talkmagic.co.uk

My main question is, what do you guys think of using self working card tricks - ie using tricks which involve maths with the cards

(I make reference to this thread - http://talkmagic.co.uk/ftopic19848.php)

I mean sure its a good trick, but is is a 'real magic trick' or is it just clever maths which the spectator just cant work out?

My personal view is that they are not 'real' magic, as no skill is involved, its just a self working math based method - what you guys think?

Magical_Trevor wrote:My main question is, what do you guys think of using self working card tricks - ie using tricks which involve maths with the cards

(I make reference to this thread - http://talkmagic.co.uk/ftopic19848.php)

I mean sure its a good trick, but is is a 'real magic trick' or is it just clever maths which the spectator just cant work out?

My personal view is that they are not 'real' magic, as no skill is involved, its just a self working math based method - what you guys think?

I think you've missed the point completely

I'm sure it's just down to personal preference, really; myself....well, these type of effects just leave me totally cold, and bore the socks off me

To me, they simply seem lacking in any real impact, and I'd rather watch paint dry than be subjected to this kind of tedium

Self working tricks do have their place in magic. As far as I am concerned, how good an effect is has nothing to do with the skill required to preform it, but the reaction that it gets from the spectators.

For example, you could quite easily come up with a trick that uses every sleight that you know, but just does not have the impact on the audience that a self worker has.

There are a few self workers (Tricks that require no slight more difficult than a magicians force and probably base themselves on some mathamatical principle) that I can think of offhand that I rate very highly. But what really comes to mind is the Paul Harris effect 'Overkill' it can be found in one of the Art of Astonishment books, and is one of my favorite pieces of magic, and it always gets fantastic reactions.

Choose your magic more on the merit of the effect and not so much on the method.

robstanley1 wrote:I'm sure it's just down to personal preference, really; myself....well, these type of effects just leave me totally cold, and bore the socks off me

To me, they simply seem lacking in any real impact, and I'd rather watch paint dry than be subjected to this kind of tedium

Well, if you're just going to count out piles of cards, I agree, but there's a world of effects with ingenious principles buried deep at the heart of the tricks that, with decent presentation, produce very strong revelations indeed.

Tomo wrote:

robstanley1 wrote:I'm sure it's just down to personal preference, really; myself....well, these type of effects just leave me totally cold, and bore the socks off me

To me, they simply seem lacking in any real impact, and I'd rather watch paint dry than be subjected to this kind of tedium

Well, if you're just going to count out piles of cards, I agree, but there's a world of effects with ingenious principles buried deep at the heart of the tricks that, with decent presentation, produce very strong revelations indeed.

Absolutely agree Tomo; I kinda' suspected the OP was talking about the mathematical self-workers that generally involved explicit counting or spelling with stacks etc.

Thinking about it though, I s'pose he could have equally been referring to any effect with a mathematical principle, in which case - again - it all depends upon the actual presentation, rather than the working

By twisted definition, a self working card trick would be where you just chuck the deck on a table then go and join the specs while the cards do the show all by themselves. If the mathematic angle is obvious then it's a puzzle or a curiosity at best but if that same principle is well covered by patter, story, direction etc then it would still, IMHO, be magic.

Mandrake wrote:By twisted definition, a self working card trick would be where you just chuck the deck on a table then go and join the specs while the cards do the show all by themselves.

Don't give me ideas

robstanley1 wrote:I'm sure it's just down to personal preference, really; myself....well, these type of effects just leave me totally cold, and bore the socks off me

To me, they simply seem lacking in any real impact, and I'd rather watch paint dry than be subjected to this kind of tedium

I agree. However, there are some good self-working tricks out there and one of my favourites is a trick called Gemini Twins (More Self-working Card Tricks by Karl Fulves). Truly self-working and so very simple to perform but always goes down well with the spectator.

thing is though, if you apply some creative thought to self-workers and step away from the cards as the "objects"..there's so many great effects out there...the use of photos, small gemstones, all kindsa stuff...

R.Shane has a book which is all pretty much self-working, and its emmense!...no, i wont provide a link or tell you the name though...i have a sore head...

i was reading about about testing psychic abilities recently, and one of the testers said "out of everything i saw today..the one thing that if someone had said to me - yes, i have psychic powers, here's the proof - i would of believed them..."

he was talking about OOTW... which is pretty much, a self-worker...

I'm finding self working card tricks brilliant for a beginner to get to grips with at the moment. I'm trying the card trick rfom The Secrets of Alkazar called "Magic Touch" and it's other variations on the same trick.

I may try it out on some work collegues for a tester....

THE BEST Self Working Effect I know is by Richard Sanders. It is a Spectator Finds The Aces effect, where the spectators cut and deal all of the cards themselves and do everything by themselves. The magician never touches the cards, but the spectators impossibly find The Four Aces!

It can be found on the Sankey/Sanders Sessions DVD set, and my review of it is here: http://www.talkmagic.co.uk/ftopic19123.php

The Spectator doesn't know how it was done. So why would it matter how you did it?

I would much rather do a self worker than a difficult sleight of hand trick if the self-worker gets a great reaction, IE:OOTW

Often (not always, but often) self-working tricks rely on dealing procedures, reverse-faros, duck-and-deals and other such devices that just make no sense!

I think this is boring for spectators (I know it's boring when I watch a trick like this), and when the method essentially is the effect the spectator can't really help but know how it was done. It's done automatically by the tedious procedure they went through.

These are the tricks that give self-workers a bad name, and it's a shame because there's some excellent ones out there (like Overkill and OotW, already mentioned) but many are just a naked principle and tragically unmagical!

(OotW skates the edge of illogical dealing procedures imo, with it's indicators, and the swap. That's why I use Galaxy - just as self-working, but even better hidden)

robstanley1 wrote:I'm sure it's just down to personal preference, really; myself....well, these type of effects just leave me totally cold, and bore the socks off me

Here here!

I personally like effects where there is plenty of sleights involved, it makes it more fun and challenging for me.