talkmagic.co.uk

So, I do used a marked deck in a couple of routines, and instead of spending more for someone else to mark them for me, I do the marking myself. I find it's better this way as I know my own markings strait away then. My issue though is that I love my tally-ho's, I think that the circle backs in red are beautiful, however, because of the quite simple back design, I'm having trouble finding a way of marking them myself that is both easy to read but well enough hidden. Otherwise I'm stuck to using your bog standard bikes.

If anyone else has over come this problem then please let me know, either that, or if you've read about this somewhere, please point me in that direction.

Just a final note, the way I mark the cards is by using a small knife to scratch away the marks, I'm not a fan of using ink.

Thanks.

Can't help you with working out your own marking system, but do recommend reading hidden in plain sight. It gives marking systems for bees and bikes, but may give some inspiration for tally-ho decks. It contains general good advice on using marked decks.

I am a little shocked. How long have you truly spent studying the back of Tally-Ho cards?

There is a routine I do that uses a marked deck, but there is no marked deck on the market that I can see, even with the bifocals. So I just used a black marker and wrote the number of each card on the back. I left one back unmarked, so the deck looks normal.

I have always found it easy to use the deck and prevent anyone seeing the big black numbers.

Count down the sides of a circle back Tally. You'll find an interesting and useful number.

I've studied them a fair bit, and have marked a deck of two trying out some different things, but I'm just kind of trying to refine it into a more perfect marking system.

As for Duplicity's comment, thanks, but maybe next time, not bother. Sorry, that's to your first comment.

That's interesting Tonyb, although I wouldn't go for that myself, it must be fun playing around with hiding such large numbers. I wouldn't be able to do that myself though. I normally just mark my decks, and use a marked deck for everything, even if the effect does not require a marked deck, rather than switching, it just means less stuff to carry. Also, it can be useful if you happen to just glance and notice the back of a selected card but for some reason, loose the break or something along those lines, you can still carry on.

If you were to stop random people on the street and asked them what the design of a particular major brand of playing cards looks like, most would either not have a clue or a general mental image. Very few would be able to provide accurate details.

Or at least that's my speculation. I've never actually done what I just claimed as fact.

This is what I did do, however. I went with the above assumption and also considered that most laymen are used to seeing copyright and trademark information slathered over any and every thing. I came up with my own "code" that resulted in a string of numbers. As I continue to explain, you'll wonder why I didn't use letters since they would be less suspicious. And you would be right. I tried using letters but could never comfortably get over the mental hurdle of my brain wanting to make actual words out of scrambled letters line up in secession. At the very least your code will tell you the card that it is. You would need to add filler numbers/letters to it. If you are interested in a marked stacked deck then you use the filler spots as additional values. Now you would be able to know the card itself, the cards before and after it and the top and bottom cards without any calculations. With calculation you would know the exact location of any given card and/or vice versa. Once you come up with your values you simply add the copyright logo in front of it and add it to the white border. I recommend printing it in the same color as the dominant color of the back design.

An additional bonus is that it comes very close to passing the riffle test so long as your alignment is accurate from card to card.

I know that you said that you rather take away than add to so that idea may not appeal to you. Have you tried Boris Wild's system? The concept can be used on brands other than Bicycle.

That does sound interesting, you almost sounds like you're not talking about a marked deck anymore and memorized deck. I'm really not too keen on the idea of adding though, especially when it's a completly new addition to the design, it is interesting, and I'd like to see something like this in use.

I've not seen the Boris Wild stuff though, although I have been tempted to get it a few times in the past. The reason being is that I had my system and it works well for me, so I saw no reason to fork out money. However, I really do want to move away from bikes completely now and keep using tally-hos for everything, so it might come to that.

But, interesting idea never the less.

hds02115 wrote:However, I really do want to move away from bikes completely now and keep using tally-hos for everything, so it might come to that.

May I ask why you want to move away from Bikes? If you have a good system for Bikes, why move? I personally use Boris Wilde. To you, as a magician, Bikes might be common place and perhaps even a bit boring. But who are you performing for? Yourself or the spectator? The spec couldn't give a hoot if you're using Bikes or Tally Ho's. They don't know the difference and they don't care.

If it ain't broke, why fix it? Keep it simple. Etc etc.

Yeah, I know that to your average spectator, they wouldn't know the difference, and especially in the uk where you can't really even buy bikes in a normal shop. However, I'm not wanting to ditch the bikes for tally-ho for the spectators benefit, more for mine. I like that tally-hos are a little stiffer and thicker, I think they last longer and keep their quality longer too. This is why I like them. I know in the end it's not going to make a big difference, but we all have our preferances.

themagicwand wrote: I personally use Boris Wilde.

When you lectured in Liverpool and done your effect using a marked card on me I had a (rather quick) glance at the back of my card and didn't see the mark, had you marked them yourself using that system?

hds02115 wrote:That does sound interesting, you almost sounds like you're not talking about a marked deck anymore and memorized deck. I'm really not too keen on the idea of adding though, especially when it's a completly new addition to the design, it is interesting, and I'd like to see something like this in use.

I moved from a marked deck to a stack YONKS ago ... best thing I ever did imo.

I like that tally-hos are a little stiffer and thicker

I find that with Aviators, so use them for my stack ... even though they (again, persoanl opinion) look like a "found in a pub" deck

Dan

Yeah aviators are a little generitc. I know it's all the same for spectators, but that doesn't mean we have to look at something we're not into all the time. If I could use them for everything, I would love to use stud cards, but they're out of print now and so aren't your usual £2 odd per deck.

Why not use the Ted Lesley system?
You read the name s direct as JD 2S

Don't use Letterset.
Get the stuff that TL used. It is permanent

I used to buy it from Russell Hall--Magick Enterprises, Sheffield.

Allen Tipton