the spectator where to hold the stick but the method makes this not possible.

Now of course there's an argument to claim that this moment is choreographed within the routine such that it goes by unnoticed or/and that all handling is a compromise of method and desired effect. But the degree to which one accepts these kinds of compromises is personal and for me this effect, both as a performer and as a spectator, is lacking a handling/technique that makes it smooth enough for my sensibilities.

In other words, while I can see the effectiveness of Bev Bergeron's routine it hasn't changed my opinion about this effect.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Mar 23, 2012 10:12PM)
[quote]
On 2012-03-23 15:48, Sealegs wrote:
In other words, while I can see the effectiveness of Bev Bergeron's routine it hasn't changed my opinion about this effect.
[/quote]

Okay, no problem, I believe you have a right to like or dislike a trick or routine. IF the classic handling has weak, point, and I understand exactly what you are referring to, then it has a weak point. No doubt about it.

Some prefer to work on over coming the weak point, but if you chose not accept that explanation, that is okay as well. As I read the post, I don't think anyone was trying to change your mind, they were just explaining the finer points of the handling in the routine.

I do Ring on Rope and Ribbon, more then the straight Ring on Stick, it just never fit with me either, as I can get 5 minutes out of my Ring and Ribbon sequence.

But it is a good item to have in your knowledge bank, if you were in a situation where the only things available was a ring and pen.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Mar 23, 2012 10:19PM)
[quote]
On 2012-03-13 20:48, John Long wrote:
[quote]
On 2012-02-28 19:10, Harry Murphy wrote:

Frankly, I would advise checking out Ron Bauer's "The Cursed Ring". it is a ring on stick (OK, ring on pencil) that requires nothing extra and is multi-phase. Ron's manuscript gives you a script, the handling, bits of business, and presentation advice. You get so much more than just the basic handling of the trick.

[/quote]
The routine is nice, but it has only two phases, and the first is more of a joke than magical (but it does add to the second phase). I would have preferred more phases, as in Bev's version.

John
[/quote]

Why not add more phases yourself, there is no law that says you cannot be creative. I myself have created 2 routines by taking material from several sources and combining them into one routine. I have even changed the props and in my opinion made the tricks better by changing some of the material. Like a paper envelope to the nest of purses for the final reveal, and adding more puzzling moves to make the trick seem to build in more impossible looking releases.

Be creative and have fun!
Message: Posted by: RS1963 (Mar 23, 2012 11:24PM)
As for changing ones mind about the effect. The only thing that could possibly change your mind is to actually try it. If you ever decide to. Forget all the other versions out there and go with the Vernon handling directly from Stars of Magic first. If you ever do try it. You just maybe amazed at how this somewhat dismal effect to you is much stronger than you think.
Message: Posted by: Sealegs (Mar 25, 2012 12:12AM)
Bill, I think your right in that I don't think anyone was setting out to change my mind about this effect but I was kind of hoping that during this thread someone would. I admire Michael Skinner enormously and it irks me to not be able to see something extra special in this effect that he obviously could.

I'm pretty sure that's way more likely to be a failing in my judgement rather than Michael Skinner's.

RS1963; suggested I, "... try it. You just maybe amazed at how this somewhat dismal effect to you is much stronger than you think."

Just for the record.... As far as I'm concerned It's not a dismal effect and I'm quite aware how strongly it can play with an audience.

I just don't think it warrants being considered as "the greatest trick ever created", as it was stated in the opening post that Michael Skinner thought it to be. It seems to me that an effect that has a built in weakness that needs to be accommodated is an unlikely candidate for such a legend.
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Mar 25, 2012 08:58AM)
Horses for courses here. Mike Skinner's opinion is his own (and shared by some) and based on his experience performing. He felt the routine was stronger than color changing knives, linking rings, and any card trick he knew and performed. Experiences and performers vary. You don't share the opinion and probably have a trick/routine in mind that in your opinion is "the greatest trick ever created". In your hands it probably feels true.

