talkmagic.co.uk

I'd love to perform this, see if I can adapt it to my style, but where to start? Is the method in the Berglas book?

You are not the first to ask such a question.
The berglas book is out of print and very expensive- it is very useful to catch a glimpse into the mind of David Berglas (hence the name) and his magical thinking which is very insightful, the method is not 'the' method, it is 'a' method.
There are many many ways of doing it, each with differing degrees of 'cleanness'. If you are interested in adapting it to your own style, then create your own version with your own methodology- O have my own variation on the effect with which I am very pleased and it suits my style and presentation. That is the way to create 'magic' personally taylored effects and performing skill which every performer can only constantly humble and improve himself on. That is why the berglas effect is so good, because Berglas is a master performer and an origional thinker. If you are interested in understanding the making of legendery effects then get the book, if you are mereley interested in a method then don't, you won't understand the purpose book and you'll be throwing your money away.

What Sam said. there is an entire thread (or possibly even two!) devoted to this particular effect somewhere in the miscellaneous section I think...

Learn a memorised stack (e.g. Mnemonica)
Ask them to name any card
On an offbeat cut that card to sixth from the top and cull it under the deck
Ask them to name a number (make sure it's between six and 51)
Count through the cards
Show that their card is at their number
Easy!

I wouldn't bother, it's a poor effect anyway

Something really bugs me about ACAAN. Firstly, it involves counting, and despite people on L&L tapes hollering every number, counting is never much fun in real life magic. And then there's this awful smugness about dragging out the counting to a card which - let's face it - was always going to be their named selection. Then there's the fact that there's nothing really "impossible" about it - the card could have been in that position, so at best it's a coincidence.

Yet magicians seem to love it...!

the version i use is a card is mentally thought of and found in the deck by the punter, then the deck is mixed, they do not name the number out loud only in their head...and they merely say "stop" when we reach that number...

the card is then placed to one side...the rest of the deck can be shown (if needed)...

the card is turned over by the punter, and there is the card...

I half agree with Farlsborough. I have never understood what the big deal is about this trick. It is just a good card trick like any other good card trick.
Anyway that is the half I agree with. The half I don't agree with is that I still think it is a good trick. It is just no big deal. And there are ways of making into something interesting whether there is counting or not. A good showman could probably make this into something.
But then a good showman could make a lot of other card tricks into something. I just don't know why this should be singled out for special attention.

I agree with some of the comments above - with the wrong presentation an ACAAN can seem more like a "puzzle" than anything else.

mark lewis wrote:I half agree with Farlsborough. I have never understood what the big deal is about this trick. It is just a good card trick like any other good card trick.
Anyway that is the half I agree with. The half I don't agree with is that I still think it is a good trick. It is just no big deal. And there are ways of making into something interesting whether there is counting or not. A good showman could probably make this into something.
But then a good showman could make a lot of other card tricks into something. I just don't know why this should be singled out for special attention.

#Shocked tone# My god Mark, and there was little old me under impression that in a previos thread months ago you stated that all card magic received 'pity applause'.. thus surely implying there is no such thing as a good card trick!

Farlsborough wrote:I wouldn't bother, it's a poor effect anyway

Something really bugs me about ACAAN. Firstly, it involves counting, and despite people on L&L tapes hollering every number, counting is never much fun in real life magic. And then there's this awful smugness about dragging out the counting to a card which - let's face it - was always going to be their named selection. Then there's the fact that there's nothing really "impossible" about it - the card could have been in that position, so at best it's a coincidence.

Yet magicians seem to love it...!

I agree, I would never perform this effect because it involves numbers, and, to most people, numbers means maths. And maths isn't magic. Seriously, My friend was showing everyone possible this trick he had found online, that involved adding up numbers and predicting the final number. The spectator only had a free choice of the starting number in this line of maths, and they weren't impressed. Not one bit. He asked why, and I told him. They all knew (or guessed) that it was just a "maths trick", and that he was doing another "Ha ha! I'm so clever! I know your number!" trick. I cannot stand numbers!

I have no idea what our young Welshman is blabbering about. I have never stated that card magic receives pity applause. Just as well since I do rather a lot of card tricks myself.
No doubt the child is referring to someone else and has got a trifle mixed up.
Yes. I am afraid self rule for Wales is still a long way off. It is rather obvious why.

Yes. I am afraid self rule for Wales is still a long way off. It is rather obvious why.

Maybe because it has a population crisis- you cannot function in a society with only 16 people.
On the subject of acaan, I disagree that it is one of those mathematical puzzles, I tend to hate maths tricks like 'add one to your number and take of your origional number... I am sensing your number is... wait for it.. one?' 'no.' Acaan is either a coincidence or prediction effect but I'm not entireley sure which it is supposed to be. I have only performed my version once to some amateur magic hobbyists, it seems that only magicians or those who know what a revered effect it is are amazed by it, to the 'laypublic' it doesn't have the same impact. Nonetheless, it was still a puzzle to them rather than an actual piece of magic.

Good evening guys,

Just a question concerning ACAAN effect, I have been considering different ways of presenting it (I use the method of Matthew Johnson, which in my opinion is the greatest and cleanest one today, magician never touches the cards, and the deck is on the table before card and number are named).
Is it better to perform the ACAAN as itself, I mean asking any card and any number, and then the spectator counts the cards etc…, and it matches, OR do you think it may be better to do a presentation which uses a peek-pad, I mean the first spectator writes down his tought-of card, for example 7C (you peek) and then you give the pad to another spectator who writes his number, for example 47 (you peek). After that, you give a deck of cards to this last spectator, who deals the cards, WITHOUT revealing his number (he is counting silently in his head), and then stops at his number, and the card where he stopped is the 7C, it matches! Here, for the spectator's point of view, you never know the card, neither the number...

Would you advise me to do a “simple” presentation, when you know the card and the number, or does the use of a peek-device add a "plus" to the whole routine?

Thanks in advance for your answers

SamGurney wrote: it seems that only magicians or those who know what a revered effect it is are amazed by it, to the 'laypublic' it doesn't have the same impact

That's because the laypublic does not think like magicians and this is why people like Mark will be relatively indifferent towards it, I personally think, rightly so.

Whether you do a peek, a force or anything else, an acaan is just another way of predicting the spectators card but as they have a free choice of card in all effects what, from their point of view is so special about acaan.

It only appeals to magicians because it appeals to magicians guilt, those magicians without guilt will never be overly impressed with it as they do not see the point.

magicianDo wrote:Would you advise me to do a “simple” presentation, when you know the card and the number, or does the use of a peek-device add a "plus" to the whole routine? Thanks in advance for your answers

Hi MagicianDo.

Personally i would just keep the simple presentation. If the deck is tabled throught the routine, then it doesnt matter whether you know the identity of the card or number, (from the spectators point of view), as you cant manipulate the cards anyway.

It has been mentioned that this effect can come across as a puzzle. In actual fact ANY effect can be seen as a puzzle or a mere curiosity. It is up to us, as magicians, to make it something more, to make it magical

jim