talkmagic.co.uk

I am desperatly looking for a "semi-false/false" shuffle, which a spectator is able to do on a deck of cards handed to him, which does not change the order of the cards in the deck, though a cut at this point wouldn't be the problem.

Actually the order does not need to be fully preserved on the whole deck, there are just three cards in sequence somewhere in the deck which should not fall appart.

So I wonder if there is a method in which a spectator can do a false or semi-real shuffle on a deck without disturbing the three or cards.

The only next best thing, that I could come up with on my own, was that the spectator would do a series of cuts on the deck until satisfied, but that poses the problem of being to obvious, considered the audience knows the basics of handling cards.

If it helps, the exact position of the pack of the three cards is not known to the performer, nor the spectator, what can be assumed is, that for this effect, they would probably tend to accumulate somewhere around the middle of the deck, though this could also be varied to the lower or upper half of the deck.

The idea behind the effect, is of two cards being forced, so essentially I am not bound to a specific force, it's just the only one I that I could know/recall at this point.

Sure, I could do a false shuffle on the deck before handing it out to the spectator, but I like the astonishment created, by "in your hands" kinda stuff. This doesn't exclude false-shuffeling the deck myself first, but it just makes up for the rest of the intended effect.

Tak

Bring cards to the top as you "loose them into the deck", palm the three cards, allow the spec to shuffle to their hearts content, and put the three cards back on top?

Le Petit Bateleur wrote:Bring cards to the top as you "loose them into the deck", palm the three cards, allow the spec to shuffle to their hearts content, and put the three cards back on top?

Palming ain't possible for three reasons, though it makes perfectly sense.

1. and most embarrassing, I am not able to palm cards that it looks natural nor can I hold it in a way that it, won't be seen unless I bend it beyond whats good for the cards. I just haven't invested time in this yet. Sounds stupid, but sleights aren't one of my strength's. (Let's say I am clumsy, when it comes to dexterity, while I managed some basic handling of some very rudimentary sleights, I still have huge problems doing an ordinary riffle shuffle and I don't know why.)

Though the two more interesting objections against palming in this scenario are

2. I don't want to touch the any of the deck after I handed it to the spectator, for this is a prediction effect.

3. One of the three cards is at the moment at least genuinely choosen by the spectator and just acts as a tool, which marks the predicted cards later.

Hope you can see, how cheap the method is I am currently applying.

You could identify the three cards by using short, long* and wide cards. It would not take great skill to bring these together after a thorough and genuine shuffle.

You could also use breather crimps.

Or a stripper deck.

* Long cards are hard to find. I've had a card man cut down decks for me so that regular cards are long and wide. These can then be further trimmed to make long and wide cards.

T.

PS. And having read your reply properly after posting... I can see that you don't want to handle the deck at all after the shuffle. Hopefully the above will help someone else.

Do the shuffle in two halves. You pass the half that doesn't have the three cards in to the spec. They shuffle, while you false shuffle your half. Then you either packet switch and hand them the same half to be shuffled, or with the three cards you need to control at the top, catch a break under them and transfer them to the half they shuffled in the process of handing them your deck. You ought to be able to control the cards to how you want them in your second bit of false shuffling.

Mr Grue's is a fantastic suggestion!!

If you want an even more fair seeming shuffle, use a change bag and have it pre loaded with your stack. let the audience handle a different deck and then throw them in the bag and shake like crazy while retaining your stack.

Im sure there is a way to make this work which would convince the audience.

Alec

I guess I am not understanding. You want a false(ish) shuffle that the spectator can do? Are you going to teach this shuffle to the spectator? If so you are better off handling the deck yourself. In fact you are better off handling the deck yourself anyway. And after 40 years the only people I have ever come across that know that cutting a deck does not disturb the order are other magicians. Cutting the deck is not an issue. If you shuffle, then hand the deck to the spectator, patter some the audience will never in think that you handled the deck.

TakWah wrote:I am not able to palm cards that it looks natural nor can I hold it in a way that it, won't be seen

You have to consider the 3 P's in magic: Practice, practice, practice!

After the spec has shuffled the deck, push the deck towards him, add the palmed cards to the it, saying: ”I don't even want to touch the deck!“

I shouldnt tip this, as it's one of my pet methods but....

TAKE A RISK.


Pick a spectator who cant shuffle cards. women are best. And you find out if they can shuffle during your earlier effects.


then ask them to shuffle the deck. If they look like they know what they are doing, stop them just after they start.

you will find that a handfull of cards have moved, but teh vast majority is in exactly the same place.

Its a risk, but it's squeeky clean. just make sure YOU have an out if it doesn't work.

though Gunnar has seen me do exactly what your after with 4 cards.. AND i have done it with a full deck...


No False shuffles, and everything done by the spectator.

I probably will be doing this at Freddies show in a few weeks...

if your in london, come and see.

Though all above suggestions are great, there is something else you could try.
You don't think that just simply cutting the deck will suffice to your audience, how about making them cut the deck into 3 or 4 or 5 piles then putting it all back in any order.
I have just sat here, put 3 cards together, cut the pack into 5 piles, put them back together in a random order and repeated 3 times, and the 3 cards were still together. Obviously you still have that chance the cards will be cut at that point and you lose the order.

I'm with Dale

Hand them the deck, ask them to give them a quick shuffle, bob's your uncle. The chances that those three cards will still be together is very high (especially if they give them a quick shuffle).

Do the motion of a basic overhand shuffle as you make the request, and the chances are even higher that unless they're particularly experienced with cards (and tbh I've seen someone who works in a casino who can't shuffle cards, so even that doesn't matter so much) they'll do a overhand shuffle a few times in a very haphazard way

I haven't done it a lot (only a few times) but it's always worked

yeah - its in Cards on the Table by Sadowitz, the whole card displacement thing that dale's talking about...

you could try breather crimps...

or, for brevity's sake - just get them to cut the deck a couple of times...to most punters its the same thing...

Switch the deck!

Whats the effect supposed to be, there must be an easier solution.