The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » Adjuncts to Mem-Deck Work (4 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5 [Next]
Dennis Loomis
View Profile
1943 - 2013
2113 Posts

Profile of Dennis Loomis
To Baobow,

It is NOT necessary to do any faros in conjunction with Chappy's 53rd card concept. You can have the deck in regular stack order. You then use the Joker in either of the ways that he suggests to replace the selected card. After a suitable delay you can then determine the selection.

Also, you don't have to look through the deck if your 53rd card is a locator. You can cut it to the top and now all you have to do is glimpse the bottom card of the deck. The selection will be one higher in your stack. An All-around-square-up glimpse is natural following the cut of the cards and if done properly should not betray that you have seen any cards.

This could be great in conjunction with an Invisible or Brainwave deck. A Spectator removes any card from the deck and places it in his pocket without looking at it. Apparently no one knows what the card is. But you do. You remove a second deck from your pocket and explain that some hours ago you reversed a card in this deck. You spread the deck to show one card reversed. The spectator then removes his selection from his pocket and it matches. That should kill lay people and some magicians.

Dennis Loomis
Itinerant Montebank
<BR>http://www.loomismagic.com
Dennis Loomis
View Profile
1943 - 2013
2113 Posts

Profile of Dennis Loomis
I just realized that it is not necessary to have an extra card in order to use Chappy's replacement principle. For example, I have the top card of my Aronson Stack Deck (JS) scallop shorted on each of the short ends. If I get this card into underspread cull position I can have a card fairly selected and slip this card into the spot where it came from. Now I can do some false shuffles and cuts and then cut to the scallop card and bring it to the top. Then glimpse the bottom card of the deck which tells me the value of the selection.

Even easier, I can use Chappys idea of just having a spectator plunge a card into the deck. In this case I would simply hand them the scallop short card. They plunge it half way in and I spread the cards letting them take either the card above or below the card where they inserted it. I then push the projecting card home. After a suitable time delay I can cut the cards at the scallop short and glimpse the bottom card, thus learning what the selection is.

This procedure will leave you with a single card out of place in your stack. But it's a locator card, so you can easily get to it and move it back into place if you are going to do more effects.

Dennis Loomis
Itinerant Montebank
<BR>http://www.loomismagic.com
Cain
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles, CA
1513 Posts

Profile of Cain
Quote:
On 2012-10-09 23:03, baobow wrote:
Hi Chappy/Greg,

It's a very interesting principle, but very counter intuitive to use a key card (the joker) to determine the card that it replaces in a mem deck?


I used to do a version of Triumph (with a mem-deck) where the cards were in a face-up face-down condition and one was removed, set aside, and never peeked. The idea was that it would be impossible to control or know a mystery card removed from the deck. I gave the cards a faro. Then a card from the pack was glimpsed. I gave the deck a faro. Then a third card was glimpsed. I gave the deck a final faro. Three selections total.

"All the cards are in order." The pack was spread and all the cards were face-down except the glimpsed selections. "That's control. Process of elimination. But it's impossible to a control a card that was removed from the deck (first selection)." I spread the cards to myself and said "the Joker tells me the identity of the mystery card. (flip the joker face up, spread the deck face-down). It's the five of diamonds." Turn it over, and it's the five of diamonds. "How did I know that? Well, when I said the cards were in order, I meant that they were... *in order*." Spread the cards face up and they're all in A-K order. Where the Five of Diamonds would be in the spread between the six and the four, there would be the face-down joker (which allowed me to to the faros).

I still do a version of the trick, it's my closer, but no joker is used. Funny story. Showed it to Bill Goodwin at the first MagicCon and he said the day before, Denis Behr had done something similar, but clearly more streamlined. Denis Behr/Pit Hartling independently worked out a similar version of Triumph -- cards mixed face up into face down, faro'd and then shown in A-K/suit order. I'm sure others have as well.
Ellusionst discussing the Arcane Playing cards: "Michaelangelo took four years to create the Sistine Chapel masterpiece... these took five."

