The Magic Caf
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Nothing up my sleeve... » » Micrediting of the Schneider Pick up move (12 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page 1~2 [Next]
Michael Rubinstein
View Profile
V.I.P.
4467 Posts

Profile of Michael Rubinstein
Someone asked me to elaborate on a post I made about the miscrediting of the Pick up move (and other sleights) from another thread.I am posting it on a new thread here, as I already took too much space on someone else's thread, and for that I apologize (again).

It is explained better on the conjuringcredits.com site, and here is a quote from that site:

"Schneider Pick-up Move

This move i(s) often credited to both Al Schneider and Derek Dingle, as a product of independent invention. However, the sleight in Al Schneider's only. In the description of the trick “Four Coins in the Countin'” (Dingle's Deceptions, Haines House of Cards: Ohio, c. 1966, p. 42), Harry Lorayne credits the sleight to Derek Dingle. In later descriptions, such as Frank Paglia's “Shovel Coin Shuffle” (Apocalypse, Vol. 1 No. 8, August 1978, p. 89) and in “The PickUp Move” (The Complete Works of Derek Dingle by Richard Kaufman, Kaufman & Greenberg: New York. 1982, p. 190), it is stated that Al Schneider independently developed the sleight. However, in “Al Schneider and the Story of Matrix” in Genii (Vol. 63 No. 2, February 2000, p. 38), Schneider writes that during a magic convention in Columbus, Ohio, he met Dingle and on that occasion showed him an unpublished trick of his that would later be published under the title “Matrix”. At the time, he called it “Coins-n-Cards”. At next year's installment of this convention, Dingle showed to Schneider a trick he developed from the technique Schneider had showed him the year before, and said he planned to publish it in a book he was then writing. This, presumably, was Dingle's Deceptions. Dingle died before this information was published, so (he) never commented on it. However, it seems everyone accepts Schneider's claim, and the sleight is now generally attributed only to him."

I posted this on the other thread to show how mistakes in the literature can perpetuate if no one makes a conscious attempt to correct them. Of course, there are people who just don't care about our history. You can discuss and discuss, but those people will never change their minds. Nothing can be done about that, and you can see that in threads posted elsewhere in this very forum. Oh well. We do what we can.
People who, for example, read about the Pick up move attributed to Dingle will continue to call it that (or publish it in their book with an incorrect name) unless there are ways we can show and correct those mistakes. That is where new books, internet sites that are dedicated to proper crediting such as conjuringcredits.com or conjuringarchive.com come in handy. Also social media groups and sites such as The Magic Café, The Genii Forum, Facebook coin groups, The Magician's Forum, etc., are the perfect spots where novices (and even people who have been around awhile!) can become aware of crediting mistakes and learn not to repeat those mistakes. Yes, in the beginning it can be confusing when a new name is proposed for something that many have become familiar with. But as it has been pointed out over and over again (like with the Tenkai pinch or the Pick up move), people will make the crediting mistake less and less. That is called evolution, my friends, and that is how magic evolves and GROWS.
Credits and history are important, both for continuity, and acknowledgement to the creators. There is so much more information out there now, with an ever expanding hobby and ways to learn. Books and magazines, and learning from mentors where the only way not too long ago. This has expanded to dvds, downloads, social media, and YouTube. Learning and duplication of material is now easier than ever, because it is so much harder to research the vast amount of material being churned out. I see young guys from Japan put out great stuff, as well as some young guys here. Some of the material looks the same to me. Who's is it? No idea when people put out stuff with no research.
Anyway, as someone mentioned elsewhere I may just be yelling into the wind,or beating a dead horse (not the best expression for a Veterinarian). But I hope I have at least given some of you food for thought. There will always be crediting errors, and as we discover new information we can do our best to correct them.
RUBINSTEIN COIN MAGIC SPECIAL:
I HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF COPIES AVAILABLE TO BE SIGNED, AND COME WITH A SPECIAL FREE GIFT! If interested, shoot me an email for ordering information at rubinsteindvm@aol.com
magojose|
View Profile
Regular user
187 Posts

Profile of magojose|
I’m on your side Doc. Giving correct credit for things is a sign of evolution and let future researchs easyer ‘couse you don’t need to waste time looking for the original source, you just go to it
tonsofquestions
View Profile
Inner circle
1475 Posts

Profile of tonsofquestions
I'd like to voice a possibly controversial opinion.
But first: I want to agree with most of what Dr. Rubinstein has said.
Attribution is extremely important, both for contribution, crediting, evolution, and sharing. Stealing ideas is bad.
I also readily acknowledge that I don't know the context and history of either of the two moves recently discussed (the pick-up or the pinch), and my additional points are meant generically, not to suggest anything else about the history of either of them - though it will come back at the end.

