(Close Window)
Topic: Best in hands false shuffle?
Message: Posted by: Ky (Mar 22, 2016 09:46PM)
I don't care about the easiest, what is the best (in your opinions) false shuffle non-requiring of a table?

I already know a couple OH false shuffles, but feel free to discuss them here as well!
Message: Posted by: Tim Cavendish (Mar 22, 2016 11:16PM)
If you want this sort of hard-won knowledge given to you, tell us how much work you've put in:

Tell us the ones you've tried, and your assessment of those.
Message: Posted by: Ky (Mar 23, 2016 12:10AM)
Tim Cavendish: My apologies, I'm new to the Café. I would have joined a while back but they weren't accepting new members at the time, and I hadn't tried again until recently. What I currently use is in front of spectators for an in the hands false shuffle is an overhand shuffle. The 2 I am most comfortable with are Harry Lorayne's jog shuffle from his book Close Up Card Magic, and G W Hunter's full deck false shuffle from Greater Magic. I can do an in the hands push through false riffle, but even though it looks good in my mirror, I don't do it in performance because it feels awkward in my hands. I've spent the past 6 months on the Unshuffling Shuffle by Kiko Pastur, but cannot even begin to get the hang of it for my life. Because of this, in an attempt to mimic the action, I've learned to anti-faro. I'm not great at it yet, but I can already tell that it won't be as practical in front of spectators as the Unshuffling Shuffle. Perhaps the reason I couldn't grasp that technique is because the video is in another language with subtitles and not very in depth.

I was looking into getting "Past Midnight" by Benjamin Earl and Alakazam to learn the Grey Shuffle, but was uncertain because I am not certain if it can be done in the hands.

I also have 3 or 4 false cuts that I learned early on and am very comfortable with, but given their flourishy nature, I have never felt that these are anywhere near as deceptive.

I can easily retain the order of my deck without a riffle shuffle (and with the in-hands push through, I can do that sometimes as well), but I know that there has to be a better method or learning source out there that can either lead me to being able to execute the Unshuffling Shuffle, or provide a better method for it.
Message: Posted by: magicthree (Mar 23, 2016 07:08AM)
My favorite is in Richard Turner's Beat a Cheat dvd.
Message: Posted by: WilburrUK (Mar 23, 2016 08:25AM)
Depends what impression you want to give. Are you an elegant card expert (Guy Hollingworth), a sloppy chaotic performer (Lennart Green), a normal non-expert (Richard Osterlind). This is (IMHO) the fisrt consideration you should make when selecting a false shuffle - personally I use the Hollingworth shuffle, but a) I wouldn't call myself elegant and b) I'm not saying it's THE BEST, it just suits me.
Message: Posted by: Tim Cavendish (Mar 23, 2016 01:00PM)
WilburrUK makes an excellent point, and since you're wary of some of your false cuts "due to their flourishy nature," you're attuned to those issues, so that's good.

For its balance of reliability and very convincing action -- both visual and auditory -- I personally prefer Derek DelGaudio's Truffle Shuffle. Here's a Café thread where people debate the relative merits of the Truffle and Heinstein shuffles:

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=563858&forum=205

But sometimes a riffle shuffle seems out of place. So it's good to know overhand shuffles as well, which you do.
Message: Posted by: Waterloophai (Mar 23, 2016 04:06PM)
The truffle shuffle and the Heinstein shuffle are the two most convincing riffle shuffles. (but they are not easy....)
An innocent looking overhand shuffle can also be convincing.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Mar 23, 2016 04:18PM)
Some folks here (not me) are big fans of the Bob King False Shuffle (found only in Ortiz's The Annotated Erdnase). I prefer the Truffle Shuffle (already mentioned above) and the The Fishman Overhand False Shuffle (found only in Patrick Redford's Square). Hope that helps.
Message: Posted by: Sean Macfarlane (Mar 24, 2016 12:30PM)
Jared Kopf has an excellent false shuffle that's sold in Vanishing Inc.
Message: Posted by: danielvanm (Mar 25, 2016 05:00AM)
I second the Truffle Shuffle by Derek DelGaudio, it can be found as a download on dananddave.com. It's not easy but worth it! And of course a false overhand shuffle which can be found in many different places. Gregory Wilson also describes a variation on this on his second Penguin lecture, I think he calls it the overhand/underhand shuffle. I will send you a link in a PM of this shuffle! If you can do a normal overhand shuffle, you can do this.
Message: Posted by: ekgdoc (Mar 25, 2016 12:32PM)
You might like Dan Fishman's full deck retention false overhand shuffle. I learned it from Patrick Redford's book Applesauce. Here is a demo on YT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQzR1O6wiBw

