talkmagic.co.uk

On a recent pursuit of odd things, I decided to try and work on not looking good with a deck of cards.

I can quite happily pull off very clean and smooth looking false shuffles and cuts, but it wouldn't look like much else than somebody very good with cards.

This evening I quickly filmed a practice session of me trying to do the opposite...control a few cards whilst not showing enough skill or competence to arouse any kind of suspicion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bb5lqQCWgmY

Thoughts, criticisms, compliments and hate mail are all welcome.

That was wicked mate ! Very Lennart Green

Very good, mate. Looked messy and uncontrolled till the reveal. Keep practising until you errr get worse..?

Very good work!

Thanks.

In normal circumstances I would use the initial wash shuffle to steal the cards off the top and invite the spectator to continue messing up the cards, leaving a lot more free and fair feel to the shuffle.
I also follow the shuffles with an ace cutting sequence of Sal Piacente's but decided against it in the video, as it is merely a demonstration.

The start looked very much like me with cards, that is, terrible. So good work!

Second half though was very clean. As someone useless with cards, a riffle shuffle is something that immediately implies someone is good with cards, the cuts looked very tidy too.

Do not get me wrong, it all looks amazing to me but if you want to look bad with cards, those were the two bits that gave it away that you are actually very good, before the reveal of course!

Getcha, thanks. Maybe I'll substitue a very sloppy riffle shuffle or an overhand style.

When I riffle shuffle I tend to end up with a VERY disproportionate number of cards flicking off, not a clean and even mix like yours, 10 card chunks of cards landing on top of each other, it looks disjointed, messy and incompetent (because it is).

Thanks! I play cards a lot at a bridge club, some small poker games and just social games so I am exposed to a lot of shuffling. Whilst a neat riffle shuffle is quite common place, especially during Bridge, you're completely right. The two parts are completely different and probably telling of each other.

Lenoir wrote:Getcha, thanks. Maybe I'll substitue a very sloppy riffle shuffle or an overhand style.

I agree with A_n_t in that if you're wanting to appear all thumbs the second shuffle does conflict with the idea.

The solution you mentioned - a sloppy riffle or overhand shuffle - would work, BUT, I think it would be better to have no shuffle at all (by you) after the initial mixing. You mentioned that you allow the spectator to mix the tabled cards - in my opinion it would be more deceptive to then take those cards and do the ace production, rather than mixing them further MYSELF first. With the latter the thinking spectator would assume the mixing by you was simply for controling the aces for the finale. With the former there is no solution, THEY mixed the cards then you instantly produced the aces.

Ive never understood when magicians have a spectator shuffle the cards only to take them back and shuffle them themselves, especially when its not necessary for the effect. It totaly defeats the purpose of the spectator shuffle. To the spectator the cards ARE well mixed, why wouldnt they be, they have just shuffled them. Why then would we question their shuffle to the extent that we shuffle them ourselves just to make sure ? The more logical thinking of your spectators will see this shuffle as part of the method, to them there is no other reason why you would need to shuffle an already shuffled deck.

Of course its just my opinion

jim

In the context of the routine, I'm shuffling and cutting to aces.

The effect goes along as how a proper deck of cards is shuffled before a proper game...a wash and then riffle shuffles.

I completely agree that if I were to hand out the deck for shuffling, take it back and then shuffle it myself it would certainly seem illogical, but I don't think so in the context of the routine, as the underlying principle is that although it is clearly OUT of my control, somehow through the cackhandedness I remain in control.

Appreciate your comment.

I would see them both differently.

A "clean" hands off, spectator only approach is very different in my mind to incompetent idiot suddenly doing something amazing.

Stick with the cackhanded idea but give someone rubbish with cards a deck to mix up and watch how they do it, then try and achieve the effect while appearing to be as incompetent as they actually are, if I find time over the weekend I'll try and record and upload of me handling a deck of cards if you want, once you have finished laughing you can make notes on how to add bits in to your presentation.

Tried this today to a couple of people who work as a casino, one being a croupier and they were completely fooled.

Shuffling incredibly messily, the wash, and the following up with riffle shuffles of a high quality is completely normal to them as they are the standard procedure.

I've added in a phase where by if they are sitting opposite, they can spread and shuffle the cards around as I do, adding a new layer of conviction.

Lenoir wrote:Tried this today to a couple of people who work as a casino, one being a croupier and they were completely fooled.

That was kind of my point.

What seems normal to someone who works with cards all the time seems impressive to someone who never sees the same thing.

Refined the wash control to now be able to three stocks of four cards that can be moved to the top or bottom on demand. I'll film it soon.