Ok, I spend way too much time looking at Cups and Balls stuff.

I think the gentleman in this video has an original and well-rehearsed routine. It's worth a watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lxZcW8a7Ig

He's only got 14 views. Let's make the poor guy wonder why he's getting so many hits, all of a sudden!

I think he does a great job.

KG

I enjoyed that. Really interesting construction.

I really enjoyed his routine. Didn't you start a thread once Kent regarding final loads and thinking outside the box? I think his is a fooler. Nice misdirection, although I wouldn't doubt that it could be more effective with magicians than laymen.

Bill

Thanks kent... always like to see various folks do the classice with their own 'twists'

Kent, thanks for the head's up on this. Love the timed misdirection for the final loads.

Very instructional -- a model in timing.

I especially like the demonstration that a 'cup'
is nothing more than an extra hand.

For me, the final load detracts from the routine
and gains less as a 'surprise' as it looses by
disrupting the logic of the routine offered to be 'instructional'.

I know -- 'everybody' does a wierd final load ...

which is exactly why I don't often do one.

I tend to agree with friend funsway here. It is a nice and well structured routine. His pacing/timing is good making the routine very easy to follow.

His final loads are incongruous at best. He didn’t do any set-up at all with them resulting in a smaller “wow!” than they should have brought.

I like his routine to the point that I showed it to a dozen or so non-magician friends/co-workers (I have a captive audience of a little over 500 co-workers, some of whom are friends, and being the boss makes them have to suffer my explorations in the arcane, eccentric, and weird! LOL!!).

All found it interesting, some found it magical, and some actually liked it a great deal. None of them thought he sold his ending. I think his pacing and presentation undersold his finale.

In all a good solid routine that probably plays better to a live audience than on the tube.

Funsway,

I'm intriguing by your dislike of final loads. I think they are an inescapable part of the effect. I've chosen final loads that mimic the small balls I use exactly, except for size.

Could I get your opinion on my routine?

KG

You have my opinion. That should suffice...

Take away the final loads in most cups and balls routines, and all you really have is a sleight-of-hand demonstration involving inconsequential objects and three huge covering agents. It can still be a fun diversion, but it's not exactly show-stopper material. By working one-ahead you can get decent mystery early on, but really, most of the time, it's not totally sustainable.

That's not to diminish the importance of those opening phases. I've got a buddy who wants to do a cups and balls routine where he jumps straight into the final load sequence, and it's a shame, because he doesn't understand the importance of it -- to show the cups empty multiple times, to use the revelations to direct attention, to motivate trips to the pocket, to nullify the suspicion of those pockets, to set their expectations at a certain level before trumping them, etc.

But really, if you put it all together correctly, the final load production gives you one of those great WTF moments in magic... Strong enough to close a set or act with.

Thanks for your kind remarks concerning Bill's Cup routine. I guess I should mention that I'm Bill Wilson. I don't want anyone to think I took an avatar to hide behind. When I joined The Café a few years back I can't even remember what my reason for taking a silly name was. Fact is, I may not have had a reason.

Anyway, I would like to mention, I am not much of a fan of magic on video, whether televsion, YouTube or any other media player. But, it's a routine I have been working on for years and it will never likely be published so I thought I would give it some exposure. Ironically, on the very thing that so often rubs me the wrong way when it comes to magic... the dreaded YouTube.

I couldn't agree more with Kent Gunn when it comes to final loads... it is just that important. However, it's not so much a final load in the sense of big rubber balls, tennis balls, fruit, baby chicks, salt, etc... what's important is an ending of some kind. Without some sort of ending the routine is incomplete and your audience is left hanging. This isn't just for the cups and balls but any piece of magic. Just my opinion.

Sorry for not posting anything sooner but I just got back into town.

Hope you had a nice time 'out of town'. First, let me say I really liked your work with the cups.

Everything I see or hear makes me think. The comments about no final load made me think of an alternate way to finish a routine.

How about all the small balls are SUDDENLY GONE... VANISHED. ???

I'm glad you enjoyed the routine Pete. Sure all the small balls suddenly vanishing could be a good ending. In fact when I was a kid I used to end just that way. It was an ending but not real strong. It led to people guessing out loud on many occasion as to where the small balls might have gone. That was probably one reason I started to work out a routine which would end with not just the small balls vanishing but a production to follow. Having a production after they disappear tends to make people forget about the vanish and to think more about how the big ball(s) got their.

It's a nice idea : mixing the 3 ball routine with cups and balls.
I like the ending because, the phase just before, you lift a cup and take the ball which was there (not on the top). It's very convincing.
To make sense, why not having three final loads with printed balls : E. N. D.?