In my hands the version of this trick/routine works well. Unlike Mr. Skinner I wouldn't say it was the greatest trick ever (the jury is out for that one I am so fickle. Still, it works.

There are hundreds (maybe thousands) of tricks that I simply don't like, don't fit my performing style, or can't quite "get". I simply don't waste any of my time on them. I leave them for others. The beauty of magic is that it is varied and broad. Horses for courses.
Message: Posted by: RS1963 (Mar 26, 2012 11:52AM)
B.T.W. Michael Skinner had two versions of Ring on Stick that he would do. One was the standard Vernon way. He also had a version that only used the spectators ring a handkerchief and a rubber band. Both are very strong.
Message: Posted by: Justin W. (Apr 4, 2012 08:50PM)
[quote]
As far as I know the Ring on Stick that Michael Weber uses is not in any notes. It is however in his book Lifesavers.
[/quote]

There [i]is[/i] a handling in his notes that differs from the one in Lifesavers. I like it. It's quick, and you get three penetrations--on, off, on. All without a duplicate (ring or otherwise).
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Apr 18, 2012 09:15AM)
Watched Bev's take on this and while OK, I think this sorta take on it is a bit more up to date and much more stealth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJLoZSt6eKM&feature=fvwp
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Apr 18, 2012 11:50AM)
Eric's is truly a ballet and looks very magical.
Message: Posted by: Xcath1 (Apr 19, 2012 02:01PM)
Eric, d**n he sure turns a tired old routine into a piece of sweet visual magic.
Message: Posted by: RS1963 (Apr 20, 2012 12:41PM)
Eric's is nice but I still prefer having spectator hold on to the ends and bam their ring is on the wand stick etc.. Nothing better than that in my opinion. Mileage may vary for others of course.
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Apr 20, 2012 07:38PM)
Not for nothing but clearly you can see how in Eric's take on this where he could easily have spec's hold on to each end like in the old performances, he just didn't have anyone in the video with him to do that and so was just showing a few moves, as the video title speaks to. Personally I see no comparison as to the moves, the magician or the magic but you're right RS, mileage may vary.
Message: Posted by: jedoonatmagic (Apr 21, 2012 05:33AM)
Wow..., I'm surprised that that video reemergered! LoL It's a good routine, and I have reversed engineered it. But I haven't got around performing it for anyone.
Message: Posted by: J-Mac (May 31, 2012 12:16AM)
Another Ring on Stick that I donít think was mentioned here is R. Paul Wilson's "The One True Ring", which uses a one-piece street wand and an Ellis Ring. Three quick phases: On, off, and finally on again while specs hold the ends of the wand. Flows nicely and looks magical.

http://www.rpaulwilson.com/videos.htm

Thanks!

Jim
Message: Posted by: VernonOnCoins (Jul 24, 2012 08:58AM)
Tommy Wonder has a beautiful sequence written up in one of the Books of Wonder.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Jul 24, 2012 01:41PM)
Yes, I agree R. Paul Wilson's "one True Ring" routine looks good, it will take some work to master it, but it would make a nice addition to any Ring on Stick routine using an Ellis Ring. It would be an easy matter to segway to a spectator's finger ring, and finish with the Classic handling mentioned previously.

I did not notice a ring on wand trick in the Wonder Books, do you have a volume and page number.
Message: Posted by: VernonOnCoins (Jul 25, 2012 08:25AM)
Sorry, I no longer own these books and have forgot which one it's in. Basically this is a move -one sequence- which contains some off beat deceptions... a sequence you could add to any existing routine... very Tommy Wonder and very cool
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Jul 25, 2012 03:40PM)
The Books of Wonder Volume II, pages 64 through 68. The chapter is called " "Clear Through".