I have become a fan of the optical false shuffle. Because it is so easy, it allows you to shuffle and simultaneously look directly at the spectator. I have done this many times standing right next to a spec and no one has ever mentioned seeing anything suspicious.

David M.
Message: Posted by: danielvanm (Mar 25, 2016 12:38PM)
[quote]On Mar 25, 2016, ekgdoc wrote:
You might like Dan Fishman's full deck retention false overhand shuffle. I learned it from Patrick Redford's book Applesauce. Here is a demo on YT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQzR1O6wiBw

I have become a fan of the optical false shuffle. Because it is so easy, it allows you to shuffle and simultaneously look directly at the spectator. I have done this many times standing right next to a spec and no one has ever mentioned seeing anything suspicious.

David M. [/quote]

Very nice one!
Message: Posted by: ThomasJ (Mar 25, 2016 02:39PM)
+1 for Truffle Shuffle. Very deceptive false riffle shuffle. Fishman's above looks really great, too.

I've been toying around with an in-the-hands Zarrow that I accidentally "discovered" years ago when practicing the Faro.

Ultimately the shuffle you use will depend on what makes the most sense within the context of the routine. What follows is a simple one that just popped into my head as I was typing this up. It's influenced by Paul Harris' "Flip-Flop-Plop" control:

1) From right hand end grip, swing cut top half into left mechanics grip and separate the hands. The right hand being roughly 6 inches above and to the right of the left hand.
2) Right index immediately pulls up on the outer edge and breaks off a packet from the right half, using the thumb as the pivot. Upper packet of these in the right hand is held by thumb and index, the lower packet by thumb and ring.
3) The lower packet is dropped onto the left hand's half, keeping a break between the half already in the left hand and the dropped packet. Pinky break would work, but I'd prefer an injog as the packet is dropped.
4) The packet remaining in the right hand is plopped on top of all.
5)Make a straight cut at the break.
While doing the sequence, the left hand should remain relatively still, but right arm moves nonchalantly in a counter-clockwise rhythm as it swings, drops, drops. Breaking the wrist as the right hand packets are dropped seems to aid in the illusion and fairness.

T.J.
Message: Posted by: Cain (Mar 25, 2016 07:30PM)
I used more frequently do Eric Anderson's false shuffle with an added cutting flourish. Now I prefer to begin with a couple perfect faros (which gets me into a mem-stack). While not technically a false shuffle, I find the perfect faro ideal for a couple of reasons: 1) The cards are genuinely mixed; 2) My second faro finishes with a waterfall cascade (the cards drop from one hand into the other), which is beautiful to look at. This is not only functional, but entertaining. Most of the time people will say, "Do that again," so of course I perform a trick instead. A layperson will see the cascade, and figure it was done in order to amaze or show-off. The cards are obviously getting interwoven, so it will not occur that they end up in a special order, much less one that has been memorized.

In between tricks, when I'm turned to the left, I'll prefer to do the overhand false shuffle that appeared in CLOSELY GUARDED SECRETS and credited to Kennedy/Mead (Ellusionist apparently put out something similar not long ago). When I'm turned to the other side I do a version of the optical false shuffle. I refrain from doing false shuffles that require a riffle because my regular method of shuffling involves butting the packs together. Riffle-shuffling would just be inconsistent.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Apr 5, 2016 09:05PM)
[quote]On Mar 25, 2016, Cain wrote: Now I prefer to begin with a couple perfect faros (which gets me into a mem-stack). While not technically a false shuffle, I find the perfect faro ideal for a couple of reasons: 1) The cards are genuinely mixed.. [/quote]

No. The cards are not "genuinely mixed" after a perfect faro. That is nuts.

