Wesley James Enchantments.pdf

Matt Field provided much advice and assistance in the editing of chis book in an earlier form, which greatly benefited the present volume. Max Maven, Harvey Rosenthal, Peter Duse , Paul Gordon, Alan Shaxon, Michael Weber, Jim Cuthbert, Nick Ttosr and Gene Matsuura all aided with historical and bibliographic details. George Dailey did yeoman labor in researching information on Herbert Milton. And Noel Coughlin, Jason England and Newell Unfried lent welcome and vigilant eyes to the galley proofs. All these men gave generously of their time and knowledge, and the author and publisher are more in their debt than this simple note of thanks can express.

Copyright O 2004 by Wesley James and Stephen Minch.

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Con- ventions. Published in the United States by Hermetic Press, Inc., Seattle.

Printed in the United States of America.

ISBN 0-945296-45-2

First Edition

6 5 4 3 2 1

CONTENTS Preface Introduction

PART ONE: FORGERY, PACKETS & PRINCIPLES SECTION ONE: FORGERY Forgery

SECTION Wo: ACE EFFECTS Trapped Ace Surprise Catch-Ace-Trap-ee April Fools' Aces

Ace and Three-Card Vanishes Ace and Four-Card Vanishes

Catalytic Progressive Aces

SECTION THREE: PACKET EFFECTS Below Zero Minus One

The Spread Displacement The Marlo Flexible Count Grip The J E H H F O ~ Count Semaj-Novrec Masked Packet Reverse Snap Reverse

Turn Me Down Why Don't You The James Gang

The Marlo-James Multiple Shift Quick Three-Way, My Way

Small Packet One-Handed Top (SPOT) Palm New FAces of 1 2 3 4

Spread ATFUS

Hyper-Warp

SECTION FOUR: TWO PRINCIPLES The Sigma Principle A Sleight Case of Murder Vanishing Eleven and Placement

PART TWO: TECHNIQUES SECTION ONE: PALMING Palming.. . Named Travelers

Secretly Disordering the Deck WJ Bottom Palm

Holdout Holdup The Coughlin Palm Replacement The One-Handed Daley Switch

Chameleon Colors Revisited De-Flourished Ossip Slip Cut

SECTION TWO: LIFTS Naturalness: The Double Lift-and More WJ Two-Step Double Lift The WJ Two-Step Double Lift Hit Variation A Stuart Gordon Turnover Variation The Unload Subtlety My Ambitious Card Routine

The Moveable Card Pass Coming Up in the World (a.k.a. The Load-Up Move) The WJ Side Steal The Simulated Shuffle-a Palm Cover The James Palm Transfer The Speed Load-a Wallet Loading Technique

SECTION THREE: FALSE DEALS Deals Bottom Dealing Follow That Card I1 P.K.A. Cheating Fair Risk (Spectator's Open Prediction) Second Dealing The Moon is Made of Blue Cheese Sympathetic Blacks

Marlo's Future Reverse-Broken Form The Krenzel Square Reverse

Etude for Dealers The Option Second Deal

The Countervailing Motion Principle Miscellaneous False Deals A Hand Too Few

Miscellaneous False Deals (Continued) Theory Thirds

Fourths, Fifths, etc. The Undifferentiated Middle Adding Differentiation

Miscellaneous False Deals (Concluded) Theoretical False Deals Summary

SEC;TION FOUR: SHUFFLES False Riffle Shuffles The Zarrow Shuffle

WJ on the Zarrow The Tabled Winnipeg Cut

I'll Put Money on It Color Triumphant The Merlin Push-Through The Strike Push-Through The Crand-bler's Prediction

SECTION F m : BIE PASS The Pass The Basic Position The Edge Pass The Squeeze Pass The Pivot Side-Jiggle Pass The Diagonal Pass The Automatic Pass The Anomalous Pass

SECTION SIX: TOOLBOX Low Lateral Palm

The Position The Deal-Out Subtraction Low Lateral Control Low Lateral Conversions Add-Backs

Standard Add-Back No Contact Add-Back

Bottom Add-Backs Low Lateral Steals Low Lateral Switches

The Christ-Annemann Alignment Displacement Sequence

Four-as-Four (Hiding Two, Faf-Two) Counts The Faf-Two C Count Splay Grip

West-Townsend-James (WTJ) Count Turnantula The Egress Vanish A Refinement for the Bluff Shift

The Bluff Shift as a Control The Bluff Shift as a Rime Force

PART THREE: MENTAL EFFECTS & GAFFED METHODS SECTION ONE: GOING MENTAL Mental Magic The Vibratory Prediction

The Intention Force The Kick-Off Switch

Blushing Leaper Brownian Movement (The Sequel)

The Veeser Concept and Alignment Insurance Ham and Ace Sandwich Divine Miraskill A Vision or a Dream?

SECTION mo: SERIOUSLY GAFFED Why Not? Wishuffle Birthday Aces Watch the Wild Ace

SECTION THREE: GENERAL TIPS The Hands Breaking in the Cards Routining

Closing Comment

PREFACE INDIAN SUMMER is a warm but bracing time in New York. Dreams are born as young men, returning to school, remember the freedom of the past summer and the discipline of a school year just beginning. It was at just such a time that I gave my first professional magic performance. The year was 1 957.. .

Autumn was desperately trying not to succumb to winter but losing the fight. The streets of New York were gray and gloomy. The air was filled with an omi- nous foreboding that the first snow would soon be falling. A strange depression had filled my days since returning to New York's bleak and lonely streets from a series of shows at a nightclub in Winter Park, Colorado, where snow and minus thirty-four-degree weather had already become the norm. I put aside my close- up pad. The year was 1982.

Many of the magic brethren never noticed my absence. My light had never shone that brightly. Besides, much of the joy of magic is in what's new, not what's gone. Am'ba Magia!

Why did I walk away? Why indeed, when the roster of magic is filled with men like Dai Vernon and Tony Slydini, who lived long lives devoted to magic. In spite of the angst, were they not happy and fulfilled by their passionate love of magic?

Let me not be melancholy, for I have embraced magic fully and been kissed by her tactile delight. I, too, have effused and rejoiced at a new discovery. Many the smile has forced its way onto my sullen face as a beautiful new move left a tingle in my hands and a thrill in my heart.

I never walked away from the goddess magic. I don't believe that possible-at least not for one such as I, who truly loves her. I walked away from her other jealous suitors, from the fight for her hand, which cannot be won. I walked away from the indefensible war that rages between those who love her too much and themselves not enough, but who fight petty battles for her honor. The goddess is a slut who will spread her limbs to all, but yield her heart to few.

With that view expressed, you may wonder why this book? If I walked away, why re-enter the fray? The answer is simple: I am not back to fight; I am back to love. I am not back to argue, I am back to embrace. If I am resigned to one idea upon my return, it is a notion well expressed by the Nez Perct Indian Chief Joseph, considered by many the greatest military strategist who ever lived.

"I will fight no more, forever."

INTRODUCTION MAGIC IS a many-splendored thing. It is a performing art and an academic discipline. Both can be enjoyable pursuits. Neither can exist without the other. Magic can also be a wonderfully engaging hobby. Hobbyists, like sports fans, are true devotees; they are important, perhaps even essential, to the vitality of our art, though they are not players themselves. Their tastes influence magic, their creativity feeds its repertoire and their dollars contribute to its viability as a livelihood. Still, however much they dream, hobbyists with rare exception do not share the considerations of the professional. On the other hand, many professionals, concerned with the need to put food on their family table, sacrifice their technical and creative growth to more pragmatic considerations. This book is not written from the hobbyist viewpoint. I certainly hope and expect that many hobbyists will find this book an enjoyable read and a hand- some, often referred to, addition to their libraries; but that could not be my principal focus. This work may open the eyes of a few, but I fear some hobbyists will find it too serious, too detailed, too analytical. I won't apologize. While I no longer perform very often in a professional capacity, my mind-set, and therefore perspective, remain that of a professional performer, and a serious one at that. Having been a full-time professional, it is difficult to divorce myself from the attention to detail so critical to professional success. This book, therefore, should find its greatest favor with the professional-who should appreciate the attention to details-with the serious hobbyist-who may enjoy my analytic approach-and with the amateur who aspires to become professional-who will, hopefully, find this book revelatory. For all such individuals and other intrepid souls, read on; know that this book reflects my love of both the art and crafi of magic.

xii + ENCHANTMENTS

PERFORMANCE THE ART OF MAGIC

Magic that is not designed to be publicly performed is an educational exercise at best and mental masturbation at worst. Magic that cannot be performed is essentially a puzzle. I would seriously question a sonata written for a piano with 112 keys; such a piece could not be performed because no such instrument exists. Like music, magic must bepeformed to be art; therefore, an effect must be practically performable to be magic.

For some this will seem to be preaching to the converted, but examine your experience for just a moment. How often have you read effects, even whole books, that have no point and no hope of finding one? Can an effect that requires dealing through a deck three times ever be practically performed? Can twelve cards be passed off as four in a close-up routine? Such material is born of individuals being clever for the sake of cleverness; they are clever pipe dreams. I can appreciate a clever idea as readily as the next fellow, but I wouldn't offer such fare as magic. Such material is not, nor can it be, magical and will not be offered here.

Having stated my position starkly, I hasten to add that such fare can be amazing. The world is full of amazing things that are not magic. When I'm not pursuing magic these days, among other things I design computer software and electronic devices. I assure you, what my software does and what my circuits do is amazing-in many instances, clever and amazing. They are not magic. So, taking nothing from the cleverness of any of these creations, I don't confuse them with performable effects and, I strongly recommend, you don't either. That's why you won't find any here.

Performability alone is no assurance that one's efforts will produce magic. An effect must be "magical" at its core. If being amazing doesn't automatically quali? an effect and being amazing and performable doesn't completely fill the bill either, what then is required? Magicality comes from a special place; to be magical an effect must speak to the human experience. It must touch an emotional, aesthetic or primordial chord in the spectator. That can only happen in today's world, burdened by magic's poor public image, if the performing magician creates a receptivity in the spectator and then delivers more than a "trick"-an experience.

Most spectators want very much for this to occur but we must work to accomplish it. The desire of our audiences to embrace what we do is a double-edged sword. It has lamentably allowed many very poor performances to be inflicted on an uninformed public, who do their utmost to cooperate and respond posi- tively. This has encouraged an enormous amount of bad magic to survive. As a result, many very poor magicians continue cheerfully along, believing that the

ENCHANTMENTS + xiii

performances they give are good magical entertainment when it is simply not so. This is truly sad.

The positive aspect of this willingness on the part of our spectators (often called "willing suspension of disbelief') is that for those few but hopefully increasing number of performers who are aware of their task, it is relatively easy to accomplish. It requires only that one get one's ego out of the way, muster some faith in magic (even without the benefit of comedy) and afford the spectator a reasonable vehicle. That translates to a giving attitude, good execution of the requisite techniques and a theme that allows the spectators something interesting to substitute for the explanation that purely "tricky" physical means are at work. People want very much to embrace the cozenage we present. Were that not so, magic would not have survived so long. Even when we insult, demean and condescend to our audiences, they endeavor vigilantly to find a way to enjoy our performances. If we fail to offer plausible alternatives to "trickery" for them to wrap their minds around, they will allow us to cast our performance as a puzzle, a challenge or almost anything we choose. Since so many performers have chosen the challenge approach, audiences have come to presume this is what we want. We've played a game of "You try to catch me and I'll insult you until you do" for too long. A straightforward presentational adjustment could eliminate this attitude and end the game with most spectators. Those few who misguidedly persist in the challenge mentality are likely to give up if they realize they are playing the game alone.

Do not misunderstand; I am not advocating that we present what we do as "real." The effort to convince an audience of the notion that means of a truly supernatural nature are at work is charlatanism, not magic. It was this type of performer that Houdini set out to expose so many years ago. Uri Geller is such a performer. Both James Randi and, to a lesser degree, Danny Korem enhanced their careers by exposing such acts. Neither am I saying that patter that includes the statement that a spirit occupies a deck of cards is charlatanism. The distinction is one of characterization. If you profess to be a spirit medium, the assertion of a spirit occupying the deck is charlatanism. When you profess to be a magician, such a claim participates in a theatrically acceptable presentational premise, albeit one that ends with your performance. Some of today's Bizzarists seem to have confused the line between theater and life.

That brings us to the question of who, as a performer, the magician is. The celebrated Robert-Houdin line, "The magician is an actor playing the part of a magician," is, in my opinion, false. It sounds good superficially but shatters under examination. The western world has no image of a character who is a "true" benevolent magician (except perhaps for the Merlin archetype). While Dante, for example, may have looked like the public's image of a magician, it

xiv + ENCHANTMENTS

was because he resembled the darker side, Magick, not our art. The West has many images for the dark side: Aleister Crowley, Anton LaVey, etc. The magician cannot be an actor playing the part of a magician, because the audience cannot recognize and surely cannot identify with such a character. Jon Racherbaumer has suggested that the magician is a REactor playing.. . but that doesn't hold up for me either. It seems to me that one possible view-I am sure not the only valid one-is that the magician is an actor playing the part of a professor (one who professes) who holds knowledge on arcane subjects. (I have often thought of the role as similar to a Sensei of martial arts-perhaps because I am a martial artist.) The subjects change with the effects. One minute we are demonstrating a little-known method of printing by rubbing two cards together while chant- ing a nonsensical accolade to the gods; in the next instance, we are offering that the properties of a rope are not as commonly understood. In the capacity of professor one is likely to find as broad a range of personality types as you have, no doubt, encountered over the course of your life, and with the same potential for audience reaction. Some professorial types are likeable and we enjoy being with them and learning; others are not so affable and one comes away thinking of them as dolts, buffoons or worse. People don't generally change from good- natured to foul-tempered without adequate provocation and, in most cases, neither should our character. One should be true to the character one creates. The great magicians have all known who they were, whether it was Cardini's English Gentleman or A1 Flosso's Carnival Ballyhoo (both are types that could be encountered in life; both could be memorable). My hope here is not to suggest who you should be-that's an individual decision-but to revitalize the dialogue about the magician's role. It is clear, at least to me, that the idea that we are playing the part of a magician is circumlocution that leads nowhere. We can do better and we must. The creation of a character and persona is part of the art in performing magic.

ACADEMIA THE CRAFT OF MAGIC

I alluded earlier to an aspect of the academic side of magic when I wrote that one was required to have "good execution of the requisite techniques." The academic side of magic and the craft aspect are closely allied. The craft of magic is what is most ofien written about: new "tricks'-if tricks we must call them-new sleights and new flourishes. Increasingly, however, over the years excursions into the thinking behind various techniques and the refinement of their execution have become acceptable fare. If only it were more often so. This book will, to a significant degree, enter that domain. I will not attempt to define or redefine the landscape, only to contribute to the dialogue in those areas that I fear have been abandoned or left inadequately explored. There is very little more to say

about this matter. To me it is entirely cut and dried. Just as a musician would be derided for performing in public without adequate ability to play his instrument, we are obligated to have mastered the technical aspects of our craft. One need not have mastery of the most challenging pieces in the repertoire to play simpler, nevertheless enjoyable, pieces. One should, however, never perform publicly beyond one's level of competence. In my opinion, doing so has no justifiable excuse. Toward that end, I have taken great pains to describe the best techniques and methods of executing them I have been able to learn or devise. My obligation in writing this book was to give you the best tools of which I was aware and to make my best effort to present them to you so that you might learn them. Your obligation-not to me but to yourself, your audiences and our craft--is to master the techniques and the effects they produce, investing your best effort before you present them publicly. An audience has the right to expect this at minimum in return for giving you their attention and trust when you perform. There are no exceptions or excuses for doing less. At the same time, returning to the music analogy, the great Vladimir Horowitz said, "You have to make mistakes when you perform because you have to take risks. Otherwise, you might as well play a record in the concert hall." Every performer has had bad performances, shows when things went awry, nights when everything that could go wrong did. The professional covers as best he can and continues, just as a musician would. Nevertheless, practice and rehearsal are disciplines meant to be pursued away from public scrutiny. It is a requirement for all performers, whatever their craft. Once you've mastered the techniques of a piece and have rehearsed it, with its patter, sufficiently to present it before an audience, you enter into a period roughly akin to previews in theater. This is a difficult period but crucial to one's development of polished effects. Most magic books give no indication as to what level of refinement the included material has been developed. This book is an exception and, I admit, hopes to start a trend.

REPERTOIRE THE MATERIAL OF MAGIC

Some of the effects in this book were taken directly from one of my close-up acts. This material is all thoroughly performance-tested and works extraordi- narily well as a piece. That is to say, these routines stand as vignettes. Changing of a single line, gesture or nuance might disrupt the whole. For those effects- which I've marked "Final"-I would advise that you learn them exactly as they appear. Think long and hard about any change you propose before making it, and be prepared to back off from the change if it doesn't work. This should not be understood to mean that I think my words, timing, techniques or the other contributing factors are perfect or even too good to be improved. The term "Final" merely indicates that the effect, as described, like a hit song, might not

xvi + ENCHANTMENTS

be a hit if changed. At the same time, like the late Slydini, I recognize that only by learning the effect, though not performing it, exactly as written, will one fully understand all the nuance and implications of the h l l Gestalt of the piece. In sum, my offering of the full details should not be understood as license or encouragement to clone my way of performing the piece but rather as a means to convey the fullness of my knowledge and experience with that piece.

The majority of the material in this book has received what I call "Beta" testing. Beta testing is second-level testing. The major bugs have been worked out and the piece is a cohesive whole but it is not as set as the "Final" material. A few of the effects are only "Alphd' tested. They have been performed between five and twenty times and their construction is known to stand up but they have not been fine-tuned. Moves may be changed, patter lines may be altered but the premise of the effect has proven viable and the presentational shape is believed right. Finally, there are some effects in this book that I believe are fundamentally sound, entertaining and magical and that can work for lay audiences. Beyond that, I can say little with assurance. I include them motivated by a line of reasoning that parallels Peter MacDonald's in his book, Highly Mediocre Tricks, when he named an effect "Somebody Else's Watch Trick." To wit: The ideas are unfinished and whoever comes up with the finishing touches can make the effect his or her own. I hope that by presenting the idea it will spark in you an

idea that has escaped me. Perhaps you will be the one to take one or more of these effects to the next level of development. You can recognize them as marked "SEWT (pronounced like "suit") in appreciation of MacDonald's observation.

Interspersed through this book are explorations of the thinking behind, rationale for, and well-established principles underlying various technical subjects. Some are included to contribute to the record, some to share observations and some to encourage further thought. All are intended to be at least as important as would be another "trick." It is hoped that you will find some of these observations affecting your thoughts and, with luck, your way of thinking.

FORMAT HOW TO READ THIS BOOK

As you sit to read this book, you may notice elements of its format that strike you as odd. One is the use of numbered steps within effects and routines, though not techniques. This is a largely abandoned practice in recent magic writing. It was also the cause of considerable discourse between my wise publisher, Stephen Minch, and me during the preparation of this work. While other authors have used numbered steps for their own reasons, it is my intention that the steps provide the reader with guidance regarding "performance phrasing," a term and concept that requires some explanation. A magical effect is neither a

ENCHANTMENTS + xvii

series of discrete actions nor a chain of techniques interposed with open actions and patter. Rather, all the actions, secret and open, cluster into sequences or "phrases." Between these phrases are pauses, sometimes frlled with patter, when nothing consequential seems to happen. These pauses are functional in much the way paragraphs are in writing: they improve clarity. I believe "phrasing" to be an important element in effective performance but one that is rarely, if ever, addressed in print. Like a rest in music, the "performance pause" is as integral and useful an element of a magical piece as a patter line or a gesture. While the most evident benefit is to increase the clarity of the effect, other ends are also served. To be fair, sometimes these lulls allow secret actions to be performed, or at least to be set up, and some authors have noted such uses in their text. The late Tony Slydini employed somewhat exaggerated moments of tension and relaxation to integrate misdirection into his choreography. Such use is indeed powehl. Most oken, however, these pauses are simply moments of relaxation, respites of varied duration between clusters of activity. In most sequences, precisely when a pause occurs is not critical but that one occurs is important. (Essential pauses are noted in the text.) Thus, while the particular moment may not be critical, a

step-indicated pause is ofien necessary and is always helpful. Still, they are not cast in stone but should be seriously considered. Collectively, the pauses impose a sort of irregular rhythm to a performance. I could, I believe, write a small book on performance phrasing and how little variations from regularity-known in Music as "rubaton-distinguish performers and their performances. For now, it should suffice to suggest that you take note of the step-indicated pauses. Con- sider them as both general guidance and specific reminders that a pause is in order and where I recommend you take it.

Beyond this active performance function, I see the step divisions as a kind of "super-paragraph," binding together related ideas that have multiple sub-ideas relating to the sequence being described. A step number indicates more than a paragraph break but less than a section heading. Finally, as they have been used in the past, step numbers allow for more efficient description of multiple handlings of the same effect where only portions of the two differ. With the gentle prodding of my fine publisher, I have tried to provide enough of a reminder of what the referenced steps accomplish to avoid requiring you to re-read the original text. It is, however, assumed that you have a familiarity with the referenced handling. Where you have doubts, re-read the original.

You will also notice gray stripes in left margins of many pages. At times, in the explanation of an effect or a routine I will stop to examine side issues, occasionally at some length, that are closely related to ideas being discussed. To make it easier to follow the trail of the actual handling, the action text is indicated by the gray stripes.

KNOWLEDGE MY ASSUMPTION

I stated earlier that this book was not written for the hobbyist; neither was it written for the novice. An issue that arises in any magic book these days is ref- erencing standard techniques. This book is no exception. Enchantments is not intended for the rank beginner. There are many excellent texts for that purpose. It is assumed you have a working familiarity with the basic tools of our craft. I have not re-described techniques that I believe the reader should already know. Still, we all have gaps in our knowledge. Mindful of this, I've tried to provide references to texts describing these techniques. These texts are not always the earliest versions but rather point to what I consider reasonably good descriptions. Most other techniques are described within this work, though I've tried, where possible, to avoid re-description or duplication of my own published material.

CREDIT THE CREATION OF MAGIC

This is a sore point for me. I believe that credit should be given where credit is due, and I have endeavored to do so as best I can. I have even taken some credit for myself. I have no personal vendetta for or against anyone. I made my pilgrim- age to see Ed Marlo and I thought the man a wondrous gift to our chosen pursuit and was glad to call him friend. 1 knew Dai Vernon from the time I was a boy. I didn't know then that the man would become a living legend but he was always a kind and informative help to me. I have submitted material to those who have asked me to do so and some who haven't, and I intend to continue to do so. If I offend anyone, it is not because I intend to offend but because the truth is the truth; I report it as I know it. Someone (I wish I knew who) once said, "There are three sides to every story: your side, my side and the truth." I report my side. If anyone wishes to discuss these matters with me, to add information to my store and by doing so attempt to alter my perception, I am willing to listen. I will not take sides and I will not argue. To all who have contributed to the art of magic, I love you all. You have shared with me the product of your creative minds, a gift from God, a reflection of the God within you. I can do no less than love you for that. But if you would fight, bicker or bring negativity to magic, I will ignore you. The price you wish to elicit for your work is too dear. The courts take years and millions of dollars to settle battles over who invented what, and even then the results are rarely satisfying. In those cases, at least the parties get to present their respective cases before an impartial arbiter. We have no such arbiter in magic and no forum for the presentation of cases. The bitterness that grows out of arguments is corrosive, invidious and hopeless of resolution.

Eat, drink, make magic, for tomowow we may die.

PART ONE FORGEBY

PACKETS & PRINCIPLES

FORGERY

FORGERY

IN 1980, or thereabouts, I seriously considered selling this effect, just as presented here, for fifteen dollars. The text that follows was the proposed ad copy. I was warned at the time that I was not well enough known in magic to get away with this kind of marketing approach. As a result, magic did without the effect until I released a version in my 1989 lecture notes, Stop Fooling Us! (page 39). See what happens when I listen to nay-sayers.

Since 1972 (when I first revealed "Forgery" to the magic community), despite a number of effects that have appeared that clearly derive from it, I feel "Forgery" itself stands as a powerful piece of thoroughly audience-tested magic that can be a most effective addition to almost any close-up act.

IT YOU DON'T PERFORM MAGIC, - u m ~ ~ m m m ~

5

I've heard people say, "I don't like card tricks." Many more people are too polite to say it but think it. Women are, or are supposed to be, most commonly of that persuasion: They'll watch, but be bored. Once in a while a new effect comes along that defies these prejudices. I'm proud to say this is such an occasion. I'm not talking about a new premise or a new method for an old one, but a new effect. Like most good effects the premise is clear and succinct:

"Two cards physically merge into one." That's new!

Is this new effect any good? Well, I've performed it no less then a thousand times and never, not once, has the response been less than tremendous. On at least one occasion it has yielded an instant, spontaneous, standing ovation. Not bad for a card trick, huh?

In the more than fifteen years since its creation I've shared this effect with a few others, working professionals all. Their reactions have been universally enthusiastic to say the least. Perhaps for that reason, Derek Dingle was kind enough to contribute a handling variation. Frank Garcia was generous in contributing a touch of his. Both Phil Goldstein and Danny Tong, who have performed the effect for their audiences to considerable response, have shared their thoughts as well. All are included.

I don't want to sing the praises of this effect too loudly. So many ads I've read, seen or heard claim that "Our is the greatest ..." This ad is obviously no different, but I'm not simply saying it. I'm going to prove it.

Here's my offer: Order FORGERY, learn it, practice it and perform it ten times before ten different audiences. If you're not satisfied with the reactions you get, if you don't feel it's worth every penny you paid, send it back and I'll refund your money. You'll have the secret free. No one to my knowledge has ever offered a deal like this for a magic effect. I feel safe in doing so. I'm quite sure that the feeling of reward you get for the enjoyment you bring your audiences will convince you that this is among the greatest of close-up effects, if not effects in general, you will ever perform. Send $15.00 cash, check or money order. Send it today. I've only printed a limited quantity and do not anticipate reprinting.

I wrote those words in 1980 with the enthusiasm of someone who had performed the effect to amazing response from innumerable audiences. I will admit to a bit of advertising hyperbole but by and large I stand by all but one statement made in the ad. "Forgery" is without doubt an exceptional piece of magic; it isn't the greatest effect in all of close-up magic. While that is not precisely what the ad says, it does strongly suggest it. What follows is what you would have gotten for your fifteen dollars. It includes material that has not appeared in print before, plus a reprint of the version that previously appeared in my lecture notes. I believe now, as I did then, that this effect is worth fifteen dollars at least. I probably should adjust for inflation, but what price greatness?

EFFECT: A selected card whose face is signed by a spectator merges with an odd-backed card signed by the performer, making a single card with a signature on each side.

REQUIREMENTS: A deck of blue-backed cards plus two additional red- backed cards. These cards should not only have red backs but be of a different back design. (I believe it is generally a good idea to use cards of a different back design as well as a different color. The change is greater and you never know when you'll run into a color-blind person. It is a fairly common malady among men.) You'll also need a felt-tipped pen that will write on a card. (A Sharpie or photographic markers work best in my experience.)

METHOD 1

SET-UP: Place one of the red-backed cards on the bottom of the blue-backed deck and the other red-backed card in your pocket. Do not use court cards. The card on the bottom of the deck should have your initials on its back, in the forward left- hand corner. It will look more or less like Figure 1. The felt-tipped pen should be handy.

Shuffle the deck, keeping the bottom card on the bottom. Be careful not to allow your audience to see either the face or back of that card. The simplest way, though not necessarily the most deceptive, is to Hindu Shuffle, pulling the blocks off the top until about three-quarters of the deck is exhausted. Drop the remainder on top but secure a fourth-finger break. Square up, retaining the break. Cut or Double Cut to the break and repeat the entire sequence until you sense your spectator is satisfied that the deck is well mixed.

With the bottom card in its original position, state, "Since you're satisfied that the deck is thoroughly mixed-we'll use the card that happens to be on the bottom."

3 'Turn the deck face up into dealing position and show the spectator and the rest of the audience the bottom card. Have the spectator sign the card while it remains on the face of the deck. You can allow the spectator to take the deck from you if you feel she won't remove the card. Allow the ink to dry before turning the deck face down.

NOTE: This may seem an unusual practice to you as a magician. One ordinarily gives the spectator the card to sign rather than the deck. Remem- ber that lay people have no preconceived notions about how a card should be signed. Some may worry about handing the deck to the spectator for signing. Remember, the spectator has no reaon to suspect anything at this point in the effect; she is highly unlikely to wanr to examine the card.

You will note that I've referred to the spectator as she. This does not preclude you performing the effect for a male. Throughout this book I will use the female pronoun in those effects that I prefer to perform for females, and the male pronoun in those effects I prefer to perform for males. This may nor be politically correct but it is pragmatic.

4 Take the red-backed card out of your pocket without showing its face. Place it face down on the top of the face-down deck. Openly initial the back of the card in the forward left-hand corner. Try to make your initials look as much like those on the other red-backed card (the one on the bottom of the deck) as possible.

5 Remind the spectators of the situation. Then, with the right hand, take the deck by its ends from above (a position often incorrctly called "Biddle Grip"; we shall call it Overhand Grip in this volume), rotate your hand palm up and show the card on the face of the deck (the spectator's card). Turn the deck face down.

(1 Reach under the deck with your left fingers and secretly slide the bottom card slightly to the right by making contact with the left side of its face. Apply upward pressure on the card second from the bottom and draw it from the bottom as though it were the bottom card of the deck. Do this slowly, as it is a quite convincing and natural procedure. (This is a slight variation of Vernon's Side Glide from Expert Card Zcbniqw, 1940, page 123.) Figure 2 shows the the card believed to be the spectator's being drawn from beneath the deck. The card seen jogged to the right at the bottom cannot be seen from the front because of the screening right hand. Openly place the card on top of the deck, above your signed card. Square the deck.

7 Cut the deck, positioning the spectator's card above yours with one card between them in the middle of the deck. This is explained with the line, "If I cut the deck like this, it puts them closer together. And if I give the deck a little squeeze, like this, I put them very close together indeed."

8 Spread the deck slowly between your hands until you reach the spectator's card with your initials on the back. Be carehl not to flash the back of the second red card (two cards below). Figure 3 shows the way the deck is spread so that you get as much warning as possible of when the spectator's card is about to show.

9 Place the red-backed card face down on the table. Turn atl the cards above the spectator's card face up and spread them to your right on the table. Turn all the cards below the spectator's card face up and spread them to your left on the table.

10 Turn over the face-down card with your initials on the back to reveal the spectator's name on the face. Acknowledge the audience's appreciation and give the card to the spectator as a souvenir.

NOTE: You are left with a red-backed card in the deck. Dispose of it as you see fit. (See Clean-Up Procedures following Method 3.)

The preceding description is "Forgery" at its simplest. In this form it relies heavily on inference for its success. Each of the following methods replaces a n inferred state with a more convincingly demonstrated state.

METHOD 2

REQUIREMENTS: The same as for Method 1: two red-backed cards, one of which is initialed, and a felt-tipped pen.

SET-UP: Place one red-backed card into your pocket. The other red-backed card should be palmed in the left hand (use Full Palm, Gambler's Flat Palm or Gambler's Cop, depending on angles). The felt-tipped pen should be handy.

