On Dec 12, 2015, nonprofitmagic wrote:
She only saw the performance, not the stuff before and after it. It was a performance that did not fool magicians, mentalists, or laymen. I blame the method, not Peter Nardi. You on the other hand blame Peter Nardi and not the method.

Kevin

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, T.G. Jones wrote:
That just goes to show how naive you are. The Alakazam Video Blog is for magicians, not magicians wives! If he performed it for your wife directly he would fool her.

On Dec 12, 2015, T.G. Jones wrote:
As I said, it just goes to show how naive you are. The Alakazam Video Blog is for magicians, not magicians wives! If he performed it for your wife directly he would fool her.

On Dec 12, 2015, T.G. Jones wrote:
As I said, it just goes to show how naive you are. The Alakazam Video Blog is for magicians, not magicians wives! If he performed it for your wife directly he would fool her.

On Dec 12, 2015, Tarik Flash wrote:
Peter normally performs the effects on the blog as if it was to a lay audience

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, Tarik Flash wrote:
Peter normally performs the effects on the blog as if it was to a lay audience

No.

As I said above, Peter does not 'perform' the tricks on the blog, he 'demonstrates' them.

He runs a magic shop, selling magic products for magicians; his target demographic in his blogs are magicians.

He may be doing what you might construe as a 'performance' but don't think for one second that that is how Peter ACTUALLY performs when at a proper paid gig!
He is not trying to fool you, he is not trying to fool a lay person (the vlogs are not aimed at them), he is simply showing what a performance might look like from beginning to end in regards to simplicity of method.
Can you perform this easily?
What does it look like?

Case in point, If how he demonstrated the Pantera wallet in the past vlog is how he actually 'performs' (where he just flat out told Dave what he drew with absolutely no mind reading presentation whatsoever) then...well I'm not even going to grace the rest of this hypothesis with any more text because I'm 100% certain peter himself will come on here and say that's not how he actually performs at paid gigs.
It was purely to indicate how effective the peek is; yet I would seriosuly hope no one using that wallet simply flat out tells their audience what they've just peeked!

It's a demo, not a performance, whose target audience is not lay folk, but magicians.

Seriously, if there are performers out there performing magic using these 'demonstrations' as indications of how to perform then...it's no wonder threads like this exist.

On Dec 12, 2015, nonprofitmagic wrote:
In the pantera vlog, he explicitly revealed the method. In the tequila hustler vlog, he said not one word about the method. Peter is not to blame. The method was simply revealed by the words uttered in the process to achieve the effect.

Kevin

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, Tarik Flash wrote:
Peter normally performs the effects on the blog as if it was to a lay audience

No.

As I said above, Peter does not 'perform' the tricks on the blog, he 'demonstrates' them.

He runs a magic shop, selling magic products for magicians; his target demographic in his blogs are magicians.

He may be doing what you might construe as a 'performance' but don't think for one second that that is how Peter ACTUALLY performs when at a proper paid gig!
He is not trying to fool you, he is not trying to fool a lay person (the vlogs are not aimed at them), he is simply showing what a performance might look like from beginning to end in regards to simplicity of method.
Can you perform this easily?
What does it look like?

Case in point, If how he demonstrated the Pantera wallet in the past vlog is how he actually 'performs' (where he just flat out told Dave what he drew with absolutely no mind reading presentation whatsoever) then...well I'm not even going to grace the rest of this hypothesis with any more text because I'm 100% certain peter himself will come on here and say that's not how he actually performs at paid gigs.
It was purely to indicate how effective the peek is; yet I would seriosuly hope no one using that wallet simply flat out tells their audience what they've just peeked!

It's a demo, not a performance, whose target audience is not lay folk, but magicians.

Seriously, if there are performers out there performing magic using these 'demonstrations' as indications of how to perform then...it's no wonder threads like this exist.

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, nonprofitmagic wrote:
In the pantera vlog, he explicitly revealed the method. In the tequila hustler vlog, he said not one word about the method. Peter is not to blame. The method was simply revealed by the words uttered in the process to achieve the effect.

Kevin

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, Tarik Flash wrote:
Peter normally performs the effects on the blog as if it was to a lay audience

No.

As I said above, Peter does not 'perform' the tricks on the blog, he 'demonstrates' them.

He runs a magic shop, selling magic products for magicians; his target demographic in his blogs are magicians.

He may be doing what you might construe as a 'performance' but don't think for one second that that is how Peter ACTUALLY performs when at a proper paid gig!
He is not trying to fool you, he is not trying to fool a lay person (the vlogs are not aimed at them), he is simply showing what a performance might look like from beginning to end in regards to simplicity of method.
Can you perform this easily?
What does it look like?