[quote]On Mar 25, 2016, Cain wrote: My second faro finishes with a waterfall cascade (the cards drop from one hand into the other), which is beautiful to look at. This is not only functional, but entertaining. Most of the time people will say, "Do that again," so of course I perform a trick instead. A layperson will see the cascade, and figure it was done in order to amaze or show-off. The cards are obviously getting interwoven, so it will not occur that they end up in a special order, much less one that has been memorized.[/quote]

There is much to be said for this. But despite everything that can be said for this, what the layperson will (or should, if they aren't an idiot) conclude is that you are an expert at handling cards. And this turns your "magic" into mere card manipulation, which you've already telegraphed that you're great at multiple times over. I can do perfect in- or out- faros without a problem. I don't perform these in front of "laymen" or, in fact, before anyone. My faro followed by a waterfall/cascade is flawless. And yes, it is a thing of beauty. But I would never telegraph those types of card handling skills before performing a magic trick.
Message: Posted by: chappy (Apr 6, 2016 02:12AM)
Cain, I agree that audiences seem to find a well executed waterfall (following a faro shuffle) entertaining to watch and it serves to reinforce that the cards are not being kept in the same order. I used a bridging/cascade rather than a waterfall but for the same basic reasons you've mentioned. Both before and during magic tricks, I find it very effective.

To the OP
+1 for Eric Andersons "Shufflesque". It's a great in the hands false riffle shuffle.

..and another for Truffle Shuffle. It's the in the hands false riffle shuffle I use most often.

danielvanm, I think the overhand shuffle you mention with reference to Greg Wilson is Dan Garrett's Underhanded Overhand Shuffle. It is a great overhand false shuffle.

Best,
Greg
Message: Posted by: Cain (Apr 7, 2016 08:07PM)
[quote]On Apr 5, 2016, RiderBacks wrote:
[quote]On Mar 25, 2016, Cain wrote: Now I prefer to begin with a couple perfect faros (which gets me into a mem-stack). While not technically a false shuffle, I find the perfect faro ideal for a couple of reasons: 1) The cards are genuinely mixed.. [/quote]

No. The cards are not "genuinely mixed" after a perfect faro. That is nuts.[/quote]

Semantic wanking. The order of the cards genuinely changes (except the top and bottom in the case of an out-faro).

[quote]There is much to be said for this. But despite everything that can be said for this, what the layperson will (or should, if they aren't an idiot) conclude is that you are an expert at handling cards.[/quote]

That's fine. I [i]am[/i] an expert at handling cards. It makes what I do worthy of someone's time and attention. I can also use the assumption against by people by doing a "self-working" trick.

[quote]And this turns your "magic" into mere card manipulation, which you've already telegraphed that you're great at multiple times over.[/quote]

By "multiple" you mean two shuffles?

[quote]I can do perfect in- or out- faros without a problem. I don't perform these in front of "laymen" or, in fact, before anyone. My faro followed by a waterfall/cascade is flawless. And yes, it is a thing of beauty. But I would never telegraph those types of card handling skills before performing a magic trick. [/quote]

Different strokes. You're missing out. The faro is the cull's evil twin. It's the engine for some of the most powerful tricks that can be done with a regular pack of cards.
Message: Posted by: Ben Blau (Apr 9, 2016 09:40PM)
There are two false shuffles taught in my new book, ASYMPTOTES. One of them is an in the hands false riffle shuffle, that has some unique features. It's called the "Rosanna Shuffle" (some people will get the reference). I think I've shown it to Café member Sean Waters. If you're interested in hearing someone other than me spouting its virtues, ask him what he thought of it.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Apr 11, 2016 09:13PM)
Riderback, Cain and I have a history of differences, but I'm afraid you're out of your league with him. He will reduce you to rubble if he feels like it.
Your lack of knowledge is more apparent with every post.
It has been written and proven in performance, that one of the best ways to mask the perfect faro is to actually point out to the onlooker that all 52 cards are interweaving perfectly. Show them up close. I have done this countless times for intelligent audiences.
Please, do us all a favour and stop with this "it only fools idiots" routine.
You're wrong. It fools Ph.D 's and geniuses. Why? Because they are easier to fool than idiots.
You should know this, but you don't.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Apr 14, 2016 07:00PM)
[quote]On Apr 11, 2016, magicfish wrote: It has been written and proven in performance, that one of the best ways to mask the perfect faro is to actually point out to the onlooker that all 52 cards are interweaving perfectly. Show them up close. I have done this countless times for intelligent audiences.[/quote]

This is so cute!

