talkmagic.co.uk

I've not performed this for many years. There are only three in the UK version that need any fishing and I don't think they came up that often.

Perhaps I should dust this off again

Ian

I thought they all needed fishing in that you always have to suggest some letters. Maybe I misunderstand!

The second post explained how to use a branching anagram table. If you don't have experience with this sort of effect, you might want to give it a miss!

You need to work on the presentation so that the method (which can seem a tad transparent at certain times) is masked. Max Maven has a lot on this.

Ian

Lady of Mystery has got a nice routine using Monopoly cards in her new book.

IanKendall wrote:The second post explained how to use a branching anagram table. If you don't have experience with this sort of effect, you might want to give it a miss!

You need to work on the presentation so that the method (which can seem a tad transparent at certain times) is masked. Max Maven has a lot on this.

Ian

Sure, but I was thinking that I'm happy to spend lots of hours learning it if I have an idea how it plays out but at the moment I don't understand how it plays out. Though am hugely impressed by the generosity of presenting something that has clearly taken a lot of time and effort. Just can't know how it plays out without dedicating hours to learning it. Catch 22.

Dirty Davey wrote:Lady of Mystery has got a nice routine using Monopoly cards in her new book.

Will check that out. Big time! There is something beautiful about Monopoly property cards. People kind of feel like they're quite a personal thing. Which is an illusion of course, as Monopoly is available in so many different editions around the world. I was the same, had no idea it's not even a British game until I looked it up somewhere.

Myself and Reverend Tristan have a routine involving monopoly cards.

Kinda an envelope/ootw type effect.

Turns out it was similar (in method) to another published routine by a chap called Marvoyan.

Very nice to use in close up and I have a few times, but like I say, as Marvoyan got there first and the guy is not easy to track down, we decided not to release. But I can point you in the direction of his book if you wish.

E x

Harris wrote:Myself and Reverend Tristan have a routine involving monopoly cards.

Kinda an envelope/ootw type effect.

Turns out it was similar (in method) to another published routine by a chap called Marvoyan.

Very nice to use in close up and I have a few times, but like I say, as Marvoyan got there first and the guy is not easy to track down, we decided not to release. But I can point you in the direction of his book if you wish.

E x

Please do point me in the direction of the book!

OH MY GOD!!!!!

IanKendall wrote:The second post explained how to use a branching anagram table. If you don't have experience with this sort of effect, you might want to give it a miss!

You need to work on the presentation so that the method (which can seem a tad transparent at certain times) is masked. Max Maven has a lot on this.

Ian

It's so weird. I generally think I'm a pretty smart guy. But when I first read your posts, Ian, I just didn't get it. It was only tonight when I printed out this entire thread and read it through with a lady friend in the pub that I started to get it. Even then I still thought it was weak as I felt confused about the YESs and the NOs, so kind of imagined you'd get too many NOs before you got a YES.

We went through it a few times and found that most of the time we'd get at most one NO... and even then there'd be so many YESs that the NOs wouldn't really seem important. It's like: "Yes! Yes again! Oh my god, that letter is in there too! No, that letter isn't." And then of course you usually name the word. In my head I'd imagined it'd be: "No. No. No. Yes, that letter is in there..."

Within two hours of this realisation, my friend and I had worked out a mnemonic system to memorise the entire table (the UK version), which also surprised me as although I've studied mnemonics a fair bit, I found this whole thing baffling when I first read it through.

Ian, THANK YOU. You're my hero.

(Am PMing this to you in case you don't read it on the website.)

Back to the original post, where you asked for info about the monopoly pieces, it seems to me that maybe you ought to consider that most adults don't play monopoly (maybe it's different in England). Therefore, they are most likely to remember the way the pieces were shaped during their childhood. So maybe you would do better to look for monopoly sets from 20-40 years ago. You could even say these came from an old monopoly set you found in your ancient toy storage or something, and let the nostalgy drip through.

I agree with you 100%, DUP, though to my knowledge the style of the pieces hasn't changed much. Possibly the construction has changed though.