Tommy Wonder/Jos Bema teaches "one original method for achieving this effect (Ring penetrating a stick)". He notes that single sequence is probably not substantial enough to stand alone but could be incorporated in a longer routine.
Message: Posted by: VernonOnCoins (Jul 26, 2012 05:45AM)
Thanks for following up, Harry. It's a terrific move
Message: Posted by: Tonylew (Sep 12, 2012 09:51PM)
As was mentioned in a previous posting, I learned the Ring on Wand in the early 1960's from a Johnny Platt lecture. I feel that it is one of the strongest routines that I do. I do not know anything about the other methods, but Johnny's routine flows smoothly along with no awkward moves. I use a heavy gold ring of my own that I always wear. The spectator examines it to make sure it is OK. I find the weight to be perfect for the trick. It makes a great climax to see that shiny ring spinning on the wand.

If I am doing a kids show, I use this as an encore bit with an adult as my helper. It never fails to get a great reaction.
Message: Posted by: manal (Sep 13, 2012 01:21AM)
Sol Stone
Message: Posted by: Lawrence O (Oct 2, 2012 03:25AM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-31 01:16, J-Mac wrote:
Another Ring on Stick that I donít think was mentioned here is R. Paul Wilson's "The One True Ring", which uses a one-piece street wand and an Ellis Ring. Three quick phases: On, off, and finally on again while specs hold the ends of the wand. Flows nicely and looks magical.

http://www.rpaulwilson.com/videos.htm

Thanks!

Jim
[/quote]

To me R Paul Wilson is by far the most visual routine. It's not any shorter than other routines and its performance in full view (not even screened by the hand) is really astounding.

Now, apart from Michael Weber, who can be seen on his Greater Magic Video Library performing this Tom Sellers effect that he unearthed for us, Daryl has a version with a stick and a rope, Sol Stone in his DVD has another sleight of hand version...

With a little work, one could combine the script suggested by Ron Bauer and R Paul Wilson technique for a really entertaining routine.
Message: Posted by: Sealegs (Oct 5, 2012 08:40AM)
The video clips of Paul R Wilson's and Eric Jones's take on the ring on stick are really excellent. Paul and Eric have both created terrific close up routines for the ring and stick.

They certainly do away with the issues and weaknesses that I earlier identified and completely change the feel of the effect. Making it a one man effect, with no assisting spectators involved, gives a reason and rationale for continuously holding onto the stick. This greatly adds to the effectiveness of the magic as all the handling becomes completely naturally motivated.

These two routines have the feel of the now rarely seen, slightly old fashioned Jardine Ellis ring routines that I enjoyed seeing members at my local club perform when I was a young lad.

They're great pieces of magic but they are very different in nature to the stand up cabaret style ring on stick effect.

Introducing spectators into these close up routines would change the requirements of the handling ( I'm not suggesting Paul or Eric's routines ought to, should or need spectators actively involved... I'm just pointing out that the inclusion of spectators completely changes the handling requirements) and the same problems of having the spectators holding while you also hold the stick would have to be addressed.

In an earlier post someone wrote about my stated dislike for the weakness in this effect saying. " Some prefer to work on over coming the weak point, but if you chose not accept that explanation, that is okay..."

I'm happy that some are working to overcome the weaknesses of otherwise excellent effects... it wasn't that I didn't accept that people were working to over come the weak points it's that no suggestions had been offered that addressed and solved the issue of the weakness that I disliked. Of course Paul and Eric's versions do remove the weakness I disliked but they also change the look of the routine. That's not a criticism... their routines are fantastic... but they no longer play like a classic stand up ring on stick routine.

But... since I last posted on this thread I had the pleasure of seeing Michael Weber give a lecture during which he included his handling for the ring on stick. His routine has a spectator holding the ends of the stick and in an explanation of his routine he mentioned the same potential weak moment in the routine that I brought attention to in this thread. Fortunately though he had a very small and quite subtle bit of handling that instantly dealt with this weakness in such a way that the problem instantly disappeared.

