The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » Blaine style double lift (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
Andrew Wong
View Profile
Loyal user
209 Posts

Profile of Andrew Wong
Wow, there are 3 answers now, which one is the correct one??

PushOff Double ?
Dingle DL ?
Krenzel's dl ?

Andrew <---- very confused!
Smile Smile
Clarence
View Profile
Regular user
Singapore, City Central, Scotts Road
146 Posts

Profile of Clarence
David Blaine uses the PushOff Double.

Enough said. Smile
Andrew Wong
View Profile
Loyal user
209 Posts

Profile of Andrew Wong
Thanks!!! Can anyone suggest some vidoe to learn the push off dl??? Smile

Andrew Smile
Creanada
View Profile
New user
47 Posts

Profile of Creanada
As Bone suggested, the new Ellusionist video, Crash Course 2 teaches it very well. I had pretty much got the basics of it in no time from this.
Nash
View Profile
Inner circle
Hong Kong ~ USA
1089 Posts

Profile of Nash
Forget Blaine's double.

Master Pinky Count, then you can pretty much do whatever kind of double life you want once you get this invisible get-ready.
I usually move from pinky count, then keep the break with my ring finger, then push the cards to the right with my thumb, applying pressures between my thumb and ring finger to keep the two cards in place, double turn over.
Done. (It sounds complicated but all that is done in less than a 3 seconds)


Trust me, if you don't trust me, trust Darwin Ortiz.
Pinky count is a "must" for every magician.
It is the best get-ready for double lift, or add on moves, or switch ins, best of all, it is totally invisible.
Smile
Don't give up, don't EVER give up.

Corporate event magician
Andrew Wong
View Profile
Loyal user
209 Posts

Profile of Andrew Wong
Thanks!!! Then can anyone please suggest a place to learn Pinky Count???? I own Card College already, but seems it's not very detailed.

Andrew
Maxim
View Profile
Regular user
London
113 Posts

Profile of Maxim
Darwin Ortiz teaches the pinky count in his book 'At the Card Table'. The guy's nuts about it.

Maxim.
Jordini
View Profile
Inner circle
2766 Posts

Profile of Jordini
You guys are all wrong. David Blaine uses the "Pickup two cards while my hand is out of the shot" double.
Logan
View Profile
Inner circle
2280 Posts

Profile of Logan
Quote:
On 2003-05-30 13:21, marko wrote:
Whatever DL Blaine uses, I don't think it looks very good anyway. Learn Vernon's DL and you'll never need to learn another.

Agreed.

The double lift was meant to give the illusion of handling a single card.

Who in the world turns over a single card like that?
You've been hit by, you've been struck by, a smooth criminal.

Singapore's Hairiest Corporate Comedy Magician!
at4aces
View Profile
New user
1 Post

Profile of at4aces
Magic should mimic real life in order to look natural. If you ask 100 people to take a deck and turn over the top card, none of them will turn it over like Blaine does. (It is the push off double lift taught on Ellusionist). The best looking double lift will mimic what it would look like if you were turning over one card naturally. There are many ways to get into position to turn a card over naturally and I think Vernon, Ortiz and Jennings all teach different versions very well. Master one technique and go with it. The snap double by Jennings is very easy and can look very natural, but I would advise not trying to make the cards "snap". That is not very natural. Just my 2 cents.
rannie
View Profile
Inner circle
4355 Posts

Profile of rannie
Logan,

Buddy you said it man! No one turns over a card that way. Worse ,after the double , he (Blaine) turns it casually for the single. A snap, strike , Vernon's or Ron Bauer's DL is more natural. The closer it looks to a normal way you would turn over a single , the better. I am still continously working on my DL. I practice by turning a couple of singles in a row and burn that image as reference.

Peace,

Rannie
"If you can't teach an old dog new tricks, trick the old dog to learn."

-Rannie Raymundo-
aka The Boss
aka The Manila Enforcer

www.rannieraymundo.com
www.tapm.proboards80.net
Paul Sherman
View Profile
Inner circle
Arlington, VA
1511 Posts

Profile of Paul Sherman
Quote:
On 2005-05-30 22:42, at4aces wrote:
If you ask 100 people to take a deck and turn over the top card, none of them will turn it over like Blaine does (it is the push off double lift taught on ellusionist).

Ask 100 people to shuffle a deck of cards and probably none of them will do it the way a casino dealer does, but that doesn't mean the way a casino dealer shuffles is unnatural. "Naturalness" doesn't mean handling cards the way a layperson does, it means handling them in a way that doesn't arouse suspicion. I see nothing particularly suspicious about stud-style double-lifts (and apparently neither does Derek Dingle or Martin Nash).