[quote]On Apr 11, 2016, magicfish wrote:Please, do us all a favour and stop with this "it only fools idiots" routine. You're wrong. It fools Ph.D 's and geniuses. Why? Because they are easier to fool than idiots. You should know this, but you don't.[/quote]

We can talk more after you have earned an advanced degree from an elite institution.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Apr 14, 2016 07:09PM)
[quote]On Mar 25, 2016, Cain wrote: Semantic wanking.[/quote]

Alternatively, just a preference for clarity of expression.

[quote]On Mar 25, 2016, Cain wrote: That's fine. I [i]am[/i] an expert at handling cards. It makes what I do worthy of someone's time and attention. I can also use the assumption against by people by doing a "self-working" trick.[/quote]

You can be an expert at handling cards without telegraphing that. Being an expert does make what you do worthy of someone's time and attention. But being an expert doesn't entail that you need telegraph your expertise. It's your call if you want to telegraph a lot of that expertise. Maybe that's you're style. (I honestly don't care what your style is.) But I will again state my considered opinion: An expert at card handling can do a better job of pulling off effects which are perceived to be miraculous than someone who lets people know that they're an expert at card handling.

[quote]On Mar 25, 2016, Cain wrote: Different strokes. You're missing out. The faro is the cull's evil twin. It's the engine for some of the most powerful tricks that can be done with a regular pack of cards.[/quote]

Different strokes for sure. And I recognize the faro's power. A cull, however, when done properly, needn't telegraph any expertise.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Apr 14, 2016 07:18PM)
Ok, let's just settle this. The best false shuffle is a set of eight out-faros... And to turn that false shuffle into the best possible fooler, make sure to point out to your audience how well you're mixing the cards! Draw their attention to the perfect interlacing of cards, and then, for extra bonus points, challenge them to pull that off (and don't forget to make sure to remind them to cut the pack just right!)
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Apr 14, 2016 07:23PM)
***. I realize I overlooked the absolute best false shuffle. I'll take you awhile to do it, but I'm sure you're nail them. At 2s per faro, we're looking at a mere 1.7m of shuffling.
Message: Posted by: Scott Kahn (Apr 14, 2016 09:38PM)
(1) Bob King's shuffle from Annotated Erdnase.
(2) Justin Hanes' M.O.S.E.S. (Modified Overhand Shuffle Entire Stock).
Message: Posted by: Waterloophai (Apr 15, 2016 02:12AM)
Please Mr Riderbacks, have respect for the opinion of Mr Cain.
Please Mr Cain, have respect for the opinion of Mr Riderbacks.
When one read the posts of you both regarding this topic (faro), it shows that both of you are passionate people and that can't be wrong. On the contrary.
However, it is also very clear that neither of you will be converted to the opinion of the other. There is nothing wrong with that and there is even no need for that.
I am (almost) sure that on this topic, Michael Close and Darwin Ortiz will be on the side of Mr Cain and that Lennart Green and Dani Da Ortiz will be on the side of Mr Riderbacks :-).

I am afraid that in this particular case, I agree with Mr Riderbacks. That does not mean that I don't respect the view of Mr Cain. I just don't understand his view.
To differ (very) strongly from opinion can en MUST be possible without getting personal or sarcastic. Besides, the absolute "truth" does not exist.

I too, wrote in 2014 a (passionate) piece about the execution of the faro IN COMBINATION WITH A MEMORIZED DECK and published it in my web eBook "TTT-memdeck".
Those who are interested can PM me and I will give them a web address where they can read a copy of that article.

P.S.: Excuse me for my miserable English grammar. It is not my native language.
Message: Posted by: Davdo (Apr 15, 2016 08:52AM)
For my style, I give another plus one to the Dan Fishman overhand. I also throw in the Charlier shuffle a lot because it's so delightfully sloppy that it just CAN'T be false... But it is...

