talkmagic.co.uk

Nikodemus - you are right - I should let the specs always count the cards. As a beginner - this was one aspect I was worried about - however, a year or so has passed since I bought this, and I think that from now on I'll let the specs count. I did at Christmas, and got fantastic results!

I don’t want to tip the method, but reading your post I would say you are now more than able to make your mind up about making the decision if this effect is for you or not. As for your final questions – (A) If maths is required for this effect, then it doesn’t need a crib sheet – however, I’m not saying maths comes into it. I’ve performed this effect and not had to ‘calculate’ anything. (B) I can’t really talk about the move (if this effect uses a move) but it is very simple. So simple and obvious, I can't believe it works - but it does - every time! However, maybe this effect doesn't have a move. I’ve performed this effect where I haven’t had to make a move!

Sounds complicated?! – Honestly it’s not. Click on that “Checkout” button and soon all will be revealed! The shear impossibility of the outcome makes this a very powerful effect – well worth the money!

I'm going to PM you to continue this in private.

For those who are interested in this type of effect, I believe there is somethinga called Impossible 1 in 52 by Kozuch. This is almost identical except the 'move' (if there is one!) is performed automatically by a gimmick. I have posted a seperate review request for this.

Ther are also MANY other variations of varying degrees of subtlety & impromptu-ness.
Berglas seems to be the most famous.

Here is my take on 'The Grail'...

I will admit I only bought it because I am a 'card at any number' freak, and am fascinated by approaches/methods for this kind of effect.

I think 'The Grail' is very, very clever. It combines a couple of ideas very neatly indeed. However, I am not quite as sold on it as some others in this thread.

First, I don't really agree that this is the 'ACAAN' effect for the real world, strolling, etc, any more or less than other versions of the effect that I am familiar with. You still have a deck that can't be shuffled and you still have to reset it. Resetting is a bit easier than some 'ACAAN' effects, but still needs to be done.

Secondly, I don't think 'the move' is quite as invisible or easy as has been suggested. It's not difficult, certainly, but you do need to practice it in order for it to be smooth and natural.

Thirdly, it's not 'ANY card at any number' but 'SPECIFIC card at any number'. However, this is not necessarily a bad thing as this makes the effect clearly an example of your own predictive powers, whereas 'Any Card...' effects have to be presented carefully to seem like more than mere coincidence.

Finally, you would have to be wary of going on to use the deck for other effects, depending on their nature. Not a big deal, but there is a discrepancy that you wouldn't want showing itself.

Lest any of this be taken as unduly critical, let me also say that 'The Grail' has one HUGE advantage over other 'ACAAN' tricks, which is the fact that you have about a 1 in 6 (1 in 3 with the tiniest bit of thought) chance of needing to do no handling of the deck whatsoever. A 30% shot of the effect being so indisputably clean is a major selling point.

So while I still prefer the Barrie Richardson effect and John Born's sublime 'Meant To Be' version, this is a very, very good solution to the 'card at any number' plot, especially if you don't want to have to memorise a deck.

PS: But you really should learn to memorise a deck anyway, it's not hard.

PPS: Sorry if this suggestion is too obvious for words, but if you are performing this effect I think you should remove the red-backed prediction card from a full red deck, not just have it already separated.

i have some question about this effect..
1) can spectators fully examine the deck? face n back
2) do i need a table?

Answers:

1) Spectators could examine the deck front and back and there's probably less than a 1% chance that they would notice the tiny discrepancy. There are no DF or double backed cards if that's what you're worried about.

2) A table would be best because cards are going to be dealt down in order to count to the spectator's chosen number. Obviously they could just count in their hands.

Misterblack, judt a minor OT quickie, is the Barrie Richardson effect the same as the one taught by Daniel Garcia? If so it's an excellent impromtu solution to the plot in my opinion.

I made a Menetekle deck according to the specs by Jon Racerbaumer out of an old issue of Kabbala. The effect is called Think as I Think. Show two decks, one red and one blue. Spread through the blue deck and take out your prediction and place it face down on the table. Take the red deck and spread the cards face up to show they are different. You can overhand shuffle the cards and have them touch the back of a card as you spread them facedown. Cut to the card they touched, take it from the top of the deck and use it to scoop up the tabled blue back card. Now turn them both face up on top of the deck. Take the top card (KH) from the top and set it aside, the other face up card is a KH as well. drop it on the table next to the other KH and ribbon spread the red deck to show no other face up cards. Turn the two KHs over to show one red and one blue. Can be repeated again and again for the same people and the cards are different. No slieghts, moves, special setup or memorizing cards. If you would like to know more PM me for details. I get excellent reaction with this and when I'm done I put the red deck up and use the blue deck for other effects.
Cheers
Al

bronz wrote:Misterblack, judt a minor OT quickie, is the Barrie Richardson effect the same as the one taught by Daniel Garcia? If so it's an excellent impromtu solution to the plot in my opinion.