I guess we aren't all lucky enough to have a brain that thinks in the clever way Michael Weber's does.
Message: Posted by: Leo H (Mar 3, 2013 10:44PM)
Sol Stone's 3 phase Ring on Stick routine can be found in The Essential Sol Stone. It utilizes a borrowed wedding band and a pen that can also be borrowed. You can also do Sol's routine with a wand that can be adjusted to half its size. The ring penetrates the pen, you pretend to remove it with a bar gag to add soome humor and relax the spectator's attention for the final penetration off the pen.
Message: Posted by: Rainboguy (Mar 4, 2013 02:52PM)
The late, great, Jim Ryan took the time to teach me his version of his ring to stick routine many, many years ago during a Houdini Club of Wisconsin convention in Appleton, Wisconsin.

Jim was a great guy and was loved by all and will be missed.

This weekend I made another stick (wand) to use with this routine and as a backup for my cups and balls.

Jim Ryan's routine is pretty hard to beat!

You can see more information abut the Jim Ryan routine here: http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=7849&forum=4
Message: Posted by: VernonOnCoins (May 16, 2015 05:47AM)
Sure... Vernon, Leipzig, Malini, Skinner, I'm sure they had it all wrong. As far as those modern, "extreme" ultra visual updates, they're fine I guess. I've played with them, but I have enough to worry about in the real world, don't need knacky moves to stress over in the trenches.

the other problem with these newer variations is you cannot borrow the ring and if you are not borrowing the ring you are losing 75% of the routine's impact. Once again like all things modern it becomes "look at me, how clever I am"
Message: Posted by: Rudy Sanchez (May 16, 2015 11:55AM)
"The other problem with these newer variations is you cannot borrow the ring and if you are not borrowing the ring you are losing 75% of the routine's impact".

I agree completely.

The best version I ever saw was Dr. Giovanni during the late '60's' thru 70's on television shows like Mike Douglas, Steve Allen, Merv Griffin, etc. Dr. Giovanni would be introduced and come out borrow the drummers drum stick and then go into the audience and borrow a ring. He had several phases which were amazing and he never failed to amaze. If anyone would ever be able to find old videos of Dr. Giovanni performing his version this would truly be a lesson in misdirection, showmanship and extremely strong magic.
Message: Posted by: Theodore Lawton (May 16, 2015 02:59PM)
I just want to thank everyone for this thread. All this great input has only added to my wish list!
Message: Posted by: Leo H (May 16, 2015 03:32PM)
[quote]On May 16, 2015, VernonOnCoins wrote:the other problem with these newer variations is you cannot borrow the ring and if you are not borrowing the ring you are losing 75% of the routine's impact. Once again like all things modern it becomes "look at me, how clever I am" [/quote]

Absolutely! You wring maximum impact out of this effect with a borrowed ring, preferably a wedding band. A ring with a heavy stone will throw the balance off and you will feel gravity pull the heavier part of the ring downward as you slide it on the wand or stick. This might not bother some but it bugs me. I suppose it's alright to use your own silver or gold band provided the spectator is allowed to thread it on the wand/stick at least once at the beginning. Of course, it won't stay that way for long.
Message: Posted by: ROBERT BLAKE (May 16, 2015 06:48PM)
I perform this all the time with my own ring. I was tired of the flimsy thin multiply puzzle multiple like rings. I wanted a ring that does the job. because the ring and stick are examinable no effect is lost. one of my favorate routines.
Message: Posted by: VernonOnCoins (May 19, 2015 05:52AM)
Let's not forget John Carney's reworking with a straw.
Message: Posted by: Alan Munro (May 23, 2015 09:09AM)
I learned Jim Ryan's version from Jerry Mentzer's Magic With Finger Rings. Excellent responses to the routine!
Message: Posted by: DrVG (Jul 12, 2021 03:24AM)
Dears, have anyone mentioned the excellent version of Flip (taught on World Greatest Magic : finger ring on rope), Supenpapos !

Also I remember reading (or viewing ??) a ring on stick routine involving a napkin I believe,
one of the phase involved a fake take of the ring laying on the table that would lead to the ring appearing under the napkin.
-> would anyone be able to point me to this material ?
Message: Posted by: ringmaster (Jul 16, 2021 06:29PM)
Forget that, Stars of Magic.
Message: Posted by: ringmaster (Jul 16, 2021 06:38PM)
Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZpIiKf7DPc