Hand out the deck to be shuffled and cut by the spectator. Upon receiving it back, secretly add the palmed card to the bottom. Thus, the only difference between the first method and this one is that the spectator is permitted to shuffle while you hold out the card. This will have considerable appeal for some performers.

METHOD 3 (Preferred Method)

FINAL

This is the method I previously included in my lecture notes. It is the version I have most often performed. While it is slightly more demanding technically than Methods 1 and 2, with a modicum of practice it is well within the capabili- ties of most performers.

REQUIREMENTS: A deck of blue-backed cards and a card wallet like those used for business cards. It should contain at least a few red-backed cards. These cards should not only have red backs but should be of a different back design.

SET-UP: The wallet with the extra cards inside and one pre-initialed card outside-face to the wallet, its back closest to your body-is in your left inside jacket or shirt pocket or, alternately, in your left outside jacket pocket. Your initials should be in the upper left corner of the card as it rests in your pocket. The marker should be in your left shirt pocket or your left inside jacket pocket.

Offer the deck to be shuffled and cut by a spectator (pref- 4 erably female). While that's being done, place your right hand into your pocket and take out the wallet. The red- backed card should be kept hidden behind it. You can do this by talung the wallet into left-hand dealing position, with the palm turned down. Keeping the card hidden, drop your lelt hand to your side and get a fourth-finger break between the card and the wallet (Figure 4).

Before accepting the deck back from the spectator have it cut and the cut completed on the table. With your right hand only, pick up the deck in Overhand Grip. You then explain, "This is an effect done with a deck of cards.. ." as you gesture slightly with the deck in your right hand. Continue, "a little wallet.. ." Gesture slightly with the wallet. Then, as if remembering something, bring the left hand fairly quickly toward the right and place the deck onto the wallet. The left hand turns palm up under the deck to hide the card on the wallet as it is added to the bottom of the deck (Figures 5 and 6 show the deck and wallet being brought together). With your right hand, immediately reach into your jacket pocket and remove the pen. Lay it on the table. Continue your patter with, "and a pen." Take the deck back, holding it in Overhand Grip in the right hand, and use your left hand to lay the wallet on the table. Explain, "In the wallet there's a card. You will notice that the back of the card does not match the deck. It's my card, but first you must have a card."

Take the deck into left-hand Dealing Grip. Announce that you will run your (left) thumb down the corner of the deck and the spectator is to call "Stop" when she likes. Do so, slowly. Lift off all the cards above the spot at which you were stopped. Start to place them under the left-hand packet from the near right corner. As you do so, use your left fourth finger to pull down the bottom card (or a few cards) of the left-hand packet. Be careful to avoid flashing the bottom card of the deck. It is vulnerable from the right unless you tilt the right edge of the deck down until just before the packets meet. Most of all, the sequence must be practiced for smoothness. If it appears at all awkward, suspicion will be aroused. In any event, this cuts the deck but leaves the bottom card intact. It's the reverse of a Bottom Slip Cut. (This is the Pull-Down-first described in Irehnd5 Curd and Coin Munipuhtion 1935, page 9-applied to a cut, an idea that probably began with Ed Marlo.) Finally, turn the deck face up and show the bottom card. Have the spectator sign the card on the face. Allow the ink to dry or blow on it if you like, then turn the deck face down.

4 Remove a red-backed card from your wallet without showing its face. Place it face down on the top of the deck. Openly initial the back of the card in the forward left-hand corner, making your initials look as much like those on the other red-backed card (the one on the bottom of the deck) as possible.

5 Remind the spectators of the situation. With your right hand, take the deck into Overhand Grip and rotate your hand palm up, showing the card at the face of the deck (the spectator's card). Turn the deck face down.

6 Reach under the deck with your left fingers and secretly slide the bottom card slightly to the right by contacting the left side of its face. Apply upward pressure on the edge of the card second from the bottom and draw it out as though it were the bottom card of the deck. Do this slowly. (This is the same slight variation of Vernon's Side Glide from Expert Card Technique referred to in Method 1 .) Place the card on top of the deck, above your signed card and square the deck.

7 Conclude the effect in the same manner followed in the previous methods.

CLEAN-UP PROCEDURES

Since I usually use this effect as a closer-yes, it's that strong-I don't have the problem of cleaning up. The problem is not difficult in any case. There is only one extra card in the deck and it sits second from the top of the left- hand spread. Pick that spread up first and place it, still face up, in left-hand dealing position. Place the other half on top of it, also face up. (If you'd like, you can Double Cut the rear card to the face of the deck. This will leave the red-backed card at the rear of the face-up deck.) As you square the deck, take a break above the lower two cards (the break should be taken above one card if you've done the Double Cut). Hold the break with your right thumb at the rear. With your right hand holding the deck from above, move it down over the wallet lying on the table. Pick up the wallet, adding the card(s) onto it, and place the wallet and the card(s) into your left hand, in dealing position. This may necessitate sliding the wallet off the table. The left hand turns palm down as it moves from under the deck, taking the wallet and the card(s) below the break. Place the wallet and stolen card(s) into your left outside jacket pocket. This leaves the deck clean, though perhaps short a card. I wouldn't worry about the lost card as you can always retrieve it later. As I've said, no real problem.

NOTE: It should be obvious that any combination of these three methods can be used. The method I have most often used is Method 3. Ideally, you should be able to perform all methods with equal facility. You can then choose your method (none is very difficult), adapting to the performing conditions and the audience.

FURTHER APPROACHES

I made quite an impression on some of the best card men in the country when I first performed "Forgery" for them. They were impressed enough to create some alternate handlings. I present some of them here for your consideration.

GOLDSTEIN AND TONG TIP 1974

In 1974, I received a letter from Phil Goldstein (Max Maven) to whom I had earlier shown the effect. In the letter he informed me that both he and Danny Tong preferred using a Gambler's Cop as suggested in Method 2. Since they are both seasoned, working professionals, I am driven to assume there is something of particular merit to that approach. I recommend you try it when the angles are right. It's about as easy as anyone could ask to load from Gambler's Cop. Try it. It's more a matter of guts than skill.

The set-up for the effect changes in that the extra card starts out with its back to the wallet rather than face to the wallet. The wallet should be held in dealing position, but with your palm down and the wallet opening against the thumb. With the deck held from above by the right hand, use its left side to help open the wallet. This will leave you with the deck resting on the right corner of the wallet when it's opened. The extended fingers of the left hand support the wallet from underneath and assist the right second and third fingertips, which are bent around the corner, to touch the face of the card below. Move the right hand diagonally back and to the right. As you do so, the right fingers, which are around the deck, draw the card, as it comes from under the wallet, into alignment with the bottom of the deck (Figure 7). The right hand then continues its motion, this time to the left and forward, extending the right first finger to point to the red-backed cards in the wallet. The extra card now lies on the bottom of the deck. Place all the items on the table and continue as in Method 3, Step 3, just after the card is loaded.

I I

The set-up is the same as that in Method 3. Instead of resting the deck on the wallet and reaching into your pocket for the pen, bring the deck and the case together with a left-hand wrist turn, transferring the extra card, but then continue immediately by bringing the case forward and flipping it open with an assist from the left side of the deck. Place the deck, now carrying the extra card, onto the table, then reach into your pocket for the pen. Continue as in Method 3.

For further variations on my Forgery theme, see Peter Samelson's "New York Transpo" from his book Theatrical Close-Up (1984, page 73); Darwin Ortiz's "Bold Fusion" (Cardshdrk, 1995, page 139); Chris Carter's "Cold Fusion" (The Linking Ring, Vol. 70, No. 9, September 1990, page 94); "Anniversary Waltz," a Doc Eason presentational variation of the Carter treatment; and Gary Kurds "Psychological Fusion" in the August 1991 issue of Genii magazine (Vol. 54, No. 10, page 664). Jay Sankey's effect titled "Forgery" (Richard? Almanac, Vol. 1, No. 516, January-February 1983, page 43) is unrelated to my premise.

PATTER COORDiNATiON The following is the exact patter I use when performing this effect. It is offered here to assist those who wish to learn the effect by coordinating the patter with the action. It is not my intention to suggest that you can or should duplicate my patter. The flirtatious aspect of the presentation is certainly not for everyone. You shouldn't attempt it unless you're confident you can deliver it in an unarn- biguously charming tongue-in-cheek manner.

DURING STEP 2 1 explain, "This is an effect done with a deck of cards, a little wallet and [pame to take out thepen] a pen." Indicating the wallet, say, "In the wallet is a card, which will be my card; but first we need a card for you."

Patter is required to have the spectator sign the card on the face without removing it from the deck. Accompanying Step 3 I say, "Take the pen and sign the card across the face." Pause until she finishes, then add, "And directly beneath that your phone number." This may get a laugh. "That's okay, forget it. I used to get a lot of phone numbers that way but people have become such septics." Catch the word as if it slipped out mistakenly and immediately correct it to "skeptics." "So, that will be your card, the [name ofcard]."

ACCOMPANYING STEP 4 I say, "In the wallet I have a card." Take the card out. "It will be my card. I'll sign it on the back, but I'll use my initials; it's faster." Sign it and let it dry.

ACCOMPANYING STEP 5, as I display the condition of the deck, I say, "Just as a reminder, this is your card, which you signed on the face. You'll recognize it, it's the only [name of card] in the world with your signature on it. And this is my card, which I've signed on the back."

ACCOMPANYING STEP 6, as I perform the Side Glide variation, I say, "We'll place your card directly above mine. That puts them close together."

ACCOMPANYING STEP 7, as I cut the deck, I say, "If I cut the deck like this, it puts them [in a sexy voice] closer together. And if I give the deck a little squeeze, like this [squeeze the deck], I put them [in an even sexier voice] very close together indeed." I take a long pause as I stare longingly at my spectator, as though I were dreaming about her. If you see that your spectator is made uncomfortable by the intense eye contact, look down at the table. You don't want to make her uneasy. You might add, "I have an active fantasy life."

ACCOMPANYING STEP 8, as I spread the deck between my hands, I say, ''AS I spread through the deck, you will notice that one card is different from the rest; that's the card that I signed on the back."

ACCOMPANYING STEP 9, I continue, "Logically, the card directly above it should be your card." Spreading all the cards above the signed one face up, add,

"But it's not. You might think I did something sneaky and somehow managed to manipulate the cards in such a way as to have your card arrive below mine." Spread the left-hand packet face up. "But, I wouldn't do that either."

PRIOR TO STEP 10, with building intensity, I state, "In fact, if this effect succeeded, then the card I signed on the back and the card you signed on the face [dramatically enunciate each word] should have physically merged into one." I turn the card face up. "Is that your signature?" (She acknowledges that it is.) "That's mine.

"Thank you." I strike an applause cue, with my elbows bent but arms out- stretched for a moment; then while the applause continues, I pick up the signed card and turn directly to the spectator. As I hear the applause start to trail off I add, "You keep this as a souvenir, and 1'11 put my phone number under my signature after the show." This comment should restart the applause.

ACE EFFECTS

TRAPPED ACE SURPRISE

JANUARY 28, 1972 BETA

"TRAPPED ACE SURPRISE" is a straightforward, tongue-in-cheek, Four-Ace Location. Since I avoid flourishes like the plague, most such routines are out of the question for me. This one is fun and effectively devoid of flourishes.

SET-UP: The Four Aces are on top of the deck in Diarnond-Heart-Club- Spade order from the top down.

&- '.+ y- Give the deck a convincing false shuffle and false cut, retaining the Aces on top. ..< ~ z i 9 %+

Spread the cards between your hands and hold them out toward a spectator, ,,?%" +%& *w,r

saying, "Some magicians would spread through the deck and have you select &2s a card." Pause as though thinking, until the spectator makes a motion toward *<*e*T

**@@ the spread. Abruptly close the spread as you say, "But I won't do that." Square " $ $ +:1.9 the deck while saying, "Because you might feel that I somehow influenced your 35%: @ choice." Continue, "I'll give you one. That's fair." Hand the top card of the deck * >

, ' , to the spectator. . " NOTE: This sequence should not be handled in an aggressive manner. It should appear as though there was a simple misunderstanding. You should not try to embarrass the spectator. The spirit of the routine is farce but your manner should be matter-of-fact, straight not silly.

Have the spectator show the card to the audience while you turn your head away. Turn back saying, "Now everyone knows the name of the card except me." Take back the card and look at it as you say, "Now everyone knows the name

of the card." Give the card back to the spectator. "Return the card to the deck anywhere you like-face up."

Allow the spectator to insert the card anywhere into the deck. Square the cards after making certain that he is satisfied with his point of insertion. Spread the deck, calling attention to the face-up Ace of Diamonds and the card below it.

Openly form a break under the card below the Ace of Diamonds and close the spread, but keep the pair of cards spread and clearly in view (Figure 8). With your right hand, slip all the cards above the face-up Ace into the break (Figure 9) and square the deck. All ~ou've done is transfer the face-up Ace of Diamonds and the face-down card beneath it to the top of the deck.

Say, "Would it prove inter- ? + .- esting if the card you placed

your selection next to were 10 a card of the same color and value?" Execute a Hit-style Double-Lift in the following manner: Push the face-up Ace of Diamonds to the right for about half an inch. Move the deck inward toward your J right hand, which should be positioned to the right of your body's center line and slightly higher than the left hand. This almost automatically causes you to tip the deck backward slightly as your right first finger extends downward to contact the right edge of the Ace of Diamonds. Push a bit further with your left thumb to cause the second card from the top to move rightward (Figure 10). It is a simple matter to align this indifferent card and the Ace of Diamonds above it, using the lefi thumb to pull back the upper card while the right fingers complete the squaring of the pair. You then immediately lift them off as though they were one. Remove the double card and hold it to the right of the deck. Push the top card of the deck to the right for

half its width. Use the double card to lever the top card face up. Take it onto the double and replace them, squared, on the deck. Deal the two face-up Aces onto the table.

NOTE: The approach to the Hit-style Double Lift used in the previous step is based on the analysis of Steve Draun, which appears in his thought- ful book, Secrets Draunfiom Uuderground ( I 993, page 19). Steve clearly has an exceptional eye for the fine details that separate the card expert from the norm. (See page 161 of the present volume for more on this technique.)

G Hold the deck in the left hand for an Overhand Shuffle. Undercut half the cards with the right hand and run six. Throw a block of cards from the right-hand packet onto the left-hand half, in-jogging the block, and shuffle off the remainder of the right-hand packet. Undercut at the in-jog and run seven cards in a broken rhythm. That means, as an example, run three, pause as you say something, then run four. After the seven cards are run, throw the rest of the deck on top. There are now two black Aces on top of the deck.

NOTE: The shuffle sequence just described is essentially the G. W. Hunter False Shuffle (which is a full-deck false shuffle; see Greater Magic, 1938, page 167) used to retain just the top stock. At the same time, it gets rid of the one extra card left behind by the previous sequence.

7 Perform a Double Undercut in the hands to move the top Ace to the bottom. The audience should be convinced the deck is in random order.

8 Set up for a Four-Card Catch by placing a face-up red Ace on top of the deck, jogged widely to the right. The other face-up red Ace is placed jogged widely to the left on the bottom of the deck. Your left thumb contacts the top face-down card of the deck and the right-jogged Ace. The left second finger contacts the left-jogged, face-up Ace and the card above it (Figure 11). Now say, "At the count of three, the deck will vanish from between the Aces; one-two-three." O n the count of three do the "Catch." In other words, press lightly on the deck, maintaining contact with the top and bottom pairs of cards and, with a tossing action, release the rest of the deck. The deck should land on the table, leaving just four cards in your left hand (Figure 12).

NOTE: This Four-Card Catch is avariant of theThree-Card Catch contributed by Reinhart Miiller to the July 1971 issue Pdllbearers Review (Vol. 6, No. 9, page 43 1). Almost thirty years later Mr. Miiller himself discovered this sleight described in a scarce 1853 book, Eirz Spiel Kirrten: Lebrbuch der hiiheren Kartenkunst, by "R. P," published in Prague. The handling I use is based on one by Harvey Rosenthal, which also appeared in Pallheilrers (Vol. 6, No. 12, October 1971, page 461). Harvey's handling was, like its predecessor, for a three-card catch; however, the four-card variant was an extension that I've long credited to Harvey. In checking with him, he tells me he did indeed come up with the idea in the early 1970s, but never got around to publishing it. He had forgotten about it until I contacted him for purposes of tracking the attribution. 'This may indicate how much material Harvey has developed over the years. In the interim, I suspect others discovered the expansion to four cards, and may even have published it. If any such reference exists, it has so far eluded me.

Say, "You see the deck has vanished from between the Aces. I know what you're thinking: ~ou're thinking two cards didn't vanish from between the Aces-these are Aces!" As you deliver these lines, 13 place the face-up Aces on the table. Turn over the face-down cards in unison with your remarks and show they are the black Aces. Place them down, forming a square display around the deck, as shown in Figure 13. You can then proceed to your favorite effect with the Aces. I think a version of The Collectors would be a logical follow-up. You might wish to look at "The James Gang" on page 67, the presentation of which can be adapted to fit "Trapped Ace Surprise" or vice versa.

CATCH-ACE-TRAP-EE

The history of this piece is strange. Pabukzr contained an effect, the name of which I cannot recall. After reading it, I wondered why it had been published. In playing with it, however, I came up with this effect. The two have little similarity, save the fact that they both use playing cards, but I will consider the Pabukzr effect inspirational anyway. (Who knows how the mind works?) At the time I came up with this I was not at home but rather at Tannen's Magic emporium in New York with a friend, Geoff Latta, who saw it through its development. A short while after the idea was born Mark Scudiery, a former student, came into the store and I showed it to him. I made the mistake of writing only the sketchiest of notes at the time. Thus later, in October 1975, while in Los Angeles, I was forced to reconstruct the handling. On October 23rd-during a

late-night session with Steve Draun of Chicago, at the Arlington Park Hilton, at which Peter Samelson was present-I performed the piece. Steve suggested that the effect was a bit confusing and contained too little proving. Still in Arlington, a few nights later, on October 27", I wrote some fresh notes containing this version, which addresses some of Steve's objections. The method herein is the best to date, so I'll waive all prior claims for methods except for those of Geoff Latta, Mark Scudiery, A1 Cooper, Peter Samelson or Steve Draun. Methods developed by these individuals may have been influenced by mine.

EFFECT: An apparent sandwich effect becomes a transportation-transmogrification and sandwich effect.

SET-UP: Remove the four Queens, openly laying them in a face-down pile on the table in Diamond-Club-Heart-Spade order from the top down. (The suit

order isn't critical but alternating the colors has aesthetic appeal and makes this description easier to follow.) Also bring the black Aces to the face of the deck, making no particular secret of it. As you accomplish these two open actions secretly obtain a fourth-finger break under the four cards at the face of the deck (two black Aces and two indifferent cards).

Using a Hit-style Multiple Lift, shift the four cards above the break (represented as only the two black Aces) to the right for half their width. With the right thumb pull the upper Ace hrther to the right for half its width (Figure 14).

I J As you move the cards into position say, "This effect involves the two black Aces ..." Flip the four cards face down on the deck, as though they were two. Continue, "...which I'll place here." Deal the top two cards face down into a pile. (These are believed to be the two black Aces.) Use a left-hand wrist-turn to hide the face-down cards (black Aces) that remain on the face of the deck.

Have a spectator place one hand onto the two supposedly black Aces and get him to repeat the names of the cards.

Reach forward with your right hand and spread the four face-down Queens. Pick them up and fan them face up in your right hand. Bring them to the apparently face-down deck. Actually, when you again turn the left hand palm up with the deck, it appears to be face down, but is face up, its true condition covered by the two face-down Aces. You make this turn of the hand behind the right arm, which has been screening the left hand by spreading and picking up the Queens. This sequence is discrepant but the audience will assume you turned the deck over while your hand was out of sight. The arm obscures the left hand and deck, further concealing the ruse. Next, rest the fan of face-up Queens on top of the apparently face-down deck.

NOTE: You could perform a Fake Reverse Reverse (see my P!stebonrd Perpensions, 1990, page 52) as the deck is coming back into sight, to help convince the audience that you turned the deck over. I feel it unnecessary, but as a reminder (and because you'll need it later) I'll briefly describe the Fake Reverse Reverse.

You are about to perform a "Carlyle" Turnover Move. (See The Phoenix, No. 48, November 19, 1943, page 196. My learned ~ublisher informs me that the sleight actually dates back further, citing Douglas Dexter's

I'? - I he Mystic Star," published in Goldston's Great Magicians' Tricks, 1 93 1 , page 203. We are probably forever saddled with the Carlyle attribution, but the correct history is useful and proper to detail.) However, rather than the usual application, apparently showing both sides of a card while actually showing one side twice, here it will be used to simulate the reversing of a deck. For those unfamiliar with the technique (or who don't recognize the name) it is performed as follows: The left hand performs two actions simultaneously. While the lefi thumb slips under the left side of the deck (Figure 15) and flips it over, side for side, the hand turns palm down, turning the deck face down (Figure 16). The result, when properly coordinated, is that it appears the deck has been turned over. Try it with a deck in your hand

v and you may fool yourself.

You might also try laying rhe deck on the table behind the screening right arm. Once the deck has been tabled the audience will lose track ofwhich way the deck is oriented. Although not the ideal way to construct an effect, this move happens early on and does not clutter the effect in any significant way.

5 While continuing to show the faces of the fan of Queens, have the spectator name one. Leave it face up on top of the deck while openly transferring the remaining three face-up Queens under the deck. Contrive to have the Queen of Hearts third from the face of the spread (unless it is selected, in which case the Queen of Spades should be third). This arrangement will improve the deceptiveness of a mis-show that occurs later.

6 Turn the selected Queen face down and remember its suit. Also remind the spectator of his selection.

7 Do a Fake Reverse Reverse of the deck. It will appear you have turned the deck over; that is, face up but with the Queens face down, covering the face of the deck. Say, "You didn't want the Queens of.. ." (Name the unselected Queens.) Reverse the order of the first two cards as you take off all three. This sandwiches the selected Queen between the black Aces. Square these cards and place them face down on the table. You needn't point it out but, when the three cards are taken off, the spectators are left looking at the same indifferent card they previously saw on the face of the deck.

NO'I'E: You may be tempted to have the spectator place his other hand on these cards. This is illogical as supposedly they are irrelevant. Simply place them off to the side.

Turn the deck over, this time honestly, but with an action that simulates that of the Fake Reverse Reverse (for consistency), and push the top card forward and to the right on the deck. Place your right fingers over the index corner of the card (Figure 17). Lift both hands flashing the face of the card but not

the index (Figure 18) and say, "This is your card, the Queen of [name]. Place it under your other hand." (The other hand is the one not covering the supposed Black Aces.)

"Now if you'll take the deck in your two frontal bicuspids and shuffle. Forget it, I'll do it myselfn Give the deck a Double Cut to the table, bringing the bottom card to the top, as follows: Squaring the deck, form a break above the bottom card and perform a Swing Cut into the left hand. Complete the cut while maintaining the break, which transfers the original bottom card to the top of the lower packet. Now cut the deck at the break, carrying the top portion to the table and place the lower portion on top of the tabled one. When I'm in a playful mood, I'll cut the upper half into a series of very small packets, three or four cards each, restacking the upper packet on the table. After cutting a seemingly absurd number of small packets, I'll have exhausted the cards of the upper portion, and myself. I then take all the remaining cards and slap them onto the tabled pile with a note of finality. Whether you give the deck a simple cut or this elaborate one, as you complete it say, "Enough, why wear out a good thing?" You could actually shuffle the cards at this point but the gag adds a bit of fun to an otherwise dry sequence. Continue, "Lift your hand and I'll take the black Aces."

10 Pick up the two cards and insert them into the deck, face down, at two different, widely separated, spots. Point out to the spectators what you are doing and push the two cards flush.

1 1 Table the deck and lift off half, or dribble the cards and have the spectator call "Stop" somewhere near the middle. Say, "Let me have the Queen of [spectator? cdrd]. Notice the black Aces are neither above [Izjyour hand to show the card at the face of the upper portion] or below [show the card on top of the lower section]. That's important, because instantly the two black Aces will come together trapping your card between them." Place the card remaining under the spectator's hand onto the lower half of the deck, drop the upper half on top and square the cards. "But it doesn't happen in the deck, it happens here." Point to the discarded Queens you placed aside earlier.

12 Pick up the supposedly discarded Queen packet and take it into Dealing Grip. Turn the top card face up and deal it to the table as you pull down the bottom card of the remaining two with your left fourth finger. Deal the next card (the Queen) face down onto the face-up Ace, overlapping it to the right. As you deal the Queen, pull down firmly with your left fourth finger to cause the third card to flip face up in your left hand. Figure 19 exposes this action, but in practice it occurs under cover of the Queen as it is dealt. The idea you wish to create here is that the Queen is sandwiched face down between two face-up Aces. You have openly turned up the first Ace but in the end the picture you desire is left in the minds of the spectators.

13 "There is one face-down card between the Aces. Name your Queen." As the spectator names his Queen turn the face-down card over, revealing that it has been trapped by the Aces as promised.

NOTES: The most difficult part of this effect is making the conditions of it clear. It is for that reason that the cards are placed under the spectator's hands. It helps everyone keep track of where all the components of the effect are at all times. It is, therefore, imperative that you have the spectator name the cards as you place them under his hands. This reiteration process is a notion that I learned from Francis Carlyle, who used the practice in all his transposition effects. He was astute in recognizing that the strength of such effects is directly proportional to the degree to which the spectators are convinced of the positions of the cards. I believe this could be a near miracle if properly sold.

APRIL FOOLS' ACES APML 1, 1976

BETA

I AM far from the first to attempt to eliminate the use of gaffed cards from the celebrated "MacDonald $100 Routine" (More Inner Secrets ofCardMagic, 1960, page 26). One might speculate that card aficionados began the effort to eliminate the gaffs the day after Hohinser introduced the idea. Nevertheless, most published material on Ace routines using double-faced cards are more in the way of handling variations. My goal was to simulate, as much as possible, the types of vanishes found in most popular handlings but without recourse to gaffs. I was less concerned with the specifics of a commercial routine. The material that follows can be considered something of an academic exercise, for while it eliminates the gaffs, it uses a full compliment of duplicates. Except for the purist, this is not a particularly significant advantage. The techniques taught herein, however, are applicable to a broad range of routines of the type that have gained increasing popularity in recent years. The routine I included in my earlier book, Pasteboard Peerpensions (1990, page 44), titled "Undone Dukes," is an example of a Reverse Assembly that could make use of some of the vanish sequences explained here. Moreover, some of the techniques taught have more far-reaching application. Stated in another way, you may consider "April Fools Aces" a tray on which to serve up a collection of tools from which the card enthusiast may sample. Viewed from this perspective, I think you'll find this an intriguing routine.

REQUIREMENTS: Two Aces of Diamonds, two Aces of Clubs, two Aces of Hearts, one Ace of Spades and a deck.

SET-UP: From the top of the deck, Ace of Diamonds-Ace of Clubs-Ace of Hearts-Ace of Spades-talon-Ace of Hearts-Ace of Clubs-Ace of Diamonds.

Openly remove the four Aces from the top of the deck and spread them face up on the table.

Casually remove twelve cards, one by one, turning each face up as you remove it, but allow each to flip face down as it falls to the table.

Spread the remainder of the deck between your hands and secure a left fourth-finger break above the bottom three cards (duplicate Aces). Square up, transferring the break to the right thumb.

With your right hand above, drag the twelve cards off the table, adding the three Aces from the bottom of the deck; or, if you prefer and are familiar with it, load them as you place the deck aside, as in the well-known Vernon Transfer. (See Ten Card Problems by Vernon and Ross, 1932, page 16; Early Vmon, 1962, page 36; or, for a fuller description, Roberto Giobbi's Card College, &Volume 3, 1998, page 516).

Square up the fifteen-card packet in the left hand. Pick up the four face-up Aces and turn them face down onto the packet, but maintain a left fourth-finger break. With your right hand, lift off the four Aces as a block from above and peel off each of the Aces onto the fifteen-card packet, reversing their order and out-jogging them for half their length. Lift off the four cards and place them on the table, then spread them. Finally, draw the top Ace (the Spade) back into Collector Ace position in the standard "T" formation.

NOTE: This sequence switches nothing; it simply arouses some minor suspicion as to whether the four tabled cards are the Aces. This is psychologically valuable later in the routine.

Spread the fifteen cards between your hands while commenting that these cards act as the medium for the effect. During the spread, in-jog the fourth card from the top. Close the spread and turn the packet face up, side for side. Lift the jogged card slightly to form a right thumb break above the three duplicate Aces and transfer the break to the left fourth finger.

Pull the first card off the face of the packet into left-hand Dealing position, stealing the three duplicate Aces under it (Figure 20) and maintaining a fourth-finger break between them and the accompanying indifferent card. This is a form of the Veeser concept. The

taking of four cards as one will probably be difficult and a bit scary at first. T h e alignment is critical, so bevel the packet forward and to the left before beginning to peel off cards. This is accomplished by pressing the left side of the packet against the left thumb, to produce the l e h a r d bevel, and rocking the packet forward on your right thumb and second fingertip to produce a forward bevel. With the packet "bevel-squared" in this way the three-card thickness will be harder to detect even when screened by only a single card. A slight downward tilt of your hand limits the spectator's view to the face of the top card while obscuring the front edge. (See page 425 for details on alignment insurance in other applications.)

NOTE: I use the term "Veeser Concept" in what may be a slightly non-traditional way. I've discussed this in my previous book, Pasteboard Perpensions (1990, page 4) , but I'll briefly restate my usage here. Any technique that involves concealing one or more cards under one or more cards during the actions of a display or count is an application of the Veeser Concept. I use the term irrespective of what technique is used to enable or facilitate the action. It is clear that this definition, when used retrospectively includes techniques that predate the Veeser declaration of the concept. As an example, the Hofkinser Under Spread Control (often referred to as the "Hofkinser Spread Cull") employs the Veeser Concept to conceal the culled card(s) once they have been culled.

Peel off the next card onto the left-hand packet (actually three Aces and an indifferent card). Finally, peel a third card onto the left-hand packet. Continu- ing, with the aid of the right fingers, square the six cards and secretly transfer the cards above the left fourth finger's break to the bottom of the right-hand packet, as exposed in Figure 21. Turn the lefi hand palm down as it moves to the left, spreading the three cards it holds face down. The status at the completion of the sequence should be: The left hand holds three face-down Aces, which the audience believes are three indifferent cards. The right hand holds twelve cards, which the audience believes to be nine. Place these three Aces onto the Collector Ace (the Spade).

8 Pull down on the bottom card of the packet and steal it behind the card on the face of the right-hand packet as you peel it into your left hand. Peel off the next two cards, one at a time, from the face of the right-hand packet onto the left- hand packet, then lever the left hand's cards face down and place these four, as though they were three, onto the rightmost Ace.

Repeat these actions (Step 8) again to place four cards as three onto each of the orher single Aces in the row. This procedure isn't strictly necessary for the last packet, but is adhered to for the purpose of maintaining the precise appearance of the actions.