Nice work Mr. Wilson.

exactly! So, rather than contrive an even stranger final load, why not change the routine, or cups, or objects so that they are 'consequential' and meaningful 'covering agents'. My FoldCup routine simply ends by giving the cup to a spectator as a gift and they discover the missing ball in their hands. My other offered routines in various ShareBooks provide transitions to other effects, and "Infestation" has a Chop Cup type effect weave in and out of your entire show wiht no beginning or end.

Routines like Kents which I have seen and commented on before provide a rational development toward a conclusion that has larger balls. I do not 'dislike' the final load approach, but questions its 'necessity', and oppose the concept that anything in life is 'required' just because it is popular or tradition.

Many people have posted their 'boredom' over C&B or Chop Cup routines. This is because they are limited by "what came in the box."

I have offered methods of showing the Cup empty even when it has a retained ball, and ways of showing the hand empty between Cup moves and approaches such that the audience does not even know they are viewing a C&B effect. Surely any of these can avoid your view that C&B is nothing more than a demonstration of feeble sleights.

You challenge my opinion of a weird final load not being 'required' but have never explored any of my alternatives -- that is strange. It is not a matter of "better than " but one of "other than" Consider: a coffee cup

You take the Cup by the handle and pour a single Rose bud
onto the Saucer, and allow it to tumble to the table. The Saucer is spun in the fingers and set aside, and the Cup revolved and rotated to show it and the hands empty. The Cup is set on the Saucer, the Rose picked up and crushed between the fingers where it disappears and both hands shown empty. The Cup is tipped over and the Rose falls out onto the table. The empty Cup is inverted and placed on the Saucer. The Rose is popped into the your mouth and the perfume blown onto the Cup. It is lifted and the Rose is found on the Saucer while the Cup is set aside. Your finger spins the Rose on the plate where it slowly splits into two Rose buds. One is dropped into the Cup and the Saucer placed on top. The Rose again vanishes completely from the finger-tips as it is invisibly bounced in the air and taken to the covered Cup. When the Cup is poured onto the Saucer this time a half-dozen flowers tumble out to overflow the plate and hands.

Oh my, that's a final load

Excellent routine!

Because, in my opinion, the production of the final loads is a great trick made stronger by an opening that isn't distracting. The opening sequences, and working one-ahead, provide an adequately engaging mystery that inevitably leads one towards the suspicion of sleight-of-hand. The final loads, however, seem to totally trump that. How can one execute sleight-of-hand with objects that seem too big to be concealed in a fist, that seem too big to fit into the cups?



Well, personally, I wouldn't take magicians' boredom over a routine too seriously. We've all seen a hundred cups and balls routines. Most of our spectators, when they see us perform one, are seeing it for the first time.



Feeble wasn't a word I used. I think people are genuinely impressed with the opening phases in any well-constructed and well-executed cups and balls routine, but in the end, if they try to rationalize it, sleight-of-hand isn't eliminated as the primary cause for what they saw. Sleight-of-hand, however, seems to be an impossible explanation for how the final loads get into position. Couple this with plenty of genuine displays of empty cups throughout the routine, and you've got a great trick.



Strange? Sorry, no offence was intended, funsway, but prior to this I hadn't seen any of your alternatives.



Seems like a good idea for a routine. If the construction and execution is good, I bet it would play well. The thing is, I personally couldn't do a routine that involved flowers and rose buds and whatnot -- not because I don't like the idea, but because it'd be foreign to my performing character. For some, perhaps the use of rose buds and flowers wouldn't be a distraction. For me, it'd be odd. In my case, the use of inconsequential objects such as balls actually helps, because it's an easily-understood thing that detracts little aesthetically away from the interaction I want to have with my audience. That very blandness then allows for extra surprise with incongruent final loads.

EDIT: I really don't want to get too far afield of the original routine offered by Bill, so I'll end my theoretical nonsense musings here.

Thanks, Andrew for changing my perspective -- that the final load may be the entire reason for the presentation and all the cup moves a prelude. I had not considered that as an alterntives, and will re-write some of my ShareBooks to incorporate this thinking. Thanks to the input from many people using my new sleights and moves I will modify my effect description on the assumption that most will want to lead up to a spectacular final load.

This is why I love the Café' -- creativity on the run

What fits you is important. When a teenager I had a joke store rubber dogpile as a final load. Then I used a small frying pan for a bowl routine and finished with a hamburger patty and a fried egg (both fake rubber novelties).

Then a bagel with a cockroach, and a mechanical windup spider.

I think I've outgrown those, but....