~Dave
Message: Posted by: Jerry Danes (Apr 15, 2016 11:37AM)
Ky,

I can recommend you to purchase Jack Carpenter´s At the table lecture. In it he shows 2 different in the hands false shuffles, they are both complete full deck retentions. I especially like the Z-break shuffle, and it is a overhand version that is fairly easy to do. It kind of mimmicks the way a layperson shuffles. It´s a mix of block shuffles and a short single run sequences.I Think you will like it.


Sincerely,
Jerry Danes
Message: Posted by: Ky (Apr 15, 2016 08:38PM)
These are all proving to be great resources! Thanks to everyone who has contributed so far, great stuff. I have looked into/ordered several of your suggestions, much appreciated!!
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Apr 15, 2016 09:12PM)
I don't think I've disrespected anyone. I've just stated my opinion clearly. If Cain wants to telegraph expertise at card manipulation, that's his business. If that's his style, that's fine. He can do whatever he wants. And I have no doubt whatsoever that one can be successful while telegraphing the fact that one is a master card manipulator. If you want to be that kind of guy, go for it. And none of that has anything to do with my point. I have stated, for the record, that the deception is heightened if you don't make available to your audience explanations such as: "Oh, this guy is a a sleight-of-hand artist and master card manipulator!" I stand by that claim and I could, though I won't, point to a fair bit of psychology literature which (plausibly) reinforces it. You'll never catch me using the CP as a color change for these reasons. Can you impress by doing so? Sure. Does opting for that cheap impression diminish the impact of what you might do next? Why yes, yes, it does!
Message: Posted by: Cain (Apr 16, 2016 08:27PM)
[quote]On Apr 14, 2016, RiderBacks wrote:
Ok, let's just settle this. The best false shuffle is a set of eight out-faros... And to turn that false shuffle into the best possible fooler, make sure to point out to your audience how well you're mixing the cards![/quote]

Your straw man needs some work... Why eight out-faros? Why not 52 in-faros? Or maybe that's what you meant in your follow-up, where I see that obvious "preference for clarity of expression":

[quote]***. I realize I overlooked the absolute best false shuffle. I'll take you awhile to do it, but I'm sure you're nail them. At 2s per faro, we're looking at a mere 1.7m of shuffling. [/quote]



[quote]Draw their attention to the perfect interlacing of cards, and then, for extra bonus points, challenge them to pull that off (and don't forget to make sure to remind them to cut the pack just right!) [/quote]

No, it's not advised that you show the cards are perfectly interlaced. Spectators will not detect (let alone suspect) that the cards are [i]perfectly[/i] interwoven. The point is that the flourish masks what's actually going on. No one will lean over and say, "Didja see that, honey? The cards are in a foretold order, one that he's probably taken the time to memorize." As I said, the cards will also be given overhand shuffles, and spectators will see what appears to be a random order.

[quote]On Apr 14, 2016, RiderBacks wrote:
You can be an expert at handling cards without telegraphing that. Being an expert does make what you do worthy of someone's time and attention. But being an expert doesn't entail that you need telegraph your expertise.[/quote]

Do you see the chicken-egg problem you've set up for yourself? Being an expert makes you worthy of time and attention, so how do people know you're an expert? You could tell them. You could have [i]somebody else[/i] tell them. You can also show them.

[quote] It's your call if you want to telegraph a lot of that expertise. Maybe that's you're style. (I honestly don't care what your style is.) But I will again state my considered opinion: An expert at card handling can do a better job of pulling off effects which are perceived to be miraculous than someone who lets people know that they're an expert at card handling.[/quote]

Miraculous is miraculous regardless of the performer's background. "Hey, Jesus is going to be in town tomorrow. Are you gonna see him perform some miracles?" "Why bother? That Jesus is always performing miracles. I wanna see Riderbacks!" You might have a point if you're talking about managing expectations (under-promise, over-deliver); a card cascade could be a serious problem if it's by far the most impressive thing you can do.