I now offer you two options:

(a) You can do the vanishes from the position you are in using the following set of Ace-and-Four-Card Vanishes

(b) You can change the layout procedure, counting off nine cards as though they were twelve. Don't count them aloud. Stop two or three times during the count to make comments to the spectators. This is intended to prevent the audience from counting the cards. The addition of the three duplicate Aces allows you to place the three Aces on the Master-Collector Ace packet and still have nine cards left. This is what the audience believes, so you are in the position you should be. You can then put three cards onto each Emitter Ace packet and be set for the Ace-and-Three- Card Vanishes.

Of course, depending on your needs, you can mix and match these techniques to suit your preference and the size of the packet from which you need to accomplish the apparent vanish. In this routine you can also use whichever method you prefer on whichever packet you like. Let's assume you're working from left to right.

ACE-AND-THREE-CARD VANISHES

METHOD 1-Beginning with the Ace on the bottom of the face-down packet.

Execute an Elmsley Count with the packet but don't place the last card onto the packet; rather retain it in the "originating hand." Rotate both hands palm down (Figure 22) to flash the faces of the cards (but concealing the top card of the left- hand packet, an Ace).

2 Rotate both hands palm up again. Push off the top card of the left-hand packet (an Ace) onto the table (Figure 23) and immediately drop the right hand's card on top of the tabled one.

23

3 The right and left hands move toward each other. The right hand then takes the bottom card of the two held by the left hand and moves to the right with it. Both hands rotate to palm down, briefly showing the faces of the cards they hold. They then rotate palm up and deal the right- and then left-hand cards onto the two already tabled ones. This sequence is Marlo's Olram Subtlety.

NOTE: Owners of my earlier book, Ibsteboard Pevensions, will recognize this sequence as a version of the Elmsley-Olram Vanish (page 45).

METHOD 2-Beginning with the Ace on the bottom of the face-down packet.

1 Reverse the order of the cards, simulating an Elmsley Count, and secretly in-jog the third card as you take it. Stop when you are holding the last card in the right hand.

2 Lever this card, the Ace, face up and place it squarely onto the packet. Form a break above the jogged card and transfer it to the left fourth finger as you square the packet.

3 Shifting its grip, the right hand now approaches the packet from the right near corner. The right fingers pass under the packet while the tip of the right thumb contacts the edge of the card above the break exactly at the corner. The ball of the thumb immediately moves down to grip the cards below the break. This causes the card above the break to buckle convexly (Figure 24). Using a combination of the spring tension in the buckled card (which propels the card forward diagonally to the left) and the right hand moving diagonally back toward the right, separate the packet from the single face-up Ace. It should appear that you have simply slid the bottom card from under the packet (Figure 25).

NOTE: The sequence just described, Step 3, is a useful idea that may also be used for fdse counting any packet where a block of cards must be removed in the f.irst take-action. I call the concept the Edge-Off Block Control. From this concept grows not only the Edge-Off Displacement used in Step 3, above, but also a technique called the Edge-Off Count, which allows the counting of more as less by hiding the extra cards under the top card of the packet. In the situation in which we find ourselves in Step 3, one could just peel the card into the left hand but using the Edge-Off technique obscures where in the packet the Ace is actually being positioned.

4 Bring the hands back together, placing the right hand's cards onto the one in the left hand. Don't make an issue of how many cards are being placed onto the Ace. The audience should believe the Ace is being buried face up in the packet, second from the top. That's all that matters.

5 Give the packet a Jordan Count and turn the last card face up on top; it will be an indifferent card. Using a Block Push-Off or Buckle, turn over three cards as one, apparently turning the indifferent card face down.

6 Spread the packet revealing an indifferent card face up second from the top. Take the face-up card from the spread into your right hand while your left hand squares the remaining three-card spread. Perform the Olram Subtlety as in Method 1.

METHOD 3-An Ace is on the bottom of the face-down packet.

1 Perform an Elmsley Count, forming a fourth-finger break above the lowermost two cards in the process. Turn over two cards as one, showing the Ace apparently on top of the packet as it should be. You should retake the break as you turn the two cards face up.

2 Perform the Edge-Off Displacement as described in Method 2, Step 3, but buckle and remove two cards.

3 Perform another Elmsley Count, out-jogging the face-up indifferent card, and complete the count.

4 Do a Pull-Down on the bottom card of the packet (the Ace). Next, using the right first finger and thumb, with the thumb above, pinch the back right corners of the two face-down cards _ -

and pull them inward slightly, * .

keeping bottom of the the face-up packet Ace station- at the pT +%A 7

ary. As the two cards are drawn back, you will reach a point when the face-up out-jogged

card can be gripped by the left thumb on the left edge, the left second finger on the right edge, and the left first finger at the front edge (Figure 26). Once this grip is obtained, it is a simple matter to slide the face-up jogged card and the face-up Ace into perfect alignment as you draw the two face-down cards diagonally inward and to the right.

NOTE: The sequence described in Steps 3 and 4 of this method constitutes a technique I call the James Alignment Move. It has many other applications beyond that just described.

lxver the two face-down cards face up onto the left hand's face-up card(s) and immediately push the face card of the left-hand packet into the right hand. Turn the right hand's card face down in the right hand, then flip the packet face down using the left hand alone. Perform the Olram Subtlety apparently showing all four cards. This is based on Jonathan Townsend's combination of the Broken Elmsley Count and Olram Subtlety, which I call the Townsend Count (see ApocaLpfe, Vol. 12, No. 1, January 1989, page 1590).

METHOD 4-This technique begins with the Ace on the bottom of the packet and employs the Broken Elmsley Count.

Perform an Elmsley Count to reposition the Ace third from the face. Ifyou wish, you may form a fourth-finger break below the top two cards during the count, execute a Double Turnover, retaining the break under the double card, then turn the double face down again. This shows the Ace on top immediately before the vanish. In either case you now turn the packet face up.

Do a Broken Elmsley Count as follows: Count the first two cards in the standard manner, switching on the second card. Turn the two cards held by the left hand face down and immediately spread and drop them.

Count the right hand's two cards fairly into the left hand. Turn them face down, spread and drop them as well.

ACE-AND-FOUR-CARD VANISHES

METHOD 5-Begin with the Ace on the bottom of the packet.

Do an Elmsley Count but don't place the last card onto the packet. Instead, turn both the card in the right hand and the packet in the left hand face up.

Push the card on the face of the left-hand packet to the right and take it onto the card in the right hand. Continue by pushing off the next card from the face of the left-hand packet and taking it onto the right hand's cards. Finally, take the last two cards as one onto the right hand's cards. (The Steranko Move-Genii, Vol. 27, No. 3, Nov. 1962, page 127-is a nice touch here.) Apparently the Ace has vanished.

NCYI-E: I've come to reali~a that the technique I use when the Steranko technique might normally be applied is slightly different from and more reliable than the original. The count proceeds as usual, pushing off cards one at a time, until only the last two cards remain in the left hand. Using the pad of your left fourth finger, press the two cards against the flesh just below the mound at the base of your thumb. This keeps them securely aligned. While maintaining this grip, curl your left first finger and thumb tightly. This will allow you to pinch the card(s) between your left first finger below and thumb above, ntrr the front left corner. You now have four contact points on the card(s): your first finger and thumb at the front left (two points), your fourth finger on the right edge, and the base of your thumb against the inner left corner (Figure 27). You will now make it appear that you are straightening your first finger and thumb to move the double card, as if pushing it to the right. However, you actually pivot the card, maintaining the two near-end contact points while straightening your first finger and thumb (Figure 28). You add to the illusion by moving the right hand's cards, still in spread condition, past the right edge of the double card and press it with your right second finger and thumb to the underside of the fan (Figure29). You - can then safely release your left hand's hold and carry the right-hand spread away. Prop- erly timed it appears that you have pushed the right-hand card out to your fingertips, as , in the original Steranko Move, then taken the card into the right hand.

Drop the entire packet onto the table with an air of casualness.

METHOD 6-Begin with the Ace on the bottom of the face-down packet.

Reverse the order of the cards, simulating an Elmsley Count. During the count, in-jog the third and fourth cards, which you push off as a block (as one). Stop when you hold the last card in your right hand.

Lever the card face up onto and square with the packet, showing the Ace. Form a left fourth-finger break below the jogged cards as you square the packet.

Bring the right hand to the right near corner of the packet and execute my Edge-Off Block Displacement as described in Method 2, page 32. Figures 24 and 25 show the action. The right hand moves diagonally inward and toward the right, separating the two-card packet from the three cards topped by the face-up Ace. Bring the hands together to place the right hand's two cards onto rhe three in the left.

Perform an Elmsley Count, then turn the packet face up.

Holding the packet in Overhand Grip, use the left fingers to draw out the lower three cards of the packet while the right hand holds the top two cards squared as one. Place the double card onto the table and quickly follow up by dropping the other three cards face up onto the double.

NOTE: At the end of this sequence, the Ace has apparently vanished but is actually face down on the bottom of the packet. This can be useful in many situations, but if you wish to clean up the reversed Ace, proceed as follows: Instead of placing the double card onto the table, separate the hands, with three cards in the left and the double in the right. Flip the three left-hand cards face down, then drop the double on top of them. You're now in position to do an Olram Subtlety-or simply turn down the top card and drop the whole packet onto the table.

METHOD 7-The Ace is on the bottom of the packet.

Simulate an Elmsley Count, actually counting fairly, but form a fourth-finger break above the lowermost three cards as you do so. Turn over the last two cards as one, showing the Ace on top of the packet. Retake the break as you turn over the two cards.

Perform the Edge-Off Displacement, placing three face-down cards onto the face-up double card; then Elmsley Count the packet, out-jogging the indifferent card.

Perform the James Alignment Move (see Method 3, Steps 3 and 4, page 33).

Turn the three cards held by the right hand face up and count them onto the face-up card(s) in the left hand.

CONCLUSION

After having vanished the three Aces, turn over the Collector packet to reveal the four Aces to have cleanly arrived there.

CLEAN-UP

Depending on which vanishes you elect to use, you may have the apparently vanished Aces back on the face of each Emitter packet. If such is the case this

allows an immediate Reverse Assembly, though an extra card (or two) in the Collector packet would make the display of that packet more convincing after the reversal. If you elect not to do a Reverse Assembly, there is little to do but stack up the tabled, face-down Emitter packets and place them, jogged to the left, on the Collector packet. Pick up the whole group and, as you square it, use a Gambler's Cop to steal the duplicate Aces of Hearts, Clubs and Diamonds from the bottom of the packet. Drop everything else onto the deck, giving it its correct complement of cards. You can go south with the copped cards at your leisure. It's probably a good idea to ask a friendly nearby spectator to shuffle the cards, so that the distribution of the Aces is disguised.

CATALYTIC PROGRESSIVE ACES

March 1 1, 1990 S E W

THE PROGRFSSIVE ACE premise has generally been considered a Ken Krenzel "problem" dating back to the 1960's. Stephen Minch, the ever-helpful publisher of this work, brought to my attention that Roger Smith may have been the first to have published a version of the Progressive Aces, in Necromancer (Vol. 1, No. 1, August 1970, page 6). The Smith treatment, however, is nearly incomprehensible in parts. One of the appealing aspects of the routine is the simplicity of the plot. The first Ace vanishes from the first packet and appears in the second. The two Aces from the second packet then vanish and appear in the third. Those three Aces then vanish only to arrive in the fourth and final packet. Over the years a number of people have published versions. To my knowledge, Buddy Ackner's marketed version (which also includes a William Zavis handling) has created the most interest.

After watching Ken Krenzel's performance of his Progressive Ace routine (The Card Chsics ofKen Krenzelvideo), I realized that he had, perhaps unintentionally, defined a variation of the premise. He does not specifically call it a premise variation but to my way of thinking it is. The variation is the open use of a "catalyst" card. (In both his routine and mine it is a Joker. I have discussed this issue with Ken, who has been a friend since we were kids, and he agrees.)

The open use of a catalyst card considerably alters the avenues of approach to the premise. Ken uses the Mexican Turnover in his handling. In the routine that

follows, I use it as a means for accomplishing a Scoop Addition. I am not satisfied that either Ken or I have taken the catalyst idea to its ultimate refinement, but I feel confident we have both advanced the effort to solve this interesting problem.

EFFECT: A Progressive Ace assembly with the added element of a "catalyst" card, which is both openly and secretly of assistance in the performance of the routine.

SE'r-UP: On top of the deck are the four Aces in CHaSeD order, followed by an indifferent card, then a Joker (Ace of Clubs-Ace of Hearts-Ace of Spades-Ace of Diamonds-indifferent card-Joker-talon). It helps if the face-down deck is given a fairly pronounced lengthwise concave bend. This effect should be performed without a close-up pad, for reasons that will become apparent.

Remove the top four cards (Aces) and ribbon spread them from right to lefi, with the Diamond at the face.

Perform a Double Turnover of the next two cards to reveal the Joker. Use your right hand to take the face-up double card (Joker and indifferent card) and scoop up the Aces. By pushing with the first two fingers of the right hand you can easily add the lower (indifferent) card under the Aces (exposed in Figure 30). The action is like that of the K.M. Move, or the opposite of the block push-off action in an Elmsley Count. Carry the face-up, scooped Aces to the top of the deck and hold them there, under your lefi thumb, jogged to the right for about three-quarters of their width. Move the Joker to the right, clear of the Aces, then use it to lever the "Aces" face down and square onto the deck.

1ndz5reIzt card is a&d under

Ace spread

NOTE: What I'vc described are only the essentials. The logic of the routine can be improved, however, with a more elaborate sequence: When you've turned over the double card, displaying the Joker, take it onto the deck so only about one quarter of it overlaps. Hold it in place with your left thumb. Next move your right hand to pick up the tabled Aces but intentionally have difficulty due to the hard, slippery table surface. After an attempt or

two, a b a n d o ~ ~ the effort dnd move your right hand back to take hold of the Joker (double card). 'Iake the card(s) into right-hand I'inch Grip and rnovc to the table to use it as a scoop; then continue with the add-on. This brief wquence makes it clear, without a word being spoken, why you use che Joker as a scoop throughout the routine. 1 consider this sequence non- essential but quite useful in reinforcing the logic for what might otherwise be a action

3 Place the Joker aside, face up, near the right front corner of your working area. Deal the top four cards (believed to be Aces) in a left to right backward diagonal line (Figure 3 1).

4 Explain that you will place three cards on 31 each Ace and illustrate by spreading off the top three cards. Square the three, forming a break beneath them. Deal off the top four cards from the deck into right-hand Dealing Grip, counting them as three while reversing and rearranging their order. That is, take the top card; then take two as one, facilitated by the break you formed under the top three cards; and take one more card to complete the count. Square the cards as you place them back onto the deck. Stop and say, "Let me be fairer. 1'11 show them to you." (The function of this first count is to displace the Ace of Dia- monds, not to false count four cards as three.)

5 Spread off the top three cards and two additional ones in a short sideways ribbon (Figure 32). With the right hand, take the top - three cards, in spread condition, into Over- hand Grip. Pull the remaining two cards back square with the pack, forming a break under them as you do so. Rotate your right hand briefly palm up to show the hces of the cards. Fairly square the three cards against your left thumb and deposit them onto the leftmost tabled card (an indifferent card believed to be the Ace of Clubs).

6 The right hand again approaches the deck from above and lifts off the two cards above the break as though they were one. Move these cards to the right

and spread the next two cards over to complete a supposedly three- (actually four-) card spread. Lift this spread away from the deck and rotate your right hand palm up, showing the three faces. Rotating the right hand palm down, square the left edge of the spread against the lefc thumb and secretly drop off the bottom card of the four. No break is required to accomplish this drop-off. It's

33

made possible by controlling the angle at which pressure is applied as you push the spread closed against your left thumb (Figure 33). Try it a few times and you'll acquire the feel. Deposit the three cards that remain onto the second tabled card from the left, the Ace of Clubs. This packet will now contain both the Ace of Clubs and the Ace of Diamonds.

7 Duplicate the look of the sequence you've just performed (Step 6), showing three cards, then squaring, but actually place only one card on the third Ace. Again, pressure as you close the spread against your left thumb substitutes for a break.

8 Repeat the preceding sequence but remove no cards. Instead, simulate the placing of cards onto the last Ace. At the same time, to cover this deception, reach across to the front right corner of your working area with your left hand, which still holds the deck, and pick up the Joker with your thumb and first two fingers.

NOTE: Some will worry about pretending to put three cards onto the last Ace while actually placing none. Some will worry about placing one card as three on the third Ace. Some people like to worry. In situations where people are close enough to grab the cards (as in bars) the concern may be somewhat justified. You need to be able to judge your audience. Ifyou don't feel confident you can control your spectators, this is not a handling you should choose to use. In a formal performance environment you can be confident this ruse will pass completely undetected. You have established the action of placing three cards on each Ace with the first two Aces. By the time the third and fourth Aces are reached, the audience will have relaxed its scrutiny sufficiently so that they will not notice. The act of reaching across to pick up the Joker, coincident with the supposed placement of cards on the last Ace, is further insurance that the deception will not be detected. The point when the situation might most be suspected is just before the final Ace packet is scooped up. By the time that moment arrives there should be other issues on the spectators' minds, so it is extremely unlikely the swindle will be recognized. If this method is reserved for more formal

performance situations, where the distances are slightly greater, the dodge will unquestionably pass unsuspected.

For those who just can't bring themselves to be quite this bold, I offer two

alternatives: You can place one card on the last Ace. This will require that you perform a false count at the end, when yo~l reveal the four Aces to have arrived in the final packet. Alternately, you can place your card box on the last Ace, apparently to precl~~de tampering. You make the call.

Place the deck aside and pause to patter with only the face-up Joker in your hand. You might want to remind the audience that each of the Aces has three cards on it. (In reality, the first packet contains four indifferent cards; the second contains two indifferent cards and the Aces of Clubs and Diamonds; the third contains only two cards, an indifferent card and the Ace of Hearts; and the fourth packet consists of only the Ace of Spades.) Tap the tops of the first and second packets with the Joker. You may choose to explain that the Joker has special properties.

Use the face-up Joker to scoop up the first, leftmost, Ace packet, which is, of course, face down. Still using the Joker as an aid, flip the four cards face up into left-hand dealing position and spread them to reveal there is no Ace. Duck the Joker face up under the packet. Deal the four cards to the spot from which they came in a short face-up spread. When you deal these cards, in-jog the second card from the face in preparation for a break you will need to pick up later. It will appear that the first Ace has vanished, with its transposition soon to be revealed.

Use the face-up Joker to scoop up the second packet as you did the first. Flip these four cards face up into left-hand dealing position and spread them to reveal two Aces, the Ace of Clubs at the face and the Ace of Diamonds at the back. Duck the Joker face up under the packet. Deal the four cards from the pile into a spread at the spot where the face-down Ace packet sat, first laying down the two indifferent cards, then the Ace of Clubs followed by the Ace of Diamonds. There is nothing fancy about this, simply deal the cards out of order. It will be accepted as a means of increasing the clarity of the effect.

Turn the Joker face down and use it to scoop up the leftmost face-up spread of four indifferent cards. Flip the scooped packet face down into left-hand Dealing Grip. The Joker will be face-up on top. Obtain a break under three cards (Joker, indifferent card, indifferent card). With a little care you can preserve the in-jog you created earlier and convert it to a break in the process of scooping up the spread and squaring it. In a pinch, should you miss this break, you can use a Pull Down on the bottom two cards (also see my Splay Grip, page 382). Pause to comment upon the trip of the first Ace into the second packet.

Take the three cards (face-up Joker and two face-down indifferent cards) from the top of rhe left-hand packet as one, in right-hand Pinch Grip. Use these three cards to scoop up the second face-up spread (two indifferent cards and two Aces). Carry the entire packet to the left hand's packet and flip the four cards of the spread face down. Keep the scoop card(s) close to the packet so you can follow by dropping the Joker and the two cards below it on top of the packet. It is possible to deposit the cards hidden beneath the Joker on top of the packet without releasing your hold on the Joker. The action is very much like that used in a K.M. Move. This is arguably more logical, but is also more difficult. I don't think it worth the risk of the cards falling out of alignment, but that's a personal conclusion. Assuming you release the Joker, the packet will read from the top down: face-up Joker, four face-down indifferent cards, face-down Ace of Clubs, face-down Ace of Diamonds and two face-down indifferent cards.

Take the Joker into your right hand and deal the top four cards from the left- hand packet to the table, in second position, one handed. Use the Joker to help square the tabled packet. Tap the tops of the second and third packers with the Joker, as a magical gesture or pointer. As you do this, secure a break under the top two cards in the lefi hand. A two-card Pull Down does the job better than a Push-Off and re-square.

Use the face-up Joker to scoop up the second packet in preparation to reveal the vanish. The scooped packet is deposited face down on the left hand's four cards, with the Joker face up beneath it. Deal the top four cards face up into the second position, in-jogging the second card from the face as you do. The two Aces have vanished. The face-up Joker is now the top card of the left hand's packet. You should be holding a break below three cards.

Take the three cards, as one, into right-hand Pinch Grip and use them as a scoop to pick up the third Ace packet (an Ace and an indifferent card). Carry this packet to the left hand and deposit all of the cards except the Joker onto the left- hand packet, forming a break under all. The Joker is slipped out of the packet in a gesture to the right and is then brought back to the packet and inserted into the break. Square the cards.

Deal the top four cards (an indifferent card and the Aces of Hearts, Clubs and Diamonds) into a face-up spread on the table. The face-up Joker and two face- down indifferent cards remain in the left hand.

Turn the Joker face down and use it to scoop up the leftmost face-up spread of indifferent cards. Flip the scooped packet over onto the left hand's two cards, bringing the face-up Joker to the top. Form a break under four cards (the Joker and three indifferent cards) as you square. This is facilitated by the

in-jogged card you set in the tabled spread. Pause to comment on the traveling of the Aces.

Take the four cards from the top of the left-hand packet into right-hand Pinch Grip and use these cards to scoop up the face-up spread (an indifferent card and the Aces of Hearts, Clubs and Diamonds). Carry the entire packet to the left hand and flip the four cards of the spread face down. Keep the scoop card(s) close to the packet so you can drop the Joker and the three cards below it on top. The packet will read, from the top down: face-up Joker, four face-down indifferent cards, Ace of Hearts, Ace of Clubs, Ace of Diamonds and three face-down indifferent cards. Here again, it is possible to deposit the cards hidden beneath the Joker onto the packet without releasing your hold on the Joker. The choice of techniques is yours.

Take the Joker into the right hand and deal the top four cards from the left-hand packet into the third position on the table, one-handed. Use the Joker to help square the packet. Tap the tops of the third and fourth packets with the Joker and, as you do so, form a break under the top three cards in the left hand. This is the most discult break to pick up in the routine. I use a t h m b count because I find it the surest method under these conditions, without looking. If you find a better technique (the obvious Triple Buckle or Pinky Count don't qualify), let me know.

Scoop up the third Ace packet and deposit it face down onto the left hand's six cards. Leave the Joker face up in the packet. Deal the four face-down cards into a face-up spread back into their spot on the table. The face-up Joker is now the top card of the left hand's packet. The Aces have vanished and you should be holding a break below four cards.

Take the four cards, as one, into right-hand Pinch Grip and use them as a scoop. You'll need to keep your hand in motion to prevent the thickness from being observed. If you used the box as cover for the last Ace, you'll need to move it just before you proceed. Scoop up the fourth Ace "packet" but hold it in your right hand for a moment.

Turn your left hand palm down and pick up the tabled spread of indifferent cards from the third position. Place all these cards face down on top of the deck, which should be off to your left. You are simply clearing away the clutter.

Transfer all the cards, except the Joker, from the right hand to left-hand Dealing Grip. Maintain your grip on the Joker and deal it to the right. This will require that you slip it from the left-hand packet. Once the Joker is tabled face up to the right, return your attention to the left-hand cards. Deal them into a face-up line from the near left to the far right, revealing the four Aces to conclude the effect. If you wimped out and placed a card on the last Ace, you'll need a false display

here. Since the extra card is the top card of the packet, turning the packet face up and dealing three cards to the table will leave you with a double (the Ace of Spades and an indifferent card) as the last card. You can use it to scoop the tabled Aces and flip everything face down into your left hand. Dropping the deck on top cleans up the evidence of the extra card.

NOTES: I am not convinced that this treatment of the Progressive Ace premise is anywhere near ideal. I haven't, at this point, performed it enough to comment meaningfully on how well it plays for lay audiences. I do know that it is easy to perform and well constructed. It has a small number of vulnerabilities. Those that exist are fairly well covered. The one fncror that prevents me from endorsing this routine more fi~lly is the assumption that the audience perceives the scoop action as innocent. I did not invent the Scoop Addition. It is, I believe, a Marlo concept (The Linking Ring, Vol. 34, No. 1 1, January 1955, page 82), though the same action is associ- ared with the Mexican Turnover. The same type of problem exists with the Curry Turnover Change and similar sleights. The magic community has felt ambivalence over such moves for many years. I believe the Scoop Addi- tion is less suspect than the Mexican 1-urnover. I don't know how much less suspect. The conclusion under which I currently proceed is that these techniques are accepted as natural. Still, at some level, audience members realize that the actions, however natural, could, at least partially, explain the effects they are witnessing. One might argue that such attitudes exist for many techniques in many effects. This is no doubt true. This, in my view, obliges us to examine the moves we elect to use under a critical light. We cannot blindly accept that such techniques are deceptive. In this case, the jury is still out.

BELOW ZERO MINUS ONE

JULY 1 ,1973 BETA

I SUSPECT that this premise has a longer history than that of which I am aware. I will, however, offer those credits I know. The effect is a sort of packet version of avis- ible, slow-motion, ~acket-elevator routine that to the best of my knowledge, began with Bob Ostin's 1974 marketed effect, "The Submarine Card" The presentational idea of a card acting like a submarine, however, seems to date back to Charles Jor- dan's "Impossible Journey" (Thirty Card MysstPes, 19 19, page 58). Ostin's version involved a special card and, because it did, I found his method (based on an idea by J. C. Whylie (Phoenix, No. 193, December 30,1949, page 770; and Abraadabra, Vol. 8, No. 199, November 19, 1950, page 263, which appeared in an effect titled "Elusive Lady") to be of only academic interest (though it led to handlings from Jennings, Cervon, Lorayne and Stephen Tucker). It seems that the special card used by Whylie had been used earlier, in another context, by Tom Sellers in his 1936 book, 21 N m Card Tricks, in an effect titled "New Principle Card Trick" (page 8). It has been speculated that the Sellers-Whylie-Ostin card led to Busby's lizto the Fourth Dimension.. . and Beyond (1 973) and Walton's "Card Warp" (1974). I guess it says something about me that I was uninspired by the special card that seems to have inspired so many others while I found the routine itself quite intriguing.

Roy Walton, a man who knows a good premise when he sees one, recorded his method in his book Cardboard C h a r d s (1971, page 44). He titled it "Below Zero." His approach was fine though it used an extra card and a move of which I was not fond. His method and presentational approach, however, guided mine.

My method-which introduces three new sleights and a fresh application of an old one-eliminates the extra card and the questionable move. It was the elimination of the extra card that prompted the name: "Below Zero Minus One." It is worth noting that Ken Krenzel has published a handling for this effect, "Light and Heavy C a r d (Epilogue Special No. 2, circa 1974, page 247). His is a fine handling; it is reaffirming that Ken also saw the appeal of this premise.

EFFECT: As stated above, this is a visual, slow-motion, packet-elevator routine. Five cards are freely chosen from the deck, and one of these, while face up, passes one card at a time down through the others. It is then clearly placed face up on the bottom of the packet, whereupon it magically turns face down and rises to the top-twice.

1 Spread the deck and have a spectator remove any five cards. Square the deck and place it aside or into your pocket. Turn the five cards face up and spread them between your hands. Have one of the five named. Explain that merely by naming the particular card the spectator has endowed it with certain magical properties, which you will demonstrate.

2 Turn all the cards face down except the selection. Place it face up on top of the packet, jogged forward for about three-fourths of its length. The packet should be in dealing position, but your curled left first finger should contact the bottom card of the 34 packet on the face at the front right corner.

3 Move your left thumb to the left side of the packet and lift that side until the packet is tilted roughly forty-five degrees to the floor. The left fingers should be straight. This somewhat resembles the traditional Charlier Cut position (Figure 34).

4 Place your right palm onto the uppermost face-down card of the packet so the heel of the palm rests on the rearmost portion of the card. Your right fingers extend over the out-jogged face-up card. Turn your right side toward the audience, much as you would if you were about to perform the Roterberg version of what is usually referred to as the Herrmann Pass (actually Hofzinser's). Slide your right hand back, dragging the face-down card beneath it until its forward edge clears the near edge of the jogged face-up card (Figure 35, an exposed view).

You may pause for a moment in this position, provided your hands are large enough to completely hide the face-down card.

5 Move the right hand forward, pushing the face-down card back to its original position, but one card higher in the packet. This captures the out-jogged Face-up card second from the top. I usually wiggle my fingers and spread them before dramatically moving the hand away. When the right hand is moved aside, the effect created should be that the face-up card has penetrated the face-down one.

NOTE: This is a novel appliation of a technique borrowed from a move usually referred to as the Erdnase Color Change (actually Houdini's), which is traditionally performed with a squared, face-up deck. A description of this color change appears in the S. W. Erdnase classic The Expert at the Card Table (1902, page 151). It had appeared in Selbit's Magiciarzi Handbook previously ( 1 90 1, page 27), and in Elliott: Last Lega~y ( I 923, page 133) afterward, with the correct atrribution, but the Erdnase description is the most readily available. When performing for smaller groups, where turning side-on to the audience would seem too "staged," the technique can be performed straight-on as one might a more traditional color change.

6 The next move, which is original with me, was created specifically for this routine but can be applied to others as well. I will describe it only once and thereafter refer to it simply as the Spread Displacement.

THE SPREAD DISPLACEMENT

Push the out-jogged card partially back into the packet so that a bit less than half of its length protrudes from the front. Grip the top card (face down) and the out-jogged card (face-up) by the right side at the area where the two cards overlap. Your right thumb should be above, your first and second fingertips below (Figure 36).

This next sequence, the essence of the move, may prove easier to accomplish if the right first finger pushes up very lightly on the out-jogged card. Slide the two cards to the right for about half their width and something over a quarter of an inch forward. Immediately, using your left thumb and fingers, spread the

cards remaining in the iefi hand (Figure 37). The right hands cards should not be lifted during this left-hand spreading, which should be as wide as is practical. As the left-hand spread is being completed, the right hand continues to slide its cards to the right until the near left corner of the out-jogged card is clear of the right side of the card beneath it. As it clears, the jogged card drops slightly on the left side, as though it were being pulled on. Actually, it bends because of the downward pressure necessarily exerted on the pair of cards to keep them together. The right side of the uppermost face-down card of the left-hand group easily slides into the opening between the face-up jogged card and the face-down card above it (Figure 38, exposed for clarity). The left edge of the out-jogged card also slides above the second card from the top of the left-hand spread. Note how the slightly advanced position of the right hand's cards helps to conceal the insertion. Through all this the spread must not be broken. When this action is complete, push the spread closed, positioning the two overlapping right-hand cards slightly forward as you do so, to conceal the card that has been slipped between them.

