talkmagic.co.uk

I agree that this effect works really nicely done silently - and that's how I now do it.

Thanks Mandrake.

And thanks Jon, for the 'heads up'. Keep 'em comin...

i've been busy practising DOUBLE BACK and I'm having a bit of a problem with one element of the trick (and NO - not that bit...!!)... could anyone with this effect drop me a PM with some advice for how to do the bit that follows the two kings being turned FACE TOGETHER... knowwhatimean?!?

Still waiting for the instructions............


J

I have been performing Double Back for sometime now and have to agree that it is an excellent effect. It is extremely visual and the reactions are always great. It basically takes DDLT to new heights. I also think that the original handling is best because it does not have the discrepancy which exists in handling 2. I also found that this was an excellent effect to practice your EC (assuming that is what people are having difficulty with) as there is no real possibility of a flash. You are just counting four red backed cards. Have I missed something, is there another reason why people seem to be favouring handling 2?

is there another reason why people seem to be favouring handling 2?

Yup! It depends on how you get on with the EC and, in the opinion of many, it doesn't actually add a lot to the effect. The other reason, of course, is if you can't comfortably do the EC you can't use Handling no 1. Which is where I'm at! Handling no 2 is clean, relatively easy, and illustrates the effect beautifully so it's really a matter of which version you feel comfortable with. IMHO two methods means twice the value so Jon has produced something doubly gobsmacking!

I would just like to thank Jon publicly for sending me the instructions which were not included when the trick was purchased.

Thanks again.

S

It was the least I could do!

A number of people have commented on the use of the EC in Double Back. Personally, I can't see what the fuss is about. It fits in perfectly with the presentation and it is a natural count in the circumstances. I think magicians see it as a move but in the 000s of perfromances I have done, nobody has ever said, "Hang on a moment! You did a weird count!!" or suchlike.

If you cando the EC, then it will be of great benefit.

Jon

the_mog wrote:even though it comes in red bike it can be transferred to any make of cards you like (with a little thought of course.... i use tally-ho or bee decks so i needed it to work with those)

Thats nice to know. the Bikes we get here in SA have a different back, & using "rider backs" arouses suspision.

I agree that the EC fits nicely into the presentation. So if you can do an EC it makes sense to use it. I also think Double Back is one of the better effects to use to practice your EC as the spec. is unlilkely to link the transposition back to the count (even if the count is not done particularly well). As mentioned before, there is also no possibility of flash as you can only ever see four backs. This makes it a much better effect to use for practicing your EC than something like Twisting The Aces which has neither of the benefits mentioned above.

Horrible, horrible & horrible is my opinion of this trick at this moment in time. However the effect as described & seen http://www.murphysmagicsupplies.com/video/html/doubleback.html
is very good & I shall spend a bit of time working on this before I get it down or flog it in frustration.

1. The EC. I'm not to bothered about this but having to grab a finger break whilst doing it, well I'm bothered about that, although I'm getting there.

2. My big gripe. A DL from the bottom. Ouch, how hard is that. If I'd known this move was involved I wouldn't have bought the trick. Following the instruction is no good, I slide over the top card & the 2nd card slides slightly as well, & then getting the cards over & squared up, Nah. A normal DL no problem but from the bottom.
If anyone has an alternate move for this part I'd love to hear it.

3. Turning the cards so their both sandwhiched together. I certainly can't do that as the instructions say without flashing, however I can do this by holding the card in a different position. Not a pleasent move though & if anyone is at your side & watching too closely I can see this being spotted.

4. Showing the Kings in your hand. What is going on with these instructions? Again I can do this but in a totally easier & different way.

Lastly the instruction for the final reveal that your holding different cards to what you just flashed. Eh eh & eh!!! a, I can't follow what's going on & b, why even do it this way? Who holds cards as in figure 7?

If this trick is still being produced I think the instructions need revising considerably. Some simple things like what card is meant to be where as in fig 5, in case one gets lost, for example.

Re the easy set up, eh again. If you follow this to the letter your left with a face up deck with a pinky break, but the cards need to be face down? Just a simple mention of turning the cards face down as you bring them together, (whilst obvious to some) confused me for a bit.

Sorry if I seem pretty negative on this trick & yes I'm a newbie at all this card stuff but having spent the last 2 hours trying to sort out the handling given & then a further hour sorting out handling that I can use have left me a bit pee'd off.

By the way this trick is going for £9.99 (inc postage) on ebay.
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=6147474694&ssPageName=STRK:MEWN:IT

I wish these reviews could be more specific, it wasn't until page 2 that the EC was mentioned & there has been no mention until now of a bottom DL, nor was any mention of this made on any of the sites I looked at while investigating this site.

Maybe reviews should be moved to the restricted area where they can be more open?
Just as long as I'm given access.

Great trick, c*** (not the best) instructions.

There is a demo of this available somewhere which should help a lot when trying to understand the moves etc.

Have PM'd you!

Have not received any PM's although looking at the thread again I assume you mean Johnny Bravo not me?

Yes - JB rather than your goodself!