Oh! That's good news!
Thanks Nico!

Yeah you can continue. He covers a few different ideas for this. As I said hes gone into fantastic detail with this.

Jamie

Just purchased.
I'm still shaking my head over what is introduced on page seven.
Sorry to say, it's not as "hands off" as the description reads. Can't go into detail without tipping.
This one won't be right for me. Glad it was cheap.

Hi Maynard, I just went back through the description to see if I had accidentally described the effect as "hands off", and assured myself that I hadn't. In fact, "hands off" doen't appear in the effect, on the website, or in any of the reviews thus far. Perhaps you have a hang up with a moment in the routine? If you do, I would love to help you out with it. PM me, and we can chat if you'd like, I wouldn't mind taking the time to help you out personally.

...although, hands off would make it a much better effect!! I wish I was that good.

Sorry Paul, I meant to say.. as hands off as the description implys.
I will PM, (and hopefully word it better), thank you for the offer.

Anytime I look forward to hearing from you. In fact, if you find it easier, you can email me directly at mike@michaelpaulmagic.com

Fantastic detail?

Real World?

Practical?

I think not. I couldn't do this if I tried. This whole concept "assumes" way to much prior knowledge of thing I am not interested in...and then the main piece of it, I have no clue how you would even begin to do...and there is no explanation other than do it.

I'd love a refund on this one.

Fantastic detail?

Real World?

Practical?

I think not. I couldn't do this if I tried. This whole concept "assumes" way to much prior knowledge of thing I am not interested in...and then the main piece of it, I have no clue how you would even begin to do...and there is no explanation other than do it.

I'd love a refund on this one.

Oh and by the way....your description "screams" hands off.

Hey Guys,
I purchased this E-Book today and I'd like to give my two cents:

I'm not sure where the comments about "hands off" are coming from, but I don't see how an effect where the only real move is obtaining a specific card and executing a M*****n T******r can be looked at as an effect with "heavy hands".

As for real world practicality, an effect where I can take out a card, place it face down on the table, have someone cut to a card in a deck they hold it in their hands, look at it, close their eyes and think about that card, turning over my prediction card BEFORE they name the card that only they saw is pretty right between the eyes knock them on their A!@ Magic!

On the subject of detail, I agree with you Mike that there could have been more info on certain aspects of the "set-up" for the effect or at least a reference to where that information could be obtained. I PM'd Michael and suggested that to him as well.

I do know that I will be trying this one out and taking a few heads off with it...

Sorry guys, this one is not for me either...

It's the second time I'm disappointed with Michael Paul's products: I downloaded Phantom and... well... yes, it works, but it's not, imo, very practical... plus I really thought the coin could be borrowed (no, the ad didn't say this, but I really thought you EASILY could: it can be borrowed - though how to do it is not covered -, but you really get into too much trouble in that case...)

Why do I tell you this? Because I kind of have the same feeling with Freak: man... it's like killing a fly with a bazooka... Ok, it works and everthing written on the ad is true (btw I also thought it screamed hands off), but you get into SO MUCH TROUBLE... just for this??? Don't take me wrong, the effect is good, and I really don't mind going into complicated things to achieve tremendous effects (I love Bebel's routines for those of you who know him and they're known to be the epitome of complication), but here, again in my humble opinion, it's just not worth it. Like Jamie already said, you'll have to get your hands on a few other things that most of you have, but I simply don't want to go into all what is needed to perform an effect that could be performed easier and that, FROM THE SPECTATOR'S POINT OF VIEW, would nearly look the same. I can't tell a lot more without tipping part of the method, but when I read Justin Miller (which is a great guy btw, really) saying that Freak is SOOO practical, SOOO real world, I reall scratch my head thinking: "did he read the right pdf"?