Move your right hand over the packet in a duplication of the magical gesture you performed earlier (Step 5) . Repeat the Spread Displacement again as you reveal that the face-up card has sunk one card lower in the packet. This time, however, you will need to count off the top card fairly before you begin. The top card is held in the same manner as the overlapped pair but is spread to the right

for half its width (Figure 39). You will find that the card above the double card does not affect the mechanics of the technique. As you create the spread, point out that the face-up card has dropped to the third position in the packet.

8 Repeat Step 7, this time counting two cards fairly before beginning the Spread Displacement actions. Alter your comments accordingly. Again, the cards above the overlapped pair do not affect the mechanics.

NOTI'E: Depending on my sense of how the audience is responding to the egect, I will sometimes abbreviate the sequence by displacing the face-up jogged selection all the way to the bottom during the actions of Step 8, making it sink from third to fifth position in the packet in one step. This requires that the third and fourth face-down cards enter between the face- lip out-jogged card and the face-down card directly above it. This does not change the fundamental mechanics, as brief experit~~entation will reveal.

9 As you simulate the actions of the Spread Displacement, showing the out- jogged card to have sunk, by stages, to the bottom (whether in Step 7 or Step 8), slightly in-jog the second card from the top of the face-down packet. Openly move the face-up, out-jogged selection to the top of the spread and square the cards, forming a break under the in-jogged card. You will be holding a break under three cards.

10 Say, "Actually, I've been holding out on you. Not only will the card sink down in - the packet, it can also rise. If I put it on the bottom.. ." As you finish saying this, execute a Hit-style Triple Lift. This is facilitated by the break. Transfer the three cards to the bottom as though they were one. Now, as a magical gesture, pass the packet through your hand, performing the Vernon Through-the-Fist Flourish, but without reversing the packet. That is, simply, place the packet onto your left fingers with one edge at the crease formed where the innermost phalanges meet the palm (Figure 40). Close

your hand loosely around the cards as you rotate your hand to palm down. In effect the packet has turned end for end but not side over side, though the impression created is that it has been turned over. Push on the end of the packet with your left thumb and the packet will slide along the crease till it protrudes out the fourth-finger side of the hand (Figure 41). The crease acts as a track, keeping the packet in good alignment. When the packet is "through the fist" the right hand approaches and takes it by the front left corner. If the right first finger contacts the left edge while the second finger contacts the front edge (Figure 42), the packet can be pivoted against the left fourth finger until it has turned end for end and the right thumb can lower onto the back (Figure 43). The packet will stay in near-perfect alignment during this pivot.

42 43

NOTE: I have found a better, albeit slightly more difficult, alternative for the Through-the-Fist Flourish, which I use here. It is my variation of Cer- von's Novrec Turnover, which I refer to as the Semaj-Novrec. I'll describe it shortly, when we reach the point where the version involving the secret reversal is used. If you wish to use this alternative, perform an All-Around Square-Up, end-for-end twist of the packet. This rwist sets up the pattern for the later technique.

I 1 Next you will execute a JEHHFOWJ Count. Hold the packet as for an Elmsley Count with the cards in whatever grip you normally use. I use what I term the Marlo Flexible Count Grip, which I described in Pateboard Perpensions (page 4) , and will redescribe here for completeness.

THE MARLO FLEXIBLE COUNT GRIP

Take the packet into Pinch Grip, with the right thumb above and the first two fingers below, positioned near the center of the right side. The tip of the right

fourth finger lies against the edge of the packet at its near corner to give added assurance for alignment during the count (Figure 44).

NCITE: I have altered the grip position from Marlo's, who pinched the packet close to its near corner (see Marlo's "Flexible Count" in the December 1963 issue of New Tops, Vol. 3, No. 12, page 22; and also in M.I.N. T, Volume 1, 1988, page 37). It should be noted that Marlo described the Flexible Count as a left to right hand count with the left hand's Pinch Grip at the near corner of the cards. My grip position also differs slightly but significantly from that described by Marlo in his later discussion in Marlo: Magazine, Volume Three (1979, page 77), in that the tip of the fourth finger provides an alignment stop for cards taken back into the right hand. This left-right alignment stop is more useful, in my estimation, than the front-back alignment stop provided by the finger positioning suggested by Marlo.

THE JEHHFOWJ COUNT JULY 1, 1973

You are now ready to execute the JEHHFOWJ Count (pronounced JEFF- OOGE), which combines elements of the Jordan (Houghton-Haxton) and Elmsley Counts with a five-card packet. It was devised for this routine but has much broader applications. It is similar to, though I believe it predates, a count devised by Daryl Martinez calledThe D.M. Count (first described with a three- card packet in Secrets of a 'Tuerto Rican Gambler, " 1980, page 109; and with a four-card packet in Dayl i Cardboard Chameleons, 1981, page 3). I do not suggest Daryl knew anything about my count, simply that I find mine easier to perform reliably; it's what I use.

NOTE: The JEHHFOWJ Count hides, like the Elmsley and Houghton- Haxton Counts, and displaces, like Jordan's Count (whatever technique he may have used). It uses a grip I modified, based on a grip Marlo recognized could be used to cycle Elmsley and Jordan Counts, in what he termed the Flexible Count. I've argued it should have been called Flexible Count Grip (see P'tebonrd Pe'erpensions, page 4).

The JEHHFOWJ Count is a true hybrid, embodying features first identified by Norman Houghton and Francis Haxton (see Verne Chesbro's booklet, Ultimna Color Separatiorz, No. 2, 1964, page 3), where Houghton and Haxton agreed on sharing credit). 1 see a growing tendency to lump all applications of a technique under the mechanics of that technique,

7 . despite its creator's bilure to share pertinent applications. I his accounts fix a number of disagreements over credits. My perspective is founded in my scientific background. 'The discoverer of the atom doesn't get credit for the A-bomb or tracking isotopes through the body for diagnostic purposes. Each depends on the other but they are not inherent or "obvious to one schooled in the art." That wording comes from the patent process but it reflects in legalesc a notion taken as given in the scientific conlmunity. In thar community, where therc is doubt, the presumption is thar credit should be given. In the patent field, where money may be at issue, it can come to trial and be adjudicated. I would like to think that magic would follow rhe practice of the scientific community, since financial remuneration is not at issue in most instances. That's the perspective I bring to the Jordan-Hough- ton-Uaxton distinction. I t is at the heart of my philosophy for crediting in magic, as it is in the sciences. I strongly suspect not everyone will agree with me on the matter. I believe, however, that each reader is entitled to reach his or her own conclusions based on information, not dogma. Hence this somewhat lengthy side excursion.

As you hold the packet in right-hand Marlo Flexible Count Grip, pull off the top card fairly into left-hand Dealing Grip. Push over the block above the bottom card, as in an Elmsley Count, and steal back the single card from the left hand under the right-hand card as you draw the block into your left hand. This is also like an Elmsley Count. Pull off the next card fairly for the count of three (though you should not count aloud). As you take the last card from the right hand, on the count of four, steal back the lowermost card from the left- hand group, as in a Jordan (Houghton-Haxton) Count. This shows all the cards apparently face down and leaves the face-up card, the selection, on the bottom, below the four face-down cards. As you finish this display you comment, "You will note that the card has turned over in the packet. If I give the packet a twist, like this.. ."

12 Execute the Vernon Through-the-Fist Flour- 45 ish again, but this time secretly reverse the packet. More specifically, place the packet face down on your left palm with the right edge on the crease at the base of the fingers (Figure 45). Close your hand into a loose fist and turn it palm down. Using your thumb, push the packet through your hand along the track formed by the crease. Remove the packet, with the same pivot action used before, and place it into dealing position.

This is apparently the same action used in Step 11, except that the packet was then placed on the fingers, resulting in the packet's not being reversed. Never- theless, that sequence sets up this one.

NC11'E: 'Those familiar with it can apply the NovrecTurnover or my Semaj- Novrec variation instead of the Vernon Through-the-Fist Flourish. The Cervon technique appeared in his book The Bhck B White Zick and Other Asjorted Mysttries ( 1 989, page 47). A description of my variation follows:

SEMAJ-NOVREC MASKED PACKET REVERSE JULY 18, 1990

Begin with the packet in left-hand dealing position. Your right hand moves over the packet, grasping it between the right second fingertip at the front left corner and the thumbtip at the diagonally opposite, near right corner. All the fingers of the left hand relax, moving away from the right edge of the packet, except the left fourth finger, which remains bent above the right side, close to the near right corner (Figure 46). The position of the fourth finger is as though it were holding a large break, save that 1 ' 1 there are no cards above. \ .4' As soon as the right hand is in position, two actions occur simultaneously. The right hand will turn the packet clockwise 180 degrees. This is accomplished by combining a pivot of the right wrist and a swing of the front of the packet to the right, achieved by the right second finger and thumb. The near corner maintains contact with the right thumb. The left hand also rotates the packet clockwise and downward during this action. The left fourth finger's contact with the packet causes it to rotate clockwise along its diagonal axis (Figure 47, in which the under card of the packet is shown with a shaded back to clarify the action).

As soon as the packet is rotated 180 degrees end for end and a little less than 180 degrees corner over corner, the left hand retakes it into Dealing Grip (Figure 48). All this may sound complicated. It actually isn't. The packet is simply rotated along one axis, its approximate center, end for end, and another axis, the diagonal, side for side. The smaller rotation across the diagonal is masked by the larger rotation and is partially screened by the right hand. Prop- erly coordinated, the smaller rotation is effectively invisible; timed incorrectly it will seem impossible that the technique can be deceptive. The technique and timing will reveal themselves with minimal mirror practice.

13 Having said, "If I give the packet a twist, like this.. ." and put the packet through either the Vernon or Semaj-Novrec maneuver, you continue, "your card rises through the other cards, leaving just the four cards you didn't make special." This next move was first recorded in my private notes of July 1970. I had the pleasure of performing it in the context of this effect for the late Arturo de Ascanio who was instantly enamored of it. I included it in Pasteboard Perpensions (page 53, Step 6.5), with a full deck, but this small-packet version allows an almost uncanny visual and aural illusion that makes the technique completely invisible.

SNAP REVERSE JULY 1970

Holding the packet in Dealing Grip, relax the left fingers (releasing their grasp). The right hand grasps the packet as though it were a single card, taking it with the thumb above and the first two fingers below at the middle of the right side. Lift that side of the packet slightly and slide it lightly along the left palm until the left edge of the packet lies along the middle joint crease of the first finger and the inner joint crease of the fourth finger (Figure 49).

Push up and slightly forward 50 with the right hand and allow all of the cards except the top one to escape from the grip of the right fingers, the thumb holding that card in place (Figure 50). If you have done everything correctly, it should look as though the card has been lifted sharply off the packet-which it has. What should not be realized is that the packet has been reversed, flipping side over side, in the process. The Snap Reverse is a novel form of Action Half Pass or packet reverse. As such, it can be applied to many of the Eunctions of both. Its closest relative seems to be Ben Harris' Fandango move (from his 1986 monograph of the same name). The Snap Reverse has the advantage of being invisible and far less subject to angle constraints.

I4 Flick the face-down card with your left thumb then turn it face up revealing it to be the card named earlier, which has apparently risen to the top.

CLOSING NOTES: In the final, "ambitious" phase of the routine, after the magical gesture of the Through-the-Fist Flourish, the selected card not only turns face down, it also rises to the top of the packet. Its position, however, isn't shown. This rise is merely suggested by your words. The JEHHFOWJ Count proves that the card has turned &ace down as it is moved back to the bottom of the packet. A final magical gesture then causes the card to pass back up through all the others. Since the effect of the routine is very visual, my patter doesn't try to hard-sell this "logic." The left- and right-brain activities have a tendency to fight each other. Instead, the logic is offered only lightly and the visual element carries the effect.

A fine addition to this routine is to begin with four blank-faced cards face up in positions three through six from the top of the deck. Any face-up card lies second from the top and any face-down card is on top. Spread the deck and have five cards removed, taking care not to flash the reversed cards. Turn the selected cards face up on the deck, spread them and have one named. Transfer it to the face of the group, then square everything. Lift off the top, face-up card, then turn over the top ten cards as though they were four. Spread off the top four face-down cards of the deck, which are now four blanks. I'erform the routine as described and you have a surprise ending: The four unchosen cards turn blank. There is a reversed card lefr second from top, but it is easily righted when you place the deck into your pocket. A line 1 have used to punctuate this change, which has proven quite

effective, is: "Once you've seen a card perform as this one has, other cards seem pale by comparison. "

Either version of the routine, with the blank cards or without, will fasci- nate and intrigue a lay audience. Both versions play very well in stand-up, walk-around, restaurant or cocktail-party conditions. Such venues tend to be noisy, and patter can't be too detailed. In this routine a minimal amount of patter is required to keep the plot clear. This flexibility has made it something of a favorite of mine for quite a few years. The effect is not devastating but is received as pleasing "eye candy," an interlude between nlore intricate plots.

TURN M E DOWN WHY DON'T YOU

JUNE 22, 1976 BETA

MY NOTES are very sketchy as to how this effect evolved. The only fact I can determine with certainty is that I was inspired by something I saw Derek Dingle perform. A related routine much later appeared under the title of "Illusion Aces" in his excellent collection, The Complete K6rks ofDerek Dingle (1 982, page 79). Derek did not explain his routine to me-frankly I didn't ask-and the version I saw seems to differ in some ways from what appears here and from what was eventually published. I realize that isn't much of a history, but it's all I have. If anyone wishes to claim the idea I can't really argue. Thus far the best theory I've heard is that the premise is one by Karl Fulves. I include it here and claim it as my own handling because I have not seen anything else quite like it in print, and it opens up an interesting sandwich approach to a one-at-a-time Twisting- the-Aces-type effect, with an unexpected ending. It's not a miracle, but it is a rather strong impromptu effect.

EFFECT: Four Aces are, one by one, placed face up between the two black Tens. Each turns face down and is placed aside. After the last of the Aces has met its fate, the four reversed cards are revealed to have transformed into Queens.

REQUIREMENTS: A normal deck of cards is used. I have noticed that certain brands (notably Maverick) seem thinner than most brands from U.S. Playing Card Company. Thinner cards are to be preferred for this effect for reasons that will become evident.

SET-UI': From the top down: any Queen-another Queen-Ace of Clubs-Ace of Spades-Ace of Hearts-Ten of Spades-Ten of Clubs-another Queen-the final Queen. The last two face-down Queens, the two below the Tens, should be crimped convexly at their near end. The entire stack can be culled under the pretense of looking for the Tens and Aces.

Spread off the top seven cards without letting the spectators become aware of exactly how many are being spread. (They should believe that only six are taken but you need feel no compulsion to prove it.) With your right hand, turn the block face up and lift it off the deck. Peel off the top two cards (the Tens) back onto the top of the deck, with the Ten of Clubs in-jogged for about one quarter of its length and the Ten of Spades out-jogged a similar distance. Keep the face of the right hand's packet tipped toward you so the audience gets as little time as possible to note the Ace of Hearts there.

Place the deck onto the table, using only your left hand. The Tens should remain in their face-up jogged condition (Figure 5 1) and the end crimp should remain nearest you.

Your left hand returns to take the right- hand packet just long enough for the right hand to switch to Flexible Count Grip (see page 54 and Figure 44). The additional alignment insurance provided by this grip is critical in this routine, since the packet being handled is thick more often than not during the handling. With the packet back in the right hand alone, pause for a moment. Look at the audience as you comment to the effect that you have the four Aces. Use the Jordan Count to false count the five cards as four, taking them into left-hand Dealing Grip. It will appear that you've shown the four Aces. The Ace of Hearts will return to the face.

NOTE: I am of the belief that whenever counts of the Elmsley, Jordan, Flexible Count sort are performed, it should, whenever possible, be made very clear which hand is holding the packet before the count begins. This is oken overlooked by card workers, even by some vesy good ones. This clarity is provided by simply establishing the right hand's grip by separating the hands for a beat before beginning the count. This may not seem like a big deal and, I gather, there are those who disagree with me; but it is a small price to pay to help clrtrzfi the direction of the count, and thus your intent, for your spectators. Such clarity greatly helps them in feeling that everything you did was fair. When this type of count was routinely performed at the fingertips, this "courtesy" was problematic because alignment was more

difficult to assure. When counting into Dealing Grip this small courtesy costs you only a momentary pause. We ask that our spectators be courteous to us; should we not be courteous to them?

4 Turn the packet face down in your hands and count it to display the five cards as four. Take the double card last as you reverse the order of the packet. Place the packet, in squared condition, onto the table. If you were to check the order of the packet, from the top down, you would find: Ace of Clubs-Ace of Hearts- Queen-Queen-Ace of Spades.

5 With your right hand reach over to the deck and pick up the two face-up Tens. However, in this action you actually pick up four cards, the two Tens and the two face-down Queens. This is made possible, in fact easy, by the near-end crimp.

6 Square the packet without making it apparent you are doing so (two cards wouldn't require much squaring). Be sure to keep your right fingers across the front end of the packet and keep that end tilted downward to prevent the spectators from noticing the extra thickness. Peel the face card (the Ten of Spades) off to the left and place it under the Ten of Clubs (actually three cards), side-jogged to the left for half its width.

7 With your left hand, pick up the top card of the face-down, tabled packet, the Ace of Clubs, turn it face up and place it between the Tens. Square the packet and, if you like, do the Vernon Twisting Flourish from his "Twisting the Aces" (see Dai Vernon? More Inner Secrets of Card Magic, 1960, page 6) . Perform a K.S. Spread of the packet as follows to reveal that the Ace has turned face down. The action is easy. (While the K.S. Spread can be performed to show more than three cards, the three-card display will be used throughout this routine.) The right hand holds the packet from above. The left hand draws the uppermost and lowermost cards l e h a r d , with the left thumb above and fingers below. This will leave a block of variable number aligned in right-hand Overhand Grip. Since this packet may be considerably thicker than one card, it is best if the right hand tilts the front end of the card(s) downward. At the same time, the left thumb should move forward and the fingers inward, spreading the two left-hand cards in a lengthwise spread (Figure 52). This spread should not be neat. Pause very briefly in this position, then immediately bring the hands together, recombin- ing the packet as required. In this case, transfer the right-hand block to the face of the left-hand packet. 1 4'

NOTE: Without getting into the argument about who invented what when, but to keep designations in order, 1 use the following naming conventions. I define the Ascanio Spread as being done, as it was when first introduced in this country, with the cards held by their long sides. For me the essence of the Ascanio Spread, of which I am very fond, is that it is not a count but a casual display. Its use should, therefore, be limited to situations that permit, and preferably benefit from, such casualness. It follows that the Ascanio Spread can be used to show a vanish but should not be used to prove that only n cards are used.

I define the K.S. Spread, as published by Roger Smith in Smith on Cards 2: The K-S ControlSystem (1 971, page I) , as a separate and distinct idea. Smith is, I think, correct when he notes that when the cards are held by the ends the action of pulling off the top and bottom cards is similar to the Klondike Shuffle. This explains the K.S. designation. This action is also used in the Milk-Build Shuffle and Herb Monge's Monge Shuffle, which my informed publisher advises me appeared as "skinning the goat" in Professor Kunnard's 1888 work, The Book of Card Tricks (page 67). It is certainly true that the Klondike Shuffle was never intended for use as a display or a count. It is, nevertheless, a reasonably appropriate designation. I have chosen to use the K.S. Spread designation to describe a casual display of the cards (Ascanio- like) but with the cards held by the ends. I prefer this naming convention to the "Vertical Ascanion-as coined by Jon Racherbaumer-because one cannot readily get the same look or feel of the Ascanio Spread when holding the cards by the ends, nor should one try.

I am quite aware that Ascanio himself eventually came to favor the end grip. This merely clouds the issue. The Ascanio Spread, as originally offered, involved holding the cards by the sides while the K.S. Spread, as originally offered, involved holding the packet by the ends. Moreover, the two displays originally had different looks and used different mechanics. I hold to the original, more clearly distinguishable, definitions and designations. Finally, when the Klondike Shuffle-like peeling action of the top and bottom cards, characteristic of both the Ascanio and K.S. Spread, are incorporated into more studied count-like use and the edge grip is abandoned, we end up with different techniques altogether. Possibilities such as an Ascanio Count or a K.S. Count, are, in my opinion, antithetical and undesirable.

& With your right hand, remove the top face-down card (believed to be the Ace g@s- of Clubs), dealing it face down to the table. At the same time, turn the left $3 hand palm down to hide the second face-down card. Take the packet into :&$J e*.;. Overhand Grip in the right-hand without re-reversing it. A face-down card is >,&' se% visible on top.

Peel this face-down card into the left hand, slip it under the right hand's packet and re-square the "two" cards. Turn them face up and slide the back card of the packet out to the left. You are back in the position of Step 6 , apparently holding two spread Tens.

Pick the Ace of Hearts off the tabled pile, slip it face up between the black Tens and square the packet. Perform the Vernon Twisting Flourish, if you wish, then do another K.S. Spread, causing the Ace to turn face down. Instead of transferring the card to the face of the Tens, this time use the block (supposedly just the face-down center Ace) to flip the Tens over, face down; then place the center card (block) on top. Deal the top face-down card onto the previously tabled "Ace" (actually a Queen). Once again you must turn the left hand palm down, this time to hide the face-up Ace of Clubs. With your right hand, take the packet back into Overhand Grip, with the Ace of Clubs lowermost.

Pick up the original tabled Ace packet (the spectators believe it now contains two cards) beneath the right hand's packet, holding a thumb break between them. Transfer this break to the lefi fourth finger as you square the packet in your left hand.

Push the two face-up Tens to the right and take them from above with the right hand. Use the Tens to lever the top card of the left-hand packet face up. This, the Ace of Hearts, should fall square with the top of the left-hand card(s). Say, "We'll leave this one, the Ace of Hearts for last." Pick up the Ace of Hearts, jogged to the left of the Tens, with the Ace of Clubs hidden below it and place the back- to-back Aces as one card squarely onto the deck. This secretly disposes of the Ace of Clubs, places the Ace of Hearts aside for later use and leaves the Ace of Spades and two Queens in your left hand.

Deposit the right hand's face-up Tens back onto the left-hand cards. Now, with your right hand, take all the cards into Overhand Grip and turn the right hand palm up to show the Ace of Spades at the face of the packet. Turn the hand palm down again.

Draw the Ten of Spades into the left hand, then slide the bottom card (the Ace of Spades) face down onto it. Use the left edge of the right-hand block (supposedly one card) to lever the face-down Ace of Spades face up on the Ten of Spades but jogged to the right. Place the right-hand card(s) on top of the others and square everything.

If you like, do another Vernon Twisting Flourish, then perform a K.S. Spread, removing the center block. Another Ace has turned face down. Continue by placing the face-down card (actually three cards) onto the Tens and deal the reversed card onto the tabled group while turning the left hand palm down to

hide the face-down card below it. Now reposition the Tens, to prepare for the last Ace, by taking the packet into your right hand in Overhand Grip without re-reversing it. Peel the top face-down card off into the left hand, then slip it under the right hand's card(s) and square the packet. Turn the packet face up and slide the lower card out to display two spread Tens.

Pick the Ace of Hearts off the deck and make it turn magically face down between the Tens, using the same procedure employed for the previous Aces. After performing a K.S. Spread to reveal the face-down "Ace" (actually a Queen with two face-up Aces hidden beneath), use it to flip down the two Tens and drop it onto them. Deal the top card onto the table as your left hand turns palm down to conceal the face-up Aces on the packet. Then, with your right hand, take the left hand's packet to Overhand Grip, without re-reversing it, and secretly form a thumb break above the face-down Ace of Hearts and Ace of Spades.

Start to place the Tens onto the deck and, as you do, drop the two cards below the break on top. As an afterthought, but in a continuing motion, drop the Tens face up onto the table in front of the deck.

You are now prepared to build up the impending climax of the routine, which concludes by your turning the four tabled cards over, revealing them to be the four Queens.

NOTE: In the beginning, if you cull the fourth Ace to a position just below the stack, you will be in a position at the end of this routine to go straight into a Finding-the-Aces effect. The Aces are waiting for you on top of the deck. The following effect, "The James Gang," requires the four Queens; you can, therefore, segue directly into that routine from this one. They both use the sandwich configuration, but are otherwise unrelated.

THE JAMES GANG AUGUST 1971

BETA

IN MID-1970, Derek Dingle started performing a number of variations of the Walton developed, Marlo modified and popularized premise, "The Collectors." Of the four or five versions he did for me, one appealed to me for its directness. That version, later published as "Dingle's Collectors" in Hieropbant, No. 5 (1971, page 232), became an almost immediate part of my working repertoire. Like most of the popular versions being used today four cards of matching value are dropped onto the deck whereupon they instantly trap three selections between them, alternated with the four of the kind. Unlike most handlings, at no time, before or after the selection process, are the four of a kind handled more than cursorily.

Over the following few months, I found myself making changes in the method as well as the presentation. Recently, I looked at the Dingle version again and was surprised at how different it is from the handling I entered into my notes in 1971 and have performed ever since. I believe my version is about as direct as it could be, which may be the key to the commercial success it has enjoyed. I don't use it in mixed company. I have other presentations for those situations. For all male audiences the patter theme is acceptable, albeit not politically correct. I won't include the exact patter here-young people read magic books-but it revolves around the idea that many males have had the fantasy of being a pimp with a stable of ladies of questionable repute at his beck and call. Most of the rest you can work out for yourself but a few lines and bits will be included where I think them helpful. The tone should be mockingly satiric and certainly never serious.

SET-UP: The four Queens are on the table face up, along with the card box. The deck is in left-hand Dealing Grip. (As has been previously mentioned, "Trapped Ace Surprise," page 19, and the preceding "Turn Me Down Why Don't You" provide good introductions to this effect.)

1 While delivering some introductory patter about the afore-mentioned fantasy, form a fourth-finger break under the top card of the deck. Pick up a pair of Queens (one red and one black) with each hand. The two Queens picked up by the left hand are taken face up onto the deck.

2 Peel the two cards from the right hand onto the two already atop the deck so they alternate red, black, red, black. Square the Queens and lift off the five cards above the break as four.

NOTE: I handle the cards a bit roughly, sort of yanking them up off the table, saying, "These are my bitches. I got two brunettes and two redheads." 'The lines are delivered in a sort of street-tough style.

3 Peel the top three Queens back onto the deck into an overlapping spread. Add the Double above them and square all five cards on the deck, immediately lifting off only the top card, as though it were all four Queens, held in Overhand Grip. The fingers hide the front of the card, preventing its lack of thickness from showing. Pretend to square the card as though it were a packet. (This switch was first published by Alex Elmsley in his "Still Taking Three" in Pentagram, Vol. 10, No. 12, September 1956, page 91. I'm told Wilfred Jonson also published this switch, but have not been able to verify or date this claim.)

4 Pick up the card case and place it broadside and slightly to your right on the table. Slip the front edge of the single Queen you hold under the side of the case (Figure 53, action in progress). The situation is now as follows: There is one card face up part-way under the card box. The audience believes the four Queens are under the box. There are three face-up Queens at positions two, three and four from the top of the deck with one face- down cover card on top.

5 Turn the deck face up and have three cards selected and signed. (I refer to the three selections as "Johns" and have the guys sign names like John Smith, John Jones and John Brown.)

G Turn the deck face down and insert the three selections into three different spots, in one-two-three order from top down, leaving about a third of each card

protruding. All the selections must be placed above the middle of the deck and Selection Three should be inserted just above center.

Perform the Marlo-James Multiple Shift (which I'm about to describe) or your own favorite. The Multiple Shift should leave all three selections, in order, on top of the deck, while the three Queens and one cover card end up in the middle with a fourth-finger break held above them.

THE MARLO-JAMES MULTIPLE SHIFT JULY 15, 1971

In 1961, when Ed Marlo published his book on the Multiple Shift (Multiple Shzj: Rmolutionary Card Technique, Chapter l l ) , he included what was for its

1s was time a break-through concept, the All-Around Square-Up (page 11). Th' based on the idea of a moveable jog. I don't believe Ed was laying claim to the moveable jog. Both Erdnase and Hilliard had described that idea earlier. As best I can determine, Marlo was claiming the development of the broad concept of moving jogs to allow the practitioner to apparently square all sides of the deck while maintaining control of jogged cards. One of the outgrowths of his concept was a Multiple Shift he named the Moveable Block Shift (Multiple Shtj, page 19). The following technique is clearly an evolution from that Shift. This Shift is also a composite of other techniques. As that is the case with most Multiple Shifts of the last twenty years, I offer no apology. The primary sources for the elements of my technique are Marlo and Andrus (Andms Deals You In, 1956, page 46).

In my view, a Multiple Shift is composed of three phases: The Jog-Through, the Block-Alignment and the Strip-Out. The method for the initial phase, the Jog-Through, I use derives from the Moveable Jog and Andrus' Diagonal Jog. The mechanics of the Block-Alignment-the means of aligning the jogged cards with a cover block-are, to the best of my knowledge, my own. The techniques I use to accomplish the Strip-Out of the inserted cards are, so much as is possible, guided by the effect in which the Shift is applied. Generally, I agree with Elias and Marlo that a no-cut Shift is most desirable though not always practical. A one-cut Shift is quite acceptable for most situations. Going further, a Swivel or Swing Cut is to be preferred over a longitudinal cut.

NOTE: The Hindu Shuffle Control, done as part of a Multiple Shift without comment, is self-canceling If the purpose of the multiple insertion that begins a Multiple Shift is to convince an audience that the inserted cards are widely separated, the Hindu Shuffle diminishes that conviction. It also offers a direct and correct explanation for how the cards are controlled. Despite the weak logic, you'd be better off merely asserting that the unshown cards are widely separated, perhaps reinforcing the assertion with a Hindu

Shuffle. Why? When a magical performer asserts a fact, it will be accepted, rejected or left unexamined unless it becomes pertinent. If your subsequent actions support your assertion, to the degree the actions are convincing, they are worth performing. Thus, asserting that the cards remain separated as you perform a shuffle, fiirther losing them, remains viable. If, on the other hand, one goes through a procedure, such as multi-point insertions, to prove a point, engaging in a practice that contradicts that point not only invites challenge to the assertion and the actions but risks the audience con- cluding you are stupid or, worse, think them stupid. Neither conclusion is a good payoff for your effort. If the audience doesn't buy your claim, at best you lose credibility; at worst, it reflects a negative attitude toward your spectators-never a good impression to create. It might be possible to engage in multi-point insertions, shuffle the cards afternard and presentationally avoid the negative impact that potentially flows from the illogical practice. It hardly seems worth it, however, to gain nothing and risk losing much when better-considered techniques can produce the intended conviction.

Insert the selections into the deck until roughly one third of each projects from the front. They should be widely separated but a quarter of the deck or more should be above or below the topmost or bottommost card. The position of the block, above or below, will be determined by the type of strip-out cut you plan to use and whether the deck is face up or down.

NOTE: Re: "The James Gang," the three selections are inserted into the upper half of the face-down deck. The lowermost selection should be as close as you can estimate to the middle.

The left forefinger curls under the deck, applying upward pressure near the right side. The left thumb and second finger hold the deck along its sides, near the front. The second finger is close to the front right corner. he third and fourth fingers rest idly along the side of the deck.

