|
|
Terrible Wizard Inner circle 1973 Posts |
I'm interested in Trost's automatic lie speller effect given the high praise it generally recieves here. But before pursuing it (probably via Anderson's pamphlet), I have a quick question.
Does it require a particular variety of stebbins, or is it irrelevant in terms of CHSD, SHCkD, 3 or 4 etc? |
carlyle Regular user 166 Posts |
It uses the standard Si Stebbins stack. I imagine it would work the same using a CDSH stack (as the colours still alternate - I ran through it several times using CDSH and had no problems), but it needs to be in a cycle of plus three.
If you don't have "The Card Magic of Nick Trost", you should really try to get a copy, great book. |
Terrible Wizard Inner circle 1973 Posts |
Certainly trying to get that book It's very much wanted, but pricey for me at this time.
So it has to be +3, but the suit order is irrelevant so long as it is r/b (how else can it be for Stebbins?). Thank you, that is very useful info for me. If anyone uses this trick with a SHoCkeD arrangement could they please confirm that it still works perfectly? Thanks |
Steve Burton Loyal user 258 Posts |
It really doesn't work all the time, does it? If the premise is that they can lie or tell the truth then the second question must necessarily be the truth not a lie. Example: "Was your card red or black?" They answer "red." You spell RED. Now you ask, "Was it a diamond or a heart?" If they lie at this point and say, "Club" the effect doesn't work.
|
carlyle Regular user 166 Posts |
If they say red, they do need to choose diamond or heart, if they say black, it needs to be a club or spade.
If the card is red and they say red, they can still lie about the suit - and say diamonds instead of hearts, for example. But no, they can't claim to have a red club card, or a black diamond card. |
Steve Burton Loyal user 258 Posts |
Yes but they can claim to have lied on the first query and tell the truth on the second. For instance they chose the Four of Hearts. On the first query they say "black" then on they second query they say "hearts." The first was a lie and the second answer was the truth and the effect will not work. If the instructions are that they can lie or tell the truth on all their answers the premise doesn't hold up. If the first question is a lie the second must necessarily be a lie as well. If the first answer is the truth they can tell the truth or lie on the second. I point this out because it happened to me during a performance of the effect. I had to steer them to respond "hearts or diamonds" to which they replied, "I'm telling the truth this time, it was a Spade." The point is they do not have a free choice to lie or tell the truth on the second question, they must lie even though they have a choice about which lie to tell.
|
stickmondoo Veteran user 306 Posts |
That does not make sense to me. If they lie on the first and say red when their card is a black card then the card turned up will show its a lie so their next question is is it a spade or club.
|
Steve Burton Loyal user 258 Posts |
The card is not turned immediately but the color spelled and the next card dealt face-down. Therefore you don't know if it was lie or the truth. The next question is one I had a problem with, the specific suit. They must stay within the boundaries of the first answer and cannot tell the truth if the first answer was a lie.
|
alecStephenson New user 69 Posts |
Quote:
On May 13, 2016, Terrible Wizard wrote: I like automatic lie speller. I don't think the above is entirely right. It works perfectly with any R/B suit order, but it doesn't have to be plus 3. It can be plus anything (between 1 and 12 inclusive) and it will still work. This includes +10 (reversed +3), which means you could do this effect using the bottom of the deck as well as the top, but the final move will then need to have a slightly different handling. It may be worth offering the spec the option of bottom or top dealing. |
alecStephenson New user 69 Posts |
Or how about this...
You get two specs to select the one card, and you do the effect simultaneously for both, creating six piles in total. For spec 1 you go from the top, and for spec 2 you go from the bottom. Do the moves, and reveal that the cards of both specs each indicated the color, suit and value of the one chosen card. Off to try this now to see if it actually works... Edit: I'm back. It works great. A couple of presentation/handing ideas are: Do top deal spec and bottom deal spec alternately. Tell the specs that one of them MUST always lie and the other MUST always tell the truth. This makes it more interesting and avoids the issue with the original effect discussed above. For the last stage, it doesn't matter if top/bottom changes places. You need to do a simple move or two here, as in the original. Or maybe change it a bit and do a s***n p******y !@#$e with the selected card. |
alecStephenson New user 69 Posts |
I've had a re-think on stage three as you are in a much stronger position at this point. Maybe a better idea is:
Cut remainder in "half", get specs to deal themselves packets 5 and 6, combine remaining packets into a 7th packet and table it. Correctly reveal color and suit and reveal who the liar is. Then value reveal is a "magi makes an obvious mistake" because the values of the packet 5 and 6 cards are not even the same. Reveal selected card, and then use packets 5, 6 and 7 to do a four-of-a-kind finish. I'm sure you can fill in the details. |
magicfish Inner circle 7006 Posts |
Do it exactly as described in the book.
It is brilliant. And it works every time. |
Soumyajit Regular user Under Your Bed 130 Posts |
The point is lying to question being asked. As they do not have any idea what questions are going to be asked and they say red while they have chosen a black card, they cannot get back to true answers anymore. If they are asked diamonds or hearts and they say, well it is a spade, then you go so it is a black card isn't it? See the deck caught it, let's try with black and spades now.
Visit my site at : www.ulpnet.com
|
Andy Moss Special user 713 Posts |
I do understand what Steve Burton is saying. However if (let us use his given example of the 4H) the spectator first states "black" then you simply play along with this (leading them to think that they might have successfully fooled you!)and naturally offer the limited choice of clubs or spades. This should seem natural to the spectator. They should be more than happy to play along with this. In fact such a situation is a positive scenario.
You could of course use a marked deck and peak at the next card dealt down after the color has been spelled out by the spectator.Then you could challenge/correct them in a good humored way as if you were actively reading their mind during the procedure. However this is not necessary. I use a marked Boris Wild deck as my normal working deck but have not needed to go down this avenue. Hope this helps. Andy. |
Andy Moss Special user 713 Posts |
One last thought.For an effect that allows the spectator to lie or to tell truth at will (i.e no need for continued consistency in the lie or truth)there is Roy Walton's "The Inconsistent Liar" page 45 of the first volume of his collected work.
Both Trost's offering and Walton's have inherent advantages and disadvantages. Both are recommended.The set up for Walton's offering can easily be done 'on the fly'.Add a false full deck shuffle and you are home and away. |
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » Automatic lie speller set-up (4 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.02 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 < |