Both Pete and Lloyd talk about this principle and different ideas with it on the project

Thanks for the review. I can’t wait to hear more of your thoughts when you have seen the rest of the project

I made my life about words, reading them and writing them. I wish I had a more elegant way of telling you all that I love you.

I had a good run, made wonderful friends, shared many laughs, and I learned a great many things. I learned that magic allows us to be so much bigger than we are. I learned we should be kind to one another and forgive people for being flawed and prideful.

The one thing I know is that we can all do better, and I think we will.

-- Max Maven (1950-2022)

There is a full post regarding all of this information that explicitly states Scott's position and exactly where he shared it.

Those who want answers to questions only need to use their eyes. Go back and read the post on page 24 of this thread.

Here are a few points that are included the previous post.

Scott was never a famous magician and didn't even consider himself a performer. Because you cannot find someone who doesn't have an online presence does not mean they do not exist; it just means they are not online. Scott was a hobbyist who has not been in the world of magic for a very long time.

Scott wanted me to make clear that he doesn't want credit and drew full inspiration from Horrors in Practical Mental effect - Which is incredibly easy to research.

Scott put together a set of ten lecture notes (that technically weren't lecture notes) titled "Little Shop of Horrors" to give to other club members (when he did a show and tell evening). Scott (and I) don't consider this to be sufficient enough to class as "published", but it is important to note that other people have played with this concept and idea well before Weber and Trono and did share it with other performers.

Denis from Conjuring Archives will receive a set of notes from Scott and can look at them for himself.

I don't care about or for Craig, and I don't care for Weber and Trono.

David.

Now that I be curious to see as your props are set up in the complete opposite way.

I do hope at least one of these gentlemen credited Max.…

Prism.

Search the Conjuring Archive for details.

Weber's response video. Wow!

Lots of people talking about how published something has to be in order to claim ownership, we should also consider how unique something needs to be to claim ownership. In this particular case the basic effect is only a slight step up from “I do it with a blue deck”. The original was 4 lists on paper, in this case it is 4 lists on paper made to look like receipts, beyond that the effect and method is the same as the original, someone picks something from the list and you reveal the item they picked from the list. That’s not a million miles from saying the original version was on red bicycles, my new version is on blue tally ho’s so I now own doing it with blue decks and tally hoes.

What if I use restaurant menus instead of receipts or the multitude of other things that you can put a list on and can have 4 or more of, does that now make it unique enough to be able to claim ownership? When do we apply these ownership rules? Let’s take the ACAAN for instance. This was originally published by Eden-Gilles Guyot in Nouvelles Recreations Mathematiques et Physiques in 1769. Robert Houdin published his version in 1868, Charles Shepherd published a version in 1908 and Al Baker published his version (wilhich is probably closer to the modern day ACAAN in 1908. Despite all this the effect is commonly known as the Berglas effect. even though there are a limited number of methods for this effect there is a new version released almost every week often using a variation of Asi Wind’s or Barrie Richardson’s method and rarely does anyone call foul.

This isn’t a dig at Craig, he is not claiming to have created an original effect he is claiming to have created a project exploring this method with receipts and all indications are that this is a fair description of the product.

As far as this whole debate is concerned I can understand Weber feeling put out as it certainly appears that he did come up with this before Craig. I can also understand Craig’s and Murphy’s position with the earlier version being published in too hidden and secret a form to be able to prevent Craig and Murphy’s investing time and money into producing the project based on a very old method that has been used on the back of cereal packets.

In my personal opinion, had I published (in any form) this exact effect before anybody else I would not consider it original enough to be a hill worth dying on. In Murphy’s position, having invested time and money into producing the project I might feel more inclined to dig my heels in, particularly considering the limited nature of the “original” part of this effect eg. Store receipts rather than sheets of paper.

As to all the other stuff, Weber has only ever been kind and courteous to me in person and I can only judge him on that basis. This is also true of Tim and also of Craig. I can only judge all 3 of them on that basis.

Mark

Back in 1928, my Grandads Brother "Reggie" performed a magic trick with receipts. As a direct bloodline relative it means someone owes me royalties!

I'm back!

Dave Scribner was working at trying to get my account back all day yesterday and concluded that my account had indeed been hacked. My email was also attacked almost immediately after posting on Craig's video. That too, has been recovered. Just thought I'd let those concerned know I'm ok and things are good.

