Thius is a beautiful transposition ant that has multiple phases that goes full circle.
. it is perfect for walk around or table hopping

https://youtu.be/5J7W-5ter1k


vinny

A real thing of beauty! I downloaded Marion's routine from Vinny's website and am practicing it ...

MB's skill in handling the routine is very high.

The presentation is extreamly smooth and friendly.

However, I believe Excalibur plays better for several reasons:

1- It doesn't necessitate a table

2- Can be done standing up or walking around

3- The audience feels they have more control of what is going on.

4- The audience feels more like magic has happened as they totally believe they have the coin they selected.

5- They do not detect any odd moves that would suggest they are being decieved.

I percieve that the MB Transpo suffers from Juggle-itis. That is, the spectator knows that the two coins are somewhere in your

hands. They will applaud the cleverness with which you can hide the coins from their view but there is no feeling of magic

in the performance. At the point which one coin changes visibly, the fact you wave your hand so they cannot see what you

are doing is essentially a statement that you are switching the coins. The clever palms are ignored for the waving

indicated you are doing a switch.

Furthermore, it is just a bunch of old moves strung together in a row. I see nothing new here.

Al, I am not sure I follow your rationale, or the post is just to continue the feud. You start with compliments and ends saying that is not good.
Also your first comparison with excalibur is that it does not need a table. MB transpo and your transpo do not need a table, and they are shown without tables, am I missing something?

I see Marion's routine more as a demonstration where the spectator watch, and yours where the spectator participates, beyond that both are transposition of 2 coins, both very nice and enjoyable to watch.
I am not educated enough to understand which one play better in real world.
I will buy Marion's and yours and try both, where can I get yours, could not find it in your web
Pablo

I am not interested in selling this item. I once sold it as a video file but discontinued it some time ago. Someone asked about some details of the handling. I wrote up a quick note and sent it to them. As you are not using a real name I can search on and as you have not supplied an email address, I cannot send you anything. I put up Excalibur simply to display something I thought the people here would fine interesting. Some compared it to MB's routine. I could not comment as I had not seen his routine. As it was just put up, I can now comment, which I did. To be fair, I copied the format MB used to comment on Excalilbur. I am trying to be careful and comply with the behavior of those on this forum. I sense you are disturbed with something. Are you interested in continueing some feud? That seems to be of more interest to you than the technical aspects of what I have to say.

Al you state Marion uses a bunch of old moves ... I beg to differ he uses a brilliant finger palm he calls the lwag subility that is so natural and the fingers are open , then he uses his blow change it is very visual his retention vanishes are beautiful.andt hese moves take years to master....

lets talk about stargate. your routine is very old that has been done before . your vanishes are very old , the only thing new is the hand placement palms down,and spectator taking the coin
now for a layman your routine works fine
Marion.s work is for the serious coin worker,however both effects play well in the real world.;.;.

vinny

Al, thank you for your reply, I am disturbed by the behavoir of these small group of members hickjacking most of the topics of this sub-forum, and not I don't want to stir any feud rather avoid it. I would sent you a pm but you did not open the previos one. I apologizes for the confusion.
My name is Pablo Varela, my email is pabloinus@hotmail.com, if interested linkedin has part of my resume.

Back to the transpo, One thing I agreed with you is that Marion twirl the coins a bit much, not sure it is necessary, is this the jiglling part you refered? On the other hand I like the waving hand as indication of the magic moment, not sure that as spectator I will be thinking in where the coin is at that moment. Also I don't see it as many moves putting together, I enjoyed the routine end to end, but again my experience is more of an spectator than magician.
If you are willing to sell me your routine I will pay gladly, I like the interaction with the spectator and I am not clear in all the sleights you use. Another option is to tell me the sleights and I will look for them I have your big book, the one on coins and one on false transfers that takes me a lot of time to practice.

Pablo

Vinny, instead of continuing with the discussion, what about an effort on constructive criticism, we all benefit for that.
Pablo

Vinny,
I didn't see any retention vanishes. I would assume you are referring to the first two false transfers in the routine. I am

beginning to think you operate in a vacuum away from performing magicians. My eyes saw a kind of move in which the

fingers extract the coin from within a closing hand. There was no retention of vision in play. As the move is executed

there is a great deal of finger flutter. This labels it as a very old style move. When normal people move a coin into

another hand, the fingers open a fraction of an inch. There is virtually no finger motion. Also, when normal people move a

coin into their other hand, the fingers of the transmitting hand do not enter the cupped other hand. The coin is normally

dropped and the receiving hand closes under the transmitting hand. Again, this labels the move as old school.