The right hand will seem to push the cards flush into the deck. In actuality, the right second finger does nearly all the pushing (Figure 54). The left first finger's upward pressure and the right hand's second-finger push combine to cause a pronounced right-side angle-jog. (The use of pressure from the left first finger to cause angling is Andrus' idea.) The angle-jog is most

pronounced at the near right corner. The jogged selections may protrude as much as an inch from the side of the deck. Such an extreme jog is not necessary but may be helpful while you're learning the technique.

73 During the creation of the jog, the front left corner of the selections will break through the left edge of the deck under the left thumb. At that point the left thumb can take control of these cards. The right fourth finger should then take over as the primary pushing finger. This finger continues pushing until the front right corners of the selections are flush with the front end of the deck. The jog condition will look like that in Figure 55.

74 The continuing action of this technique will move the jog from a right-side angle-jog to an in-jog. (This is an application of the Moveable Jog.) In other words, the completion of this next sequence will leave the selections extending an inch or more from the inner end of the pack. Knowing that in advance will - help you understand what follows, which may otherwise read like a flurry of finger movements. The right thumb moves from the near end of the deck to the middle of the left side. This thumb should take hold about an inch nearer your end than your left thumb. Simultaneously, the right fingers release their grip on the front edge and move around the front right corner to the right side. The second, third and fourth fingers should take hold closer to the near end than the left fingers (Figure 56). During its movement the right hand stays close to the deck to conceal the left fourth finger. Meanwhile that finger is busy pulling inward on the angle-jogged cards, converting them to an in-jogged condition. During all these finger movements the hands are rotating the entire deck clockwise until its left edge is uppermost (Figure 57). You may also, depending on where your audience is, want to tip the deck back a bit.

NOTE: Some readers may feel that in-jogging the cards an inch or more is excessive. However, there is a reason for it. Small jogs create more visible "tell-lines" at the front edge of the deck, while larger jogs allow these tell-lines to be compressed and eliminated. It requires slightly greater care to screen a larger jog but greater reliability is gained-particularly with various deck conditions-and the elimination of the tell-lines justifies the increased attention demanded.

This next sequence is difficult to describe yet easy to do, once the feel is acquired. Its function is to align the block of cards below the in-jogged cards with those cards. Until now the left first finger has been under the deck. Place it on the front edge. At the same time move your right thumb to the near upper corner of the in-jogged cards and pull them firmly rightward. By lying across the upper edges of the in-jogged cards, the thumb also helps to conceal them from the audience. The right first finger prevents the upper block of cards from moving rightward as your right thumb applies its pressure on the in-jogged cards. Because of the positions of all the fingers, the left thumb and right second finger will have independent control of the block below (that is, to the left of) the in-jogged cards. Apply upward pressure with your right second finger, pressing against the lower edge of the block containing the target cards. The pressure from the second finger results in an inward articulation of the second fingertip which, in combination with the right thumb's rightward pull, causes the block below the lowermost in-jogged card to slide back into alignment with the in-jogged selections (Figure 58). The moving block rides on the left second fingertip. The odd thing about the technique is that nothing seems to be providing direct energy in an inward or outward direction, yet that's the direction in which the packets move relative to each other. The right thumb is the prime force for the movement but its pressure is applied to your right. Do this alignment slowly at first, until you are familiar with the feel; otherwise you may lose control of the block. You will be able to speed it up considerably after practice.

NOTE: The physics of this alignment action are extremely complex. I've been using it since the early 1960's, when I accidentally discovered it, and to this day I can't hlly explain the fulcrum, lever and cantilever relationship that make it work. I do know that it feels amazing and pleasurable in the

hands. Even if you don't want ro use this Multiple Shift, try this alignment action. I think you'll get a kick out of it.

%h LC)NGI?'UDINAI, CU-S-The deck is in position for a longitudinal strip-out. I don't often use this approach but it does have its place. I have used three variations. I don't claim any of them as original. The first is to split the cards as you would for a Faro Shuffle. The second is to split them in the hands for a cut to the table. This looks like an honest cut. The third variation is for tabled use. In effect the action is like the strip-out after a Push-Through or Strip-Out Shuffle. All three are, in my opinion, valid one-cut Strip-Out Shift endings.

NOTE: In "'The James G a n g you use a 1,ongitudinal Cut to strip-out and immediately follow with a Faro Shuffle. The longitudinal cut thus appears to be a split before shuffling. Such a splitting of the deck is not perceived as a cut at all. If you use this approach, you would then perform an In Faro. This leaves one indifferent card above the "Collected" cards, which may be disposed of with a Slip Cut or Double Cut. The problem is dealt with in another way within this effect.

77 If you wish to use a Swing or Swivel-Out Cut, you will need to perform the following additional preliminary actions: Move your right thumb to the near left corner of the in-jogged cards and aligned block. Pivot them, as a unit, to the right as your right second, third and fourth fingers move to Overhand Grip (Figure 59). The left thumb and second finger still control the deck. This allows the right thumb to move to the protruding inner left corner of the jogged block. Push that corner toward the deck until the jogged block is nearly flush. The corner will remain in contact with the right thumb (Figure 60). This gives the right hand independent control of the deck and the jogged block. This condition is necessary so that the left hand can move away from the deck in preparation for the Swivel or Swing Cut.

SWIVEL-Move the left hand away from the deck and turn it palm toward the audience, fingers pointing up. Place the left second finger on the left edge of the near left corner of the deck and the left first finger at the near edge of the near left corner of the upper packet (Figure 61). From this position it is a simple matter to swivel this packet around the right second finger as the left hand moves forward and left, turning palm up as it does so to receive the clockwise-swiveling packet. You have openly swiveled off the upper portion of the deck, but you have secretly stripped out the desired cards as well. Complete the cut by adding the right hand's cards onto the left hand's. The selections will be together, in order, on top of the deck. This action is also useful for the strip out after an in-the-hands Strip-Out or Push-Through Riffle Shuffle.

SWING-The left hand releases the deck in preparation to carry the upper packet away to the left. This packet, however, is swiveled out by the right first finger, stripping the upper block away from the still-interwoven target cards. The right fourth finger performs a most critical duty here. It is the fourth finger's function to maintain control of the selected-card block. It does this by pressing on the right front end. This allows the right thumb and fourth fingers to control the selected-card block while the right first finger wraps around the left front edge of the upper block and swings it to the left, pivoting it on the right thumb (Figure 62, exposed from below). This may seem difficult at first. The right fourth finger requires a bit of strength and the right first finger needs to be accurate in swinging over only the upper portion. It gets easier with practice. To complete the sequence, the left hand takes the cards swiveled by the right first finger into Dealing Grip. The right hand then completes the cut. The selections are left on top of the deck. This is essentially a Neal Elias idea (see Marlo's Multiple Sbzji, page 9).

NOTE: That completes the Marlo-James Multiple Shift, along with four one-cut endings. Many other techniques may be combined with those described to produce incalci~lable permutations. It is my contention that little would be gained by publishing these variants. I justify the publication of my additions and emendations to the Multiple Shift with the Block Alignment procedure it includes. I believe it to be new, novel and a

contribution that can be well and easily applied to other Jog-Through and Strip-Out handlings. Try it with your favorite techniques. You may find yourself adopting it.

If you performed a longitudinal cut, complete the cut and adjust the break so that the cover card above the three Queens is moved above the break. The three selections will be on top of the deck while the three face-up Queens will be the uppermost cards below your break. Turn the deck over, face up, side for side, by pivoting the deck around the break. If you keep the flesh of your fourth finger in the break during the turnover, it will cause the break to become a step at the near end of the right side.

HISTORICAL NOTE: This pivot-step idea was discovered by Tenkai in the 1940's or earlier (see "Card Flight" in Robert Parrish's Six T~cks by Tinkai, 1953; and again in The Mdgic of Tenkai, 1974, page 130) and popularized by Marlo (see his CotztrolSystems, 1952, page 32) in the U.S. At the time of his publication of the idea, it is unlikely Marlo knew ofTenkai's work, which was one-handed and more related to platform performance.

Cut at the step and perform an Out Faro from the bottom up. The Faro interlaces the selections with the Queens. At the completion of the Faro, the lowermost face-down card will be Selection Number One. Turn the deck face down and your alternating set-up is on top. There is an alternate approach, based on the Swing Cut, which I use occasionally. Substitute a Swing Cut for the Faro split and form a break between the packets. Then cut at the break in preparation for the Faro. As previously noted, a Slip Cut can be used to get rid of the extra card above the third selection after the Faro ShuHe.

Once you take the deck back into normal Dealing Grip, the rest of the handling is evident. Pick up the Queen that is under the box as though it were all four Queens. Drop that Queen on top of the deck and immediately spread off the top seven cards. Conclude by removing the face-down cards, one by one, revealing them to be the selections.

NOTE: I have an alternate ending that I've used from time to time. It replaces Step 9. Instead of picking up the tabled Queen and adding it to the deck I palm the top six cards from the top of the deck. I use the Buck- ley Multiple-Card Top Palm (from Arthur Buckley's Card Control, 1946, page 70) as I explained it in The Magical Record and Thoughts of Wesley lames (1997, page 78) under the title "Action Palm Variant" but with the insertion of a card as cover eliminated. You can also use Maurice Kooklyn's Top Palm from Dai Vernon: Ultimate Card Secrets (1 967, page 161 of the Supreme edition, or page 120 of the L&L Publishing edition) or your favorite multiple-card Top Palm. I then transfer the palmed cards to left-

hand Gambler's Cop with an action like that described in my James Palm Transfer (page 188). This consists essentially of placing the cards from the right palm into left-hand Gambler's Cop with appropriate cover. I pick up the one tabled Queen and secretly add the card5 in Gambler's Cop below it. I then spread the Queens, revealing the three selections trapped between. This adds an extra dimension to the effect (isolation from the deck) and makes conceiving of a method nearly inlpossible for a lay person.

MY WAY 1978

FINAL

THIS IS based on the original Ed Marlo routine from Ibidem (No. 15, Decem- ber 1958, page 2, or page 282 in the book version), Johnny Thompson's "Les Quick Cartes" in Cardiste, No. 13 (included only in Gene Shelley's 1969 bound, expanded reprint of this journal, page 24), Harry Riser's "Hohinser All-Backs" that appeared in Epilogue, No. 12 (July 1971, page 91) and collaborative work Derek Dingle and I did. I have added little. The primary reason for its inclusion is to remind those unfamiliar with it just how good it is. I have been using it for many, many years. In fact, if I am in a position to perform only one effect, "Quick Three-Way" is usually my choice, and has been for a long time.

The basic plot is the classic Everywhere and Nowhere with an All-Backs phase inserted between them. I developed this version of the effect because I thought it would be useful to be set for another effect at the completion of "Quick Three-Way," even if 1 seldom used the set-up in a following effect. In fact, I rarely use this version. 1 usually perform this handling and presentation but with the standard four-card packet. The only difference between the four- and five-card handlings is the requirement of a preliminary set-up for the latter.

SET-UP: Secretly put four of a kind on the top of the deck. I'll use Aces here, as I sometimes follow this routine with my "L.S.D. Aces" (published in Epilogue, No. 16, November 1972, page 147; and in my Stop Fooling Us! 1990 lecture notes, page 35) in which case I eliminate the Spectator Cuts the Aces sequence (Stop Fooling Us!, page 34) that I otherwise use as a lead-in to that routine.

Have a card peeked at. My patter has been, "I'm going to ask you to take your left thumb-that's the big one on the end of your left arm. Do you have one?" Regardless of what the spectator says, explain, "I ask because in my old neighborhood not everybody did. [Ella tough neighborhoodjoke ifyou like.] Anyway, take your left thumb and push back the cornet of the deck and just peek at a card." Turn your head away as the spectator peeks. Pick up your break as you say, "Did you get one?" The spectator will tell you that he did. This was an Eddie Fechter gambit (Mdgician Nightly: The Magic of Edde Fechter, 1974, page 74).

Pretend that you didn't know that the spectator got one as you say, "I see they taught you how to take little tiny peeks in your old neighborhood." While it is not the most efficient or expeditious handling-as my publisher, Stephen Minch, points out, you could glimpse it in place-I use the following sequence because it gives me something to do with my hands while I'm acting like I didn't know they had peeked at a card. As any experienced actor will tell you, knowing what to do with your hands makes acting easier. Besides, if they buy the gambit, the audience has no idea what is being done. I cut the deck, bringing the peeked card to the bottom. I 63 next squeeze the deck, bowing it lengthwise to the left (Figure 63). This allows me to glimpse the bottom card. I then cut the cards again and hand them to the spectator saying, with a touch of self-annoyance, "Here, shuffle the damn deck."

NOTE: A Side Steal would also work here. (I'll describe my Side Steal later in this volume, on page 18 I), but since somewhere in the mid to late 1970's I've been using this procedure.

When you receive the deck back from the spectator say, "I'm faced with the usual magician's dilemma-trying to find your card." Quickly go through the deck, culling the four of a kind you originally put together. They should not have been separated much by the spectator's shuffle. You should also bring the spectator's peeked-at card to the bottom of the deck. I use Marlo's Prayer Cull (New Tops, Vol. 6, No. 6, June 1966, page 28; or M.I.N. T., blurne I, 1988, page 232) to cull the Aces, unde; the spread, to the top. When you have the four of a kind on top and the selection on the bottom, say, "I'll tell you what; I'll make it difficult for myself. I'll do this behind my back, in the dark." Put your hands behind your back. Add, "Notice, I close my eyes. That makes it dark for me."

Behind your back rearrange the cards as follows: selection face down, peeled from the bottom; two Aces face up, peeled from the top and flipped over;

two Aces face down, peeled from the top. From the top down the packet will then be: face-down Ace-face-down Ace-face-up Ace-face-up Ace-face- down selection.

5 Bring the packet from behind your back in squared condition, held in left-hand Dealing Grip. The talon should be brought out held from above by the right hand. Place it aside or in your pocket.

6 Holding the cards in your left hand, push off the top one and do a Pull-Down of the bottom card. With your right hand, grasp the top card and the three-card block below it (Figure 64) and move them to the right, creating an apparent three-card fan. Say, "I was so sure I knew which card you chose that I took out three cards, just to make certain; but whichever card you touch, that will be your card. Touch any one of the three and it will be yours."

NOTE: You will likely come to realize that I use the Pull-Down technique ~lmost exclu\ively throughout this routine. I generally prefer Pull-Downs when handling a small packet, as I find that multiple-card alignments are better preserved. In some instances, the Pull-Down does not feel right for various reasons. 1 will then switch to the use of a Buckle. I guess you could say my use of the I'ull-Down is more than just preference but certainly not dogma. Remember, the audience thinks I'm in trouble because I missed the peek. "1 was so sure. .." is delivered with a false bravado. The next part, " t h ~ r I took out three cards.. ." is delivered sheepishly. The delivery of the line makes it work. It isn't hilarious, but it amuses the audience to see nxe go through the emotional change.

7 If they touch any card but the bottom one, say, "...except that one. Actually, I was hoping you'd touch this, the bottom one." If they touch the bottom card say, "I'm glad you touched that one. I think that was your card." Turn over the bottom card and show it as the spectator's selection. Then replace it face down on the bottom.

8 Square the fan. Pull back the top card with your first fingertip (Figure 65), then reverse directions and push out the second card with the second fingertip. At the same time use your

right thumb to realign the top card with the bottom card at the near end (Figure 66). This is often called the "Christ-Annemann Alignment Move." During this action, say, "Of course, you could have touched the top card or the middle card."

3 Grip the protruding second card by its sides, taking it between your left thumb and first finger. This will allow you to pinch the remainder of the packet at its near end and turn it 67 end over end as one card The action is shown exposed for clarity in Figure 67, but in performance the right hand does not begin to turn its cards over until they just clear the left hand's card. To do otherwise, will cause the visible split shown in the illustration, which would expose the maneuver to the spectators. It should appear that you are turning only the top card face up on the packet. As soon as the turned packet has fallen square, push the top card to the right and remove it from the packet. It will be the spectator's peeked-at card. Say, "If you had touched the top card you would have seen a card that looks a lot like the card you saw on the bottom."

t O Place the card back onto the packet, face up. Execute a Pull-Down of the bottom card of the packet and turn over all but the bottom card as one. It appears as though you have simply turned the top card face down. The right hand now takes the packet in Overhand Grip. Spread the bottom card and the card second from the bottom to the left, in a Back-Spread. With your left thumb, jog the center card forward and close the spread. Remove the protruding card and turn it face up on the top as you say, "If you had touched the center card you would have seen a card that looked a lot like the one you saw on top and a good deal like the one you saw on the bottom." As you say "top," turn the top card face down; and as you say "bottom," transfer the bottom card to the top. Square the packet.

NOTE: Here again, what I now do is less eficient but works better in my hands. I square the packet without making the bottom to top transfer. I then say, "I know what you're thinking. You're thinking I'm using three cards that all look alike." During this line I'm performing a Pull-Down

Count as follows: Holding the cards in my left hand, I push off the top one and do a Pull-Down of the bottom card, which allows me to grasp the three cards, as one, below the card I've pushed over. I move this apparently-two- card fan to the right and transfer the remaining bottom card to the top. I then square the packet as I say, "You're right." 1 continue as in Step 11 but I perform the actions there quickly and silently.

1 1 Push over the top two cards, forming a face-down fan. The third card is actually a triple. Take the fan into your right hand, the thumb above, the fingers below. As you are doing this, say, "I know what you're thinking. You're thinking I'm using three cards that all look alike. You're right.. ."

12 Grasp the bottom triple card, pinching its left edge between your left thumb, above, and fingers, below. Show the under side by rotating the hand palm down as you continue, "but it's the top of the card that looks like the bottom of the card-or is it the bottom that looks like the top?" The triple card will look as though it were double-backed. Turn the card(s) back again by rotating the left hand palm up. Replace the triple card on the bottom of the spread and square the packet.

2 3 Perform another Christ-Annemann Alignment and turn the aligned inner cards end over end on top (Steps 8 and 9). This again apparently shows a double- backed card. Say, "On the top there's a card-it looks the same on the top of the top card as it does on the bottom of the bottom card, and the same on the bottom of the top card as it does on the top of the bottom card." Turn the same block over side for side on the bottom card and square the packet.

Push off the top card of the squared packet and take it into your right hand. Move the right hand back until its card is in-jogged for about half its length. Buckle the bottom card and take the center block of three, as one, into the right hand, in an out-jogged position. Finally, add the bottom card to complete the fan (Figure 68).

15 Transfer the fan to your left hand and grasp the center block as one card, pinching its right edge as near the middle as your out-jog permits, between your right thumb, above, and fingers, below. Lift your hand and show the other side of the card. Place it under the remainder of the packet, without reversing it, then square the packet. Accompanying this, you comment, "In the center there's a card-looks the same as the top of the top card and the bottom of the bottom card, or the bottom of the top card and the top of the bottom card." This line will take you through the next step as well.

Turn the entire packet over side for side. Turn it a second time, side for side, and repeat this a third time.

Push off the top two cards, take them into the palm-down right hand and rotate the hand palm up to reveal the faces of the two cards-Aces. Say, "By now, some people think I'm using an extra card. It's true. After all, it's better to have four of a kind than three of a kind."

Perform a Pull-Down of the bottom card, which will allow you to take the double card into the right hand, face up under the other two cards it holds, and move the bottom card to the left. Show the fourth card in the left hand, then place it onto the face of the right hand's cards and close the spread. Without squaring, turn the four cards (actually five) over into the left hand. As you square them, execute a tight-hand Palm of the top card (I use the SPOT Palm described below). Hand the spectator the four cards that remain and say, "Would you like to see a four-Ace miracle?"

NOTE: lf the patter sounds confusing, it's because it should. It is an accurate description of the situation but it is made to sound like double talk. Because the sentences get so convoluted it is amusing. Learn the patter. It helps. The Top Palm I use in this situation is unusual, but very useful. I tightly guarded it for many years, and almost didn't include it here. It is described below.

SMALL PACKET ONE-HANDED T O P (SPOT) PALM SEPTEMBER 20, 1965

This technique is a close relative of the standard One-Handed Top Palm. (While this sleight is often attributed to Jean Hugard, Card Manipukztions, No. 1, 1934, page 2, Hugard acknowledges that his technique is merely a version of one that appeared in the Magic Wand. This referrence is undoubtedly to John Elrick's "Solo Palming" in the March-May 1930 issue of that journal; Vol. X X , No. 145, page 48.) As anyone who has attempted the technique with a small packet learns, it is nearly impossible, because the packet doesn't provide enough support. I also feel that most of those who perform that Palm telegraph it by the frozen stiffness of the hand, and the fourth finger in particular. This approach to the technique addresses those issues. It is the only form of One-Handed Top Palm I use.

With your right hand, hold the packet from above, thumb at the near left corner, first finger at the front left corner. The fingers at the forward end should be positioned so the first finger screens the left forward corner while your fourth finger rests over, but not on, the extreme right forward corner of the packet.

When you're ready to palm the card, your right fourth finger aims for a table surface. (If no table is available, contact your left first fingertip, the back of your left hand or the inside of your left forearm.) O n contact, the fourth finger

presses slightly to the left and forward, rather than downward, on the corner of the top card (Figure 67). A bit of downward pressure will be required to make it possible but it occurs as a natural result of sliding the card forward. Once the card overlaps the packet at the forward edge it will escape your right thumb, pivoting around your second fingertip (Figure 70). Continue pressing forward and the card will tilt upward toward the palm (Figure 71). It need not move all the way 70 into palm position initially but it does swivel toward the right and upward past the flesh at the base of the thumb. Curl your fourth finger inward as you lift it off the surface of the packet and the card will curve upward into your palm, where it can be secured by a slight cross-pressure between the fourth finger and the base of the thumb.

Of course, the hand above provides cover for all the actions, and the contact with the table surface is very brief, just long enough for the card to move free of the right thumb and begin to tilt upward. Immediately move the hand as you lift and curl your fourth finger to complete the palm. You can then toss or hand the packet to a spectator, or drop it into your left hand. The choreography of the technique prevents the moment of strain, when the right hand freezes to lever the card up, typical of the way the technique is most often performed. It is masked by the gesture in which the fourth finger makes contact with the table, and cover continues by tossing the packet to the spectator or yourself. If you practice both the mechanics of the technique and the choreography of gestures that accompany those actions, you will find the Palm completely indetectible.

NEW FACES OF 1234 SEPTEMBER 2 1, 1989

BETA

THIS ROUTINE offers a number of handling refinements on Wilber Kattner and Roger Smith's routine "Maxi-Twist" (see Innovative Magic, No. 2, 1976, page 17; and Mmi- Twist 11, 1976) but is closer to its better-known predecessor, Derek Dingle's "We'll Twist-If You Insist" (Epilogue, No. 15, July 1972, page 12 1; and The Compete Works ofDerek Dingle, 1982, page 54). It is interesting to note that the Smith routine and the Dingle routine are identical in all significant respects except that the Smith routine uses three variations of the K.S. Spread, while the Dingle routine uses a combination of Elmsley and "straight" Five-as-Four Counts. My routine duplicates the effect sequence of both "Maxi-Twist" and "We'll Twist-If You Insist" but frames everything in a novel pseudo-religious patter. It replaces the ATFUS sequence used in both the other routines with a technique I've named the "Spread ATFUS." It also enhances the Dingle handling by replacing the Overhand Grip, "straight" Five-as-Four Counts with Pinch Grip, "straight" Five-as-Four Counts. This change in technique allows all the counts to appear alike to the spectators, a minor point, perhaps, but one that helps allay suspicion.

EFFECT: Four Aces turn face down one at a time, apparently as a result of twisting the packet. When the packet is twisted twice, the Ace of Spades turns face up again and the remainder of the packet has changed to the Two, Three and Four of Spades.

SET-UP: Arrange the Aces in S H O C ~ ~ D order, the Ace of Spades on the face. Place the Two, Three and Four of Spades face down on top of the deck and

the Aces on top of all. The stack, from the top down, should be: Ace of Dia- monds-Ace of Clubs-Ace of Hearts-Ace of Spades-and the Two, Three and Four of Spades.

1 Your opening patter begins, "Few people today remember, and most history books don't record, that playing cards were once associated with, and heavily involved in, religious ceremonies. I'm not an expert on religious practices but I've been researching this link between playing cards and religious rites. I've discovered what may be an intriguing, very early Dervish ritual. The Dervishes, who are a subsect of the Sufi movement, are of Middle-Eastern origin. They are sometimes known as the Whirling Dervishes. If you're old enough, you may have heard the expression, 'He went through here like a Whirling Dervish.' What most people don't understand is that the practice of Whirling is used to create a mystical, magical state of euphoria. I don't know that it's true, but I'm told that back in the thirteenth century a small band of Sufi Dervishes developed a technique wherein they used cards to represent respected members of their community, and they whirled or spun the cards. Let me show you the ritual and see if we can approximate the result for which they strove."

SPREAD ATFUS

Spread off and secretly form a break under the top seven cards of the deck. Turn over only the top four. Square and lifi off the seven cards as though they were four. As you lifi the seven-card packet in Overhand Grip, form a left fourth-finger break under the top card of the deck. Peel the Ace of Spades onto the card above the fourth-finger break, forming a third-finger break between the two cards. Pick up the Ace of Spades along with the card above the fourth- finger break, converting the left third-finger brealk to a right thumb break at the rear. Openly set the Ace of Spades jogged to the lefi for a quarter of its width relative to the rest of the packet (Figure 72). Peel off the Ace of Hearts and the Ace of Clubs, setting each to the left for a quarter of its width relative to the Ace above it (Figure 73).

The four face-up cards, from face to rear, should appear to be the Ace of Diamonds-Ace of Spades-Ace of Hearts-Ace of Clubs. They are actually, from face to rear, Ace of Diamonds-three hidden cards (face-down Two, Three and Four of Spades)-Ace of Spades-one hidden face-down indifferent card (above which you hold a thumb break)-Ace of Hearts-Ace of Clubs.

Square the spread against the left thumb dropping all the cards below the right thumb's break so they fall square with the top of the deck, and lift off the upper five cards. The audience should believe you have simply shown the four Aces in a spread and squared them. The five cards are, from face to rear, face-up Ace of Diamonds-face-down Two, Three and Four of Spades- face-up Ace of Spades. Set the deck aside.

"Returning to the ritual, the spinning was intended to cause a respected member of the community, usually one who had been, shall we say, 'behaving badly,' to turn away from the evil temptations of the world." Spin the packet in your hand, end for end, performing Vernon's Twisting Flourish from his "Twisting the Aces" (Dai Vernoni More Inner Secrets of Card Magic, 1960, page 6). Con- tinue by saying, "They could tell when the whirling was successful because the card representing the respected community member would change his ways and turn from temptation." Perform an Elmsley Count from right-hand Flexible Count Grip (page 54) into left-hand Dealing Grip but duck the last card, the Ace of Diamonds. It will appear that one Ace has turned face down. Say, "This is rather magical all by itself but very often, because the ritual calls for four cards, it would be performed once for each member of the group."

NOTE: The reason the last card, the Ace of Diamonds, is ducked during the display we've just performed is to address the problem of the same Ace showing up twice, at the start and end of the display. This type of problem is quite common. The problem is often dismissed with, "The audience won't notice." At the same time, great praise is heaped on techniques that produce more subtle differences. We can't have it both ways. Spectators are either observant or they aren't. I proceed under the assumption that they are observant and I endeavor to address, or at least ameliorate, problems of this type wherever possible. It is far safer to assume your audiences are observant, since the price of being wrong is merely that you will have worked harder than was essential. The price of assuming your audiences are not observant, apart from the disregard it reflects, is that you will ruin the illusion you are endeavoring to create and, therefore, the audience's experience. That is far too high a price in my estimation. In this case, the problem is fairly easily ameliorated. I, therefore, do so and recommend that you do likewise. The price will be higher on other occasions.

Repeat theTwisting Flourish. Back-spread 74 the Ace of Diamonds (Figure 74), drawing it from beneath the packet and into left-hand Dealing Grip; then continue a "straight" count of four. The last two cards are taken as one under the left-hand packet. Square the packet. "Each time the cards are whirled, another respected member of the community should obtain the strength to forsake the temptations of the physical world."

Repeat the twisting action, then Elmsley Count the packet revealing the third Ace to have turned face down. Apparently only the Ace of Spades remains face up. Your patter is, "I'm sure you can understand the effect the whirling has had: Another community member has turned from sin."

Another twist and Elmsley Count reveals what appears to be all four Aces face down. "All have developed the strength to ignore the pleasures of the flesh; the community is saved."

"One would have to admit that if the performance of a single whirling action can alter the perspective of a powerful individual, it is a ritual worth performing, but those who believe in the ritual are careful not to whirl twice." Twist the packet twice, then count the five cards as four, holding the last two as a single card, to reveal that the Ace of Spades has again turned face up. Place the double card onto the face of the packet. As you perform the count say, "The performance of the double whirl is thought to have the effect of creating a complete metamorphosis. Not merely a turn from evil but a transmogrification."

Lift off the Ace of Spades as you turn over the balance of the packet, using a wrist-turn action that hides the face-up Ace of Diamonds from the audience. The Two of Spades will show on the face of the left-hand packet. Place the Ace of Spades onto the Two and spread over the Two and Three to show the Ace through Four of Spades. The face-down Ace of Diamonds will be hidden beneath the Four. "I'm not sure if I believe in the rituals of the Whirling Der- vishes but I have to believe my eyes and I do believe in magic. This holds great promise, for if the cards can change, perhaps, just perhaps, so can we."

Cop off the Ace of Diamonds and drop the four cards onto the table, or drop the five cards onto the deck. You will have to exercise some care in doing the latter, since the two cards under the top card of the deck are two face-up Aces. These can be transferred with a Double Cut to the bottom of the deck and a Half Pass executed to clean up.

NOTI'E: The patter used with this routine touches on a sensitive subject. Both the Sufi sect and the whirling practice of the Dervishes are real. One should be careful not to cast aspersion on either of the groups or their practices. The patter is interesting to intelligent groups but must be used in fairly cliliet environments. It should not be done in bars or other noisy sur- roitndings. Try the effect using these handling and presentational elements. You will find the routine is made stronger by both.

HYPER-WARP FEBRUARY 1 1 ,1973

FINAL

I CONSIDER "Card Warp" (released as a one-trick manuscript in 1974) to be among the most unique effects of the twentieth century, and a masterpiece as it was originally intended to be performed. In spite of all the variations that have seen print in the ensuing years, none have improved upon the gem at the core. I will not either, nor is there any need for me to do so. Instead, I will offer an improved means of beginning the effect and an ending that approaches par with the rest of it. I believe these both to be important contributions, without losing sight of Walton's original stroke of genius. To Roy Walton, I offer my most heartfelt congratulations and my enduring gratitude for sharing this fruit of his brilliance.

I first learned about "Card Warp" and began performing it in early 1973. My earliest notes, which include the method for how I get into the effect, are as dated above. From that date, I did not change a move or handling detail for almost twenty years. In 1992, my dear friend, Noel Coughlin, showed me an unknown creator's bit of topological kirigami called "The Hyper Card," which Kim Iles, Martin Gardner and Karl Fulves had introduced to the fraternity (Pallbearers Review, Vol. 10, No. 10, August 1975, page 1042; and Chronicles, No. 1, 1978, page 1067). Somewhere along the way, in playing with the idea, it dawned on me that the Hyper Card would combine very nicely with "Card Warp." Within fifteen minutes I had figured out how to make the combination.