On the first point, that's not entirely accurate. Craig's version is 5 receipts, not 4. I know it's not a huge difference; just mentioning it for the sake of accuracy.

On the other point, it has been proven that the effect isn't original with Michael. He really has no claim to it at all.

Not trying to be argumentative; just highlighting some facts.

Doh! You got me. Lol.

He got me too!

Having grown up in the 80's however, I rather enjoyed it.

I'm going to get two sets of EDCeipt: 1 to use, and the other, I will frame in a nice frame with a little plaque that says "The Trick that Caused So Much Trouble". That'll surely be a conversation for when I have visitors!

That is phenomenal to hear!

Thanks Wrayvn.

On another note, I was editing my post when you responded. It should have read:

"I'm going to get two sets of EDCeipt: 1 to use, and the other, I will frame the receipts in a nice frame with a little plaque that says "The Trick that Caused So Much Trouble". That'll surely be a conversation piece for when I have visitors!"

It is entirely accurate because I am not talking about Craig’s effect I am talking about the one that is apparently original enough to claim ownership of to the point where Craig is being asked to pull his. Age receipts, and indeed the Scott versions described only appear to differ from the original by using 4 receipts rather than 4 pieces of paper. I believe this is an accurate description of both Weber and Scott’s version. I am not sure whether either are original enough to claim ownership although Scott makes no attempt to do so.

Mark

Ah, I see. Sorry for my misinterpretation, Mark.

The inverse binary approach was built into the Age Receipts printed, published and sold by Real Secrets in 2012.

The credit at the time went to Max Maven who had published it under the name Phil Goldstein in The Violet Book of Mentalism in 1980.

In his effect "Racer's Edge" he uses cards with the names of horses on them to represent the names of the equine competitors in several races.

While simply crediting "Age Cards" and writing that the principle is "*Often referred to as the "Magic Age Cards," a binary sorting method that dates
back hundreds of years." He also employs the marking in the opposite way to the classic method, so that the participant KEEPS the cards with his/her item listed and discards the other. It is from the discards that the performer secretly learns the necessary information to determine the selection.

Max was the credited as the source of inspiration for the use of the "reverse binary" arrangement. To date, we are unaware of an earlier published explanation of it in a magic text, but we do have two sets of age cards that were used as advertising give-aways, both of which use the reverse arrangement and both of which use lists of things rather than simply digits. One of them dates to 1950, the other seems to be from around 1946. (special thanks to SC for allowing us to see actual examples of these earlier cards.)

When we shared the existence of the earlier applications of reverse binary with Max, he was excited, not disappointed, to learn that he had rediscovered something so wonderful and overlooked.

It should be mentioned that the credited use of Max's published approach (of the reverse procedure) was also utilized by Tom Stone in his electronic publication Gravel, published in 2003. In those notes, his excellent effect, The Test, uses reverse binary with symbols and secret markings on the backs of the cards.

Later, purchasers of 2017 release of The Works found two different sets of Age Receipts in the box (one set printed on Tyvek) again, operating on the reverse binary construction, and offered a new technique to utilizing a natural aspect of the blank backed receipts to be able to secretly identify them from across the room. The version titled StorAge is still one of our favorites and is always in the glove compartment of our car.

And, a unique and non-mathematical approach combining binary sorting and a kind of progressive description was used with a single receipt in the effect, The Action of Receiving, published in The Journal of Psience, Volume 1, Number 5 in 2017. Performers interested in different ways to approach the presentation of the effect are invited to look at the primary routine in the issue as well as the bonus item, Hunt and Gather, which uses the same non-mathematical binary receipts in addition to writing on the back of a receipt and a p**k wallet to increase the beats and expand the themes of the demonstration.

For those interested in exploring how powerful the secret application of simple binary principles can be, you are encouraged to read all of Leo Boudreau's published work, in addition to the dozens of other binary-based mysteries Max published under the names Maven and Goldstein. Though the original Color Series booklets are hard to come by, the material has been collected in the hardcover book PRISM, which is must-reading for magicians and mentalists.

Excited to learn more about the recent revelation about Scott Dressburgh. Have, as of yet, been unable to find him mentioned in any publications, ring reports (an important place to look for references to what magicians were performing for each other throughout the decades) or letters. Will be sure to put his name at the front of the list after it gets posted to the Conjuring Archive.

Thanks Michael.

Authoritative and manipulative. That's quite a combo!

I just wanted to chime in to say that I'm not a secret Michael Weber account.