Calvin from Calvin and Hobbes: "You know Einstein got bad grades as a kid? Well, mine are even worse!"
baobow
View Profile
Special user
502 Posts

Profile of baobow
Chappy/Dennis,
Thanks for clarifying and providing more ideas on the principle. It is something that I will definitely play around with. The invisible deck idea is great.

Cain,
Denis Behr/Pit Hartling's take on the triumph ala Messy and Master of Mess are great effects, for Dennis', the feature to bring it to a known order (mem deck order) at the end is great, as it totally eliminates the idea of a stacked deck due to the convincing shuffles and convincers that are included throughout the proceedure. Doing mem deck effects after would be very powerful, though it would be hard to do anything more powerful after such a clean Triumph as Messy is.

Baobow
Jack Crafter
View Profile
New user
Kent, England
62 Posts

Profile of Jack Crafter
I've had a similar idea to Dennis regarding the use of Chappy's locator card. As an alternative to bringing in a brainwave or invisible deck you could bring in another memorised stack set up for a particular trick, like Diamond Jack or something. Reveal their card by whatever method you choose and then lead in to a closing effect that requires a particular set up.

You could even use it as a worse case scenario maybe if the stack got messed up somehow (hopefully it'd never happen, but I guess it's good to have a back up just in case). As long as you knew a small part of the stack was still in order you could make sure the spectator chooses a card from that section and still know what card they've chosen. From there you could happily switch in a replacement deck without having to perform some kind of sneaky deck switch something. Thinking about it, if you wanted to do effects that would mess up the stack you could use that principle as long as you retained a small stack for the spectator to choose from. Perform an effect that puts the majority of the stack out of order, cut the small retained stack to the centre. From there use Chappy's idea to find the spectator's chosen card and switch in your new stack for the reveal.
Dennis Loomis
View Profile
1943 - 2013
2113 Posts

Profile of Dennis Loomis
I can't believe we've overlook this one so far. It's the use of an X-Ray Card Box. I'm thinking, of course, of the brilliant three phase mem-deck routine by Darwin Ortiz: The Zen Master. It's in his book "Scams and Fantasies with Cards" and also on the video set of the same name. Darwin says it's one of the strongest routines in the book. I agree. In fact I'd say its one of the best routines you can do with a memorized deck.

Dennis Loomis
Itinerant Montebank
<BR>http://www.loomismagic.com
Michael J
View Profile
Veteran user
UK
334 Posts

Profile of Michael J
Hi Dennis,

This is a brilliant trick. I use a lot and always get good reactions. I agree that it is one of the best routines you can do with a memorised deck.

All the best

Michael
magicmann
View Profile
Veteran user
320 Posts

Profile of magicmann
Dennis

This is a fantastic thread that I have been reviewing regularly with interest. The only point that I would add that I don't think has been mentioned is counting. Rather than having to see a paticular card you just need to know the number that have been cut off to determine the next or chosen card. A great routine by Boris Wild comes to mind.

Paul
chappy
View Profile
Special user
735 Posts

Profile of chappy
Hi Dennis

Another concept which I don't think has been mentioned is outlined for the first time to my knowledge in Denis Behr's 'Finding The Way Home'. Those who were not using this concept already will find a lot of fun(and time) here.

Greg
FARO FUNDAMENTALS, DETAILS OF DECEPTION and THE DEVIL'S STAIRCASE at www.thedevilsstaircase.com
Dennis Loomis
View Profile
1943 - 2013
2113 Posts

Profile of Dennis Loomis
Thanks, Greg. Where can we find out about this? Is it a marketed item?