As I already said, for me it's not "real world" and certainly not practical, so I will not be using it. I hardly can imagine how you could defend the fact that Freak is a practical effect, but I guess some people will try. I already hear people saying things like: "if you're not ready to go into complicated things, you'll never be able to perform tremendous effects". That's not true and that's not even the way I see Magic. First, as I already said, I do complicated things, and second, Magic doesn't have to be complicated to be extraordinary. Furthermore I don't think that the effect is complicated in itself, meaning that it would be a difficult effect: it's not an automatic effect but it's really doable. The problem is, and that's where I don't agree with Astrocity, that it's just not practical at all (for me). Last point: I'm sorry, but concerning the very end of the routine (again, I'm sorry but I prefer not to tell too much): why the hell would you do that??? In the pdf you're told that the heat is over, so you do something that, imho, is not logical at all... and could look suspicious, even if, it's true, people won't understand how you did that. But I wouldn't do it two or three times in a row to the same people (the ad stats "The effect is instantly ready to be performed again with a different spectator, and a different card": I guess it means "with a different spectator" FROM ANOTHER GROUP...).

However (that's the other point I may not agree with Mike, with the fact that I would't describe the effect as "difficult"), I do agree that the effect does run as it says (except of course other things are at play which are of course not covered by the ad), the pdf is well-written and everything is clearly covered (you even get two videos for the description of a sleight most of you probably already know, but it's a good point, just in case - and it's true it's not a sleight that magicians use a lot). The idea is quite good, but it's a little like playing table tennis wearing an armour... I'm sorry Michael, in all due respect, I wouldn't recommend this one. Glad it was not expensive, even though it's the second time I purchase an effect that's not expensive and which I will not use.

It's cheap and the dollar is low, so my day is still good. This effect needs a certain skill, that I don't have and won't ever have because I don't like that part of magic. Well, it's quite cryptic but I don't want to expose something. The effect's description is terrific, but I found the explanation disappointing.

Frans

Sorry guys, but I will have to disagree with the "negation-boys" . I am not sure if any of you guys tok part in the Open Prediction Project recently started by Tom Baxter over at the mentalism forum, but suffice it to say that I did take part in that project which involved 52 different methods for the Open Prediction dilemma, submitted by some of the worlds best mentalists.

Now, let me put this on the table right now, I have only been practicing the sleights involved with Freak for about an hour, and I "floored" my greatest sceptic (my wife) and I have to say that this is a better version of the Open Prediction (although it doesn't fulfill all the 51FN rules and regulations) than any of the 52 submissions in the Open Prediction Project and even, in my opinion, beats Osterlinds "Miracle Thought Projection" (sorry Richard )

I thank Mike for making this miracle such an affordable one, I really believe its worth 50 times the price (I have no affiliation to Mike BTW, never met him, never will) and would like to encourage you all to look beyond the sleights involved, but rather on the tremendous amount of psychology involved in the effect, which as been thought out meticulously....

Just my two cents worth of a review!

Best regards
Kam

Wow, finally I get some controversy and strong opinions! It's about time... I've made it! In all seriousness, let me covers some points really quick. Everyone is entiteled to and encouraged to give their opinion. However, "real world" is not a topic up for debate. I've had Freak in my set for years, and it kills people in the restaurants, bars, and nightclubs that I work. That's the real world. I understand that you may look at the l o n g description (I go into a lot of detail), and think, "I can't use this". That's different then "it can't work".

Secondly, there are a number of people who have emailed me, and who have posted, who state, "the trick plays exactly as described... BUT...". That just tells me that they love the effect, but aren't looking forward to practicing the method. Shame. It's like saying, "I love the idea of being able to do a killer gambling routine, but wait, it involves a second deal? Forget it..." And I should stop here and mention that learning the concept used for Freak will take much less time then perfecting a good second deal.

Next, my description doesn't say "hands off" anywhere. If it implies "hands off"... IT SHOULD!!! It's a magic trick. If the audience didn't think it was hands off, it wouldn't be the great effect that it is. Anyone that has ever dealt with me on-line, or in person knows that I'm not an arrogant person, but this next statement might come off that way: I honestly believe that Freak is going to suffer because the effect sounds like REAL MAGIC (but requires some work on your part).