I've performed "Card Warp" easily a thousand times. It was a regular part of my trade-show work. Still, no sooner had I come up with this new ending and my

method for performing it than I knew this was a change I would have immediately added. As it happens, having retired in 1982, I haven't done a trade show since. Nevertheless, since creating it I've done it at nearly every cocktail party, bar mitzvah and dinner show at which I've had occasion to perform. That is, admittedly, far fewer performances than the main part of the routine but still sufficient to persuade me that my enthusiasm is justified.

EFFECT: Two cards are selected from an incomplete deck. They are put through the original "Card Warp" machinations. At the end of the sequence they are torn and twisted into the visually impossible configuration known as a Hyper Card and given to the spectator as a souvenir.

REQUIREMENTS: You will need twenty or more cards and a box in which to carry them. You will also need a small stapler that is convenient to carry in your pocket.

SET-UP: Prepare one card as required for "Card Warp and place it on top of the deck, prepared edge oriented toward the right. Place any other card above it. Put the cards into the box so that, when the notched side is up, the prepared portion of the card is on your right.

DISCLAIMERS: "Card Warp" presents an ethical dilemma any resolution of which is unsatisfactory. When one encounters such a situation, each individual must find a position that he or she can abide. "Card Warp" is, or was, a marketed item, offered by its creator in manuscript form. Remu- neration for its content should accrue to its creator. Since it was marketed, others have taken it upon themselves to expose the secret in print. These individuals-with possible exceptions-have not altered the method or the effect. At best, they have altered the handling or some superficial details. Thus, they have justified the theft of the originator's idea with incidental alterations. The result of these actions has been to deprive the originator of a potential sale of his manuscript. Legally, they may be within their rights to do so. I find it ethically deplorable. That said, an ethical problem arises when one has the legitimate goal of sharing newly created elements that may prove desirable without depriving the creator of his just cornpensa- tion. My solution, however problematic, is to share my handling, little of which is original with me (except as noted), and presentation, which is an amalgamation of ideas from various sources, without directly divulging the original method. It may be possible to ascertain the core secret from this description but that is not my intent. You might work out the method by seeing it performed as well, but that would not be the intent of the performer. Provided the performance is competent, no ethical line is crossed by doing so, from either side. I strongly recommend that you obtain the

original "Card Warp" manuscript from a reputable dealer. This act will ethically entitle you to know, use and perform the original version. As owner of this book, you will then be entitled to perform my version. In sum, if you don't own the original "Card Warp" manuscript or some other version that may come from Mr. Walton, you should not perform the routine in any form, including that herein described. I would suggest that if you know the method as a result of the theft of some other individual who published the secret without permission, you owe Mr. Walton his just recompense. That's a decision you must make for yourself. I am strictly offering counsel.

Some of the details of this handling are as they are as much due to habit as for any other compelling reason. It is important that you set up and perform the sequence the same way each time, so you don't need to think about it. It is not essential that it be exactly the way I do it. It is easiest for me to assure that I'm giving you complete instructions if I describe it as I do it, so I will. I do not suggest you are bound by my choices.

I have great diHiculty doing this routine without the patter and almost as much trouble doing the patter without the handling. The two are intricately keyed to each other. I, therefore, audio taped a performance and dutifully transcribed it. I will endeavor to integrate that transcription with my description of the handling. This is, I believe, the best way to teach it. I've put all the patter in italics and the actions in normal type. While the patter will appear to precede or follow the action, in performance they are coordinated.

Most people have no ided how many decks of cards a pefoming magician goes through in an average year. Icould tellyou butyou wouldn't believe me-no one ever does. Sufice it to say, I$ is not e q f o r a working magician. Icould tellyou stories.. . . The important thing is that I've found something absolutely incredibk to do with my old, worn, used, sticky, battered, beaten-you get t h ~ idea-decks of card.

As you can see, this isn't a f i l l deck. I've ofien been told I wasn't playing with. . . any way.

Remove the cards from their box and give them a brief Overhand Shuffle. As you cut the cards at the prepared card, bringing it to the top, raise your hands and tip them back slightly in preparation for showing the faces to the audience. This has the additional function of preventing the preparation from being seen. After completing the cut, spread the cards between your hands, with the faces toward the audience.

They are, however, all dzfferent.

Close the spread and lightly square the deck. Place your right thumb over the prepared area of the top card. Lower your hands and spread the deck for

the spectator to touch two cards. Out-jog the two selections in place as they are indicated.

You, sir [or ma'am], wouldyou just touch the backs of any two of the cards?

Close the spread and, without squaring, adjust the deck to right-hand Pinch Grip. Use your left hand to strip out the two out-jogged cards. Slide them onto the deck, slipping them far enough under the right thumb so they will stay as you move the deck into left-hand Dealing Grip. As you square the cards, obtain a break under the top three. Tipping the deck back slightly will help ensure that the preparation doesn't inadvertently flash before it is covered by the two cards above. Lift off the three cards, as two, with your right hand holding them from above.

These are the two.

NOTE: If your thumb is long enough, you can span the deck and keep the preparation covered, saving yourself a few grip transfers. (My thumbs are too short.) You would extend your left thumb across the deck and, with your right hand, strip out the out-jogged cards, swiveling them out to the right. Place them on top of the deck by sliding them under your left thumb. Then pick up the break under the top three cards as you square the deck.

*F6 Peel the top card onto the deck and put the remaining double card on top of it. rr'& #>> 3

" One, two. 2:; ; .' t'%

Square extremely briefly, using only the left fingers, and immediately push over *;+5& - the top two cards, taking them into your right hand, thumb above and fingers

e.

, below. The prepared section of the lower card will be hidden under the upper *>F : card. Place the rest of the cards aside. I often spread them on the table. +;:s

~5 e ; ,4 These are the two card with which we will demonstrate our visual phenomenon.

NOTE: This sequence, which switches one of the two selections, is my application of a Clarke Crandall control technique (see Alton Sharpe's Expert Card Conjuring, 1968, page 77) to a Switch-Force. You will find it used elsewhere in this volume as well. I like it.

Hand the upper card of the two you hold to the spectator who made the selections. This is easy but requires some attention to detail. Make sure your tight thumb is over the prepared area of the lower card, ignoring the presence of the upper card, before your left hand slides the upper card from under your right thumb and presents it to the spectator.

Here, you take one-andfold it in halfdcoss its width, with the fdce on the outsiak. Neatness counts!

8 Make sure the spectator complies with your instructions by folding his or her card in half, neatly, with the face on the outside. Miming the action helps assure that the spectator understands. Continuing the preparation, fold your card in half along its length, with the face on the outside. Be careful not to reveal the prepared area but you need not be too "cozy" while folding.

I'IIfold this one along its length, adlso with its face on the outside.

9 Take the widthwise folded card into your left hand and hold it with the creased edge on the right. Hold the lengthwise folded card in your right hand with the - creased edge also to your right. Your right second finger should rest upon the prepared area, and your thumb should keep it closed with pressure from above. Bring the two cards together, the right hand approaching from the near right corner. It should appear that you're simply plat- ing the long card onto the wide card (Figure 75). Actually, you engage the prepared section at the near edge so the near quarter passes below the wide card. This can largely be done by feel, so don't stare at your actions. When you're finished putting the cards together, the lengthwise folded card should extend past the far edge of the widthwise folded card (Figure 76).

Now, this may appear to be preparation for some bizarre form of modular origami but it; bizarre-er-er.

10 Reverse the fold of the widthwise folded card, flipping it over side for side and trapping the lengthwise folded card within. The creases in both cards, after this maneuver, should be on your left. This also sets the prepared section for the "warp illusion." The lengthwise folded card should be protruding from the widthwise folded card on the side farthest from you. Take hold of the packet with both hands (Figure 77). The

thumbs rest above, and the second , \

and third fingertips make contact below, at approximately the line where the edges of the lengthwise card run within the widthwise card. Your first fingers should remain free, as they will be used to push the lengthwise card through the widthwise card. Your other gripping fingers, in addition to providing a guide path, contribute control pressure.

r l p u t the two cards together, with the long card on the outside, nothing worth looking at happens-hut @put them together with the long card on the inside, so the card on the inside has its outside on its outside but its outside is inside the inside of the outside card, then things get interesting.

Push the lengthwise folded card slowly through the widthwise card until its forward edge is flush with the forward edge of the widthwise card (Figure 78). 'The warp illusion is revealed. I find it best to remain silent during the moments when the warp illusion becomes visible.

When Ipush on the card inside, the card turns from outside in to outside out, or is it inside out to inside in?

70

Turn the entire packet over sideways, then end for end. Open the widthwise card from right to left, the lengthwise card remaining on the right (Figure 79). This may seem strange at first, because it isn't the way one normally opens an object with its [

\

hinge on the left. It seems like open- \ - ing a book with the pages turned \ \ - - - downward. You will become accustomed to this odd procedure. As you open the widthwise card, within it a flap on the lengthwise card will also open. Move this flap to the left, along with the left half of the widthwise card. Use your left fingers to cover the opened flap of the lengthwise card, extending them across the face of the left portion of the widthwise card. Rotate the left hand palm down and raise the hand to allow the audience to view the lengthwise card held pinned to the right side of the opened widthwise card (Figure 80).

Rotate the left hand palm up again and lower it. Close the widthwise card from left to right, the reverse of the way you opened it.

The important thing is that it happens to the whole card, end to end, side to side, for the entire inside and outside, us long as they remain inside the outside card. Some peoplejnd this rather incredible disphy incredulous [sic]. I know I do.

13 Once again, position the packet in your hands in readiness for pushing the lengthwise card through the widthwise one. Push the lengthwise folded card through the widthwise card and the warp illusion is revealed again. Turn the entire packet end over end.

Still, if 1 push the inside card in, it goes pom inside in to inside out, or outside out to outside in.

14 Open the widthwise packet from right to left again. And again open the flap along with the left half of the widthwise card. Use your extended left fingers to once more conceal the flap of the lengthwise card. If you've performed the sequence as I have described it, a face will show. Rotate the left hand palm down and raise it. Then return the hand to its previous palm- up position. Close the widthwise card from left to right and turn over the packet sideways.

And, like I said, it happens+om end to end, side to side, for the entire inside and outside as long as they remain inside the outside card. Remember, the important thing is that it happens to the whole card, end to end, side to side, for the entire inside and outside as long as they remain inside the outside card.

15 Once again take the packet in both hands to provide a guide path through - - which the lengthwise card can travel. Begin to push the lengthwise card through but stop half way. Angle the lengthwise card by moving its far end to the right within the widthwise card. Swivel the near end to the left until the forward left corner of the widthwise card covers the middle of the lengthwise card, concealing the division line. Pinch that corner between the left first finger and thumb, with the first finger below (Figure 81). I /' Rotate your left hand palm down, showing the opposite side of the angled card. Rotate the hand palm up.

Now, I could do this all day but, as impressed as you are now, you would tire of this amazing visual illusion. That2 the kind of world we live in. So, for the jaded but insatiable, I'llgo one step&rther.

16 Rotate the lengthwise card back to its original parallel position within the widthwise card, then rotate the packet a quarter turn clockwise. Push the lengthwise card into the widthwise card from the left until about one-quarter extends on the right (Figure 82).

I fIpush the inside card so it? not quite inside or outside, like so, it? \ \ amazing but halfthe card is inside in and halfthe card is inside out. Halfthe card is outside in and halfthe card is outside out, all at the same time. Asidefiom that, iti inside in and inside out on both sides and the other side. Now l m beside myself: I used to have a wife but all this playing with the card and with the house allfill of used decks. . . . Well, she decided she'd rather be outside than inside. Like I said, life is not easy for a working magician. I could tellyou stories.. . . Anyway, let me show you the strangestpart of this whole spectacle.

Tear the upper layer (the unprepared half) of the protruding section upward and back, tearing it from the edge to the center crease (Figure 83). Press the newly torn section closed again and push it back within the

83

widthwise card and through till the lengthwise card protrudes for about one-quarter of its length on the left. Turn the entire packet end over end, left for right, and tear the upper layer (again, the unprepared half) of the protruding section, from edge to center crease.

F I catch the card halfway inside in and halfway outside in and tear it, I can then push it back through until it? halfoutside out and halfway inside out and tear it again.

17 Pull the lengthwise card toward the left, aligning its mid-line with that of the widthwise card. While holding the cards vertically, let the widthwise card spring open at the top and slip your left thumb and right fingers inside their respective ends of the lengthwise card (Figure 84). If you now spread open both cards together and press their creases at both ends flat, a small flap will open toward you under your right fingers, and another will open away from you under your

left thumb (Figure 85). This is as it should be. Rotate the widthwise card ninety degrees (Figure 86)-and, voila, Hyper Card!

Once iti tom, it can't be turned inside out or outside in anymore, so the card is trapped so to peak, in a topological no mani land. No word can exphin it, no mind can retain it. . .

Adjust the Hyper Card on the opened widthwise card so all four corners are aligned. Pull the stapler from your pocket and staple the two ends of the Hyper Card, directly across the center seam, perpendicular to the lengthwise crease (Figure 87).

... but you, sir [or ma'dm], for being so helpjil, can take it home with you. Show

** ."-?, *.... ,. izz2:3r it to your Fiend. Show it to your loved ones. Leave it to your p n d k i d in the will. &<&< b > ST$?

2b:&2 . Tell 'em that a lonely magician with too many card and not enough room for a bed gg2: .:e>$+z i92g$ gave you these card. Ell'ern ao word can exphin ic no mind can retain it. Tell'enz ..a;-., .?. .:-.;,.*, .., . .&. ??*

:ws..,.m F ~ + ~ ~ . ; . ~ life is not e q far a working magician. Oh, and dontforget to tell 'em he thanked

&z;%L+2-

g you. Thank you! .:,..& ,.

Two Principles

THE SIGMA PRINCIPLE

NEW PRINCIPLES in magic are fairly rare. This effect depends upon what I believe to be one of those rarities. It is clearly related to the Stay Stack concept (a Rusduck idea; see Cardiste, No. 1, February 1957, page 12) and the ancient principle used in the Clock Effect, which I call the "Ten-Twenty Force." To explore the other related principles here would be a thankless task (and probably fruitless as well). No matter which principles I cite, someone will argue, more or less persuasively, for another principle that I've omitted. Suffice it to say, to the best of my knowledge, this principle, which I have dubbed the Sigma Force, has never appeared in print in quite the form, nor dressed in quite the way, it is here. If anyone feels slighted by my failure to mention his precursor, I can only apologize and hope for some understanding of my dilemma.

Stated simply, the Sigma Force, as I use it here, combines sleight of hand with mathematics to produce a Force that seems exceedingly fair. A spectator cuts off a packet of cards from a deck, then counts down from the point of the cut a number of cards equal to the size of the cut-off packet.

This is not the most logical procedure but it is presentationally framed to seem logical. I will leave for the explanation of the effect all discussion of the presentational elements, and limit this initial description to the underlying mathematics.

If we view the deck as consisting of five elements or banks, as depicted on the next page, and examine the relationship between these elements, it should make the principle clear.

Block U - -1 Block M - Block L -

Force Card - Talon ---+ 1 I

Block U is a group of indifferent cards. The number of cards that constitutes this i 1

upper bank we shall represent as u. i

The second block is Block M, which must be made up of an even number of cards. These cards are Mirror stacked as follows:

One could call them "Stay Stacked," but in this application the deck cannot be Faro Shuffled if the stack is to be maintained. Therefore, allowing for the hnction the block serves, I'll continue to refer to it as Mirror Stacked. For the sake of simple exposition, I will refer to this as Block M.

The third bank is Block L. It is composed of indifferent cards like Block U. We will refer to the number of cards that comprises this lower bank as I. This allows us to state the size relationship between Block U and Block L as:

The Force Card will be arrived at, regardless of its position, within the constraints of the principle, when the spectator cuts the deck.

The Talon is the balance of the deck. The talon need not contain enough cards to bring the total size of the five banks to fifty-two. The size of the talon is essentially irrelevant.

To illustrate the most basic arrangement of the deck when the principle is to be applied, see the diagram below:

Block U = 2 indzfferent cards ---,

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Block= = ocard- - : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .,

Force Card = King o f Hearts - . Tdlon = n card- -L

Stay with me now. Following the procedure for the Sigma Force, utilizing a deck stacked as just described, you would ask a spectator to cut off a packet of three or four cards. This instruction would limit the spectator to cutting off Block U and card A of Block M, or Block U and cards A and B of Block M. If you wish to increase the number of possible cards the spectator can cut off, you need only add pairs of cards to Block M. The size of Block M is limited only by the number of cards you can consign to the mirror stack in the application to which

you wish to apply the principle. From a practical standpoint Block M might be as large as forty cards. This would allow you to instruct the spectator to cut off a block of up to twenty cards. (You would have to guard against the spectator cutting off only the first two cards but that should be easily accomplished.)

Once the spectator has cut off a packet, you can immediately determine what you must do to assure that the Force Card (the King of Hearts, in this example) will be arrived at when the spectator counts down a number of cards equal to the size of the cut-off packet. You need not know how many cards the spectator has cut off when you make your determination.

Let us assume we are using the deck depicted earlier, but containing nine pairs in the mirror block. The spectator has cut off a packet and the top card of the portion of the deck that remains is Card F in the upper half of the mirror stack (we can call this card Fu). You, the performer, would then spread down in Block M until you spotted the "mirror mate" of Card F from the upper half, which is Card F in the lower half (FL). Form a break above FL and execute any of the wealth of sleights or subterfuges that will transfer all the cards above the break, from FU to the card above F1, (we will refer to these cards as the shift group, Block S) to the bottom of the deck. Which technique-Cut, Pass, etc.-is best will be determined by the application at hand.

If the deck described in the previous paragraph is employed, when the spectator counts the cards in his cut-off packet, they will total seven. Counting from FL through the Force Card inclusive is also seven. This relationship, though not the numbers, will be true for all cases.

From a practical view, it is necessary that the performer be able to identifi- the cards that make up Block M. This information allows determination of the point at which the break must be established in preparation for the transfer of the cards that compose Block S. There are several ways this may be accomplished. The simplest is to establish the stack in a face-up deck. This allows the cards to be identified by their indices. A second method would be to use marked cards. Normal back marks or edge marks come readily to mind. Obviously, the marking system requires only that the relationship between the top card and its mirror mate be determinable, not the value or suit of the card. The effect that follows satisfies the requirement blatantly but cleverly.

You now have the essence of the Sigma Force. In the next few pages, we will explore an application of the Force and the principle it employs. Let the games begin.

A SLEIGHT CASE OF MURDER

DECEMBER 14, 1989 BETA

IT WAS a typical, though extremely cold, Thursday night. I'd stopped up at Tannen's, as was my wont. Rick Sanchez, one of the demonstrators at Tannen's, described for me an effect that had been performed for him by a mysterious customer. He had neither given his name nor the method he used to accomplish his effect, but Rick was dazzled. He posed the effect he had seen as a problem. (I have since learned that the mysterious worker of wonders was Dale Dewey, a gentleman from New Jersey whom I've yet to have the pleasure of meeting. I have, however, spoken with him on the phone, to confirm that my method is different from his. His version of the effect, which he calls "Who Killed Roger Rabbit?" may see print at some future time.) I liked the premise (full credit to Mr. Dewey) because of its inherent entertainment value; so I accepted Rick's challenge. I experimented with a few methods that evening but ended dissatis- fied with any of my solutions. I slept on it. The next day, while continuing my experiments, I happened upon the Sigma Principle, which, when applied to the problem, produced an exceptional solution. What follows is my preferred solution. I've also included some discussion of other approaches to the effect, which I developed during my explorations. Finally, I offer variations of the premise that can be performed impromptu. The premise for some of these methods deviates somewhat from the original, in that only one card has a name written on its back. Along the way, I've interspersed some thoughts on the general approach to this effect and others with common elements.

I've long felt there was something "silly" about both analogy and anthro- pomorphization in effect presentations. I'm talking about effects where the cards are regarded as "like" some other object, or effects wherein the cards are regarded as "like" people. An effect that combines these features is the well- known "Four Burglars." A deck of cards is not a building and the Jacks are not burglars. Standing before an audience and professing that they are is, in my opinion, silly.

Silly, is not a bad thing. A pratfall is silly. A pie in the face is silly. They can also be quite funny. The problem is failing to recognize and, in some way, acknowledge that you know it's silly. It is embarrassing to watch an otherwise intelligent adult standing before an audience and asserting metaphor as fact. I've observed many adult, lay audiences manifest discomfort with such behavior. Presentations of this type must be approached theatrically. They are either theatrical or childish, and childish is inappropriate and embarrassing behavior for an adult.

This effect is a fine example of a presentation that could become embarrassing if one lost awareness of the theatrical farce it employs. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, either I've failed to make myself clear or you should stay away from effects of this type. Safety argues for the latter.

EFFECT: The performer suggests that the deck of cards is a high-rise building in which a murder has occurred. He hrther states that he knows who the victim is but has not yet located the body, or who committed the crime. He records the victim's name in a secret file (a folded piece of paper) and enlists the assistance of a spectator in his efforts. The spectator finds the body at the floor indicated by the number of cards he cuts off. Everyone is surprised to discover that the performer has not only written the name of the victim on his slip of paper but also that the name of the killer, the spectator's name, is written on the victim's back, while the names on the backs of every other card are different.

REQUIREMENTS: Make up a forty-eight-card deck composed of twenty- four pairs. Each card should have a name written across its back, beginning close to the left side and starting about a third of the way down from the long

edge (Figure 88). You may elect to make up the deck with 88 all male names, all female names or a mixture. My deck contains all male names. If I were performing the effect on a regular basis, I'd make up a deck of all female names as well. As stated earlier, the deck should be considered as twenty-four pairs. Each pair should use names that begin with the same letter. Thus, a card for the name Bob would mate with one for the name Bill; if Robert, then Richard, etc. The values of the cards are unimportant. The four cards

remaining from the fifty-two-card deck, those not used, should be kept handy, in case you encounter someone for whom you have no pre-made card. Under such circumstances, acquire the person's name without him learning you have done so. Make up a card for that name and remove either of the two cards that start with the same letter. Should it happen that you have no card with a name that starts with the same letter, make up a mate card, giving it a name starting with that letter and move one of the other pairs to the bottom of the deck or remove it altogether. You'll also need a pen and a small piece of paper.

SET-UP: Arrange the top eleven cards so all the names are oriented in the same direction. These eleven cards are indifferent. In other words, it doesn't matter what names are on these eleven cards or their order, as long as the names are all oriented in the same direction, let's say to the right. Below the top eleven indifferent cards is the Mirror Stack, which is made up of eighteen pairs of cards. The first card of the stack, as an example, might be Al, in which case the last card of the Mirror Stack might be Andy. The list below is the arrangement of my deck:

PAUL, CURTIS, EARL, FRED, IVAN, RAY, DAVE, LENNY, GENE

GEORGE, LOU, DAN, RICK, IGOR, FRANK, ED, CARL, PETER

The names on the first nine cards should be turned in one direction while the second nine are turned in the other direction (Figure 89). The top block of nine should also be turned in the opposite direction from the top eleven indifferent cards. Thus, in our example, the upper nine would lie on the left while the lower nine would lie on the right.

The next nine cards (Block L) are also indifferent but all the names should be turned in the opposite direction to the lower nine cards of Block M (the Mirror Stack). In our example this would be to the left.

The next card down in the stack is the Force Card. The name on the back of this card should be the same as that of the spectator for whom you will perform the effect. The name should be turned opposite to Block L (to the right, following our pattern). Remember the value and suit of the card. We'll say it's the Queen of Clubs.

The Talon or balance of the deck (nine cards) should follow. The number of cards in this group is irrelevant but they should all be turned opposite the Force Card (to the lefi in our sample stack). I have made it a practice to keep the bottom two cards of the deck a matching pair; e.g., A1 and Andy. This facilitates changing the pairs in Block M should you encounter someone with a name used among those cards, say, George.

This Sigma Stack facilitates false shuffling at the start of the effect, which was necessary to comply with the conditions of Dale Dewey's premise (which builds on Fred Lowe's marketed effect, "Christened Reverse" and Dave Campbell's non-rough-and-smooth method, "Fred," published in the Scottish periodical The Thistle, Vol. 21, No. 2, December 1976, page 1 1, to which "Oscar" and others owe a large debt).

False shuffle the deck while maintaining the integrity of the stack. The upper eleven and lower nine cards can be re-ordered by the shuffle but their number must be maintained. I use the G. W. Hunter False Shuffle (see Greater Magic, 1938, page 167), but almost any qualifying false shuffle would be acceptable. The shuffle is performed as you address the target spectator: "1'11 need some assistance for this next melodrama. You, sir, you appear to be an intuitive fellow. Would you be willing to play a role?"

Once you have the spectator's agreement to assist you, square the deck and place it on the table. "A murder has occurred at Pasteboard Towers. I know who the victim is. I'll write the name in the file but we'll keep it a secret." Take the piece of paper and write the name of the Force Card, the Queen of Clubs. Fold the paper and put it aside in plain sight.

"I need you to help me find the corpse, and the killer. This deck of catds will represent the fifty-two story Pasteboard Towers. Cut off a packet of cards, say between ten and twenty, and we'll try to locate the body."

When the spectator cuts off the block of cards, the orientation of the topmost tabled card will tell you whether the cut was within the acceptable range. If not, have the cut re-seated and re-cut. The covering line, if you need it, is "You

can't search that much," or "You can't search that little and leave me the rest of the building!" Once an acceptable cut has been made, note the first letter of the top card of the deck. We will assume it is Fred. Explain, "Now we could have you look through every floor of the building but that could take up a lot of time, and the killer might get away. You have the advantage of being a magical detective. Take my word for it-I've done this before-you're a magical detective. Your cut will tell us where the victim can be found. Count your cards."

While the spectator is counting, spread the top cards of the deck and spot Fred's mirror mate, Frank. Form a break above it. Your patter during this activity is "Fred is a suspect but any of these guys could be the killer." Yell, as though to someone far away, "Seal off the building and don't let anyone leave." Continue, "Ifwe find the corpse, perhaps we can find the killer. Counting the cards you cut off will tell us the floor where we can find the body."

As the spectator counts the cards in the cut-off packet, perform a Turnover Pass. This will shift all the cards above your break to the bottom of the deck. Imme- diately spread the deck fairly neatly and widely, from left to right, face up on the table. Make sure to get a particularly open spread among the top twenty cards.

NOTE: The above description presumes that you will use the standard Hokinser-Herrmann type Turnover Pass. Of the various versions of this Pass, among the best suited to the purpose are the Daley treatment in Stars of Magic (Series 7, No. 3, 1950, page 112) and the Hugard and Braue treatment, known as the "Invisible Pass" (see Ever t Card Technique, 1940, page 37; or The Invisible Pas, 1946). In my opinion, the best version of the Turnover Pass for this effect is the much less known James "Kater" Thomp- son Pass (The Berg Book, 1983, page 2 19) but the Daley and Hugard-Braue Passes will work almost as well.

"We'll count a number of floors equal to the size of your packet." Have him count from the left end of the spread (his right) a number of cards equal to his packet. "Place your finger on the face of the card and draw it out of the spread toward you. Keep your finger on the card. You've found the body, check the file. Read the victim's name aloud." Allow another spectator-or, in a pinch, the assisting one-to open and read the name you wrote before the effect commenced. In a formal performance environment this will probably draw spontaneous applause.

Continue your patter, "I knew who the victim was all along, as you can plainly see, but you found the body." Changing your tone to accusatory, say, "How did you know where the body was? Did you know the victim? I never told you the victim's name. Do you know who the killer is? Where have you been for the last two hours?" Change your tone to one of suspicion: "You do know who the killer

- .,* + is." The spectator will look at you quizzically. "His fingerprints are all over the card. Turn over the card and you'll see the killer's name.. ." ,*i

@ When the card is turned over, say to the spectator, "And what is your name? &.P3- [Name], you're under arrest. You're under arrest as an accomplice in a killer dem- P3$ 4F. onstration. Thank you!" Hit an applause cue and enjoy the response. <*"-

PRESENTATIONAL NOTES: You may be surprised at how well this effect plays, almost regardless of method, when the climax is given the proper dramatic address. While the exposition phase demands a sense of farce, a certain tension should be built when you begin to interrogate the spectator. He will not know where you are going with the interrogation; but he should feel squeezed, as he might if actually being grilled. This will cause him to deny culpability when you accuse him. Depending on your spectator, this can be amusing. I've tried having the spectator give his name first, then revealing the name of the card. This works, but I find that the spectator's reaction is more humorous when the name of the card is revealed first. This can, however, become a moot point if the spectator is known to the other members of the audience. It is better if it seems there is no way you could have known the spectator's name, so it doesn't work as well if you use the guest of honor. You will need to experiment to determine how best to deal with these differences in various circumstances. You should, however, be pleased with the audience response you'll receive in any situation.

ALTERNATES FOR T H E PASS

Some performers are frightened of using a Pass under performance conditions. (See "The Pass," page 335.) Others find themselves in performance environments where they feel no version of the Pass can be made workable. The following approaches should serve in such instances.

7 % ~ TOMMY TUCKER PASS STRATAGEM-Many performers are familiar with the use of the Pass as a false cut. It is not clear to me when or where this idea began. It is almost certainly quite old. This same basic idea was used by Tommy Tucker as a subterfuge to cover the Pass (see Tucker's What Next.', 1 936, page 28). His action was simple, direct and effective. Perform a Classic Pass but lift the lower packet upward four to five inches above the original upper packet. It should appear that you have merely lifted off the upper packet. In this case, you could cover this action with the patter line, "You could have cut the deck at any point but you chose a point of your liking, didn't you?" This action would be regarded, under most conditions, as an innocent gesture. It may be just what you need in certain "hostile" performance environments.

A CASUAL CUT-In very informal performance situations or if you can't perform a Pass in any form, you may need an even less demanding approach. You

can, in that event, use a casual cut. The "secret" of making this approach work is attitude. If you treat the cut as off-hand and unimportant, it will very likely go unnoticed. If it is noticed, it will be considered, if at all, inconsequential. I don't believe the use of a cut, however casual, is as good as a well-executed Pass, of whatever type, but it may allow some individuals to perform the effect who would otherwise find it technically beyond reach.

ALTERNATE METHODS

As a matter of preference, or for those who perform walk-around or table- hopping, where resetting the elaborate stack of the preferred method would be difficult or impossible, I've developed some alternate methods. Since the cornerstone of the previous method is forcing a card, any of several methods of accomplishing that end will serve. Nevertheless, because of the construction of the effect, some methods will apply better than others. The following are two viable approaches:

7 k ~ FAN FORCE-This method, which can be performed with a full deck of "named cards, requires only a one-card set-up. The bottom card of the deck must be the card with the spectator's name on its back.

Proceed with the presentation as in the previous method through Step 3, wherein the spectator cuts off a packet of cards. Have the spectator count the cards in the packet, though in this instance the count is a ruse.

Next you will perform any of the many variations of the Fan Force; but instead of having the spectator touch a card, as is traditional, count up from the bottom (or down from the top) of the face-down fan and separate the cards at that point, slipping the bottom card into place to be revealed at the point of division. Finish the effect as instructed in the preferred method. (If you don't know a version of the Fan Force, see Frank Butler's Fan Force in Thompson's Top Secrets ofMagic, 1956, page 28; "Fan Force" in Dai Vernon; More Inner Secrets of CardMagic, 1960, page 73; or "Fan Prediction #2" in Close-Up Card Magic, 1962, page 168.)