A second point is that you do not listen or pay attention to what I say. You leap to conclusions without concern about

what you are saying. Stargate and Excalibur are two different tricks. You discussed both as if they were... Well, I don't

know what your were trying to say because you do not seem to know what you are talking about.

You constantly make unsubstantiated claims about my material that bear no semblance to reality. You imply that I am not a

serious coin worker.

Here is another thing that bothers me. Apparently the moves in MB's Transpo require years to master. The moves in

Excalibur were mastered by MB in about ten minutes. Hmmmm. I could master the moves or duplicate the effect of his transpo

in about fifteen minutes. But I would not be doing it at performance level for months. I must be very slow to require that

much time when MB can master my stuff to performance level in minutes. Hmmmm. I am told that MB did my routine for many

people to test it out. I don't know that for I did not see a clip of it. However, the world is told that his is better

than mine. The discrepencies here abound.

I have no doubt that MB's routine plays very well in the real world. He performs the routine exceedingly well.

Pablo
Will send you the notes I made. They are not much but offer a skeleton of the routine. Thank you for your kind words.

Arthur stead
Clicked on web page.
WOW
Your music is very, very good at a reasonable price.
My interest is using royalty free music on Youtube.
Do you fulfill that desire?
I hope everyone doesn't mind this diversion.
This stuff is really great.

Very nice Mb, thanks for posting Vinny.

I am not sure why this routine is being compared to Als Excalibur though, they are two totally different effects.

I am also unsure how one is for laymen and the other for the serious coin worker. Surely the thinking behind both are worthy of study from serious magicians?


Jim

I made a mistake it is Excalibur I was referring to. Marion routine is much more difficult than Al's routine this is why I said MBS is more for the serious coin worker...
Pablo I did give a constructive opinion . this had nothing to do with Als ability to perform Marion's work I never said such a thing .

Al made some comments about MB and I made some comments about Excalibur and they were both very positive .....
Just because I came on this tread I did not hijack anything why are you Pablo on this thread ...people come on my posts all the time. this is a public forum and if you have something to say to me that is personal pm me and not use a public forum.. I could be telling this to you in Private but I'm not. see how you like it
and AL you spuriously misspell my name ..don't thing you are using some BS on me

Remember I put this post up because I think MB"S material is worthy

Ah I see. Thank you for the clarification Vinny.


Jim

that is why I started the other thread

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......&forum=3

hoping to focus on magci and performanc eisses rather thna perosnalituies. No one seemed interested.

Al -- how about relating your new appraoch to this Standard or make suggetsions ot improve the Standard?

I plan on using/exploring your "spectator take" approach and instantly changed this entire effect to suit my style/abilities. No TC though

Is it better? Perhaps. Is it different? Yes. Will I credit you for the inspiration? Certainly.

Will I post my "improvments" here. No -- because they are not relevant to the theme of this thread.

I might have posted them on another thread where you offered this effect, but is is so cluttered with personal attacks it would be lost.

So, if you start a new thread, or comment on mine, those interested in magic can contribute with no reference to another person at all.

Incase of confusion my post was meaning clarification on my question about the laymen and serious coin workers.

Can I ask something? Is Liwag subtlty similar to ramsay subtlty?

Funsway, why would Als take on the copper silver transposition be better if it conformed to your list of ideals?

Wouldn't the introduction of handfuls of change etc simply clutter and muddy an already straightforward and pure effect?

Jim

Marion - lovely handling as usual my friend.

Personally, I feel the single coin spellbound changes which follow the transposition look great, but as the spectator has already seen two coins previously I think it diminishes the magic? The transposition at the beginning is lovely and visual though, well done.

What about combining both Excalibur and the initial transposition here? Both are lovely, MB transpo - visual change.... Excalibur - change in spectator's hand. Nice?

That's a fair point in your first paragraph simplymagicweb, and is something which crossed my mind as well.

The changes do look very good, but will they be as magical to the audience when they know a second coin is in play?

Will this part be seen as magic or something clever?


Jim