Case in point, If how he demonstrated the Pantera wallet in the past vlog is how he actually 'performs' (where he just flat out told Dave what he drew with absolutely no mind reading presentation whatsoever) then...well I'm not even going to grace the rest of this hypothesis with any more text because I'm 100% certain peter himself will come on here and say that's not how he actually performs at paid gigs.
It was purely to indicate how effective the peek is; yet I would seriosuly hope no one using that wallet simply flat out tells their audience what they've just peeked!

It's a demo, not a performance, whose target audience is not lay folk, but magicians.

Seriously, if there are performers out there performing magic using these 'demonstrations' as indications of how to perform then...it's no wonder threads like this exist.

Missing the point.

Doesn't change the fundamental fact that you, and your wife, are judging a tricks effctiveness based on a performance which I've been trying to point out is not the purpose of fooling, but selling a product.

Look, here is the fundamental difference.
Listen up, because it's bloody important!

A demonstration is aimed at selling a product; not a performance.
When you go out and perform at paid gigs, YOUR job now is to sell the performance; not the product.

It's a complete focus shift and emphasis gets weighted on a completely different approach.

Regardless of what the trick is, Tequila Hustler or otherwise, using a magic shops 'demonstration' as a indicator of a trick/method's effectiveness is flawed from the start.

It's not Peter's job to show how you perform a trick; it's his job to show what it's like to perform...so that his target demographic can make better informed purchasing decisions...not so that magicians wives can watch and be fooled or not.

On Dec 12, 2015, nonprofitmagic wrote:
To your point then, let me state this:

Demonstrations of many effects do not result in obvious exposure because the methods are robust.

Demonstration of Tequila Hustler resulted in easy exposure. Hence, this demo was removed.

Kevin

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, nonprofitmagic wrote:
In the pantera vlog, he explicitly revealed the method. In the tequila hustler vlog, he said not one word about the method. Peter is not to blame. The method was simply revealed by the words uttered in the process to achieve the effect.

Kevin

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, Tarik Flash wrote:
Peter normally performs the effects on the blog as if it was to a lay audience

No.

As I said above, Peter does not 'perform' the tricks on the blog, he 'demonstrates' them.

He runs a magic shop, selling magic products for magicians; his target demographic in his blogs are magicians.

He may be doing what you might construe as a 'performance' but don't think for one second that that is how Peter ACTUALLY performs when at a proper paid gig!
He is not trying to fool you, he is not trying to fool a lay person (the vlogs are not aimed at them), he is simply showing what a performance might look like from beginning to end in regards to simplicity of method.
Can you perform this easily?
What does it look like?

Case in point, If how he demonstrated the Pantera wallet in the past vlog is how he actually 'performs' (where he just flat out told Dave what he drew with absolutely no mind reading presentation whatsoever) then...well I'm not even going to grace the rest of this hypothesis with any more text because I'm 100% certain peter himself will come on here and say that's not how he actually performs at paid gigs.
It was purely to indicate how effective the peek is; yet I would seriosuly hope no one using that wallet simply flat out tells their audience what they've just peeked!

It's a demo, not a performance, whose target audience is not lay folk, but magicians.

Seriously, if there are performers out there performing magic using these 'demonstrations' as indications of how to perform then...it's no wonder threads like this exist.

Missing the point.

Doesn't change the fundamental fact that you, and your wife, are judging a tricks effctiveness based on a performance which I've been trying to point out is not the purpose of fooling, but selling a product.

Look, here is the fundamental difference.
Listen up, because it's bloody important!

A demonstration is aimed at selling a product; not a performance.
When you go out and perform at paid gigs, YOUR job now is to sell the performance; not the product.

It's a complete focus shift and emphasis gets weighted on a completely different approach.

Regardless of what the trick is, Tequila Hustler or otherwise, using a magic shops 'demonstration' as a indicator of a trick/method's effectiveness is flawed from the start.

It's not Peter's job to show how you perform a trick; it's his job to show what it's like to perform...so that his target demographic can make better informed purchasing decisions...not so that magicians wives can watch and be fooled or not.

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, nonprofitmagic wrote:
To your point then, let me state this:

Demonstrations of many effects do not result in obvious exposure because the methods are robust.

Demonstration of Tequila Hustler resulted in easy exposure. Hence, this demo was removed.

