talkmagic.co.uk

I can do this trick, but I want to do it in a different way. I don't really like the way it is done in the end, when you squeeze the card and throw in in to the deck.
Does anyone perform it in a different way?

Yes.

When you have the 4 cards in your hand, and counted 5, you can peek at one of the cards and ask them if this was their card. I usually name the wrong one.

Then I name the correct card and pull out the 'invisible card' and hand it to them. Then I show that there are only 4 cards left in my hand (face down).

Then I turn them around and show that their card is gone.
I then ask the spectator to turn their card (invisible in their hand) around, and toss it back into the deck.

After this I tell them to spread the cards and they find the card turned over in the deck.

I really like this method because it keeps building up effects.

Maybe I've missed the point but is this really so different from the original presentation?

The only thing that's changed is that you're giving the spectator an invisible card to hold. While they may find this amusing (in fact, some may think it's annoying) I doubt that this will enhance the effect at all. They know there isn't really a card there and whilst they may be genuinely astonished at a card disappearing from the five they are only playing along with you to see where it is leading.

Andreas, If you want a more better way to perform this then try and find a more interesting way for the card to "vanish" and a more interesting reason why it is upside down in the deck. The method itself gives puts you in this situation, you need to decide how you wanna present that situation to your audience.

I like the tent vanish thing. People genuinly think you have it in your hand, and I like the little "oh!" moment as they realise you were just playing with them. No one will actually believe that you crushed it up and threw it invisibly into the deck, but it's all about fun isn't it. At first I didn't think the tent vanish was very effective but I got some feedback and found out that people really liked it. I just think it's fun to lead people on.

But to answer your question; no I can't think of another way (although I'm sure there are lots )

I usually do something different if I really did forget their card. I just do the count of "5" cards then say, "I want you to hold the deck of cards tightly in your hand". Then I smack the cards onto the deck as I do a spread revealing that there's only 4 cards left. And it just so happens to be their card that's gone.

I name their card which is already in the deck and and say its going to go on the top of the packet in my hand. I then do a one handed fan of the four cards i have in my hand and tap it on the deck they are holding. Turn the cards over andproove that i now only have four cards. And the rest just happens.
I try to speed up the performance toward the end and do the fan and tap in one fast motion, building suspense and ensuring that they do not see i have only 4cards in my hand when i fan.

This is the way i usually do, however, as with all tricks, i change and modify the performance in different situations.

Cheers

Ben

I tend to do a 4 as 5 count before i "make their card go into the middle of the pack", and i then tap the deck with the cards in my hand and immedietly show them that a card has now disappeared. i slowly turn them over to reveal that it was their card that has disappeared, and motion for them to fan through the deck to find their card. everything after the count i do in silence because i dont think you should talk while climaxes are happening..... that so didnt sound right....

The Biddle trick was one of my favourites for a while.

I always found that the presentation is what makes this trick and that if performed right, there was not a need to deviate from the 'standard' ending.

I too liked the tent vanish and it's apparent that a whole load of different vanishes would have been considered and their impact measured against one another.

My advice would be to work on the presentation. If the rest of it ain't broke then it doesn't need fixing.

I think the 4 for 5 count is VERY important. The spectator needs to know without any doubt that you removed 5 cards from the deck, you went through those 5 cards to find their card and up until the vanish you do infact have 5 cards. If you don't do a 4 for 5 count I think it's a little to obvious how the trick was done.

I like to do a Rub-a-Dub-Dub vanish (Correct me if I have the name wrong). It goes down pretty well.

One thing I came up with a while ago but have never actually done is to keep doing 4-for-5 counts, say three of them, and then just do a regular count so you miss a beat at the end. Look puzzled then snap your fingers and squiggle the cards to show only four.

Kati

Hmm yeah I did think about that one, but I think it raises suspicion over the count. Why woyld you keep counting 5 cards? So yeah I don't think I like that one.

I don't think the effect can get much stronger than the version Oz Pearlman teaches on his Born To Perform DVD. It has 3 excellent climaxes that each build up as they progress. First, you find a card that they never removed from the deck. Second, you make that card disappear. Third, the card appears in the middle of the deck that they've been holding all along.

As far as I'm concerned the method for doing these things is not important, they will flaw an audience provided whatever method you are at least competent at that method.

If people really want to try and improve or personalise the trick, try playing around with building stronger or just different and more interesting climaxes, rather than just trying to find different ways to do the same thing.