NOTE: When the upper portion of the fan, with the force card added to its face, has been separated from the balance of the fan, reveal the face of the force card and have the spectator slide the card off the face of the packet by placing a finger on the card. If this procedure is not followed, you will lose the logic of the patter line, "His fingerprints are all over the card." This line is amusing and helps to punctuate the climax. It should not be sacrificed unnecessarily.

7 k ~ RIFFLE FORCE-This method departs from the original premise and procedures. Rather than having a packet cut off by the spectator and the count guiding you to the location of the corpse (force card) a Riffle Force is used to create the

appearance that the spectator has located the body directly. Hiding the name on the back of the card can be managed by revealing the bottom card of the upper packet. You can then preserve the fingerprint line by following the procedure described under 7 h ~ FAN FORCE. Both this and the Fan Force approach are decidedly more direct, but not as "logical" in terms of the presentation. Sometimes directness is not the best approach from a presentational perspective. This touches on aspects of Rick Johnsson's Too Perfect Theory, which I won't explore here. I believe the Riffle Force to be an acceptable approach in this context, because one can make presentational allusions to an elevator going down through the building and the spectator controlling the floor on which it stops. This same presentational device can be used with the Fan Force. Unfor- tunately, both methods require that the deck remain in the performer's hands. It would be better were it not so. However, I can think of no way to make a technique such as the Cross-Cut Force, which would keep the deck out of the hands, acceptable. It is not that the technique would be unsuccessful as a means of accomplishing the end (a force), but that it would be likely to make the effect less involving for the audience and, therefore, less entertaining. The notion that a method can be too direct and that a more intricate procedure can add interest to an effect is, to my knowledge, unexplored territory in magic's literature. Future explorations might prove intellectually stimulating, but not today.

PREMISE VARIATIONS Aside from the considerations already discussed, involving the needs of walk- around or table-hopping performers, and those of technique, there may be times when one would like to perform this effect but one lacks the necessary deck. For such "impromptu" situations, I developed the following variations of the premise. The common denominator in each of these is that only the corpse (force card) has a name written on its back. That name, of course, is the spectator's. It should be reasonably apparent that some of the previously discussed methods could be modified to work, but the three methods that follow are, I believe, better suited to such occasions.

BOTTOM DEAL-Though this treatment of the premise eliminates the use of the full deck of names, it maintains most of the other presentational elements.

Begin with the force card on the bottom of deck. Have the spectator cut off and count a packet. Count down in the deck, bottom dealing in the underhand stud-style on the last card so that it appears that the card at the counted number was the force card. The back of the card should not be seen as it is dealt. Conclude as per the original method.

m~ FAKE-TAKE DRIBBLE FORCE-This variation in the premise, in addition to requiring only one card with writing on its back, modifies the procedure by eliminating the counting to the corpse after the cut.

Begin by secretly taking the force card face down into lek-hand Gambler's Cop. Instead of having the spectator cut off a packet, dribble the deck to the table, under the presentational guise of looking through the floors, until the spectator calls "Stop." Simply add the Gambler's Copped card to the bottom of the right- hand packet as you pretend to remove the bottom card (Fake-Take). This can be done without flashing its back. Continue as per the original effect.

NOTE: A variation might be to use my standard handling of the Dribble Force (hndamentally a Marlo idea). As I have not yet published Dribble Drivel: Notes on the Dribble Force at this time you might employ the Lorayne Pass substitute (see "Lorayne's Invisible Pass Routine," page I16 of Quantum Leaps, 1979), which employs ideas of Ed Marlo's ("Dribble Replacement," page 57 of Side Steal, I 957).

I ~ E SLIP-BACK MOVE-Here a steal by Charles Jordan (see his "Unknown Leaper" in Fulves' Charles Tjordzn: Collected Tricks, 1975, page 51) is transformed into a force. While this treatment alters the look of the count-down portion of the effect it maintains all the important premise elements.

Begin with the force card palmed in your right hand. Have a packet cut off and counted as you add the palmed card onto the remainder of the tabled deck while picking it up. Keep the backs of the cards tilted toward you and out of view of the audience. Take a double card from the top of the deck as though it were one card, holding it in right-hand Pinch Grip. Continue to count cards off the top of the deck and into the right hand, taking each card onto the face of the right-hand cards, with the faces turned toward the audience. When you reach the number equal to the size of the cut-off packet minus two, approach the deck with the right-hand packet and take the top card onto the face as you have the others. At the same time, your left thumb contacts the top card of the right-hand packet, at the back of the group. Slide this rear card back onto the deck as you take the penultimate card (Figure 90). Thus, when you count the next card it will be the force card. Have that card slid off the face of the right-hand packet by the spectator. Finish as per the original method.

VANISHING ELEVEN AND PLACEMENT

JULY 20, 1992 FINAL

IT WOULD be very easy to skip right over this item, thinking, "The Vanishing Eleven again?" If you do, someone is going to fool you with it. Remember, I warned you.

There's not much point in recounting the history of the "Vanishing Eleven." Most cardicians know Ed Marlo contributed it to Ibidem, No. 24 in December 1961 (page 9; page 535 in the book edition). The idea of interest here is a concept Fulves called the Nine-Principle Location. The description of this principle appeared in Epilogue, No. 24, July 1975, page 223, as part of an effect titled "Carlyle's Ghost." There it is ascribed to Mike Skinner. Mike, however, did not make claim to it. It has been suggested through other sources that the core idea is Alex Elmsley's. It is clear that the underlying principle is the well-known Casting-Out-Nines procedure. The typical application forces a card in the ninth position. The earliest reference to this Force I'm aware of appears in Billy 07Connor's "After the Four-Ace Trick" in the June-September 1935 issue of The Magic Wand (Vol. XXN, No. 166, page 85). In any event, the application to which it is tasked is novel. I thank Noel Coughlin for calling my attention to the Skinner treatment.

Beginning with a fifty-two-card deck, have a spectator give it a shuffle. Ask him next to cut the deck roughly in half. You must estimate the cut-off portion to be between nineteen and twenty-nine cards. If this portion is greater or smaller, have the spectator cut again until the cut-off portion is in range.

Explain that you will turn your back. While you are turned away, the spectator is to count the cut-off packet. Having done that he is to add the digits of the counted total, and add them again if necessary, until a single digit results. He is then to look at the card that occupies that position from the top of the cut-off packet, leaving the card in place. To finish the procedure he is to drop the other packet on top, burying the selection.

When you turn again to face the audience, take the deck and, with a Double Undercut, shift three cards from the top to the bottom. Believe it or not, the spectator's selection is now twenty-second from the face. State that you can know only one thing with certainty: The card he is thinking ofwas at a position smaller than eleventh from the top before it was buried and lost. (This is not true, as it must be within nine cards of the point where the deck was cut, not eleven, and you know precisely where that card is, but this is far from apparent.) You will therefore show them eleven-card groups. Explain to the spectator that he is not to tell you when he sees his card but that you will ask him from time to time if he has seen it yet. This he should answer truthfully.

Turn the deck face up in your right hand and take it into what I call "Deep Overhand Grip" but is commonly and incorrectly called "Biddle Grip." In other words, you hold the deck in Overhand Grip with the second fingertip extending below the bottom edge of the deck (Figure 91). Draw eleven cards into the left hand, one at a time. Every second or third card, pause long enough to square the left-hand packet without using your right hand. On the count of six, use your right forefinger to tap the back end of the left-hand cards (Figure 92).

When the eleventh card has been counted, ask if the spectator has seen his card. He should say, "No." Drop the deck onto the left-hand cards. Square the deck and return it to Deep Overhand Grip.

You'll now draw another eleven cards off the face of the deck into the left hand. M e r the third card is taken, square them with the left hand alone. After the sixth card, use the right forefinger to square the left-hand packet. Again square the cards with the left fingers alone after the ninth card is drawn ofE Take the

tenth card fairly. As the left hand cards pass under the deck to facilitate drawing the eleventh card off the face, grip the ten cards against the bottom of the deck, stealing them, in Biddle fashion. Draw the eleventh card alone into the left hand. There should be no break in rhythm as this steal and final take are made.

Without haste, ask the spectator, "Did you see your card?" The spectator will say, "Yes." Place the deck aside or in your pocket, making sure to keep the left hand away from your body as you do so.

When the right hand returns, simulate the squaring action with your forefinger you've conditioned the audience to seeing. Next, with your right hand, retake the packet from above. Simulate a fingertip square-up as you ask, "Would you be impressed if I could make your card vanish from this packet?" The spectator should respond affirmatively. Continue, "What was the name of your card?" When the spectator names it, wondering how you're going to deal with the knowledge, let your face register surprise but say, "If that would impress you, this ought to knock you out!" Pause briefly. "Hold out your hands." Look directly at your hands and say, "How 'bout I make the packet vanish and just leave your card?" Handle the card as one sometimes does a double: Snap it, turn it end for end, etc.; then drop it into the spectator's hands.

Jaws should drop if you're performing for lay people. Magicians will say, "That's a nice touch." That will mean they haven't read this book and you caught them with the placement technique. Try it; it works!

PART TWO TECHNIQUES

SECTION ONE

PALMING

PALMING.. . 'THE VERY thought strikes fear in the hearts of many. It is a dreaded act for too many magicians but it is among the most powerhl weapons in the arsenal of any card manipulator. It is not at all surprising that the great majority of magicians do not palm cards, nor that many who do have mixed feelings about doing so. I'm convinced that the palming of cards is the most feared technique magicians employ. The reason is simple, but the logic is flawed. Magicians fear being caught with a card in their hand, but I believe a great deal can be learned by examining this fear.

During the course of a performance, many things can go wrong. Most of them do at one time or another: the Double spreads, the Pass explodes, the Bottom Deal pulls out half the deck, the Second doesn't come out at all. These all happen and we survive one way or another. Why then this enormous fear of palming cards! I submit that the fundamental reason is that we feel out of our element. As long as we have the deck in our hands, we tell ourselves we can cover a mistake, any mistake. When we palm, we have no place to unload should the Palm be suspected. We feel that Palming could leave us stranded with no way out. Add to that the fact that most moves are executed and over in a fairly short period while a Palm leaves the performer "exposed," "vulnerable" to detection for the entire time the card is held, and you have some understanding of the basis for the fear.

To my way of thinking the fear is based on a fallacy. There are innumerable things one can do if a Palm is suspected, just as there are in other situations. They're not the same types of things, but they'll get you out of a tight spot should you find yourselfin one. Lapping, Sleeving, Vesting, Pocketing and Palm

Transfers are just a few of the techniques available. If, for whatever reason, you find yourself under suspicion after you have palmed a card, use one of them. It requires only that you think through the situation before it actually occurs-a wise practice for all moves, in all situations. Ultimately, the solution lies not in what to do if suspected but in eliminating the suspicion.

I'd like to offer another perspective on Palming. This alternate view of the dynamic may be helphl to you. It may set your mind at ease. Any time the performer holds the deck, the hands are the center of attention. Certainly we can and should apply Misdirection when we are about to perform certain types of moves but we cannot use Misdirection frivolously. Further, many moves are constructed to call specific attention to the cards (Counts and Lifts are examples). These moves are done under the direct scrutiny of our spectators. Beyond this, at times any effort to misdirect will only serve to confirm that the performer needs to accomplish some secret move, arousing suspicion rather than allaying it. Finally, no one I know of has found a sure way to prevent spectators from being aware that they have been misdirected. We've all heard spectators say, "While I wasn't looking you ..." A Palm is not subject to these problems. Once the actual steal is completed, the performer can relinquish the deck, thereby removing his hands from the tight scrutiny they normally experience. Thus, not only has the performer stolen a card but he has reduced the burden of scrutiny as well. This can afford one an opportunity for picking up loads, cleaning up unwanted cards from the deck, etc. So, you see, Palming is in many ways safer than other moves.

In my experience, it is rare that a spectator actually sees a card being palmed. If they do, it is caused by a faultily executed technique and it happens during the period when the hands are still in contact with the deck. At such times, all the normal Outs one might use to cover other failed or fbmbled moves are operative. Performers who get caught palming usually get caught by giving the spectators reason to scrutinize the hands. This need not be so. It is the performer's sense of guilt and vulnerability that will likely draw the spectators' suspicion, and it is the stiffness with which the hand is too often held that confirms that suspicion. I know the classic wisdom is to allow your hand to drop "casually" to your side. It is my firmly held position that this is wrong! The worst thing you can do is let your hand cease activity. Nothing arouses suspicion more quickly than not using the hands, yet that is the thing magicians are most likely to do. If the hands are kept moving, occupied with activity, they will be viewed cursorily and deemed unimportant. Magicians must, therefore, learn to move their hands while cards are palmed. How do you learn to move with a card palmed? This answer may shock you. You move with a palmed card. Practice, think about the actions your hands can perform after a card has been stolen, then practice

them. Work out little movement patterns and sequences of actions. This section is not intended to discuss specific Palming techniques, but I will say that the two Palms employed in my "Named Travelers" routine (coming up next) are the ones I use most often. Both techniques leave you in the Palm position that Vernon discusses in everything he has contributed on Palming (see Select Secrets). Most other techniques leave you in the same Palm. What do you do from there? Ed Marlo suggested that the grip within the hand be changed so that the curl of the first finger holds the card (New Palm Position, New Tops, Vol. 6, No. 1, January 1966, page 16; or M.I.N. T, Volume I, 1988, page 203). As usual, Ed was right on the money, but switching intermittently between the two positions (Figure 93) is even better and absolutely cannot be detected by a person viewing the hand no matter how closely they look.

93

-. . - . of sorts Others have suggested transf-err~ng the grip to a 1 humb l'alm

(Figure 94) This idea is also fine in certain situations, but not nearly so many. The third Palm position that should be explored much more by magicians is the Gambler's Flat Palm (Figure 95). In this position the fingers are less constrained

and the angles are almost exactly the same as for the standard Palm positions. At the table one can convert fairly freely between Gambler's Flat Palm and standard Palm positions. m e n you're standing this is more difficult.) The more important thing is not where in the palm the card is held, but what you do with the hand after the card or cards have been palmed. Bruce Cervon, Derek Dingle and I, among many others, have used the hand containing the palmed card to pantomime the action of an Overhand Shuffle while instructing a spectator to shuffle the cards. I am told this was a Vernon stratagem. Tony Gorgio has a complete choreography worked out. He folds his hands in front of him, then moves to a position with his hands holding his head while his elbows rest on the

table. Mixed with these actions, he does change-overs between his hands. Some, myself included, have adopted the act of grabbing the wrist of the left hand to look at their watch. There are as many actions as there are people but you must work out your own. Palm cards! Try both hands at different times. Move around and observe what you do with your hands. Think about what actions can be performed while a card is palmed and choose appropriate ones for various situations. You can eliminate many a Double Lift, False Shuffle and Packet Switch if you will just learn to become fluent in Palming technique. In the process, you will streamline your magic tremendously.

I've saved the best tip for last. One of the most useful things you can do by Palming, and one of the safest from the standpoint of construction, is setting up. Over the years, effects have continually required more complex set-ups. How many times have you read something like "Set the indifferent card face up third from the top of the deck with the three Jacks above it and the fourth Jack below.. ."? Too many times, I'm sure. It isn't always easy to get into that set-up with a table full of spectators waiting for you to begin the next miracle. Palming comes to the rescue. It's easy enough to set up in advance and palm the cards in when needed, yet I can't remember the last time I saw a close-up worker do so. You can argue that if you remove the cards required for the set-up, the deck will be short; I assure you, no one, magicians included, will notice unless you have them handle your cards. I don't know about you, but I'm not in the habit of allowing spectators to handle my cards much. They have a tendency to mess them up. Sure, I'll have a spectator shuffle and cut; but not all that often because it slows down the show. Think about it. If you open your mind to the uses of Palming, you'll find yourself motivated to learn to be good at it. If you learn to be good at it, you'll think of all sorts of uses for this powerful tool.

NAMED TRAVELERS OCTOBER 1989

FINAL

WHILE IV~ANY have visited or revisited the Travelers plot in the years since Vernon's handling appeared in Stars ofMagic (Series 6 , No. 3, 1950, page 97), raising it to neo-classic status, few have meaningfdly addressed in anything but the standard way one of the important issues it raises. I refer to the potential perception that duplicates are being used and the most common solution, that adopted by Vernon in Stars ofMagic, having the cards signed. In my 1989 lecture notes, Stop Fooling Us!, I released my treatment of the plot (''W Travellers," page 5) . I paid little attention to this matter, simply acknowledging that the time lost by having the cards signed slowed the pace of the routine unaccept- ably. I might also have mentioned that my construction of the routine offered only one solution to the problem. I would then have had to admit that by the time I released the routine I had rethought the matter and resolved the problem in what I consider a unique way. That solution will be presented here for the first time. I should make it clear that, in my opinion, taking the time to have the cards signed is most often entirely acceptable. In an opening effect, however, which is how I use the Travelers, the sacrifice is too great. The solution that follows can be performed with or without having the cards signed.

I begin by asking someone to name any four of a kind. By asking a spectator for a favorite value and having them instantaneously appear on top of the deck, immediately before the Travelers portion of the routine begins, I effectively eliminate the possibility that I might be using duplicates. With either approach, the possibility of duplicates is structurally defeated from a spectator's point of view. Someone is bound to point out that four thirteen-card indexes, one in each of

the four pockets, would allow a performer to accomplish the effect using duplicates and only one palming technique. No doubt this is true, and if someone elects to perform the routine in that way, so be it. This, not surprisingly, does not occur to lay people. Moreover, I can't imagine it would be much h n to perform the routine that way. Nevertheless, I concede, it is theoretically possible.

I was doing a lecture for a group of magicians when someone asked, "Why perform the Travelers without signed cards?" The questioner asserted that if the cards are not going to be signed, one might as well use duplicates. I have maintained that while it is true that one could conceivably use duplicates, the audience would sense the difference. My experience with the routine I had been performing since 1968, the version in my lecture notes, offers support for that assertion. The question, nevertheless, started me thinking and led to the routine that follows.

EFFECT: O n the outside chance that you haven't put all the pieces together in your mind, here's what the spectators see. The performer spreads through the deck with the faces toward himself as he asks a spectator to name any value from Ace through King. The deck is immedidtely turned face down. The top four cards are removed. They are the named four of a kind. These four cards are openly placed into four different parts of the deck and the deck is given one cut. The performer then announces that the four cards have traveled, one to each of his four pockets. He tables the deck and proceeds to demonstrate the truth of his assertion.

SET-UP: Arrange the deck from top to bottom: four Aces, four Kings, four Queens.. .four Twos. The suit order should be consistent and known to you but it doesn't particularly matter what that order happens to be. When you remove the deck from its case, the Twos should be on the bottom.

After voicing whatever opening lines you usually use, turn to any spectator and say, "Would you name your favorite four of a kind, your favorite value?" Regard- less of which value is named, immediately say, "That's amazing! Is there any way I could have known what value you would name?" As you say those words and the spectator answers, spread the top, bottom or middle of the deck, faces toward you, to the area where the value the spectator named lies. Form a fourth- finger break below the named four of a kind as you close the spread and lower your hands, revealing the Two on the face (unless the Twos are named, in which case you keep the face of the deck obscured).

Perform Dr. Daley's handling of the Hokinser-Herrmann Turnover Pass (Stars ofMagic, Series 7, No. 3, 1950, page 1 12). This results in the named four of a kind being brought to the top of the deck.

"A lot of magicians would now set about magically finding the four [name the value the spectator named]. Not me, I just start out with them on top of the deck,

and that, of course, is absolutely impossible, since I couldn't have known which four of a kind you would name." Openly remove the top four cards from the deck one at a time, showing their faces and dropping them to the table. The audience will be surprised but may not spontaneously applaud. You will next need to incorporate the "Disordering" procedure that follows:

SECRETLY DISORDERING THE DECK

What I am about to describe is a unique task for a move. The task is the semi-secret disordering (mixing) of a deck under the guise of cutting it. This is unusual because we generally want to preserve or control the order of the cards while apparently mixing them. The odd situation this move addresses can, however, arise when an effect begins with the deck in what would be a visibly apparent order but must end with the deck in an apparently random order. This would be an easily solved problem if there was a reason to shuffle the deck during the effect; sometimes there isn't.

'The mechanics behind my technique grew from one by Derek Dingle. He showed me his means for accomplishing the task more than twenty years ago, and eventually published it in The Complete Works ofDerek Dingle ("Side Cut Faro Stack," 1982, page 134). Both techniques utilize a Faro Shuffle, however Off-Center and imperfect that Faro may be. Both techniques can appear to spectators as though the deck were merely being cut. Still, both techniques are significantly different and my application is, to the best of my knowledge, unique.

4 Hold the deck in left-hand Dealing Grip or right-hand Overhand Grip. Bring the hands together so the left hand can undercut what you estimate to be half the deck or less. As the left hand, with its cards, moves out from under the right hand's half deck, it should move diagonally left and forward.

5 Both hands come together as though the left hand were going to deposit its cards onto the right hand's cards. The left hand's top card should be higher than the right hand's top card. As the packets meet, the near right end of the left hand's packet should contact the left front side of the right hand's packet (Figure 96). If the right hand exerts pressure with its packet against the corner of the left-hand packet and slides the edge of the packet along that corner, the packets can be made to interweave rapidly (Figure 97).

128 + ENCHANTMENTS

As soon as the packets interweave, both hands 98 must lighten their grips as much as possible while maintaining control. The left packet should be moved diagonally right and inward, as though completing the cut (Figure 98). At some point, the packets will bind. When this occurs, both hands must convert to a squaring action to finish the apparent cut. Immediately do another Cut-Faro.

NOTE: The toughest part of this move is mahng it appear as effortless and casual as cutting the deck. This easy, unstudied look comes only with practice. Those who have a naturally light touch on the dcck will acquire the move more readily. Those with a heavier touch must concentrate on lightening up for this technique. If you cannot perform this Cut-Faro Secret Disordering technique deceptively, it is possible to wait until after the named four of a kind are removed, then openly shuffle the deck before proceeding. This nlay be grossly illogical, as a deck that is believed to be in random order should not be rnixed further, but it does not expose any part of the method. In other words, if you can't perform rhe technique, you need not forsake the effect.

APPLICATION NOTE: You nlay deal the four of a kind to the table and perform the two Cut-Faros before theTravelers portion of the routine begins, or you may perform one of the two Cut-Faros before the eEect begins and the other near the cnd of the routine, just before you turn the deck face up to show that none of the named value are left in the deck (Step 21).

Pick up the four tabled cards, showing them to be, let us say, the four Aces. Turn them face down on the deck, obtaining a break with the left fourth finger, and square the cards.

Bring your right hand to the front left 99 corner of the pack, so the right first finger almost touches it. Pull in with the left-fourth finger, which moves the four- card block diagonally over the front left corner (Figure 99).

Take all four cards as one, the right first /

finger along the front edge, screening its \

thickness. Break the pack about two- /

thirds of the way down with your left thumb. Insert the four Aces as one card, into the opening. Tip the deck sharply downward while the right hand remains

in Full contact with the still protruding block. When the deck is at a forty-five- degree angle to the floor, turn your left hand palm down as you simultaneously push the three upper Aces into the deck with your thumb while your right first fi~lger remains in contact with the one remaining Ace. Show the face of this Ace-we'll say it's the Diamond-and turn the left hand again palm up.

10 Continue by inserting the top three cards of the deck at various points above the Aces. The audience will believe these to be the other three Aces. Push all four cards flush with the pack, forming a break above the lowermost card (the Ace of Diamonds). To do this I take advantage of the natural tendency of the deck to break at the point where the lowermost card has been inserted and execute a block Pull-Down. Others may wish to use a diagonal jog. Either is workable.

I I Cut the deck at the break and complete the cut. Three of the Aces go to the bottom, one to the top. This sequence constitutes the Veeser Bluff Multiple Shift, which originally appeared in Ed Marlo's book, The Multiple ShzJ2 (1 96 1, page 31). My variation in handling is minor.

12 As you spread the deck between your hands, obtain a left fourth-finger break above the bottom three cards and square the deck.

WJ BOTTOM PALM circa 1968

1.3 The following sequence of moves constitutes the WJ Bottom Palm. It is related to many previously published Bottom Palms and one as yet unpublished. It is, however, significantly different from all others both in timing and specific mechanics. Its closest relatives are the Zingone Bottom Palm (Evert Card Tech- nique, 1940, page 62) and the LePad Bottom Palm (The Magic of Paul LePaul, 1949, page 55) . The deck is held in left-hand Dealing Grip, but the fourth finger holds a break above the cards to be palmed (three in this case). The left first finger is curled beneath the deck and the near lefi corner of the bottom of the deck is in firm contact with the base of the thumb at the spot where that corner would be if the cards were palmed. When the time comes to make the Palm, the right hand takes the deck into Overhand Grip. The left hand breaks inward slightly at the wrist taking only the cards below the break along with it. The block to be palmed should pivot on the contact point at the base of the left thumb (Figure 100). Continue to pivot the block until the front right corner becomes firmly planted at a spot between the bases of the third and I 1

fourth fingers of the right hand. The hands and cards stay in their positions until you are ready to palm. 'The left first finger should uncurl at some point before the actual palming action. When you want to take the cards into the left palm the action is simple: Straighten your left fingers and push with your right thumb. The cards go directly into Palm Position. From there they can be dealt with as required. The patter that covers this activity for me is "You may wonder why I took the Aces out of the deck only to then lose them. It's simple. If you didn't see me lose them you wouldn't believe they were lost. What I propose to do is to cause the Aces to vanish from the deck and travel, as if by magic, to each of my pockets. One here, one here, one here and one here." I tap the outside of my side and breast jacket pockets as I say the last part of the patter line. All this gesturing is more than adequate cover for the Palm.

In this instance, after returning from tapping the left side and breast pockets the Bottom Palm is completed. Continue to hold the deck in the left-hand dealing position but with all four fingers at the right side of the deck. Move the right hand away to tap the right side-pocket and your chest, over your inside breast pocket, then bring it back to the deck and palm the top card. I use Vernon's Top Palm (see "Topping the Deck" in Select Secrets, 1941, page 7). 1 think almost any Top Palm you can do smoothly will work if it is invisible and doesn't disturb or flash the cards palmed in the left hand.

Riffle the front end of the deck and say, "It's done!" Look at the audience and add, "You believe me don't you?" Some may say "yes," others "no." Pretend to hear only the believers. "Good, that means I don't have to show you." There will be some muttering from the audience, so you continue, "I guess you're going to make me show you. Okay." With your right hand, place the deck onto the table. As you do so, your left hand should fall to your side, naturally but very briefly. Remember that an empty hand would swing slightly before coming to rest: It should not come to an abrupt stop, nor should it rest longer than the time it takes to put the deck on the table.

Both hands should now move together to -. 101 their respective side jacket pockets. Once inside, the right hand has nothing to do but transfer its Ace to a clipped position between the first and second fingers and come back out of the pocket with its Ace back to the audience (Figure 1 0 1).

The left hand must first take the Ace nearest the palm from under the other two. To accomplish this, curl the fingers

around the lower end of the Aces, grasping them. Press the thumb against the face of the Ace nearest the palm, at the lower left corner, and push upward (Figure 102). The card will move out to be taken between the thumb and the side of the first fi nger (Figure 103). That finger then moves around the edge of the card, leaving it clipped between the first and second fingers (Figure 104). The thumb moves behind the card and presses forward causing . \Io3 the card to rotate over the first finger as the second finger releases its grip (Figure 105). Adjust the other two Aces to a Gambler's Flat Palm (Figure 106). Now reclip the single Ace between the thumb, on the face, and first two fingers, on the back, with the back turned outward, and withdraw the hand from the pocket, using the pocket to help twist the card about ninety degrees between the two fingers, so that it is held near the non-index corner of its inner end when the hand exits the pocket. The description sounds complicated but the sequence is actually rather easy. Most of the position transfer takes place in the pocket and is, therefore, invisible. It should, nonetheless, be done quietly and rapidly, though the action is somewhat constrained by the 105 small space in which it must occur.

18 The right hand places its Ace face up on the table, then moves to the left hand to take its Ace, which is also placed face up on the table. As the right hand carries the left hand's Ace to the table, lean forward and move the left hand to the edge of your jacket, where you slip the inner end of the palmed cards just under that edge. The palmed cards enter \ \ 106 deeper inside the jacket automatically as the left fingers grab the lapel. This is essentially Marlo's Lapel Load technique from Amazing hnt It (1 94 1, page 11).

I9 The right hand enters the left side of the jacket, going all the way in to place the fingers at the edge of the inside pocket. The right wrist then bends sharply inward. The right first and second

fingers clip the Ace nearest the left 107 palm (Figure 107) and draw it forth, as though from the inside jacket pocket. (If your pantomime skills are not refined,

.

actually put the card into your pocket before you withdraw it.) This Ace is also deposited face up on the table.

The left hand, fingers still curled lightly, moves across your chest and into the jacket on the right side, carrying with it the last of the Aces. This Ace is produced as though from the right inside jacket I I pocket. The left hand brings out the fourth Ace and transfers it to the right hand, which drops it, to join the others, face up on the table. The spectators should start to applaud but stop them.

You then comment, "This effect wouldn't be very impressive if I had an extra set of Aces left in the deck." Pick up the deck, turn it face up and spread it widely across the table. "But I don't." The audience will look hard at the deck for a few moments and, therefore, will not react. You must let them know that their time for looking at the deck is up. Don't wait too long. Say, "I usually get a round of applause at this point." Begin the applause yourself, then pose to accept it with your hands out to your sides.

PERFORMANCE NOTES: This effect plays very strong. The reaction at the end, however, must be cued. The audience is left with the task of searching the deck, If you don't tell them that their time is up and that it's time to react, they will look until they give up in defeat. This is not the kind of reaction you want. I find that by using an effect of this type as an opener and prompting the audience for the well-earned applause, I accomplish two things. First, J set up ground rules that suggest when an effect is over the audience is to react to it, not puzzle over it. The message is that the magic is to be considered an entertainment, not a problem to be solved. Second, close-up magic doesn't have a standard set of theatrical conventions in the way other forms of performance do. That being the case, and like it or not it is, we must inform the audience what conventions prevail. Audiences like to applaud; it is their way of telling themselves, the others in the group and the performer that they enjoyed themselves. It is not a matter of the performer's ego that is at issue here but the audience's right to enjoy the experience. This should not be denied them.

HOLDOUT HOLDUP

EFFECT: The exact perception an audience will have of this effect will differ slightly from version to version. The basic effect, however, is relatively straightforward and consistent. Four Kings are removed from the deck, signed and openly placed in the performer's sleeve, in which, the audience is told, you have a card cheat's Holdout. The Kings vanish and arrive, unexpectedly, in the deck, positioned for a game of Poker. This is proven when the cards are dealt. The performer suggests that this is surprising to him since what has happened is rather magical and magicians are known to prefer Aces. The hand of Kings is then revealed to have changed to four Aces. Gamblers, alleges the performer, commonly carry the Kings in their wallets, like money in the bank. The performer then reveals the signed Kings in his wallet.