But I have a couple of thoughts/nuances I think are important to consider and include as part of the conversation.
1) It's possible for multiple people to come up with a move/gimmick/concept/idea/whatever independently - even if at different times, e.g. if one is unpublished. That's totally fine and legitimate, assuming that it's possible to demonstrate that. (And again, that doesn't seem to be the case for the two moves in question).

2) I don't think that coming up with a move means that it automatically should get named after you.
Side note: I actually have some issue with naming things after people - diseases are an example of where I particularly don't like it, though it's less awful when it's something like a hold. Giving it a semi-descriptive name means that if new history is uncovered, you don't have to re-train and re-educate everyone to call it the "new" thing, since it already has a fine name.
But I digress. Merely inventing it is great, But there's something to be said for popularizing something and/or making it better known to more people. Additional work and thinking can sometimes be just as seminal as creating it. For example, I don't know the original creator of the "Bobo Switch" - but I'd hazard it wasn't Bobo, though he named it that in his book, and no one seems to be complaining about that one right now.

3) There's also a very interesting (old) thread on a similar topic: https://themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopi......&start=0 about how small differences in positioning can impact what the position can and cannot do. Of course, there should still be proper attribution of work, and the various other work that inspired the new thing, along with why it's different. So it doesn't seem unreasonable to me that there might be multiple names things that seem (at first) very similar, but have subtle differences.


Circling back.
I again want to reiterate that I don't have enough knowledge in the histories of either the Dingle-Schneider pickup, or the Tenkai-Goshman pinch. I 100% believe Dr. Rubinstein's accounts here, his quotes + prior research, etc.
I also don't actually have an opinion on what either is named - other than to reiterate that I'm not a fan of the person-based names, which ends up perpetuating assumptions about history.

And yet, having the history they do does not (to me) necessitate that either name is inherently wrong, assuming the crediting is proper. The pinch seems more cut-and-dried, as it appears Tenkai also had published work on it. But if Dingle never published his work, and Schneider further evolved it and made it widely known, then it doesn't seem too far fetched that he might get some of the credit, or even the name.

But again ... these are two very specific examples, and I don't mean to suggest I think either is a case that should change, or not change.
I just think it's worth pointing out that as with everything, there's often more nuance than being black or white.
Michael Rubinstein
View Profile
V.I.P.
4467 Posts

Profile of Michael Rubinstein
People name moves after themselves a bit for ego, and a bit to associate the move with them. There is certainly independent invention in magic, epecially when magicians in other countries published material in their own language that never got translated. For example, a move I came up with was also independently invented by Mutobe of Japan and Daryl. I found this out when I met Daryl in 1984 after he came back from Japan, and we compared the moves. He told me about Mutobe. I credited both with independent invention in my Encyclopedia of Coin Sleights (first produced as Master Coin Technique), although I called Mutobe "Matabe" because I was unsure about pronounciation. As magic as an art expanded there was always going to be duplication of things, by people working similar pathways, especially if the person didn't do his diligent research. I came up with a move and showed it to the NY guys back in the early 80s. Sam Schwartz pointed out that it was Vernon's, but applauded me for coming up with something early in my magic development that took Vernon years to do. Bottom line is that credit goes to the guy who first published, not the guy who came up with it on his own last week (Harder to prove ownership when items are published at the same time, as with Father Cyprian and Al Schneider publishing solutions to making Wild Card a coin routine back in 1980). Unfortunately that happens all too much, then the new guy puts it into print and gets chastized by those who point out the earlier reference. I saw someone who published one of my spellbound moves as his (yes it is in my book and the history is documented), because he didn't do his research that it was already published on the Master Coin Technique/Encyclopedia of Coin Sleights.

People usually have moves named after them by others, such as authors of a book about that person, or as I said, by the author himself who wants that move associated with themself. It was Bobo who made the decision ON HIS OWN to call the Tenkai Pinch the Goshman Pinch in his book, not Goshman (despite knowing that the move belonged to Tenkai who, as it is written IN THE SAME 1966 updated The New Modern Coin Magic, taught Bobo the Tenkai Pennies routine (with the move) years earlier. And if Bobo was writing a book on coin magic, and knew Tenkai, I imagine he was also familiar with Tenkai's publication (incidentally, Tenkai was not an unknown magician. He was known by many to be the "Dai Vernon" of Japan (as was Takagi), and certainly had a following. He was also interned in Hawaii during WWII because he was Japanese, and had the opportunity to meet American magicians (like Ed Balducci and others). Unfortunately, Bobo and Goshman are not around to explain the hows and whys of this mistake. But interestingly, the Pinch is not even mentioned in Goshman's own book, yet the Tenkai Vanish is taught. And as Sol Stone explains in his own book, he taught the Tenkai Pinch to Goshman, who NEVER claimed the move was his. And others did the move as well, so that had nothing to do with the propagation of the name. It had to do SOLELY with Bobo putting the miscredit in a popular book on coin magic.