Lastly, Freak Prediction was supposed to be part of a collection of effects that I was publishing because my performing character is moving in a different direction. The book was to be called ABK. I decided instead to release Freak Prediction seperately so that those interested in the open prediction plot could check it out without having to spend money on the other effects that might not appeal to them. That's why it's priced as low as it is... honestly, I spend more then that for lunch at Quizno's and for that price you're getting a piece of magic that I made my living with.

Actually... yes! I have been involved into the Open Prediction Project. And I can't beleive you're being serious by saying that it's better than any of the other 52 solutions provided by "some of the world's best mentalists"... I won't go into details here, because it would obviously involve openly comparing methods, but I really think you're exaggerating a little here. I hope it's not because you think Freak involves a complicated methodology that you feel the effect is incredible...

But if you're happy with it, I'm happy for you! (no, really!)

Again, it's ingenious, but I don't feel I need a missile to smash a mosquito, and I already have other routines which achieve the same effect and which are - though complicated - far more practical and less suspicious at the end (or at least more logical).

As a side note, anyone that has spent some time looking over the notes (that would be nobody, as the notes where released less then 24 hours ago), will realize that the value here is in the routining, and theatrical set up of the reveal. There is a no-mental work way of arriving at the same conclusion. I'll write up a word file today, and make it available to anyone who has freak and is unwilling to put in the real work.

It should... it's a magic trick. I've pm'ed you.

Heya Guys,

After polishing up last night, I have all that's needed to creat the effect luckily and I'm very fluent with all of the technques used. I decided to give this effect a chance in the real world (as I do all effects). I will say it does play VERY strong. It does do exactly what it says on the tins. The spectators freaked (hence the name) and they immediatly turned to a psycological explination thinking I had somhow influenced them to select a certain card.

However, I'm still very dissapointed with the method for it. There were a few times during performance that my hands were (hot) when I wish they wern't. At the time of turning the prediction over, I found that what ever way I played it, The heat was on my hands. There were a few comments from the onset thinking I was doing something fishy (which I was) They didn't see what was fishy but I'm sure its only a matter of time before they get it. There was no heat on the fact we were both holding a deck which was cool. I simply used my deck to help demonsrate the effect to them. The second section of the effect is harder to exicute then first thought. In the end I ended up using 2 of the spectators deck to helpo me out (those of you who have this should get what I mean).

Despite these facts (from a magicians point of view) The reactions were still great. They did discount the other cards in my hand and all comments before I turned the prediction was lost and were covered with pure astonishment.

The debate I belive people are having with the ad is it sounds MORE hands of then thought. I thought I would place a card on the table, they would go through a deck and think of any card in the deck (not having it on the table and being cut to) I belived they could freely handle the deck. I then thought I wouldnt have to do much else. Obviously I realised there would be somethng I would have to do but (without tipping the method) not whats required to get there card to the prediction.

Non the less, I would honestly recomend all those to just try it out to beging with. You SHOULD know the methods used if your a card magician. Most magicians should know one of these technques anyways as they come in VERY handy.

My closing notes being, The reactions are fantastic and all negatives in terms of comments from the specs is lost after the prediction is turned over. The method is a little iffy for my liking and I don't htink its what people were expecting. But please try it out before discounting it.

Best Wishes,

Jamie Daws

Two quick things. You've obviously read the entire pdf, and so you know that I've only included the last part of the routine you are refering to, to be complete and offer every idea I've had on the topic. Why the hell would I do that? I don't. I state right in the pdf, that I do not perform that bit, just as I do not use the script also included for another part of the effect. The item is only there for your information purposes.

And yes, by stating that it is ready to go again with no reset, I do mean for a different group... I'd never do this effect twice for one audience. You are correct in assuming that.

Glad to see I am not the only one who feels this way.

I honestly have been disappointed by Michael's other products before as well, but like a battered wife I keep coming back.