talkmagic.co.uk

A comment about which cards spectators are likely to think of spurred this post, in which I wanted to include a few ideas/thoughts/references for people interested in turning offhand questions into miracles.

First off, for anyone who doesn't own it, I strongly recommend Simon Lovell's "Simon Says" and "Son of Simon Says." STRONGLY. In "Son of Simon Says," he has explored this rather thoroughly in an effect called "The Frisk of the Risk."

One thing that's worth noting is that there certainly appear to be demographic differences, based on geography and gender, certainly, but also presumably just about anything you might think of that distinguishes groups of people (e.g. age). Simon noted that in the United States, people from the east coast generally select clubs, and people from the west coast generally select hearts. I've actually found this to be true (counter-intuitively; I'd have thought clubs would be a much less popular choice than it actually is).

Because a great deal of Talk Magic members are from countries other than mine, I'd advise you to take note of the possibility (probability) that what is true in the USA is not true in England, and what's true in one part of England may not be true in another part. One of the best ways to increase your hit percentage is by simply asking as many people as you can to name a card at random, and taking note not only of what card they say, but the characteristics of the people you ask. Create an ongoing mental database, and see what groups are most predictable. For example, you might find that the most popular card selected is the ace of spades, at about 30%, but you might also find that women under 30 pick the queen of diamonds 70% of the time; thus, a choice (QD) that's not the most popular overall might be a HUGE favorite with a particular demographic group.

In the United States, I've noticed that women tend to pick red cards, and men tend to pick black cards. I've also noticed that when it comes to number cards, women tend to pick even numbered cards, and men tend to pick odd numbered cards.

Two ideas with respect improving your odds. The first is something that probably every great mentalist does, but I associate most closely with Richard Osterlind and Banachek. The idea is to make the effect EASIER while (and this is the truly diabolical part) seeming to make it HARDER! Example: I'd like you to name one of the 52 cards, but please don't select an ace or a face card...everybody chooses those, and it makes this experiment too easy. You've reduced the number of possibilities by about 30%, from 52 to 40; at the same time, your audience believes that you've made it HARDER by eliminating common choices. Later, of course, the spectator will swear (particularly with a small (and false)) suggestion that he could have chosen ANY card.

Another thing you can do to segregate the 40 number cards from the aces &/or faces (again, no one mentalist or magician, to my knowledge, has a patent on this, but I fell in love with the way John Gustaferro presented it on his Brainstorm DVDs (also highly recommended)): The idea is that by phrasing a question in the negative, you take credit for both hits AND misses. Example: I'd like you to think of any of the 52 cards. You're not thinking of a face card are you? If the answer is "No," then very consistently..."No, I didn't think so." If the answer is "Yes," then it's "Yeah, I thought so..."

Either way, you're down to 1 in 40 or 1 in 12, and you don't seem to have missed, regardless.

Last thought, also from Lovell (his thoughts on this particular idea, and The Frisk of the Risk, are worth the price of the book alone. Also a heck of a nice guy; I wish he were American!) -- by phrasing the selection innocuously (e.g. "I'm taking a sort of a survey...") you can take all the heat off of it...so if you have one card rolled up and stashed in your left nostril, and they name it, you have a miracle; if they don't name it, you thank them for helping you out with your survey.


It was a small comment in the other thread, but the possibilities here are huge and worth considering. An inordinate percentage of the time, what happens very convincingly in the spectator's mind is this -- they named any card they wanted, and you proved that it was exactly the card you knew they'd name. That's powerful.

Excellent stuff. I'll put a link to this thread in the one on naked mentalism.

thanks for that - an interesting post.

That's very useful stuff.

This is the reason why I carry a Queen Of Hearts and a Seven of Spades in my wallet. Wonderful!

The Devil's Picturebook has a nice section on this area. Derren Brown manages to predict the chosen card of a another magician whilst talking about the 'forces' involved.

His magician friend chooses a quite obscure card which Derren correctly predicts.

Great stuff.

I constantly use the technique of framing questions in the negative...

I first realized how this technique could be used during my first attempt at muscle reading. My first try at muscle reading was with my father, using a technique found within 13 Steps... I was trying to figure out which corner of the room he was thinking of.

I failed, so I thought I could get close by eliminating the corners of the room that I was SURE ( ) he wasn't thinking of, one by one.

So I pointed to the corner on my left, and asked, as I usually would, "That's not the corner you're thinking of, is it?"

My dad shat himself.

PS. I haven't tried muscle reading since. Though Hellstromism IS available at www.trickshop.com in ebook format for a mere $7...