As for Al Schneider, he documented where and when he showed Dingle the move (and I presume others saw it as well), and documented that one year later Dingle showed him a routine he came up with using the move. So Dingle was aware that the move was Schneider's. It was Harry Lorayne who wrote Dingle's book and who credited Dingle (and who knows what Dingle told Harry, so it might not have been an innocent error). Kaufman, who was unaware of this, tried to give a sense of indpendent invention by calling it the Dingle-Schneider pick up move both in the Complete Works of Derek Dingle, and Coinmagic, until Al Schneider cleared that up (and Kaufman agrees with that assessment). The reason people believed Schneider is because he was able to back up his claim and set the record straight. I am sure Al would chime in himself but I don't think he posts anymore on the Café.
Another example, as I already mentioned, is that fact that the Kaps Subtlety is really the Malini Subtlety. It originally appeared in the 1962 book, Malini and his Magic. In the 1990 book Spectacle on pg 81, Stephan Minch writes, "However, Fred Kaps never claimed the idea. The subtlety is Max Malini's (ref. Vernon's Malini and his Magic p. 53) and was shown to Fred Kaps by Larry Jennings and Dai Vernon).
Kaufman in a 2005 Genii post stated how the name was given MISTAKENLY to Kaps.
"When I was writing the book David Roth's Expert Coin Magic, Roth often used something he learned from Fred Kaps. In it, the palm up hand holds a coin between the thumb and fingers while another coin is concealed in classic palm. Now the hand isn't really palm up, if it's the right hand then the palm faces to the left. It appears as if the inside the of hand is seen otherwise empty.
I named this "The Kaps Subtlety." At some point down the road, Jamy Ian Swiss located the identical item in the Vernon book on Malini. You can't miss the drawing explaining it since it's the only one with an eyeball!
However, by then the damage was done and many still refer to it as The Kaps Subtlety rather than The Malini Subtlety."
And from private corrispondence with Steve Cohen, additional information:
"I do not believe Malini directly taught the move to Vernon. More likely, Vernon observed Malini using that subtlety, and then he published it in his Ganson book, Malini and His Magic, in 1962. Remember Malini was very short, so his audiences were always looking down at his hands, from a steep upward angle. Malini used this to his advantage to conceal a classic palmed coin. I suppose he discovered this during the course of performing, not as a deliberate thought experiment."
Again, these show how mistakes in literature are found and CORRECTED.

Mistakes happen all the time. I taught David Regal my Spread Finger Subtlety back in the early 80's (which I also taught in my 1985 Magic Castle Lecture Notes). Next thing I know, it appeared in Harry Lorayne's 1987 book Star Quality - The Magic of David Regal, credited to Regal. When I pointed that out to David, he explained that he thought it was a standard move, and Harry wrote the miscredit as being David's move. In a Genii review on something of mine some years later, David wrote a correction, and when the book was being reprinted I asked David to correct the crediting mistake (although I do not know if Harry Lorayne ever made the correction).

Another example is my Side Grip, taught at the NYCMS in 2006 (and is on the 2007 DVD). Rick Holcomb had put out a download a few years ago, (not knowing that I had first published that position) and called it Sly palm. He had done additional work on the position (I only used it to wave one hand over the other, and as an intermediate position in switching palms), and wrote me after he discovered the fact that I did it first. He agreed to fix the download to credit me as the originator (although the download was in the hands of Jeff Copeland, and I don't know if the correction was ever made. And of course I understand it was too late to change the name on the download without redoing the whole thing). Rick is a stand up guy, so I feel this was an innocent mistake. Incidentally, the routine on the NYCMS DVDS is not in my book because I didn't think it was good enough to be included, although I do incude my technique and use for Side Grip.

Fortunately, there are guardians of our art - like Stephan Minch, Denis Behr, Max Mavin, Jamy Ian Swiss, Richard Kaufman, and more, true historians who take the time to properly credit or fix the mistakes that were made(like Kaufman did by admitting where he screwed up).
Not all the mistakes in magic have been fixed. The Bobo switch, named by Bobo, was actually referenced in the routine Florin vs Penny from the 1899 book New Coin Tricks. The author Ellis Stanyon, states that the routines in his book were not original, but was stuff used by performers of his time, so the true originator is not known. Perhaps that is why Bobo gave it a name, although there was no need to name it after himself since I am sure he already knew of the switch in magic. My guess is that he had to give it a name, and since there wasn't one, he just named it after himself for convenience.
I already pointed out that Stephan Minch found a reference that the Subtlety attributed to Ramsay was in print years before Ramsay was born. Outside of that reference there has been no attempt to correct that name, and it is not my place to do so. I just point out the earlier reference.