[quote]You'll never catch me using the CP as a color change for these reasons. Can you impress by doing so? Sure. Does opting for that cheap impression diminish the impact of what you might do next? Why yes, yes, it does[/quote]

You're comparing a flourish to a magical effect. I agree there are some magical effects that can provoke a strong initial reaction, but should be avoided because the method is not deeply fooling. Still, the out-reality of a card cascade is [i]not[/i] about fooling the audience. The fact the cards also end up in a particular order is what makes it so diabolically awesome.

[quote]Different strokes for sure. And I recognize the faro's power. A cull, however, when done properly, needn't telegraph any expertise. [/quote]

There [i]are[/i] problems with the faro -- it's idiosyncratic, for one -- which is precisely why I like to open with it, as if to say, "this is how I shuffle cards." A bonus of the cascade is that it makes an exposition phase a little more watchable. As mentioned in my initial post, my motive is consistency of action. I've seen other performers do riffle shuffles, but then their technique noticeably changes when they get to a faro trick.

It seems you want to turn this into the long-running debate about "showing skill." Some have argued bridging cards is an unnecessarily flourishy display, yet you advocate the Truffle Shuffle. I guess that move telegraphs just the right the amount of expertise, one that's no doubt richly supported by the most cutting-edge literature in psychology.
Message: Posted by: RiderBacks (Apr 16, 2016 10:17PM)
[quote]On Apr 16, 2016, Cain wrote: Why eight out-faros? Why not 52 in-faros? Or maybe that's what you meant in your follow-up, where I see that obvious "preference for clarity of expression".[/quote]

You figured that one out (and pretty easily, I'd imagine). It must have been clear enough.

[quote]On Apr 16, 2016, Cain wrote: No, it's not advised that you show the cards are perfectly interlaced. Spectators will not detect (let alone suspect) that the cards are [i]perfectly[/i] interwoven. The point is that the flourish masks what's actually going on. No one will lean over and say, "Didja see that, honey? The cards are in a foretold order, one that he's probably taken the time to memorize." As I said, the cards will also be given overhand shuffles, and spectators will see what appears to be a random order.[/quote]

I agree that it's an abysmal idea to show that the cards are perfectly interlaced. This wasn't directed at you. Just look at what someone else wrote:

[quote]On Apr 11, 2016, magicfish wrote: It has been written and proven in performance, that one of the best ways to mask the perfect faro is to actually point out to the onlooker that all 52 cards are interweaving perfectly. Show them up close. I have done this countless times for intelligent audiences.[/quote]

[quote]On Apr 16, 2016, Cain wrote: Still, the out-reality of a card cascade is [i]not[/i] about fooling the audience. The fact the cards also end up in a particular order is what makes it so diabolically awesome. [/quote]

You can see the cards interweaving perfectly in that cascade. It's obvious.

[quote]On Apr 16, 2016, Cain wrote: Some have argued bridging cards is an unnecessarily flourishy display, yet you advocate the Truffle Shuffle.[/quote]

Bridging cards is hardly unnecessarily flourishy in the States. (It might be unnecessarily flourishy elsewhere.)
Message: Posted by: Cain (Apr 17, 2016 01:08PM)
[quote]On Apr 16, 2016, RiderBacks wrote:
[quote]On Apr 16, 2016, Cain wrote: Why eight out-faros? Why not 52 in-faros? Or maybe that's what you meant in your follow-up, where I see that obvious "preference for clarity of expression".[/quote]

You figured that one out (and pretty easily, I'd imagine). It must have been clear enough.[/quote]

I had no idea what you were going on about until after I had written and submitted my post. Then I glazed over the thread and quickly edited my reply. No matter...

[quote]You can see the cards interweaving perfectly in that cascade. It's obvious.[/quote]

Except it's not "obvious." As I said, one of the most common reactions is, "do that again!" (partly because they're not exactly sure what happened). In a newer deck, the cards just melt together, and a perfect weave isn't even necessary, let alone observed. A shared trait of some of the excellent false riffle-shuffle mentioned is that the flourish helps obscure the method, and this is pretty much what's happening with a cascade.

[quote]Bridging cards is hardly unnecessarily flourishy in the States. (It might be unnecessarily flourishy elsewhere.) [/quote]

Of course it's unnecessarily flourishy -- it adds nothing to the integrity of the shuffle. Yes, it's a common flourish, and over time just feels "right" compared to squaring the deck, but I thought displays of skilled manipulation were supposed to be bad...