Denny
Itinerant Montebank
<BR>http://www.loomismagic.com
chappy
View Profile
Special user
735 Posts

Profile of chappy
It is in Handcrafted Card Magic available through Denis Behr at http://www.denisbehr.de

From the forward>
The chapter, however, that I predict will stand-out as one of the most important and influential contributions to the study of stacked-deck magic is “Finding The Way Home”.
Pit Hartling

Greg
FARO FUNDAMENTALS, DETAILS OF DECEPTION and THE DEVIL'S STAIRCASE at www.thedevilsstaircase.com
juggernought
View Profile
Regular user
200 Posts

Profile of juggernought
Another useful tool is having an accomplice who also knows the stack. For example, I know someone whose girlfriend knows the Tamariz stack. There are many possibilities for this use ranging for ACAAN (I believe that Aronson had a good version using an accomplice) to your accomplice being able to 'guess' the card someone is thinking of (i.e. after the spectator cuts the deck and looks at the top card, you could flash the bottom card to your accomplice).

I know people often shrink at the idea of using an accomplice but I think it can be worth it. After all, performing magic is not about the method, but rather the effect.
juggernought
View Profile
Regular user
200 Posts

Profile of juggernought
Oh and another idea (from Tamariz) is using a mem deck to force a number. If a spectator cuts the deck, you can take a certain amount of cards either side which add (multiply, subtract etc) to the desired number. It does require some quick thinking though!
juggernought
View Profile
Regular user
200 Posts

Profile of juggernought
I just had another thought. I know it has been mentioned that the cards can be mixed face up and face down in a triumph effect, but face up and face down shuffling of a mem deck can be used for many other effects as well. One basic idea that springs to mind is faroing the top half into the reversed bottom half. If the cards were spread and a face down card was removed, then you could calculate the card next to it.
juggernought
View Profile
Regular user
200 Posts

Profile of juggernought
'8. Letting the spectator shuffle. There are at least two methods to restore the cards to pack order:
a) The spectator only mixes part of the stack. These cards are then recalled in a memory/mind-reading routine.'

It sound like you would recall a whole block of cards to memory (not in order), like an effect which I saw Bill Malone do. I know this is a very simple idea, you could use the memorised deck combined with false shuffles and a solid presentation to do a complete false memory demonstration of all the cards in order. I have done this many times before and it never fails to amaze.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Hi Dennis,

If the x-ray card box could be an adjunct to mem-deck work, so might the "Invisible Eye" created by Dennis Marks and most recently produced by Dick Christian.

Woland
Dennis Loomis
View Profile
1943 - 2013
2113 Posts

Profile of Dennis Loomis
Great idea Woland. And you suggested to me the use of a shiner. A dentist mirror palmed in your hand, or a chrome cigarette case on the table, or a mirror inside of a pipe, build into a ring, in a match box, in piles of bills or poker chips, and even in the chewed end of a cigar. In mem-deck work, getting a glimpse of the bottom card of the deck is not only useful, but necessary at times. A shiner may help and may be more deceptive.

Dennis Loomis
Itinerant Montebank
<BR>http://www.loomismagic.com
Nick Pudar
View Profile
Veteran user
369 Posts

Profile of Nick Pudar
My favorite two shiners at the dinner table:
1) table knife blade as it is sitting there
2) liquid surface of a black cup of coffee

Nick
Let me explain. No, there is too much. Let me sum up.
www.stackview.com Version 5.0 is available!
Cohiba
View Profile
Special user
Michigan
749 Posts

Profile of Cohiba
Quote:
On 2012-09-06 21:48, Cohiba wrote:
Cool thread.
17) Using a gaffed box, ala Asi Wind or Darwin Ortiz.


By the above post, I was referring to the X-Ray card box used by Darwin.

As far as the 53rd card is concerned, I think clarification needs to be made on what it's purpose is. To allow for faros, it's a great idea. As a means to determine a selection, there are better ways.
I would suggest either culling one of the cards that were adjacent to the selection, then glimpsing, or simply cutting the deck at the position of the removed card and glimpsing. Either of these is a lot less hassle than having an extra card in the stack - unless you want to faro after the selection is removed.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Thanks for that black cup of coffee, Nick. Excellent!
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » Adjuncts to Mem-Deck Work (4 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.31 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