Paul
"The finished card expert considers nothing too trivial that in any way contributes to his success..." Erdnase



some youtube videos
J3
View Profile
Regular user
Texas
165 Posts

Profile of J3
I thought Blaine did the strike double, but its been a while since I saw the Ambitious card video. As for the pinky count it really is a usefull move to have for when you need to get a break under more then 3 cards, for just a double or triple theres a move greg wilson teaches on his pyrotechnic pasteboards and card stunts(I think) where you can buckle the top cards without any obvious movement, so theres no need to tilt the deck down or misdirect, with the pinky count if you the spectator can see the top card theyl see the back corner just snap up.
Logan
View Profile
Inner circle
2280 Posts

Profile of Logan
Quote:
On 2005-05-31 00:45, Paul Sherman wrote:

Ask 100 people to shuffle a deck of cards and probably none of them will do it the way a casino dealer does, but that doesn't mean the way a casino dealer shuffles is unnatural. "Naturalness" doesn't mean handling cards the way a layperson does, it means handling them in a way that doesn't arouse suspicion. I see nothing particularly suspicious about stud-style double-lifts (and apparently neither does Derek Dingle or Martin Nash).

Paul


Granted, that is true.

But you're just turning over one card...how much more simple does that have to be?

And Blaine turns it over the way he does.

I have nothing against Blaine, I really love watching him, so this is nothing personal.

Unlike shuffling, there is only one straight-forward way to turn a card over - I don't see why it has to be convoluted unecessarily.

The strike double accomplishes this very well, and if done sequentially alternating between doubles and singles, is undetectable.

It's true naturalness does play a part in EXECUTION, but it does not help in the LOGIC department very much. So with naturalness you can execute it flawlessly and without suspicion but it will not cover or hide the fact that it is illogical to turn over ONE card like that, especially if the rest of the time you are turning over one card 'normally'.

Am I scrutinizing? Maybe so.

Would the spectators catch on? Maybe not - but then again, you never know, our beloved spectators are cleverer than they appear!

I just feel the DL is too good a sleight to be put in the backseat.

With naturalness and the right logical method, you would have one killer DL.
You've been hit by, you've been struck by, a smooth criminal.

Singapore's Hairiest Corporate Comedy Magician!
Paul Sherman
View Profile
Inner circle
Arlington, VA
1511 Posts

Profile of Paul Sherman
Quote:
On 2005-05-31 03:19, Logan wrote:
Unlike shuffling, there is only one straight-forward way to turn a card over - I don't see why it has to be convoluted unecessarily.

The strike double accomplishes this very well, and if done sequentially alternating between doubles and singles, is undetectable.

The only straight forward way to turn over a card is to strike its right edge with the finger and peel it upwards, turning it bookwise onto the top of the deck?

Nobody tell Ron Bauer...

or Nate Leipzig...

or Stuart Gordon...

or Dai Vernon (who doesn't seem to have cared for strike DLs)...

or anyone who's ever dealt stud poker.

Quote:
...but it will not cover or hide the fact that it is illogical to turn over ONE card like that, especially if the rest of the time you are turning over one card 'normally'.

While I dispute that there is only one way to turn over a card "normally", what you describe here sounds like a problem of lack of uniformity of action and not necessarily a problem with the design of the sleight itself.

Quote:
I just feel the DL is too good a sleight to be put in the backseat.

I'll bet Derek Dingle and Martin Nash would agree on that, too.
"The finished card expert considers nothing too trivial that in any way contributes to his success..." Erdnase



some youtube videos
Logan
View Profile
Inner circle
2280 Posts

Profile of Logan
Quote:
On 2005-05-31 03:37, Paul Sherman wrote:

The only straight forward way to turn over a card is to strike its edge with the finger and peel it upwards, turning it bookwise onto the top of the deck?



If technicality is an issue here, then fine, there are at least 3-4 ways of turning a card over onto the top of the deck that would be rather straight-forward. But they all would more or less follow the same method, only difference being they just leave from different edges of the deck.

Either way, Dingle's doesn't come close to any of them. Agreed?

Quote:

While I dispute that there is only one way to turn over a card "normally", what you describe here sounds like a problem of lack of uniformity of action and not necessarily a problem with the design of the sleight itself.



PRECISELY! If one wants to do a certain double, he should try to maintain uniformity with his singles. But with the Dingle DL it just wouldn't be logical to do it EVEN WITH uniformity. Because the DL looks a little illogical, doing it again and again, with the aim for uniformity, would only cause more suspicion. It just doesn't look normal. And if you do it without uniformity, the lack of consistency is obvious, well, to me anyways.

All I'm saying is if you can turn over singles normally, why not turn your doubles normally too?

So either way, the Dingle DL TO ME isn't worth it.

Personal opinion, nothing more, nothing less.
You've been hit by, you've been struck by, a smooth criminal.

Singapore's Hairiest Corporate Comedy Magician!
Paul Sherman
View Profile
Inner circle
Arlington, VA
1511 Posts

Profile of Paul Sherman
Quote:
All I'm saying is if you can turn over singles normally, why not turn your doubles normally too?