What this really seems to boil down to is aesthetics.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Apr 18, 2016 02:35PM)
Many expert cardmen have discovered the hidden in plain sight virtue of pointing out the perfect weave. Tamariz does it often. Not for every effect using a faro mind you, But it can be very, very effective.
Onward
Message: Posted by: stickmondoo (May 5, 2016 03:40AM)
Has anyone mentioned the dovetailed waterfall shuffle Bill Malone teaches on o e of his Dvd's. That's a great easy convincing shuffle. I'm not sure but I think he said it was Ravelii's shuffle.
Message: Posted by: Danny Archer (May 5, 2016 09:22AM)
I use my own in the hands riffle shuffle with a bridge that is highly deceptive, but I feel that you need more than one shuffle to be convincing so I alternate the riffle shuffle with an overhand shuffle. Mead points out in his book, that using only one shuffle technique will start to draw unwanted heat and I agree with him wholeheartedly.
Message: Posted by: stickmondoo (May 6, 2016 04:42AM)
Here's a little wrinkle which I always use with Lew Brooks shuffle from stack attack but works with any false shuffle. If using a mem deck or full deck stack, before you false shuffle put two jokers, one on top and one on bottom of deck. Full deck False shuffle then just bury the jokers without showing them into the centre of the deck. Looks really random like the position of the cards don't matter at all. I always stick them in the bottom half because I use the top half order in my first effect. Then later when I need the full order I notice the jokers and remove them.
Message: Posted by: cfirwin3 (Jul 30, 2016 10:56PM)
My favorite is the Heinstein...
It's easier than the Truffle and can look every bit as good. It is essentially a Zarrow shuffle in the hands with a fairly simple false cascade. If you do it with a slip cut at the riffle/separation (Karl Hein published the move as a two phase shuffle, like the Zarrow... as I recall) then you can do it once and be done.

It will take practice. I worked on it for about 3 months before I used it.

The downside is that the appearance of the shuffle may require you to perform your normal in the hands shuffle differently in order to be consistent. Most people don't riffle the cards together at the back inside corners as required in the Heinstein. Most normal in the hands riffles are done with the front outside corners... the more natural way.

It's also harder (but not impossible) to do these types of shuffles while seated at a table. I tend to turn to my right which gives absolute cover of the move while seated... like Lennart Green does with his false.

You've got to get it where it is second nature, where you have to think about doing it the right way (a real shuffle) when you want to because you have learned to hit a false one every time. Be absolutely comfortable... if you aren't talking over the top of your shuffle... you're doing it wrong ;-)

Also, a big SECOND on the idea that you need more than one false. Make sure that you can run a quick over hand false every now and then... that and a couple of decent SIMPLE LOOKING false cuts. The more complex the shuffle or the cut... then the more fishy it tends to 'smell'.
Message: Posted by: Kjellstrom (Aug 9, 2016 02:16PM)
My favorite in hands false shuffle is this, published in Genii Magazine December 2004. Page 22.
"Worlds Greatest Overhand False Shuffle by Bob Farmer.
A worker & easy to do.
Message: Posted by: Imirik (Aug 21, 2016 08:33AM)
For some simple overhand shuffle ideas that are easier but work well, take a look at Giobbi's Card College volume 2. It has some full deck retention overhand shuffles and part deck retention shuffles.
Message: Posted by: mtgoldstein (Sep 9, 2016 10:03PM)
I too Jared Kopf has an excellent false overhand shuffle at Vanishing Magic. Plus a few routines. Eric Anderson's Shuffelesque in Ah Ha for a riffle.
Message: Posted by: TRI6KED (Sep 12, 2016 03:53PM)
[quote]On Mar 25, 2016, ekgdoc wrote:
You might like Dan Fishman's full deck retention false overhand shuffle. I learned it from Patrick Redford's book Applesauce. Here is a demo on YT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQzR1O6wiBw

I have become a fan of the optical false shuffle. Because it is so easy, it allows you to shuffle and simultaneously look directly at the spectator. I have done this many times standing right next to a spec and no one has ever mentioned seeing anything suspicious.