Hi bronz,

I don't know the Daniel Garcia effect, but the Barrie Richardson effect I mentioned is not imprompu as it uses a memorised deck. I have a feeling BR has published an impromptu method, though.

Cheers.

I forgot that I had this in my instruction files and decided to give it a closer look. While this is an interesting and easy effect ot perform, it should be the last card effect in your routine. It is easier to do a deck switch after you have been using a non gaffed deck. My problem with it is, I've been a printer since 1963 and I can spot anything out of the ordinary. Its a curse to pick up a magazine and look for errors and finding them. Lets say the prediction card is the King of Diamonds and the card at the number given is also the King of Diamonds, that truely is a miracle but, with the two cards together,well if you own it then you must look and see. Granted the spectator probably won't notice but, I did and it kind of spoils it for me. I'm looking for another solution, maybe Jacks or Queens. Let me know if you see what I am talking about and your thoughts on it.
Best
Al

Well my first post on this forum, and I thought there would be none better than to revive this post on Mike Rose's "The Grail" given that it is the latest card effect in my arsenal.

I can not stress enough how brilliant an effect this is. It is incredibly clean and really hits the spectator hard, especially the skeptical ones! I would argue that this effect is actually a good opener (if you can follow it with other strong effects!) because the deck can easily be used for virtually any other card trick you likely perform - that is how "regular" your deck will be left. It will really take a sharp eye and a dose of bad luck for you to get caught!

The only cons if I had to find them is that you do not actually finish cleanly, and getting use to applying the "thinking" required will take some practice for it to come quickly, particularly if your not used to mentalism effects of this kind. But nonetheless, these haven't proved problems for me and this trick is currently serving me very, very well. Highly Recommended =)

I've seen videos of this and Knock Em Dead: how do they compare in terms of impact on spectator alone, i.e. which seems most impossible?

Hello everyone,

just bought The Grail and unlike many others, I don't think this trick is as great as one might suspect. Am I really the only one?

The "secret" is actually the first thing that came to my mind when I first saw the performance of the trick. The deck is definitely not examinable! (in spite of what is said here on this review), the trick can't be done twice to the same audience, and the "easy" move looks very obvious to the sceptical spectator, especially when he/she calls out the number 1 or 52.

It's true that it leaves you quite clean (unlike Knock em Dead) which is nice, but the deck can't be shuffled in advance.
With the time spent on practising the move and the memory work that needs to be done, you could as well memorize a whole deck which is, in my opinion, far more useful.

Also, I don't really see why people call it a "gaffed deck"...

Greetz

ps: I'm not saying it's a bad trick! Just saying it's not as great as the reviews sometimes put forward.

jv123 wrote:Hello everyone,

just bought The Grail and unlike many others, I don't think this trick is as great as one might suspect. Am I really the only one?

The "secret" is actually the first thing that came to my mind when I first saw the performance of the trick. The deck is definitely not examinable! (in spite of what is said here on this review), the trick can't be done twice to the same audience, and the "easy" move looks very obvious to the sceptical spectator, especially when he/she calls out the number 1 or 52.

It's true that it leaves you quite clean (unlike Knock em Dead) which is nice, but the deck can't be shuffled in advance.
With the time spent on practising the move and the memory work that needs to be done, you could as well memorize a whole deck which is, in my opinion, far more useful.

Also, I don't really see why people call it a "gaffed deck"...

Greetz

ps: I'm not saying it's a bad trick! Just saying it's not as great as the reviews sometimes put forward.

The deck can be examined after the trick. Ofcourse you can't give the deck away and say 'here, study this for an hour'. But you can give it out let them see al the faces and take it back.

The deck can be shuffled in advance by the magician. Spectators can't shuffle the cards but there are a million tricks in which the spectator isn't allowed to shuffle.

the 1 and 52 bit. Well that's why you have to say, choose a number between 1 and 52.

The trick can be done twice for the same people, you just have to change your prediction card. I got myself 26 different predictions, which all came in a deck you can buy in almost every magic store.

And also there is a way to perform it, that I came up with, where you use TOTALLY normal deck(nothing of what you need to original trick) and instead of having card as a prediction you just write it down on a piece of paper.

I wonderd if anyone has any more thoughts on the move, if and when required,

Thought about putting a Joker at each end of the pack as an excuse to remove them on sight whilst removing from the pack and doing the neccessary