The entire point of this post is, not to continue to expound on these blatent mistakes in the literature, but to explain that these mistakes have been corrected, and the corrected names have been accepted by those who advance our art, and have now been used for over 30 YEARS (or more), and in MANY PLACES, not just a post here and there on the Café but by the experts and professionals, in periodicals, books, DVDS and downloads. Enough so that no one should try to create yet another name or state the case for independent invention when it has been pointed out that there wasn't.
So when someone says, "It is what it is", "What's done is done", and "I don't care what others say, I am just going to use the term I learned because that's the way it is", they are snubbing their nose at the art and our history.

I had a post removed because I mentioned politics, so I will tread carefully here. In WWII there was someone who said that if you tell a lie enough times, it becomes truth. You all can infer from that what I posted about recent historical events that got my post removed.

So to the people who learned the name of a move, and found another name elsewhere, I hope this post clears up the confusion, and explains how that happens. We all strive to get it straight. This way there is less confusion and more understanding for those who come AFTER us. To the people who just don't care and say, "Sorry, so and so did it well, or I learned it in a popular book so I am going to stick with the name I learned", I just SMH and realize that some people will never change.
I made mistakes as well in the past, but corrected them when I discovered the correct information. And If I can change, and you can change, we All can change (thank you Rocky).
RUBINSTEIN COIN MAGIC SPECIAL:
I HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF COPIES AVAILABLE TO BE SIGNED, AND COME WITH A SPECIAL FREE GIFT! If interested, shoot me an email for ordering information at rubinsteindvm@aol.com
Ray J
View Profile
Inner circle
St. Louis, MO
1159 Posts

Profile of Ray J
Crediting is important. It is important to the overall health of magic in my opinion. Not everyone accepts that position, especially younger magicians it seems. I do believe that recent generations are less adverse to sharing "protected" materials and in fact it has become so common that when confronted, they probably feel little guilt, if any. Example: There are frequent "drops" of unauthorized videos of Broadway musicals on youtube. I know this because my daughter mentioned it. She was happy to have downloaded a bootleg recording before the moderators at youtube were contacted to have the recordings removed. I asked her if she felt what she was doing was okay and she looked at me funny as though she didn't understand why I'd even ask. I think the crediting thing is akin to this blasé approach to piracy. So long as folks get what they want, they can't be bothered with the details. Rules, copyrights, trademarks, patents, etc. being details.

And so, when a move is explained on a youtube video and no credit given, or permission requested in order to even explain it, a segment of the magic community couldn't care less. This includes moves attributed to parties incorrectly. Those in that segment probably think those who are upset by such things are loons I'm sure.

I'm with Dr. Rubenstein when he says "So when someone says, "It is what it is", "What's done is done", and "I don't care what others say, I am just going to use the term I learned because that's the way it is", they are snubbing their nose at the art and our history." Michael is right.

I'll go further and say that magicians have an obligation to their art to make corrections when they are pointed out. And of course, documentation helps. When something is cut-and-dried, as in the performer who originated something can show a publication or provide first-hand testimony from someone, it should be respected. If it is a clear case of reinvention, fine, but the party that had it in publication first should be mentioned. I think it is only right.
It's never crowded on the extra mile....
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9632 Posts

Profile of funsway
Many fine thoughts posted above with which I can mostly agree. Yet, I stand by my oft posted position -
"First published" does not equate to "created." In addition, several noted magicians refuse to change their claim of "original"
when presented evidence to another origin. "Ego" "dollars?" I am not sure, but "crediting" is a very subjective,
and simply pointing to "first published" is a cop-out.

I am perhaps weird in not caring about those who take my shared innovations and use them in new ways.
Seeing them used and performed is a special reward more important the credit to me.

Yup, I now sell some effects and routines on Library.com, having learned that many place value on a routine unless they pay for it.
But, in the last decade on the Café I have gifted away more the 700 free ebooks containing many original sleights and moves.
My choice! I do not charge for performing either.

Yes, in my writing I give full credit for originality when known, and point readers to sources for more info if desired.
But, I have no interest in researching who might have published a sleight similar to mine.
Most of mine are "non-derivative" and need no credit. Others were inspired by another effect and I give credit. Simple.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst

eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com
Ray Haining
View Profile
Inner circle
Hot Springs, AR
1907 Posts

Profile of Ray Haining
Crediting involves research: who created a move? Naming involves custom: what do people call a move? Sometimes they coincide; sometimes they do not.