David M. [/quote]
Dan Fishman's full deck retention false overhand shuffle is my favorite. :-)
Message: Posted by: pnielan (Sep 15, 2016 12:46PM)
Jared Koph in his Vanishing Inc video (which is very good by the way) refers to an added touch that Bill Malone has on his tapes. Does anyone know which tape and which effect.
Message: Posted by: mtgoldstein (Sep 15, 2016 05:41PM)
Very good question. I was wondering the same. Hope someone might know so I don't have to search through them all :)
Message: Posted by: rjs (Sep 16, 2016 06:09AM)
It's all in the bounce! The bottom hand contributes.
See Bill Malone's Penguin Lecture.
1hr 5 mts Optical Shuffle

Also check out:
1hr 8 simulation shuffle (Ben Earl)
1hr 10 Push-thru shuffle tip
1hr 45 Optical shuffle again
Message: Posted by: Tim Cavendish (Sep 21, 2016 10:30AM)
[quote]On Sep 16, 2016, rjs wrote:
It's all in the bounce! The bottom hand contributes.
See Bill Malone's Penguin Lecture.
1hr 5 mts Optical Shuffle

Also check out:
1hr 8 simulation shuffle (Ben Earl)
1hr 10 Push-thru shuffle tip
1hr 45 Optical shuffle again [/quote]
This is great. Thanks for such a precise reference, rjs.
Message: Posted by: Ben Blau (Sep 27, 2016 02:53PM)
Here's a demonstration of the "Rosanna Shuffle" from my book, ASYMPTOTES:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ra2dkuiq95bb4xv/Rosanna%20Shuffle%20Demo.mov?dl=0
Message: Posted by: pnielan (Sep 29, 2016 07:05AM)
Jared Kopf in his Vanishing Inc video (which is very good by the way) refers to an added touch that Bill Malone has on his tapes. Does anyone know which tape and which effect.

(This post corrects the spelling of Kopf [from Koph] from my September 15 post.)
Message: Posted by: Tim Cavendish (Sep 29, 2016 05:35PM)
Rjs answered your question.
Message: Posted by: pnielan (Sep 30, 2016 03:00PM)
[quote]On Sep 29, 2016, Tim Cavendish wrote:
Rjs answered your question. [/quote]

Saw that. Thanks. Just wanted to correct my typo.
Message: Posted by: AndreOng1 (Nov 4, 2016 04:36PM)
Truffle Shuffle by Derek DelGaudio is my favorite false shuffle.
Message: Posted by: JassTan (Nov 9, 2016 11:05PM)
I leant my false shuffle from Lennart Green, very deceptive. Been using it ever since, it takes a quite bit practise though.
Message: Posted by: Forty Six & 2 (Apr 14, 2017 07:53AM)
+1 for The Real Green Shuffle. I found by switching the 'working' hand at the start of the shuffle I can eliminate the final cut, which turns this shuffle in to a full deck, in the hands f**se riffle sh***le :)
Message: Posted by: godan65 (Mar 14, 2021 04:46AM)
I did the same with the Grey Shuffle by Ben Earl. Final cut avoided :-)
Message: Posted by: Gennovense (Mar 23, 2021 08:12PM)
For me there are two must learn false shuffles, Guy Hollingworth's in the hands false shuffle and the Overhand False Shuffle by Dan Garrett. Ben Earl is also a good source when it comes to false shuffles....everything really.
Message: Posted by: Nikodemus (May 9, 2021 03:25AM)
I just came across this one, which I have never seen before. It might appeal to someone here on the Café -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrDjHGsIzI4
Message: Posted by: magicthree (May 9, 2021 11:55AM)
I like it and not hard to do. Thanks Nikodemus
Message: Posted by: magicthree (May 9, 2021 06:57PM)
Richard Turner has one very similar to this and maybe a little easier to do.
Message: Posted by: Kassim (Jul 11, 2021 08:58AM)
Combination shuffle by ben earl is really good
Message: Posted by: ddyment (Jul 11, 2021 10:47AM)
This topic has been explored in considerable depth [url=https://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=701209]here[/url].

The discussion meanders a bit, but it does cover all the best-liked solutions.