talkmagic.co.uk

I have a nice simple routine in the works. It has a beginning, middle and no end yet.

Phase one: Predict one card (set it aside), spectator then cuts to that card's mate.

"That is a good warm-up... now let us DOUBLE things and I will predict TWO cards"

Phase two: Predict two cards, spectator freely deals and stops on two different cards which prove to be the mates.

I now want to double things again and predict four cards.

I need a trick that seems fair, allows the spectator to handle the cards and allows me to predict four cards and the spectator then finds their four mates.

Any ideas from your vast library? I am not looking for methods, of course. If you know a trick can you give me an idea of how it presents and where I might find it?

why not do a variation of a spectator cuts to the aces?

Sounds like you want to end with four of a kind.

I haven't seen it, but Dave Forrest's 4x4 DVD is all about four of a kind effects, and it might give you some ideas.

Pete

I am currently using a variation on Bannon's spectator cuts to the aces to have them cut to the mates.

So far in the routine I've had them cut to the card and then deal to the card.

I wonder what is the next logical (and exciting) method for having my spec select four cards that turn out to be mates of my predictions.

IAIN wrote:why not do a variation of a spectator cuts to the aces?

Just what I was thinking!

However, I have some concerns (possibly misguided). As I see the routine, it works like this:

One card chosen by performer. Spectator finds the mate.
Two cards chosen by performer. Spectator finds both mates.
Four cards chosen by the performer. Spectator finds four mates.

As I see it, the final phase is little different from doing the second phase twice, and so not really much of a climax (although I think it would still play well). I think to make for an exciting end to the routine, you might need to do something different.

Four cards chosen by spectator. Spectator finds four mates.
Four cards chosen by spectator. These match (or are mates for) four cards that have been in full view the whole time. (Or in the performer's wallet, whether or not in full view).

EDIT: I forgot my third option, but Pete's reminded me!

Have the four (or five) cards chosen have some significance. Cutting a four of a kind (especially aces), would, I think, look better than cutting to four 'indifferent' cards, even if they are mates of ones the performer has chosen.

hofzinser wrote:I wonder what is the next logical (and exciting) method for having my spec select four cards that turn out to be mates of my predictions.

The next steps would be to pick four cards from anywhere, or to think of four cards.

Part-Timer wrote:
Have the four (or five) cards chosen have some significance. Cutting a four of a kind (especially aces), would, I think, look better than cutting to four 'indifferent' cards, even if they are mates of ones the performer has chosen.

Or have the indifferent cards, turn them face down then get spectator to turn them over - 4 aces.

Voila!

Part-Timer wrote:Spectator finds four mates.
Four cards chosen by spectator. These match (or are mates for) four cards that have been in full view the whole time. (Or in the performer's wallet, whether or not in full view).

I do need something else to make it a real climax. I've considered "magi in trouble" and magically changing the predictions to match the selections but it breaks from the theme too much. It also makes the trick about my ability when I want the climax to be more about the spectator.

In phase one my prediction is face down, spec cuts to a card, I turn their card up then show the prediction is the mate.

In phase two I show my predictions face up, the spec deals to two different cards and they are revealed as matching the open predictions.

What is a good power punch to finish this routine?

A_n_t wrote:Or have the indifferent cards, turn them face down then get spectator to turn them over - 4 aces.

Voila!

I've considered this as a possible kicker... I predict four cards, the mates are found and I then make them into aces.

I've considered predicting three cards and having the spectator select one and then all four prove to be four-of-a-kind but this seems like a step backwards in the build-up.

I should mention the spectator shuffles the deck before each phase. Method-wise not a biggie but it impacts their perception. The cards are in their hands when they cut and when they deal. I want to keep the deck in their hands for the climax.

A thought-of card is something to consider. I've yet to find a trick for thought of cards that will appear as fair as my first two phases (which are practically self-working).

hofzinser wrote:What is a good power punch to finish this routine?

"This time, I am going to choose four cards. However, I am only going to think of them, and I want you to select four cards from anywhere in the pack."

The spectator picks them, or perhaps even just names them.

"Amazing, you have chosen the exact four cards I was thinking of."

The performer acts like it's the end of the trick. The spectator objects, of course, as the performer could have said anything and just agreed with the spectator. The performer says, "I thought you might not believe me," and produces the four cards from his wallet.

How about: The spectator picks four cards, face down. The performer looks at them, and then says that the spectator has got it right (as above). The kicker is that the four cards the performer produces from his wallet are the four aces, and the spectator has pulled them from the deck.

Also, thinking about it further, who says that dealing to a card is more random than cutting to one? Taking my 'magician hat' off, I think they are similar, and the performer can paint it how he likes:

First phase: The performer deals the cards onto the table and the spectator asks him to stop. The chosen card is the mate of the prediction.

Second phase: "But of course, I was handling the cards, and you might think I was cheating. This time, I will choose two predictions, and you deal down through the cards."

Third phase:

"Of course, I might have subtly influenced you to stop at those two cards. This time, I won't go near you. Cut the deck into four piles, and don't even look at me when doing so. Nothing could be fairer than that!"

I should shut up; I am really not a card man.

A tip....

In future when devising an effect, Start at the end, and work backwards.
Often the methods sugest themselves much better this way.

as an example..

you want to end up in the situation that you and your spectator have chosen 4 pairs of cards.

now, one possible method that sugests it's self straight away is a one ahead.
if you chose to use teh one ahead principle, you know that you have to force one of the cards.

you also know that you need to know the identity of the other 3.

so, do you peek, just look at them, or use marked cards?

which ever method you chose to obtain this information, governs the methods in which the cards are handled, and influences the way that the effect starts.

Harry Lorayne's "Foursome"...

They choose a card...you have 4 attempts at predicting it...four cards are displayed face up and they are asked if there card is amongst them...you turn the four cards facedown on the table...

You correctly locate their card...the other three predictions have transformed into the mates.

Lenoir wrote:Harry Lorayne's "Foursome"...

They choose a card...you have 4 attempts at predicting it...four cards are displayed face up and they are asked if there card is amongst them...you turn the four cards facedown on the table...

You correctly locate their card...the other three predictions have transformed into the mates.

Where can i find this one?

It was originally published in Decksterity by Lorayne, and now can be found in his Classic Collection Volume One.

Michael Vincent reworked the effect so that two cards are picked and two sets of four are located...
That was called 4play with 4some.

Both are completely impromtu and done from a shuffled deck. In fact, it's one of those effects that can even be done with those awful packs of cards everyone but magicians own, so it really is brilliant. One of my favourite card effects...

I performed this to our very own Mark Waddington a few months back...even he seemed surprised when the three indifferent cards turned out to match his...