Jon,

Now you have done it! Kirk

It's okay Kirk, this time around I'm like to see the three ball trick and the cups and balls taken to a new level.

I've had the vanish to mayself for a LONG time.

enjoy it folks,

-jon

Jon, is that the crumblet 'papernapkin' vanish ?

I've seen Jon's vanish it's a good one, very deceptive. You're missing out on the good stuff if you don't hit him up about this. Jon's other work is awesome too.


~Ronnie

Jonathan:

That vanish really looks GOOOOOOD!

I posted a "Put" vanish on my web page. it is basically my interpretation of the vanish taught in the Stars of Magic.

check it out.

http://webpages.charter.net/rcramin/homepage1.htm

Ronnie

This looks extremely good. Thanks for posting. Which vanish from the Stars of Magic is this?

The Basic Sleight on page 75.

Thanks a lot. Sorry for overlooking the pagenumber on your website. The execution is really flawless.

The simple finger palm pass is great but I do agree you need a variety of vanishes. I'd use that one, two finger "pinch" vanish, through the hand wand (two variations), and french drop.

I don't think the striking vanish is very convincing, even when done well. Ammar kind of alludes to this when he recommends after demonstrating it that you show where the ball has travelled to "take the heat off the vanish". If a vanish is convincing the need for that is not so pressing.

I can also do the wand spin vanish but I don't use it in public at the moment because I don't think I've got the timing perfect yet. This is a great vanish, but I think it needs 10 times the amount of practice of other vanishes to be convincing. The timing of the drop and hand positioning needs to be precise.

Ronnie,
That looks fantastic! Thanks for sharing.

Bob

Yes, thanks for posting Ronnie!

With respect to the Striking Vanish, this is often presented as an instantaneous vanish. That is where it falls down in my humble opinion because it lacks the time misdirection inherent with many other vanishes. If the left hand is closed after the catch and then opened slowly a few seconds later after a bit of finger wiggling and a few more taps with the wand on the closed hand then I think the vanish is improved.

Thanks for the kind comments.

On the Striking Vanish: I believe I read that Williamson doesn't even use it as a vanish of a ball with the wand. My biggest problem with it is that your doing exactly what someone would suspect you of doing (throwing the ball real quick from one hand to the other)

The wand spin is great, and really sells the other vanishes. I didn't understand that until I recently saw the clip of vernons routine. I recorded a clip of that but it is a little fuzzy.

later,
Ronnie

With respect to the striking vanish, if you tilt the left hand towards yourself, away from the audience, and execute the transfer, then closing the left hand, you can continue to tap with wand and they won't suspect its gone yet. This gives the opportunity to move the right hand well away, possibly above the left, all the time tapping with the wand like you are reducing the ball size with each tap accompanied by rubbing the ball away with the left fingers. The few seconds of business before the final revelation of the vanish will serve to blur the thoughts that your hands were ever close enough for the transfer.

Personally I think the basic false transfer is the most convinving, not because it is hardest to stpot, but because it is the most natural. The wand spin might be natural to, but only if the same gesture is used every time.

Which basic false transfers do you like? I had to work pretty hard to get one I like. Ronnie also worked to get his sleights to work for him.

Ronnie is too modest to mention this but he and I wrote a book many years ago that has full details on his vanish and several other working routines called "Sleightly Strange".

~ Dan