In a perfect world, the Dingle Pickup move would be called the "Schneider Pickup move," the Kaps Subtlety would be called the "Malini Subtlety," and the Goshman Pinch would be called the "Tenkai Pinch."

As we know, in the real world, things do not always work out the way they should.

I believe I've seen Dingle/Schneider about 50/50.

I've seen Kaps/Malini about 70/30. In this case, it may be difficult to replace "Kaps" with "Malini."

But I've seen Goshman/Tenkai about 95/5. It will be extremely difficult to replace "Goshman" with "Tenkai." The move has been referred to as the "Goshman Pinch" for nearly 60 years and has been cited in the literature and on videos thousands of times. In fact, I believe "Goshman Pinch" is here to stay. I would be willing to bet that ten, twenty or more years from now, magicians will still be referring to the "Goshman Pinch."

And that's perhaps for the good. Attempting to change the name of this move at this late stage would just create confusion and be counterproductive.

Tenkai has been properly credited as being the creator of this move by Michael Rubinstein in his book.

Sometimes, we just have to accept things the way they are.
Ray J
View Profile
Inner circle
St. Louis, MO
1159 Posts

Profile of Ray J
Ray Haining said "Sometimes, we just have to accept things the way they are."

Ray, the whole point here is that some don't agree with that statement. And so they continue to try to change the record, which is what Dr. Rubenstein is talking about here. There's a tendency for things to deteriorate over time and crediting is certainly one example. Some of us refuse to follow the trend and set about trying to set things right. It's easier not to, but the work is important to us.

I also don't agree that "first published" is a cop-out. Not in every instance. I agree that being the first to publish doesn't necessarily mean that person should "own" the move or routine, and if someone else can substantiate that they also were performing the move or routine prior to the publication, then they should be mentioned as having done so.

And none of this is necessarily subjective. In fact, what Harapan Ong's wonderful (FREE!) book does is give specific recommendations on how to handle pretty much any situation that might come up as it pertains to crediting. People really should read it. His arguments are compelling. I agreed with literally 100% of his positions, something that doesn't happen very often.

There are known examples in magic literature where someone claimed to have invented something spuriously. Some are embarrassing, very embarrassing and have left the guilty party in a bad light. No need to mention any of them, if you've been around magic and studied the literature the examples are almost legendary.

And then there have been legitimate situations where someone "invented" something independently of another person. Again, Mr. Ong's book mentions this and how to deal with it in a polite, respectful manner. It takes effort and may involve editing and such, and therefore may or may not be possible or practical in all instances. But effort goes a long way and when possible, mentioning others who had similar ideas is the right thing to do. Readers or viewers can then decide whether they want to pursue the other magician's work to compare/contrast them.

Harapan Ong's book is free and available as a download on Vanishing Inc.'s website. It is must reading in my opinion.
It's never crowded on the extra mile....
tonsofquestions
View Profile
Inner circle
1475 Posts

Profile of tonsofquestions
Neat, I'll have to check out Harapan Ong's book.

I love the discussion, and agree with a lot of what's being said here, including the "it's done" not being the final word.
There are plenty of words (or patter) in our lexicon that have been changed (with effort) because the original is no longer acceptable.

That said, I'll again reiterate a point I made earlier: Naming and crediting are different.
I think it's totally reasonable to have a name that's different from the originator.
It's _fine_ (IMHO) to call it the Schneider pick-up ... as long as it also comes with attribution to Dingle as part of the explanation/history.
Again ... I don't have any skin in the game on this one.

But instead of fighting about whether it should be called the Tenkai pinch or the Goshman pinch, we should call it the Pinky pinch (not a great choice, this is illustrative) and talk about how it was popularized by Tenkai and then Goshman. Because I doubt even Tenkai was the creator.
Ray J
View Profile
Inner circle
St. Louis, MO
1159 Posts

Profile of Ray J
Dingle had absolutely nothing to do with the move other than being present when it was shown to him. There is no need to even mention Dingle when discussing the move, unless it is to indicate that he didn't invent it. Dr. Rubenstein's post above makes that clear.

Some of this gets muddy when the folks mentioned are deceased. Is it fair to question someone who cannot defend themselves? I would argue the best we can do is to consult the record and to also give credence to those who ARE still living (Al Schneider) and then render a decision. And as with anything else, let the preponderance of the evidence hold sway.

Another thing that happens is that some in the magic community refuse to allow their "personal heroes" to be shown to have had feet of clay. They will argue to the last that it just isn't true when the evidence says otherwise. Human nature in play. Lots of examples of this but again, no need to dredge them up. Those that have studied will immediately have situations come to mind.
It's never crowded on the extra mile....
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27251 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
I'm waiting for some discussion from Ross Bertram's associates about picking up a coin from under a cover. Remember he was using that 'welcome mat' for quite a while. There was closeup magic before the closeup pad. (Was it Goshman who found the wet suit material?)

