I have read that to start out in card magic, everyone should know a good false shuffle, a good card control, and a good force. Can you add to this list? Additionally can you list your favorite force, card control,and false shuffle?Thanks Glenn

I would add a good double lift, of course!

1. Classic force is still the best way to go I think!

2. My favorite card control is not published yet.

3. I will list four shuffles that I think are the best,and use:

For an on the table riffle shuffle, BJ Bueno's shuffle (from Penumbra #9) is hard to beat, followed by Dave Reynolds "Bottom Line" Zarrow Shuffle (I thought I invented this, but he beat me to it), as well as my own "Delayed strip" shuffle, which will be on the Night #2 Session DVD.

For shuffling in the hands, Derek Delgaudio's "Truffle Shuffle" is a state of the art blend of several shuffles that wanted to "be" this shuffle. It's great. You can get it from DanandDave.com.

Practice hard Glenn, and don't look back!

-Jack

Jack,I thank you for the reply.Glenn

Hope it helps Glenn, good question!

-Jack

On a semi-related note, Jack...

Let's assume there's an effect that you really like. You've found or created three methods to accomplish it.
- One is very sleight-intensive
- the second requires only one or two relatively easy sleights, and maybe a subtlety or two
- the third is virtually sleight-free, but uses a gaff.

Let's say you film yourself doing all three versions, and in the playback (audience view), they look virtually identical. Which one do you use? Or if you'd use more than one, which would be your favorite?

The reason I ask is because there is a small debate in the coin forum right now on this very subject, where some guys feel the effect is the only thing that matters, and others feel a sleight-intensive routine with no gaffs is "more satisfying" to perform.

I'd like to hear your opinion.

Effect is Indentical in all aspects?

Without question #2.

I hate gaffs- can't keep track of them, lose them, or don't have them on me. I'm talking about cards of course. Gaffs are just fine, and very useful for coin magic, and absolutely necessary for many other kinds of magic.

For cardwork, there really is no need at all for gimmicks and gaffs if your willing to persue a modicum of practice.

-Jack

I was going to ask the question about gaffs. In the Expert’s Portfolio you stated how much you hate gaffs and enjoy pure sleight of hand. I see your opinion hasn't changed much over the years.

When working on a problem do you ever catch yourself saying something like, if I use a a double-backer I could accomplish it like so? I may be answering my own question here, but it sounds like from all the years of self-discipline and the joy of sleight of hand that you will not even think of using a gaff. Personally I think their is a certain beauty to an effect when we can accomplish something truly magical with just a regular deck. Is it just me or does it seem like the reward is greater knowing that you accomplished the effect with a straight deck.

John

Absolutely John. You've got it. To me (and apparently you) using a gaffed card and being proud of it is like cheating on a test and thinking all that matters is the "effect." Why get up in the morning? So you can stuff your pockets full of double facers and feke cards? I don't get it.

Now, don't get me wrong. When a guy like Bill Malone pulls out an "Invisible Pack", it's because it's a great vehicle to entertain an audience with, and that's why he does it. It's because he's special, and he knows what he's doing. He doesn't NEED it. He's got a great IDEA with it.

I'm whining about the guy that doesn't like, care, or understand magic and pulls out the invisible pack, does the instruction trick, puts it away, brings out the change bag, does a trick, puts it away, brings out the Svengali deck, blah, blah, I could just explode.

Same with Ricky Jay. He's got a RIGHT to use those double facers in his classic rendition of Mac's Aces because he's got an IDEA. He uses great skill in ringing them in, (Piet Forton) and there's tremendous thought in the construction of the routine, that leads to the vision he had to make it reality. He doesn't do it because it's "easier."

I'm whining about the guy who does Mac Ace's and decides, "See, I'm just like Ricky Jay." They're idiots. Like the guy who paints geometric shapes but can't draw the human hand, and decides, "See, I'm just like Picasso."

Am I making any sense, or just rambling?