Kevin

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, nonprofitmagic wrote:
In the pantera vlog, he explicitly revealed the method. In the tequila hustler vlog, he said not one word about the method. Peter is not to blame. The method was simply revealed by the words uttered in the process to achieve the effect.

Kevin

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, Tarik Flash wrote:
Peter normally performs the effects on the blog as if it was to a lay audience

No.

As I said above, Peter does not 'perform' the tricks on the blog, he 'demonstrates' them.

He runs a magic shop, selling magic products for magicians; his target demographic in his blogs are magicians.

He may be doing what you might construe as a 'performance' but don't think for one second that that is how Peter ACTUALLY performs when at a proper paid gig!
He is not trying to fool you, he is not trying to fool a lay person (the vlogs are not aimed at them), he is simply showing what a performance might look like from beginning to end in regards to simplicity of method.
Can you perform this easily?
What does it look like?

Case in point, If how he demonstrated the Pantera wallet in the past vlog is how he actually 'performs' (where he just flat out told Dave what he drew with absolutely no mind reading presentation whatsoever) then...well I'm not even going to grace the rest of this hypothesis with any more text because I'm 100% certain peter himself will come on here and say that's not how he actually performs at paid gigs.
It was purely to indicate how effective the peek is; yet I would seriosuly hope no one using that wallet simply flat out tells their audience what they've just peeked!

It's a demo, not a performance, whose target audience is not lay folk, but magicians.

Seriously, if there are performers out there performing magic using these 'demonstrations' as indications of how to perform then...it's no wonder threads like this exist.

Missing the point.

Doesn't change the fundamental fact that you, and your wife, are judging a tricks effctiveness based on a performance which I've been trying to point out is not the purpose of fooling, but selling a product.

Look, here is the fundamental difference.
Listen up, because it's bloody important!

A demonstration is aimed at selling a product; not a performance.
When you go out and perform at paid gigs, YOUR job now is to sell the performance; not the product.

It's a complete focus shift and emphasis gets weighted on a completely different approach.

Regardless of what the trick is, Tequila Hustler or otherwise, using a magic shops 'demonstration' as a indicator of a trick/method's effectiveness is flawed from the start.

It's not Peter's job to show how you perform a trick; it's his job to show what it's like to perform...so that his target demographic can make better informed purchasing decisions...not so that magicians wives can watch and be fooled or not.

To which you mistakenly regard as a weak method.

You're still failing to grasp what the ultimate difference is between a shop performance and a paid gig performance otherwise this wouldnt even be being discussed.

A demonstration is a stripped away skeleton performance; it's got no bells, no whistles, it's just a 'means to an end' demonstration of the fact that with this method you can get from point A to point B.
However, I would seriosuly advise performers to not be going out performing these bare bones stripped away style performances because, guess what?, they put heavy emphasis on the method...
why?....
because it was a "performance" used by a shop to sell that method to you.

On Dec 12, 2015, nonprofitmagic wrote:
Let me ask you a q: why do you think this demo was taken down?

Kevin

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, nonprofitmagic wrote:
To your point then, let me state this:

Demonstrations of many effects do not result in obvious exposure because the methods are robust.

Demonstration of Tequila Hustler resulted in easy exposure. Hence, this demo was removed.

Kevin

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, nonprofitmagic wrote:
In the pantera vlog, he explicitly revealed the method. In the tequila hustler vlog, he said not one word about the method. Peter is not to blame. The method was simply revealed by the words uttered in the process to achieve the effect.

Kevin

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:

Quote:

On Dec 12, 2015, Tarik Flash wrote:
Peter normally performs the effects on the blog as if it was to a lay audience

No.

As I said above, Peter does not 'perform' the tricks on the blog, he 'demonstrates' them.

He runs a magic shop, selling magic products for magicians; his target demographic in his blogs are magicians.

He may be doing what you might construe as a 'performance' but don't think for one second that that is how Peter ACTUALLY performs when at a proper paid gig!
He is not trying to fool you, he is not trying to fool a lay person (the vlogs are not aimed at them), he is simply showing what a performance might look like from beginning to end in regards to simplicity of method.
Can you perform this easily?
What does it look like?

Case in point, If how he demonstrated the Pantera wallet in the past vlog is how he actually 'performs' (where he just flat out told Dave what he drew with absolutely no mind reading presentation whatsoever) then...well I'm not even going to grace the rest of this hypothesis with any more text because I'm 100% certain peter himself will come on here and say that's not how he actually performs at paid gigs.
It was purely to indicate how effective the peek is; yet I would seriosuly hope no one using that wallet simply flat out tells their audience what they've just peeked!

