talkmagic.co.uk

I did actually say that the more complicated you get, the more the impact as rather tongue-in-cheek. Truthfully, though, the ACAAN method I outlined above is a bit of a magician-fryer.
I agree in many ways that having two spectators think of the same card, without a deck in sight, may be stronger than my method above. Of course, there are many ways to achieve this too.
I think *** ***** **** **** ** ******** is very helpful when considering these plots. It can really give you an edge over conventional methods. Of course, you all know exactly what I mean.
No, I don't mean to be a pain.....just trying to have some intelligent conversation about one of my pet effects. If you know of my posts at "The Green Place", you'll be well aware that I always try to make fair and accurate comments.

I misread this thread. I thought the original poster was looking for inspiration/help and now realise that he already has a method and is inviting others to workshop new ones. That's a tricky prospect on the open part of the forum, where ****s abound necessarily.

For what it's worth, I didn't think Pirate Potty was here to stir trouble, although the sarcastic *** ****** ** **** probably doesn't help anyone.

The technique I outlined is fairly well known, and as I said I'm reluctant to say outright what it is, but there's lots of hints been posted. Ted also gave you the strongest hint so far as to what I meant

My other technique is hard to understand, in hindsight. So I'll say the first word is 'instant'

And fooling magicians doesn't matter, it's all about the presentation, right?

My asterisks aren't particularly intended to be sarcastic. This is a very well-known concept in magic and mentalism - and I thought if Kolm's askterisks were so obvious, mine should be even more so, as there can be only a very few options as to what it might be....
As to folks searching for methods, well, we don't need to exactly explain, but give a general idea, perhaps mention the books or other sources to investigate. That will make the discussion fairly watertight, no?

Pirate Potty wrote:*** ***** **** **** ** ********...

My asterisks aren't particularly intended to be sarcastic. This is a very well-known concept in magic and mentalism - and I thought if Kolm's askterisks were so obvious, mine should be even more so, as there can be only a very few options as to what it might be....

Best of luck. I'm stumped and, therefore, cannot be of any more help.
T.

Depending on the situation there are many ways, I've used a Ted Lesley bit for years that's quite simple as well as direct even though I pass it off as a kind of "wink" to the 2nd party involved because they are indirectly prompted (I generally loathe "Instant Stooge" methods; fine if you're a magician but not if you're a mentalist. . . at least that's my standard for me)

Pirate Potty wrote: though, the ACAAN method I outlined above is a bit of a magician-fryer.

A well done svengali deck can be a 'magician-fryer' I love beating dead horses, (sarcasm) but once again it is routining and presentation that fry magicians and lay people alike.

I've seen Shawn Farquhar stump a room full of very accomplished magicians with a key card method. I've seen another fry magicians with a memorized deck. Back when I was a member of a local magic club, (I've since moved) I had to perform a few effects as an audition to be a member of the club. For one effect I flipped through the book 101 tricks with a stripper deck and chose one at random, and wouldn't you know it, that was the ones that stumped the magicians.

Just sayin'

Deck sw***h and a on* wa* de**

Pirate Potty wrote:My asterisks aren't particularly intended to be sarcastic. This is a very well-known concept in magic and mentalism - and I thought if Kolm's askterisks were so obvious, mine should be even more so, as there can be only a very few options as to what it might be....
As to folks searching for methods, well, we don't need to exactly explain, but give a general idea, perhaps mention the books or other sources to investigate. That will make the discussion fairly watertight, no?

That's pretty much why I recommended Goldstein's/Maven's "Four Sided Triangle" from Prism and The Blue Book of Mentalism. It contains one of the best descriptions and applications of the asterisked phrase.

Good thoughts,

Bob

That's pretty much why I recommended Goldstein's/Maven's "Four Sided Triangle" from Prism and The Blue Book of Mentalism. It contains one of the best descriptions and applications of the asterisked phrase.

Good thoughts,

Bob

Couldn't agree more - The complete colour set is amazing; its practical, VERY useable and (more importantly imo) adaptable for however you choose to perform (Which can be good or bad in certain magaicians eyes, but I see it as a good way to make a trick your own ... as long as you dont take a trick which is meant to be presented one way (ie mentalism) and turn it into a cheap trick, it ruins the art - same with magic tricks too)

Dan

thanks Bob, I thought that in this context, someone would have gotten the asterisks: "The t***k **** **** ** e*******d".
Some of the methods above seem to be suggesting a way to have two spectators choose the same card, not to think of the same card, but it's all good stuff, as perhaps these techniques can be re-explored. I'm all for finding a really simple solution, as well as seeking out novel and perhaps more complex ones.
On another note - "Magical Trevor" - are you the same Magical Trevor who had the excellent cartoon by Weebl, the tune from which was later used by a big TV ad?
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/songs/magical+trevor/
If so, I know your song by heart! I think it's awesome!

The psychological card force from MindCraft:Perceptions (http://www.lybrary.com/mindcraft-percep ... 87714.html) would be a way to do this. I've used it with more than one person at a time and it works pretty well.

Though it's not really a a psychological force at all, just doesn't use cards...

Hmmmm, interesting. I'll try another approach out and see what happens. I'll be getting one spectator to pick a card and keep it face down, and use the other person's imagination to get a card in their mind. That's not exactly " 2 people think of the same card " ... I guess the method is disconnected logically as far as the spectators are concerned, since no one knows what card was picked in first place.