The Ramsay item "credit" is a little blurry as he did not claim credit for it - and he used the strategy as part of his misdirection rather than an apparent display of an empty hand. He had something in his hand which was held in a way so that folks looking at his hands would not see anything in his palm.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
tonsofquestions
View Profile
Inner circle
1475 Posts

Profile of tonsofquestions
My apologies. I didn't mean to re-mis-attribute the move, I was a bit tired, and I usually know it as the Schneider move, so had a brain flip.

I _meant_ to say that I think it's not un-reasonable to call it the Dingle pick-up, and attribute it to Schneider as part of the explanation.
Sure, perhaps in this case it's _still_ bad, as Dingle was basically not involved at all, but it was meant as an illustrative example with a story we had here, rather than one I was specifically suggesting here.
Michael Rubinstein
View Profile
V.I.P.
4467 Posts

Profile of Michael Rubinstein
From my earlier post - "So when someone says, "It is what it is", "What's done is done", and "I don't care what others say, I am just going to use the term I learned because that's the way it is", they are snubbing their nose at the art and our history."

Especially when corrections have been EXTENSIVELY made in the magic literature.

From another post here - "But I've seen Goshman/Tenkai about 95/5. It will be extremely difficult to replace "Goshman" with "Tenkai." The move has been referred to as the "Goshman Pinch" for nearly 60 years and has been cited in the literature and on videos thousands of times. In fact, I believe "Goshman Pinch" is here to stay. I would be willing to bet that ten, twenty or more years from now, magicians will still be referring to the "Goshman Pinch.""

This, along with the other statements on the same post, present an opinion by one person as fact.

Well, let's go to the source. Here are the facts, (except where I interjected my own thought and stated it as such).
These are the references in the literature from conjuringarchive.com, about the Tenkai Pinch (I did not include references pre-1966, because that is where Bobo made up the name Goshman pinch in his 1966 book and what has caused all the headaches).
So from Denis Behr's Conjuring Archive (I will add that this is the most comprehensive list that has been compiled in one place, although I am sure there are missed publications from lecture notes and smaller books that haven't been listed, and this doesn't include videos, dvds and downloads). One might also want to reference "Ask Alexander" from Conjuring Arts to get perhaps a more comprehensive list, although it might be more for older material rather than recent stuff:

39 entries for "Tenkai Pinch"