It's a demo, not a performance, whose target audience is not lay folk, but magicians.

Seriously, if there are performers out there performing magic using these 'demonstrations' as indications of how to perform then...it's no wonder threads like this exist.

Missing the point.

Doesn't change the fundamental fact that you, and your wife, are judging a tricks effctiveness based on a performance which I've been trying to point out is not the purpose of fooling, but selling a product.

Look, here is the fundamental difference.
Listen up, because it's bloody important!

A demonstration is aimed at selling a product; not a performance.
When you go out and perform at paid gigs, YOUR job now is to sell the performance; not the product.

It's a complete focus shift and emphasis gets weighted on a completely different approach.

Regardless of what the trick is, Tequila Hustler or otherwise, using a magic shops 'demonstration' as a indicator of a trick/method's effectiveness is flawed from the start.

It's not Peter's job to show how you perform a trick; it's his job to show what it's like to perform...so that his target demographic can make better informed purchasing decisions...not so that magicians wives can watch and be fooled or not.

To which you mistakenly regard as a weak method.

You're still failing to grasp what the ultimate difference is between a shop performance and a paid gig performance otherwise this wouldnt even be being discussed.

A demonstration is a stripped away skeleton performance; it's got no bells, no whistles, it's just a 'means to an end' demonstration of the fact that with this method you can get from point A to point B.
However, I would seriosuly advise performers to not be going out performing these bare bones stripped away style performances because, guess what?, they put heavy emphasis on the method...
why?....
because it was a "performance" used by a shop to sell that method to you.

On Dec 12, 2015, Mark_Chandaue wrote:
I didn't see the vlog so it's hard to comment but I'm assuming it was the basic presentation and probably without the date part. The basic presentation is just that a basic presentation used to explain the method and not the ideal way to perform this effect. It then goes on to discuss how Mark actually performs this and then gives routines by Pete Turner, Colin McLeod and Michael Murray.

If you perform the basic presentation with no delay between the questions and no discernible process then yes this effect wouldn't stand up. This is true of a multitude of methods including imps and peeks. The core method used in this has been used in a multitude of effects with great success by Barrie Richardson, Bannacek and Leo Boudreaux. What is new about TH is the innocence of the questions, usually this method relies on a question that stands out. The questions in TH are extremely innocent and as a result it is far easier to hide the method.

However Mentalism relies on the performer establishing some credibility. Something not really possible in a magic vlog where the basic effect is being presented in the context of here is a trick you can buy. TH is not a good magic trick, it's not suited to be used in that context. The key to performing Mentalism is establishing credibility, once you have do a good job of that and you can use bold methods that a magician could never get away with.

Pete Turner's opening effect from his Penguin lecture is a perfect demonstration of this. He fooled a room full of magicians with the most obvious solution to the plot possible with no more than words. There is far more to TH book than simply the basic presentation. However I would say that If you are a magician TH is not for you, it is not designed to be presented as a trick, that simply makes it a puzzle to be solved.

Mark

On Dec 12, 2015, ManchurianMan83 wrote:
A contrary line of thought to consider....

A method like Tequila Hustler, where if handled badly/incorrectly , can be worked out does not make it 'weak'...it mean's it's 'fragile'!
Before any comments come in to suggest such, no, I'm not saying Peter handled it badly...it just clearly doesn't 'demonstrate' well.

Dictionary definitions suggest they mean the same thing, or at least, share strong similarities yet in the context of magic, we seem to give the term 'weak' the inherent suggestion that it's bad and should be avoided...
Fragile/weak actually means 'delicate and vulnerable'.

A method like Tequila Hustlers where it is so delicate and potentially open to being worked out should be handled like you would any item that is fragile.
With care and respect.

Just grabbing it and 'having a go' is not how you treat something that should be considered fragile.

Having your wife watch a striped away, method focusing sales performance of a 'fragile' method/trick, where she works it out, and then judging the method on that would be like suggesting that because you chucked a vase at your wife and she dropped it and broke it, that the vase is weak and was clearly not designed to handle that sort of treatment.

Well, no, clearly.
But then, you don't go around chucking vases.
Same applies here.
You don't perform TH like Peter did.

On Dec 12, 2015, Tarik Flash wrote:
Funnily though Dave loosely acted absolutely stunned in Petes demonstration so he clearly certainly wasn't acting it out like a demonstration but much more like a lay reaction . So MM83 you are saying that Petes performances are all demonstrations but Dave Loosely forgot to read the script or they are both singing off different pages . Let's be fair and honest it wouldn't have been removed if there were no issues with it .