What's the best tasting fruit?"

Fruit cocktail of course

Mike

Check outTommy Wonder's video. He has a fantastic two cup routine.
Rannie

David Williamson's 2 cup routine is my favorite. And I just love his fake squeaker gag!

-- Frank

I agree with Ron.
Actually, without any disrespect to the professor, it is quite a challenge to take his routine and find your own motivation what is NOT so good in it, rather than following the masses and just copy it, being the "perfect" routine.

For starters, I think that the stacking of the cups with the penetrating balls seems less impressive from a layperson's perspective than the balls vanishing from the hands to reappear under the cups without touching. (if you want to make the routine built effect-wise). Why is it late in the routine?

THAT is the answer. The magic, to the spectator, is the surprise of the final loads. Where did they come from? How could he possibly sneak them under the cup (or cups) while I have been watching him like a hawk?

This is also the answer that Don Alan came up with in the early 60's (with a little help from his wife's criticisms of magicians). Everything leading up to the final loads is just an overture and most of it wouldn't fool a blind man. I like, Bill Palmer, chose the Chop Cup over the three cups some 35 years ago for same reasons that Don Alan spoke of.
I have never believed that the first phases of the Chop Cup fool anyone. I do the Jennings/Wilson routine. Oddly enough, I have always thought that the very fact that intelligent spectators can see through it adds to the psychological misdirection for the final loads. Just as the audience has got you figured out, you throw them for a complete loop with an impossible production!

Having said that, a few magicians have made the "overture" into an fascinating performance, especially Ricky Jay's amazing history lesson and Cellini's con patter. Ammar's surprising use of the wand spin for misdirection was wonderful the first time I saw it. Other than those few exceptions, the "cups", to me, is about the final loads.

Best regards,
Glenn Godsey

Re: THAT is the answer. The magic, to the spectator, is the surprise of the final loads. Where did they come from? How could he possibly sneak them under the cup (or cups) while I have been watching him like a hawk?

That is a challenge problem or puzzle, and not magical. Another place the magic is dispersed by poor routining or scripting.

If one were to take the perspective that the cups and balls is a tamed down version of the three shell game with larger props, one can move toward a cleaner understanding of the routine as passed down historically.

The Vernon assembly of the clever bits from a few routines is impressive as a pastiche, more than as an integral work.

As to Dan's point about the cup penetrations... in my experience people relate to the visceral clunk of the cups nesting and to the imagined penetration of the balls. Where the hand to cup magical transportations are more impressive in a technical or rational/cognitive sense ( as the audience believes the ball under the cup is the ball that vanished ), it works less well for the emotional/sensory side of their experience.

How do folks find the part where you use the wand to 'measure' the inside and outside of the cups, or the wand through cup penetrations, or the cup through penetrations? Somehow those are my favorites.

Well, the very reason I put so much time in cups and balls (not that I consider it a sacrifice;-)is that I refuse to believe all the work with the small balls is just a cover-up for the final loads.
Call me naive, but I will not stop before every phase gets gasps of astonishment, so that the final loads can be a release and evoke screams.

I say it does not matter how many cups as long as the routine works and you entertain with it. What does interest me is the comment that you use them for strolling. I never found this works too well people all round you and no table space how do you make this work I use mine in a parlour setting.

I like terry guyatt's(spelling?) routine using one normal cup "3" balls. direct, to the point,entertaining & fun. he has a nice simple vanish also. the tape I saw may be one of the "pat page presents" tapes. joey

Hi

My belief is that once you make a ball vanish from HERE and make it re-appaer THERE there is little point in doing it over and over again - Its the final loads that count - hence I do a two cup routine.

Paula

Think of a NO CUP routine with small balls and final loads. I see a way.

I prefer a chop cup routine that I devised after studying numerous routines BUT I do Tommy Wonder's 2 cup routine. It's a matter of taste and venue. Strolling= chop cup whereas a more formal= 2 cup routine.

I still use three cups and am happy doing so it works for me I think the presentation is more important than the number of cups etc. I hate the "I take the ball and put it under the cup and look its gone" type of patter.

Actually that's why I dislike chop cup, because most people do the "is the ball under the cup or in my pocket" routine and it is done to death. Jack Delvin made me howl with laughter when he did it with marshmalows and said you have to be careful not to eat the ones with the pips

I know that this thread started as a two cup versus three cup discussion but does anyone have a view as to the best one cup/chop cup routine? Or does one cup vastly limit the number of moves possible compared to two cups?

Wizzi

Again... it doesn't matter. One cup or 23 cups... if it works it works.

It is really all about you.

Agreed, Pete!

The Tim Ellis routine uses 2 cups and a radio.

Last few times I have switched back to the olde Benson Bowl with Rezvani twists and Tomsoni load midirection... it kills.

A no cup routine with small balls and final loads.

Something interesting to think about. I have an idea for half of it in my mind, but the ending I'm uncertain of.

An interesting thought to ponder..


MM

Movs and routines are only limited by your imagination as has been shown numerous times by the past masters of the cups (Present ones too).
Learn what works for you and then build on your skills and goals.
Classics are classics for their own reasons.
1) Simplicity
2) Exposure to a variety of audiences (show to)
3) Time tested ability to please those same ausiences again and again despite knowledge of inner workings.
4) Adaptability to the times in which they are shown and used.
5) Artistry in performance.

Those are at least 5 of the reasons I find classics are clasics.
Wheather you learn 1 or 100 cup routines if they are performed badly they will not endure in your act.
Do what you like to do and you will be happy when you do it.
I still think that Jennings routine is amazingly magical. So is Ammars routine even if you know how they are done they still are amazing when watched over and over.
Pete is always fun to watch also...
Later,
DK