1971 Roger Klause
Fist Steal in Tenkai Pinch
Kabbala — Volume 1 (Vol. 1 No. 4)26

1973 Jerry Mentzer
Vanish Number 2Tenkai Pinch
Close-up Cavalcade100

1973 Jerry Mentzer
Vanish Number 3 Tenkai Pinch
Close-up Cavalcade103

1975 Scotty York
The Back Clipmethod to bring the coin into Goshman/Tenkai pinch
Scotty York Coins 1

1975 Scotty York
The Back Clipmethod to bring the coin into Goshman/Tenkai pinch
Scotty York Lecture notes

1979 Unknown
Tenkai/Goshman Pinch Switch
Close-up Entertainer 92

1981 Steve Beam
In a Pinch, stealing one of several into Tenkai Pinch, one-handed
Steve Beam On Coins — Volume 1


1981 Bill Wisch
My 2 Cents
one coin in each hand, chosen one travels across, using Tenkai Pinch
Wisches II 16


1982 Roger Klause
Fist Steal in Tenkai Pinch
The New York Magic Symposium — Collection 1

1985 David Roth
Deep Palm Tenkai Pennies
Expert Coin Magic

1986 Tenkai Ishida
Tenkai Pinch
The Classic Magic of Larry Jennings 109

1987 Dai Vernon, Ross Bertram
Back Clip & Tenkai Pinch Handlings
The Vernon Chronicles — Volume 1231

1987 Dai Vernon, Ross Bertram
Back Clip & Tenkai Pinch Handlings
Magical Arts Journal (Vol. 1 No. 8) 9

1990 Michael Rubinstein
Coin Steal into Tenkai Pinch
Impossibilia 100

1990 Dai Vernon, Ross Bertram
Back Clip & Tenkai Pinch Handlings
Intermagic (Vol. 15 No. 2) 69

1991 Unknown
The Pinch and the Switchthrow switch from tenkai pinch
Workers Number 235

1996 Tenkai Ishida
Tenkai/Goshman Pinch Switch
The Art of Astonishment — Book 2 (Issue Close-up Entertainer


 1996 Unknown
Transfer to Tenkai Pinch
Lou Gallo: The Underground Man

2003 Unknown
Tenkai Back Pinch
Genii (Vol. 66 No. 4)

2003 Unknown
Tenkai Back Pinch
Genii (Vol. 66 No. 9)

2005 William Duncan
The Underhanded Steal
Tubthumping

2005 Unknown
Tenkai PinchGenii (Vol. 68 No. 9)

2007 Unknown
Tenkai Pinch
Genii (Vol. 70 No. 7)

2007 Nicholas Bengtson
Coin Ditches & Concealments
Abyss

2009 Albert Goshman, Tenkai Ishida
Goshman Pinch
Limited

2011 Tenkai Ishida
Tenkai Pinch
More Power to You

2012 Unknown
Coin to Tenkai Pinch
Genii (Vol. 75 No. 6)

2013 Tom Gagnon
Pickup and Displacement Move
Too Hot for the Devil

2013 Tom Gagnon
Phantom Coin Load
Too Hot for the Devil

2013 Unknown
Table Top Click Maneuver
Too Hot for the Devil

2017 Geoffrey Latta
The T.P. Bottom Steal
The Long Goodbye — Latta on Coins
(Note - originally published in Richard’s Almanac as the G.P. Bottom Steal, but was CORRECTED in this publication!).

2019 Tom Gagnon
Slow-Mo P&D Move
Gagnon Unfiltered

2020 Michael Rubinstein
The Blow Change
Rubinstein Coin Magic

2020 Michael Rubinstein
Tenkai Pinch Recovery
Rubinstein Coin Magic

2020 Michael Rubinstein
Pick up Pinch
Rubinstein Coin Magic

Now in fairness, there are ALSO some references on the conjuringarchive.com for just the Goshman Pinch, which show (IMHO) people who have published but were either ignorant of, or who blantently did not accept the change of name, or who published early on, before the name evolved from G.P. to T.P. . In the case of Tom Gagnon, he credited Goshman (and Dingle) in his 1981 book Sleightly Original, but CORRECTED the crediting errors in his followup publications. In fact, here is a quote from a thread here on the Café in 2014 from Tom:

"You will find several coins assemblies that use the Tenki Pinch in my latest book Too Hot (F)or the Devil. There is also a card/coin move described in the same book whereby a coin is shifted into the Tenkai Pinch in the midst of executing the well known Schnieder Pickup Move. As such the card is tossed face up onto the table and the hand cleanly displayed palm up."

(And if you look for that 2014 thread, you will find that even some of our popular Café coin posters call it Tenkai Pinch)

And way back in 2007, on another Magic Café post, here is a quote from Curtis Kam:

"Two of the routines I use all the time are on my "Silverado" DVD, and they both rely on slightly advanced applications of the Tenkai pinch. The "Triple Alliance" routine is a c/s/b based on Scotty York's excellent work--that's where the pinch work comes from. Scotty used the pinch as a steal, a production, and a standing Han Ping Chien sort of action.
And my Copper/Silver/Bent uses a Tenkai pinch for a half dollar that's almost angleproof, and not because the technique is any different. (There's a teaser for you)
Of course, the maestro of the Tenkai Pinch is Sawa. If you really want to see what's possible with this sleight, check out Sawa's Library of Magic, Vol. 1"

Here are the other references listed on conjuringarchive.com for Goshman Pinch:

1981 Camilo Vázquez
Coin Transformation
Das Camilo Seminar "81"

(These next 2 citations were from the section on Tenkai Pinch, but Tom referenced the pinch as Goshman's in his 1981 book Sleightly Original, so I moved them here)

1981 Tom Gagnon
The Pickup and Displacement Moveone-handed pick-up and transfer into Tenkai Pinch
Sleightly Original103

1981 Tom Gagnon
Open Procedure Loadloading Tenkai/Goshman pinched coin under card
Sleightly Original109


1984 Unknown
Goshman Pinch
The New York Magic Symposium — Collection 3

1988 Unknown
Goshman Pinch Handling
Magical Arts Journal (Vol. 2 No. 2)

1996 Tenkai IshidaTenkai/Goshman Pinch SwitchThe Art of Astonishment — Book 2 (Issue Close-up Entertainer)

2006 Unknown
Goshman Pinch
Power Plays

2016 Alexander de Cova
Goshman Pinch
Burners — Vol. 5

Not many, as you can see. So, to reiterate, Roger Klause, Jerry Mentzer, Scotty York, Steve Beam, Bill Wisch, David Roth, Richard Kaufman, Larry Jennings, Dai Vernon, Ross Bertram, Lou Gallo, William Duncan, Nicholas Bengtson, Stephen Minch, Stephen Hobbs, Mike Close, Jamy Ian Swiss, Mike Gallo, Curtis Kam (see quote), Sawa, Sol Stone, Dr. Michael Rubinstein, John Bannon, Tom Gagnon (see quote), Jay Sankey (who actually teaches the Tenkai Pinch on a YouTube tutorial), and many, many more, all use the term Tenkai Pinch, and have for many years.