I understand that it's just your personal opinion, but this rhetorical question reveals that your argument begs the question; it assumes that one way of turning over a card (apparently "bookwise") is "normal".

Your argument doesn't offer any evidence to support this assumption and I feel that it is incorrect.

I've seen a lot of people do the Dingle lift badly, and that certainly looks unnatural. Competently performed, however, the move looks like a stud-turnover. Turning cards stud-style (as in the Dingle and Nash DLs) is an accepted practice at card tables (that's why there's a "stud" version of every false deal). Stud-style double-turnovers are apparently natural enough that they've been used extensively by many magicians widely regarded to be masters of the art. You have a hard argument to make if you're claiming that turning cards over stud-style is unnatural.
"The finished card expert considers nothing too trivial that in any way contributes to his success..." Erdnase



some youtube videos
Logan
View Profile
Inner circle
2280 Posts

Profile of Logan
Quote:
On 2005-05-31 03:37, Paul Sherman wrote:

Nobody tell Ron Bauer...

or Nate Leipzig...

or Stuart Gordon...

or Dai Vernon (who doesn't seem to have cared for strike DLs)...

or anyone who's ever dealt stud poker.

Why are you condescending me?

These are all different people who have different opinions.

What they say is NOT THE GOLDEN RULE.

I am just expressing MY opinion, on what I perceive to be natural and logical.

There are a million DL's out there that would suffice, the regular old DL from a pinky break. A DL obtained from a pinky count. Strike is excellent. Snap is awesome. Non-acrobatic Diving Board Double looks very convincing.

I just have a gripe with the Dingle DL, as it's movements defy logic.

Again, I stress PERSONAL OPINION.


Posted: May 31, 2005 4:41am
-----------------------------------------------
Quote:
On 2005-05-31 04:30, Paul Sherman wrote:

I understand that it's just your personal opinion, but this rhetorical question reveals that your argument begs the question; it assumes that one way of turning over a card (apparently "bookwise") is "normal".

You raise a good point here.

I think it has to do with where we live. Around Asia, stud really isn't a game that is played very often - in fact, I've never seen or heard anyone playing it here, and I think this is why I can't quite agree with the logic behind Dingle's DL - as I've never come across it here. In fact, table riffle shuffles are also a rarity - albeit, people can easily identify that it's a shuffle if it's shown to them.

I see why now it seems to alien to me. I overlooked the fact that we live in different places, which have different practices.

I apologise for causing a stir.

Thanks for the heads up!

Quote:
I've seen a lot of people do the Dingle lift badly, and that certainly looks unnatural. Competently performed, however, the move looks like a stud-turnover. Turning cards stud-style (as in the Dingle and Nash DLs) is an accepted practice at card tables (that's why there's a "stud" version of every false deal). Stud-style double-turnovers are apparently natural enough that they've been used extensively by many magicians widely regarded to be masters of the art. You have a hard argument to make if you're claiming that turning cards over stud-style is unnatural.

Thank you for the clarification my friend.

Take care,

Logan
You've been hit by, you've been struck by, a smooth criminal.

Singapore's Hairiest Corporate Comedy Magician!
Paul Sherman
View Profile
Inner circle
Arlington, VA
1511 Posts

Profile of Paul Sherman
I'm sorry if you took offense. I was trying to point out in a humorous way that a number of very successful magicians (including one who more or less founded the school of "natural magic") either used non-bookwise turnovers or didn't like the strike double-lift, and would probably disagree with your argument. Humor doesn't travel well electronically. I didn't mean to condescend and, again, if you were offended I sincerely apologize.

[Deleted the last part, since I just saw your reply. You do make the excellent point that cultural difference will effect what is "natural" in any given place. I'll keep your thoughts in mind if I'm ever in Asia].
"The finished card expert considers nothing too trivial that in any way contributes to his success..." Erdnase



some youtube videos
Logan
View Profile
Inner circle
2280 Posts

Profile of Logan
Quote:
On 2005-05-31 04:52, Paul Sherman wrote:
I'm sorry if you took offense. I was trying to point out in a humorous way that a number of very successful magicians (including one who more or less founded the school of "natural magic") either used non-bookwise turnovers or didn't like the strike double-lift, and would probably disagree with your argument. Humor doesn't travel well electronically. I didn't mean to condescend and, again, if you were offended I sincerely apologize.

[deleted the last part, since I just saw your reply]


I agree, sometimes humor falls short when transmitted over the Net.

No harm, no foul my friend.

I've learned from you, so thanks once again.

Had it not been for your wise words, I would be going on and making a fool out of myself due to a lack of basic knowledge - that being we live in different parts of the world, and as such we play different games and so cheating follows different routes.

All the best,

Logan
You've been hit by, you've been struck by, a smooth criminal.

Singapore's Hairiest Corporate Comedy Magician!
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » Blaine style double lift (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.21 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL