I've been working on this one a couple days, and I have to say that this effect is what I like to call "patter dependent". That is to say, your whole performance sinks or swims depending on the patter. 

When you watch it or when you purchase it, at first your mind thinks "This is complicated and confusing! I'll never get this down pat!" 

But the routine SEEMS more difficult and complicated than it really is. That's the illusion part, because it really is quite simple, with only one, or two of what could be construed as a "slight" during the entire routine. The rest is just getting the orientation and the turning over of the cards straight in your brain. The patter, the way Daryl writes it and delivers it makes it seem much more complicated than it really is. 

The biggest challenge in the routine is memorizing the patter, then coordinating it with the physical actions of turning over the cards. 

I really would not suggest changing the patter as Daryl gives it, at least not any MAJOR changes, for it's hard to improve on perfection! 

Still, I wonder if anyone here performs the routine and has managed to successfully change the patter?

My guess would be that if you did, you first learned Daryl's way first, perfected it and then changed it later on after you were confident in the routine. 

Just curious. 

Track down Whit Haydn's excellent essay entitled "Against Originality in Magic", it should be required reading.

Where can I find it? What's the premise of his work?

A Google search found this right away.

http://scoundrelsforum.com/index.php?topic=58.0

Thank-you! That was a very enlightening viewpoint!

Any theory by Whit is valuable. Some day he will write a book on it, but in the meantime, when you see them pop up from time to time on here, grab it.

I'll definitely scarf them up.

I have this effect. I would definitely have to change the patter if I decide to perform it.
It's not particularly amusing and I'm not sure what the effect is supposed to be. It's just confusing.

Do you mean the patter is confusing or the effect itself is confusing?

Tony Griffiths in England once had patter with it that ended with 'Spot' the dog. He had a special version he made up that was marketed with permission. It was funny when Tony did it.

The effect is confusing. The patter is lame.