I am not going to show the same research for the Malini Subtlety and the Schneider Pick-up move, as I have already quoted Al Schneider and Richard Kaufman explaining the crediting mistakes. Those who want to do further research can. But I will end with the quote, stated in a few ways by others over the years but I feel said best here:

“Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”
- Winston Churchill
RUBINSTEIN COIN MAGIC SPECIAL:
I HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF COPIES AVAILABLE TO BE SIGNED, AND COME WITH A SPECIAL FREE GIFT! If interested, shoot me an email for ordering information at rubinsteindvm@aol.com
Bremner
View Profile
New user
51 Posts

Profile of Bremner
Michael,

First of all, I am a fan of yours and amazed by your magic knowledge. However, you yourself, show the following in regards to your Encyclopedia of Coin Sleights in a description of Vol. 1.

Volume 1:
Concealments: Classic Palm; Finger Palm/Low Finger Palm/High Finger Palm; Thumb Palm; Angle Palm; Back Fingerclip Palm; The Front Fingerclip Palm; Fingertip Rest; Edge Grip; "Goshman Pinch"; Downs Palm.

I don't understand the inconsistencies of your comments.
Michael Rubinstein
View Profile
V.I.P.
4467 Posts

Profile of Michael Rubinstein
Well, that was filmed in Munich on my European lecture tour back in 1983 (released in the States as Master Coin Technique in 1985,bought by L&L and converted to dvds as the Encyclopedia of Coin Sleights, Before the use of Tenkai Pinch became the preferred term. I document the use of Tenkai palm in my third set of lecture notes (dated 1990). And as I said in an earlier post, "If I can change, and YOU can change, then we ALL can change." Does THAT clear it up?
RUBINSTEIN COIN MAGIC SPECIAL:
I HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF COPIES AVAILABLE TO BE SIGNED, AND COME WITH A SPECIAL FREE GIFT! If interested, shoot me an email for ordering information at rubinsteindvm@aol.com
Michael Rubinstein
View Profile
V.I.P.
4467 Posts

Profile of Michael Rubinstein
*I re-read my prior post - too late to change the typo,from Tenkai PALM to Tenkai Pinch. My bad. BTW, glad you referenced my DVD set. It contains over 100 coin moces, some till not published, and even though it is over 30 years old it is still relevant, and got many magicians (like Bertini and McClintock) started on their journey in coin magic.
RUBINSTEIN COIN MAGIC SPECIAL:
I HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF COPIES AVAILABLE TO BE SIGNED, AND COME WITH A SPECIAL FREE GIFT! If interested, shoot me an email for ordering information at rubinsteindvm@aol.com
Ray J
View Profile
Inner circle
St. Louis, MO
1159 Posts

Profile of Ray J
Quote:
On Oct 12, 2022, Bremner wrote:
Michael,

First of all, I am a fan of yours and amazed by your magic knowledge. However, you yourself, show the following in regards to your Encyclopedia of Coin Sleights in a description of Vol. 1.

Volume 1:
Concealments: Classic Palm; Finger Palm/Low Finger Palm/High Finger Palm; Thumb Palm; Angle Palm; Back Fingerclip Palm; The Front Fingerclip Palm; Fingertip Rest; Edge Grip; "Goshman Pinch"; Downs Palm.

I don't understand the inconsistencies of your comments.


This is the last sentence of Dr. Rubenstein's 2nd post in the thread. I think it clears up any concerns you or anyone else might have about his "inconsistencies".

"I made mistakes as well in the past, but corrected them when I discovered the correct information. And If I can change, and you can change, we All can change (thank you Rocky)."
It's never crowded on the extra mile....
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27251 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Perhaps Churchill read Santayana? From Reason in Common Sense: https://santayana.iupui.edu/wp-content/u......book.pdf
Quote:
Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Michael Rubinstein
View Profile
V.I.P.
4467 Posts

Profile of Michael Rubinstein
Yes, several people over the years used some form of that quote. The first was indeed Santayana in 1905. But the way Churchill said it applies best in this situation.
RUBINSTEIN COIN MAGIC SPECIAL:
I HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF COPIES AVAILABLE TO BE SIGNED, AND COME WITH A SPECIAL FREE GIFT! If interested, shoot me an email for ordering information at rubinsteindvm@aol.com
danny
View Profile
Loyal user
England
267 Posts

Profile of danny
What a great thread. Very interesting. I have learned a bit too
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Nothing up my sleeve... » » Micrediting of the Schneider Pick up move (12 Likes)
 Go to page 1~2 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2023 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.18 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL