Hi Justin,
Thanks Man Always Happy to help! Let me know if there is anything more!

Best David Neighbors
THe Coinjurer

You see, this what happens when I actually try to use my memory Yes indeed, KB 3 uses a C/S only, with ungaffed coins of course.

At least I fumbled my way through to one right answer in this exchange. Too late on the muscle passes though. I'm physically sore and mentally irritated this morning because my muscle pass blows

Best,

Mike

You should check out cody fishers unforgettable coin magic...he has a routine using CSB, but it can be adapted to 2C1S...

Hi all,

Actually 2 Silver, copper came first, then 2 copper, Silver, then Chinese Bit, and then CSB.

I have used both over the years. On my DVD, I use the 2 c/s. In most cases, I use these props. I CHOSE to do this because I wanted to use real coins. At the time, CB and CSB used a "Chinese washer".

I have had Todd Lassen make up the CSB in real coins for me, but I still use the 2 C/S about 99% of the time. I am sure that Jamie Schoolcraft can make the props up too. The hole does make for more mystery, but I think it really doesn't matter.

Cody Fisher, Doc Eason, J. C. Wagner, Gary Kurtz, Bob Kohler, Curtis Kam, Reed McClintock, et al ... prove that it is the presentation that make the trick work, not the props.

Keep thinking.

Regards,

Paul Green

I appreciate your thoughts Curtis.
To clarify what I meant by "tight scripting and moving the action along" being the key, is that complicating the effect by offering a choice when there really doesn't need to be one is a bad decision. Not the handling per se (Kurtz has many an effect with knuckle busting sleights and I find his effects very worthwhile to study). I do believe that the impromptu miracle has a very strong reaction. However in a formal set it hinders a performance. Giving spectators the opportunity to have a choice also gives them a psychological freedom to continue making choices throughout the performance. In my shows that isn't an option. I prefer to be in control of the action not them, further I don't take requests when I perform (read that as-I don't answer hecklers calls, not that I'm heckled all that often I just don't do it).
I am ALL about the spectators enjoying a routine or more importantly the performance of the routine (IMO the actual magic trick is about 25% of the performance). The question for me boils down to "Does allowing the spectators to choose what happens next strengthen the effect?" In this case I don't believe so.

Not understanding the objectives of a routine can lead to the perception of overhandling, I agree. My response is that in every instance of Reed's material, that I have seen or read, I believe it is a misunderstanding from HIS point of view as to the objectives of the routines. A glaring point in this misunderstanding is his (over)handling of Daryl's 'Elbow, Knee and Neck'. There is no point to the machinations the coins go through. The beauty of the original is that it is wonderfully straightforward. In many cases the old saying of "Less is more" holds true. With Reed's work I have to think if he only thought of the "why" not just the "how" his work would be stronger. Of course these are all only my opinions and as an "old dog" of magic I submit that my opinions will vary greatly from many people here.

Namaste.

What the heck happened to Reed? Hope he's alright. I don't see him posting anymore.