Before discussing the workings of this effect, a bit of its history should be shared. It is a bit complex but I think instructive. On Saturday, November 24, 1973, Pat Cook performed an effect for me in which the signed Kings vanished from his sleeve and appeared in a Poker hand. It was a novel presentation for a vanish and reappearance of four cards. It seemed to me at the time that, as a result of under-exploitation, the effect was weaker than it might have been: The Kings being signed aroused an expectation that there would be some reason to doubt the same Kings were being used throughout, or that they would arrive somewhere "impossible." Moreover, the idea of having the Kings signed at the beginning, as always, seemed burdensome and illogical if it was not going to become obviously crucial. In retrospect these points may not have been completely valid, but the signing did slow down the routine for what might be

judged too little pay-OK In any case, that evening I conceived and explained to an old friend, Bill O'Hanlon what follows here as Method I .

METHOD 1 NOVEMBER 24, 1973

Openly remove the four Kings from the deck while secretly culling the four Aces to the face with one indifferent card for cover. Marlo's Moveable Card Pass (New Tops, Vol. 9, No. 3, March 1969, page 27; or M.I.IV 71; Volume 11,1995, page 50; or see page 173 of this volume) will allow this to be done directly. You may, however, use the Marlo Prayer Cull (New Topr, Vol. 6, No. 6, June 1966, page 28; or M.I.N. T, Nlume I, 1988, page 232) to bring the Aces to the top of the deck, then with a Double Cut transfer five cards from the top to the bottom. The cuts can be dealt with as idle handling during your introductory remarks. Patter to the effect that you are going to show the audience how a Holdout Operator or "Furniture Man" operates in a game. You may also wish to explain that the Kings are preferred by gamblers because the Aces are too obvious. To prove part of your claim and make it easier to follow, you assert, you would like to have the Kings signed. Have each King quickly initialed on the face. Try to handle this briskly; however important it becomes later, it is at this point mere exposition.

As you explain that the Mechanic places the Kings into a Holdout in his sleeve, pick up the Kings, taking them face up into left-hand dealing position. Leave the deck face up on the table. Reach into your jacket and pretend to place the Kings into your right sleeve. In actuality all you do is convert your grip on the Kings from dealing position to Gambler's Cop. Remove your left hand, with the cards concealed, from under your jacket and allow the hand to fall just below table level.

NOTES: Any number of other palm positions might be used in place of Gambler's Cop, though the Cop has much to recommend it. Make whatever adjustments your technique and performance circumstances require.

If one were to use this routine as part of a gambling expos6 or in a formal performance, it would be useful window dressing to be wearing a Holdout, which you would show as part of the introduction. The Holdout need not function. Such a display can lend authenticity and credibility to a performance, which can prove quite useful.

With your right hand, sweep the face-up deck off the table, adding the face-up Kings under the deck. Turn the deck face down (which brings the Kings to the top) and place it on the table in riffle-shuffle position.

Riffle stack the four Kings for a five-handed game, stacking one King in each shuffle but stack the top King one card short. Perform a Double Undercut on the table, bringing one card from the bottom of the deck to the top. The

deck should now have Kings fifth, tenth, fifteenth, and twentieth, and the four Aces are on the bottom. While you are performing the shuffles explain that the cheat would secretly add the Kings to the deck and that you'll show them how in a minute, when you do it. Continue, explaining that he would then riffle shuffle the deck four times, positioning one of the Kings in each shuffle. He would then do a false cut and deal out the hands, or he might get his partner to make the false cut. While all this is being said you are actually doing it.

NOTE: You don't need to be able to riffle stack particularly well, given this presentation. You can do it relatively slowly, as though explaining, since the audience believes the Kings are in your sleeve. It is not my intention to explore the subject of riffle-stacking technique here. For those requiring a text, I would dircct you to Marlo's Rzpe Shupe Systems (1959), Fulves' Kzjrle Shu@ Set-Ups (1374) or Roberto Giobbi's Card College, WValu~ne 4 (2000, page 918). You can eliminate the stacking altogether by employing Method 3 or 5 below.

As you pick up the deck to place it in your left hand, in preparation for dealing, obtain a fourth-finger break above the bottom four cards. You will hold this break throughout the deal. Deal only four cards to each player. Transfer the break above the bottom four cards to your right thumb as you take the deck into your right hand.

Say, "Instead of talking about it, let me show you. At this point the cards would be in his sleeve." With your left hand feel the outside of your sleeve near your upper arm and act surprised when you can't find the cards. "My Holdout's been held up!" Played properly, this can be a truly Eunny moment.

Pick up the cards you've dealt yourself, as a packet, in your left hand, as though it can't be but you'll look. Flip the four-card hand face up and spread it. There are the four Kings.

Close the spread and flip it face down, using the left edge of the deck to help. This will allow you to switch in the Aces and lap the Kings. Say, "I guess that's what I get for trying to hold out on you people." There are actually a number of ways you can handle the switch. Most are variations on the same theme. The essence of the procedure is that the Kings will be lapped and the Aces substituted for them. One simple version, similar to a technique titled the Lap Switch that appears in Harry Lorayne's book, Rim Shots (1973, page 88), and to a standard Cold Deck move, is as follows: Add the Aces above the Kings as you flip them face down using the edge of the deck, but form a break between the two groups. Then, as your right hand reaches forward to place the deck onto the table, release the Kings from under the Aces, allowing them to fall

to your lap (Figure 108). Alter- nately, you can deal the four Kings into a face-down pile on the table, then bring the right hand, with the deck, down over the face-down tabled Kings but maintain a separation between them and the Aces, above which you're holding a thumb break. Drag the Kings off the table and allow them to fall into the lap. Immediately, lift the deck and allow the four Aces to drop face down into your left hand. This is closer to a switch by Dr. Jacob Daley (see Hugardi Magic Monthly, Vol. V, No. 12, May 1948, page 422) and quite workable. You would then place the deck aside and deal the four cards, one at a time and face up onto the table, revealing them to be Aces. Still another alternative is to perform a Vernon Transfer (see page 29 for a reference) of the four Aces onto the tabled Kings, then lap the Kings as you apparently pick them up from the table. Actually, what you pick up is the Aces you've just transferred onto the tabled Kings. Whichever technique you use, the action is accompanied by a line like, "Magicians don't use Kings, they use Aces." Turn the Aces over one at a time and drop them face up onto the table.

9 Pause briefly as the audience responds and allow the left hand to drop to your lap and palm the four Kings. Execute Marlo's Lapel Load (page 13 1) and secretly load the Kings into your wallet. I use my WJ Wallet Insertion Move, as taught in "My Ambitious Card Routine" (page 170) as I say, "Gamblers keep the Kings in their wallet, in case of an emergency. They're like money in the bank." Remove your wallet and reveal the four signed Kings. If you don't have a gimmicked wallet made for loading, you really should obtain one. In a pinch you can just remove the Kings from your pocket.


The Monday after Pat showed me his original version, November 26, 1973, I passed my ideas along to him during a phone conversation. He accepted the ideas as creating a different, stronger effect than the original. He did not, however, care for my method, as it was his desire that the effect fool other magicians, a goal toward which I never strive. To achieve that goal, he maintained, it was necessary to remove the left hand from under the jacket clearly empty. I found this a desirable feature regardless of motivation, so I suggested he try lapping the cards while the hand was under the jacket. This caused problems, as the

cards wouldn't stay together in the lap, scattering when they hit. On Thursday, November 29, Pat and I met and he presented me with the idea of using a paper clip, as I'll explain. There was still a problem, one we hadn't foreseen in our consideration: You could see the cards fall. I then suggested the armpit and crossover for the lap, which will be explained in Method 3. This seemed quite satisfactory and allowed a delay before bringing the cards up from the lap. A pen provided a rational delay motivation and cover. This piece of handling was Pat's suggestion. Our combined thoughts led to the following method.

SET-UP: Engage a large paper clip onto the mouth of the right inner breast pocket of your jacket.

'This is the same as in Method 1: As you remove the Kings from the deck, you cull and control the Aces to the face of the deck, with one indifferent card below them. Have the Kings initialed.

Pick up the Kings between your lefi thumb and first two fingers and begin to place them under your jacket, as though you intended to put them into your right sleeve at the armpit. On the way, however, pass by your pocket and pick up the paper clip on the top edge of the cards, clipping them together (Figure 109). Continue to your armpit and pretend to put the Kings into the sleeve. You need only put your fingers into the top of the sleeve and push at the material to make it appear you are inserting the cards. As you're about to remove your hand, transfer the entire packet to your right armpit and hold it there. Remove your lefi hand, casually allowing it to be seen empty.

"Now they're in the Holdout, in the sleeve, but not too close to the bottom or they might be seen." As you say this, show the audience the inside of the lower portion of your sleeve by pulling the sleeve away from your wrist. This action causes you to lifi your right arm, allowing the Kings to fall from your armpit into your lap under cover of your jacket. There is ample misdirection to cover the drop, even if it could be seen. If you don't feel this misdirection is sufficient, when you show your sleeve, show it to the people on your lefi as you release the packet from your armpit. Your jacket will then cover the packet completely as it falls.

Release your hold on the sleeve and relax, allowing your lefi hand to fall to your lap where you remove the paper clip. While your left hand does this, your right hand

138 + ENCHANTMENTS

picks up the pen used to have the Kings initialed. Leave the Kings in the lap and, with your left hand, grab the edge of your jacket, pulling it open. Put the pen into your left inside jacket pocket or left shirt pocket. Let the left hand fall to the lap and pick up the Kings in Gambler's Cop, with the back of the cards to the palm. With the right hand, sweep the face-up deck off the table, adding the Kings in the process. Continue as in Method 1, Steps 4-9; or try the approach of Method 3.

M E T H O D 3 NOVEMBER 30, 1973

On Friday, November 30, while toying with the effect, I worked out Methods 3 and 4. Method 3 endeavors to address the relative illogic of going through the entire stacking procedure without, apparently, having the Kings in the deck. This illogic is addressed more or less successfully through presentation in the first two methods; but here, in Method 3, the need to stack the cards is eliminated. Some will favor this advantage while others may prefer to go through the motions of stacking and use a Bottom Deal for its efficiency, or because they cannot perform the required riffle stacking techniques. In either case, this method has much to recommend it.

Start by culling and controlling the Aces to the bottom of the deck as you remove the Kings and have them initialed (Method 1, Step 1).

Pretend to place the Kings into your right sleeve, but palm them in Gambler's Cop (Method 1, Step 2)) face to palm, or lap them (Method 2, Step 2). Add the Kings to the bottom of the face-down deck rather than to the top.

Pretend to Riffle Stack the Kings, while retaining the Kings and Aces on the bottom of the deck; or eliminate the supposed stacking exhibition.

Deal out the cards but use a Bottom Deal to deliver a King to yourself on each round.

Continue as in Method 1, Steps 5-9, but you will need to establish the break, in preparation for the switch, after the dealing of the hands. This should present no great difficulty.


Method 4 is based on a Gene Maze idea, though he was not aware of this routine at the time. His concept, the Universal Stock (Ellison Poland's Wonde@l Routines of Magic, First Addendum, 1973, page 39)) introduces an additional element to the effect, allowing the number of hands-between three and seven-to be chosen by the spectator. You could, of course, accomplish this additional feature using Bottom Deals alone but for those familiar with Gene's method-using a combination of Riffle Stacking, Seconds and Bottoms-the

top cards are each dealt fairly to the performer on each round. This is a nice additional feature.

This method begins like the previous ones. The Kings are stolen from the sleeve by Gambler's Cop or Lapping, as you prefer, and added secretly to the rear of the face-up deck. The deck is turned face down and a Double Cut used to move the cover card below the Aces from the bottom to the top. The Kings are then stacked for a five-handed deal (adjusting the stacking to accommodate for the card added on top). Ask the spectator how many hands you should deal. If the spectator names a number between three and six, proceed to deal Seconds as required to cause the Kings to fall to your hand. If seven hands are called for, you must do one more shuffle, adding two indifferent cards below the Aces on the bottom. You now deal Seconds and Bottoms as detailed in Gene's Method. (Or simply don't offer seven hands as an option.) Continue as per Method 1, Steps 5-9.

Here is another approach that avoids the Double Cut-and offers an important technique with wider applications. Cut only the Aces to the bottom of the deck, without including a cover card, and set the deck face down on the table as you pretend to load the Kings into the Holdout. While your right hand is in your lap or releases your lapel, position the retrieved Kings, back to palm, into Full Palm. Now add them to the top of the deck, using the following technique.

THE COUCHLIN PALM REPLACEMENT JUNE 17, 1990

This Palm Replacement was developed by my close friend, Noel Coughlin. He recognized that when palmed cards are added back to the top of a deck, the right hand almost invariably covers the top of the deck at some point. Moreover, at worst, it frequently flattens onto the deck at the same time. Both these actions are potential tip-offs that something reprehensible is occurring. Noel's solution is both clever and easy. It may be applied any time palmed cards are being added to the top of the deck from any palm position of which I can think.

Bring the right hand, which we will assume has cards palmed, down to grasp the deck lightly in Overhand Grip. The hand should, however, be somewhat farther to the right on the deck than usual (Figure 1 10). How far right the right hand can be on the deck is dictated by the length of your left thumb. That thumb must contact the left edge of the right hand's palmed

cards and press them flush against the top of the deck. When the left thumb's grip is secure, move your hands apart. If you prefer, you may move just the left hand. As the hands move, use the left thumb to pull the right hand's cards flush with the top of the deck, aided if necessary by the left fingers. This action is much like that of pulling back the top card after a Second Deal. It is also closely related to Marlo's Bobble Cover (Marlo? Magazine, Volume 5, 1984, page 265).

If you time the pull-back of the cards with the movement of the left hand, which need not be large or fast, the Palm Replacement is totally imperceptible. I'm confident that if you run through this with cards in hand, you'll find yourself malung it your top-card palm replacement of choice in a wide range of situations.

METHOD 5 DECEMBER 1, 1973

This method was created in an effort to duplicate the effect of "Holdout Holdup" while standing. In that sense, it was developed more to explore the challenge of doing so than to find an approach that is in itself compelling. I got more than I sought, as you will see.

Begin as in Method 1, Step 1, by openly removing the Kings from the deck while secretly culling the Aces. Have the Kings signed but, before doing a Double Cut to transfer the Aces to the bottom, crimp the bottom card in whatever way gives you a crimp you can easily locate by feel. With a Double Cut, move the Aces to the bottom but do not include a cover card.

Follow the procedures described in Method 1, Step 2, but set the deckface down on the table before you pretend to place the Kings into your right sleeve, stealing them out in Gambler's Cop. Before taking the Kings into Cop Position, turn them over under your jacket, so that they lie face to palm.

With your right hand, sweep the face-down deck off the table and into your left hand, adding the face-down Kings to the bottom. Reorient the deck on the table for a riffle shuffle.

Pretend to stack the deck but merely retain the bottom nine cards (four Kings, four Aces and the crimped card) in place. You can add the three-to-seven-hand request feature if you like, with no need to deal Bottoms or to riffle stack. Simply deal the cards honestly. It is usehl, however, to establish the break above the lowermost eight cards before you begin dealing. This is easily done thanks to the crimped card.

NOTE: For those who insist on preserving Pat's requirement of allowing the hand to come from the jacket empty, it is easy to slip the four Kings into your lower lpft sleeve while they are under the jacket. They can later be retrieved, as you put the pen back into your inside jacket or shirt pocket.

5 You will now perform a version of the Daley Switch mentioned in Method 1 or the switch described in Ian Baxter's book Ten on Deck (1970, page 6), which is essentially a refined version of the Daley Switch. Those familiar with the Daley technique will realize that normally it switches four tabled cards for the bottom four cards of the deck, or a five-card hand for another five-card hand. ?'he Baxter switch usually accomplishes the same end. In this handling, you'll switch the four indifferent cards you've dealt yourself for the bottom eight cards. I don't recall where I first learned the basis for this handling of the Daley Switch. It is not solely my creation, merely my refinement. I do not believe it has been previously published, though I've been using it for years. It is not completely logical, but if handled casually, without undue attention, it should appear that you've merely tabled the deck and picked up the tabled hand with the same hand. Proceed as follows:

THE ONE-HANDED DALEY SWITCH

With the deck held in Overhand Grip by the right second, third and fourth fingers at the front and the thumb at the near end, move the eight-card block on the bottom of the deck to the right for about half its width. Your left fingers can easily accomplish this repositioning as the deck is transferred from the left hand to the right. This transfer must, however, be handled smoothly, quickly and without fumbling. During and after the transfer, the block of cards should be screened by the right fingers at the front, but your grip on the block should be between the right fourth finger and thumb. The right first finger should be curled above the deck but you should be able to extend it around the left side of the deck, since you will need to do so in a moment.

Move the deck toward the tabled four- card hand and bring the deck down onto it so that the tabled cards are apparently aligned to the right of the deck for about a quarter of their width (Figure 11 1). Extend your right first finger around the left side of the deck until it contacts the table surface.

You will not actually add the tabled packet to the deck in the side-jogged position, though it should appear that you have. Rather, slide the deck to the right and forward, sliding the tabled cards along under the deck until you stop moving, about three inches forward and two inches to the right of where you first contacted the table. The tabled cards should align roughly with the deck, stopped by the right first finger at the left side, the other right

fingers at the front and the thumb at the rear. In Figure 1 12, the right side of the deck is sllown raised to c l a r i ~ the configuration. In practice, the deck lies flat on the tabled packet. Release the deck onto the original tabled packet and, without pause, draw the eight-card block back toward you (Figure 113). Transfer it to left-hand Dealing Grip. The switch is done and it should appear that nothing untoward has occurred. The key to making the technique deceptive is to look at the tabled cards briefly as you begin to approach them, then immediately look up to rhetorically ask something like "Is there any way these cards could be the Kings? I don't think so."

Keep the packet squared and the edges screened throughout the switch and the extra thickness will not be noticed. Remember, the eight-card packet is in motion from the time you release the deck onto the tabled packet until it is in the left hand.

6 Turn the eight-card packet face up, so the audience can see the faces as you count the cards. Count the packet as just four Kings, keeping the last five cards squared as one. During the count, in-jog the third King. Flip the packet face down and square it, forming a break above the jogged card. Pull down the card just above the break, adding it below the break, as you say, "I guess that's what I get for trying to hold out on you people." What all this jogging and break shifting does is give you a break between the top four cards (the Aces) and lower four cards (the Kings).

7 Continue by moving the four Kings into Gambler's Cop as you say, "Magicians don't use Kings, they use Aces." Turn the Aces face up as a group, fan them and use your right hand to drop them onto the table, face up. As you do so, your left hand swings naturally downward and moves the cards from Gambler's Cop to Gambler's Flat Palm. Immediately bring the left hand back up to waist level. This palm adjustment occurs rapidly without the left hand ever coming to rest. If the angles require it, you can duck the hand behind your left thigh, briefly, to help screen the action.

8 Perform Marlo's Lapel Load, adding the Flat-Palmed cards to the inside of your jacket on the left as you grab your jacket near the lapel. As the right hand enters

the left side of the jacket it takes the cards from the left hand and continues to load the wallet as discussed in Method 1. End, as you have in the other versions, by removing your wallet from your pocket and the Kings from the wallet.

CLOSING COMMENTS

I passed this last version on to Pat the following day, December I . My work on the effect ended at that point. I've performed it less than a dozen times for audiences, but I like the reactions I've obtained. It is a novel routine with a number of elements that should appeal to those who like to perform effects with a gambling flavor. The fact that the routine can be performed either seated or standing gives it greater flexibility than is typical for such routines. I believe more could be done with the presentation to add clarity and strength to the effect but such emendations will best be developed from performance experience. 'VVhile Pat's goal was to create a routine that would fool magicians, I'm persuaded by my experience that the routine will play very well for card- playing lay audiences. Enjoy.

CHAMELEON COLORS REVISITED

OCTOBER 1966 ALPHA

IN 1958, Paul LePaul illustrated and published a collection of effects by Brother Hamman titled "The Card Magic of Brother John Hamman S.M." This small booklet contains a largely overlooked routine, unimpressively titled "The Cha- meleon Colors" (page 37). By early 1966, when I began playing with the plot as defined by Harnman, most of those who had been intrigued by the broad effect had latched onto another version of this plot, which follows it in the booklet. This routine, a structural forerunner of Peter Kane's "Watch the Ace" and Frank Garcia's "Wild Card," is named "The Mystic Nine." I remained fond of Hamman's less elaborate "Chameleon Colors," which, as I see it, is more closely related to Dr. Reinhard Rohnstein's "Follow the Leader" plot but is better structured theatrically. In its Chameleon-Colors form, the plot is relatively little explored, but I continue to find its straightforward procedure and strong climax produce excellent reactions from lay audiences. I believe you will be likewise persuaded.

EFFECT: A deck is openly separated into a red cards and blacks. The black half of the deck is tabled while the red half is retained in the hands. The performer turns up one of the black cards on the table and deals a number of red cards onto it. After an appropriate magical gesture, they are shown to have changed, chameleon-like, into black cards. The process is then reversed: The red cards are isolated on the table while the black cards are taken in hand. A red card is placed face up on the table and black cards are dealt onto it. They change to red. These

red cards are added to and mixed with the black half, causing all the blacks to change to red. The isolated red packet is then shown to have changed to black.

SET-UP: Arrange the deck from the top down, with all the black cards followed by all the reds, except for one black card second from the face. That black card should be the mate of the card at the face of the run of blacks (Figure 1 14). The black card second from the face should be crimped at the near end. The order of my deck as I write this is, from face to back: indifferent red card-Seven of Clubs (crimped at the near end)-twenty-five reds-Seven of Spades-twenty-four blacks.

Spread the deck face up across the table, pointing out the separation of the colors but concealing the black card second from the face by leaving the last few cards at that end clumped together. Because the card that starts the run of blacks tends to draw the attention of the audience, it may be vaguely recalled by some. It is for this reason that you make the card second from the face the mate to the card that begins the run of blacks. As you'll see, if you use the effect with any frequency, it is a small detail; but it can be quite helpful with an observant audience.

As you pick up the spread, openly obtain a large break between the reds and blacks. However, in reality the break should be one card off. One card-in our case the Seven of Spades-should be above the break, although it is a black card. The arrangement of the cards in your hands will be, from the face: red card-Seven of Clubs-twenty-five red cards-Seven of Spades-break-twenty- four black cards.

We are about to execute what I refer to as the De-Flourished Ossip Slip Cut. Other Slip Cut techniques may work as well but I find this one reliable and particularly convincing in this context. Alignment reliability is a particularly important consideration when the deck is face up, and many Slip Cut techniques make it difficult to assure that the alignment of the slipped card is maintained. As you will see, this technique makes it easy to ensure such alignment. It is performed as follows:

DE-FLOURISHED OSSIP SLIP C U T

With the deck in left-hand Dealing Grip, openly hold a break near the middle. In this circumstance, the break will be just below the Seven of Spades but typically you can just pull open the deck with your left fourth finger at any point.

Your tight hand approaches the deck at the near right corner, with the thumb above and the first and second fingers below. The thumb should be poised to enter the deck at the point where the break is held. The fingers should appear to be ready to go below the deck. It should seem that you are about to take the lower, black packet into Pinch Grip (Figure 115). Neither the fingers nor the thumb actually enter the deck. Rather, just before the right thumb and fingers meet the deck, tip it back as you would in a necktie deal, and allow the right thumb to fall lightly on top of the deck at the near right corner, and the fingers to enter the deck at the break. Without pause, apply downward pressure with the left thumb on the face of the deck and draw the uppermost card and the lower packet forward and to the left (Figure 116), as is usual in a Slip Cut. As soon as the single upper card-a red one-has cleared the near right corner of the upper packet, tighten the right thumb's grip on the cards beneath it. This is the original upper packet minus its covering red card. Note that the black card second from the face (the Seven of Clubs), which now shows on the face of the right-hand packet, is the mate of the card on the face of the black section, the card that was at the division between the reds and blacks (the Seven of Spades). Thus, after the cut, should anyone happen to notice, the cut will likely appear to have been honest.

At this point, you will be holding half the deck at the tips of your right thumb and fingers and half of the deck in left-hand Dealing Grip. It should appear that you are holding the original upper red half in your left hand. Your right hand should appear to hold the original lower black packet.

Carry the right-hand packet to the table and lightly tap the left edge on the tabletop, then hinge the cards face down onto the table. It should appear that you have simply removed the black half from under the red half and tabled it. All appears innocent and fair.

NOTE: For many years, on 'Thursday cvenings, David Ossip regularly visited Lou lannen's magic store in New York City. 'l'his small-statured, kind and gentle man did only a handful of effects and routines, each with his own touches, each delightful in its way. He did each exceptionally well and engagingly. Among the techniques he devised and used was a flourish-like treatment of the Slip Cut, which was the key move in his favorite prod~lction of four Gngs. I'm not aware that either his routine or his Slip Cut technique have been published, but Dave's technique led to mine. While the Slip Cut technique described in the context of this routine is based on Dave's, it does not retain the flourish-like handling that defjned the Ossip technique. In any case, I probably couldn't do justice to describing the manner of Dave's execution of the technique. I miss Dave, his ilnpish performances and his enthusiastic encouragement. I have no doubt he's charming his heavenly audiences and 1 hope he is pleased by what he inspired.

To recap, the face-down tabled packet is, from the top down, the Seven of Spades, twenty-five red cards, then the Seven of Clubs. The packet in the left hand, which is still face up, has an indifferent red card followed by twenty- four black cards. Turning your attention to this left-hand packet, turn it face down and give it a casual Overhand Shuffle, maintaining the bottom card in place. As you're shuffling the cards, your patter should introduce the premise of what you're about to do.

With the right hand, remove the top card of the tabled packet, the Seven of Spades, turning it face up, and lay it on the table in front of you.

Deal five or six cards from the face-down left-hand packet onto the face-up black card. You have some flexibility in how many cards you deal and you should take advantage of this by allowing your spectators to help decide the number dealt. This adds room for some by-play and lends some credibility to the asserted logic.

Rub the face-down cards on the face of the black card as you comment, "If I deal red cards onto a black card, a strange thing sometimes happens." Turn the left hand palm down and use the extended left first finger as a stop to aid your right hand in picking up the face-down cards you've dealt. This will flash the red card on the face of the left hand's packet. Fan the right hand's cards as you turn them face up, revealing the change to black. Lay them face up on top of the face-up black card on the table. You continue, "They turn black."

8 Your left hand should by now have turned palm up again. With a Double Undercut, transfer the bottom card to the top as you place the packet to your left on the table, near its edge.

N07'E: You can, as an alternative, deal a Bottom on the last card, then change your mind and put it back on top of the deck. This will eliminate the need for the Double Undercut to bring the red card to the top of the packet. You could also shuffle the red card to eighth position from the top before you begin to deal. In using either of these approaches you'll lose the flash of the bottom card described in Step 7. Finally, you can execute a Side Steal to bring the bottom card to the top as you square the cards, before tabling the packet. 'This preserves the flash of the bottom card without adding a weakly justified rearrangement of the packet. The one thing you don't want to do is make it apparent that one card is being displaced, as this would tend to tip off the ruse being employed.

Pick up the tabled half deck the audience believes to contain all black cards. Square them and turn them face up. Pick up all the face-up blacks from the table, add them to the face of the packet and turn the assembled packet face down. Give it a brief Overhand Shuffle, maintaining all the blacks on the bottom.

Turn up the top card from the face-down tabled portion of the deck and place it in front of you on the table. It will be a red card, though the remainder of the packet is black.

Deal five or six cards from the left-hand portion onto the tabled face-up card. Again, the number is flexible, allowing for by-play. Say, "Remember, those cards came from here." Turn the cards in you hand over and casually spread the first few cards, being careful not to reveal any red ones.

Perform the magical rubbing gesture you did in Step 7, then reveal the black cards you've dealt have changed to red. Allow them to fall face up onto the table and let the effect register.

Pick up all the red cards lying face up on the table and shove them, as a unit, into the left-hand packet. This should appear a casual action but be careful not to push them into the bottom stock of blacks. As you square the packet, pick up a break above the black cards. This is facilitated by the crimp in the uppermost black one.

Shuffle the upper bank of red cards while maintaining the break above the blacks. If you use an Overhand Shuffle, this is easy. As you shuffle the cards, comment, "The strangest thing of all is that if you mix the reds in with the blacks, sometimes.. ." Square the cards and steal the blacks in Gambler's Cop as your right hand moves to the table, turning the packet face up. As you spread

these cards, say, "...all the blacks turn red. This gives me too damn many red cards, a completely unacceptable situation. It's a good thing.. ." Slide the other packet off the table adding the copped cards below them. "...that all the reds turn black." Turn the packet face up and spread them below the spread of red cards. Accept your audience's approbation

CLCXING NOTES: I've developed and used other handlings for this routine at various times. I have elected not to include them. Each would appear essentially identical to an audience. 'r'he effect is simple for an audience to understand, but it is inlportant that the isolation of the packets be clear throughout the process. If this is kept in mind, the audience's level of conviction about the composition of each half should be unambiguous. The greater the audience's conviction, the stronger the audience's response. Sell the cleanness of the handling and you'll be impressed with the response it receives.

NATURALNESS 7 k E DOUBLE LIFT-AND MORE

MANY OF the finest practitioners of our craft have expressed a common opinion about the performance of sleights and other techniques in magic. Their thesis, even without much elaboration, has been of tremendous interest to a small, but fortunately growing, number of their brethren. This shared advocacy is for the precept of "naturalness." So entrenched is this injunction, it may be considered heresy to challenge it, but I intend to hold the assertion up to the light. Without denying the fundamental soundness of the advice, in this, as in all cases, one must carefully consider the endorsement and its application. It has been my observation that while some magicians have truly adopted "naturalness" as their watchword, they remain a rare breed. For too many, it is more a mantra than a goal. For most, it is a conveniently selective judgment; they argue for naturalness when it suits their desire to praise a move but abandon it at the slightest provocation when they find a move they like or need that doesn't qualify. I contend that if the injunction is to have value, one must always question-every move, without exception, must be critically judged.

To assess naturalness, we need a workable definition. Most moves may be natural, or may be made to qualify if examined, analyzed and restricted to uses that permit natural execution; but how is one to judge without definable criteria. The core of any effort at analysis, the key question, must be, "What is natural?" This question begs an answer; yet, to my knowledge, no answer has been satisfactorily proposed. The common notion that "natural" is the way a lay person would do it fails as guidance because magicians so frequently do things that lay people never do. No lay person is ever called upon to fairly display the four Aces

prior to arranging them in a T-formation. No lay person has ever been called upon to place a coin into his or her hand in preparation for an evanishment. %en was the last time you were called upon, outside your magic, to thread a ring onto a length of rope or push a small crochet ball under a cup? I suggest that what we really mean by "natural" is:

In a mnner that we believe a Layperson would use fever they had occasion.

To that definition we must add a caveat: That the action be one that does not appear flamboyant. Without that constraint we might accept moves that look more like flourishes than expedient methods of performing their intended action. (Flourishes may have their place but that is a matter for a separate discussion.) I, therefore, propose that "natural" as it relates to magic means:

To perfom in a non-fimbuyant manner an action that is economical and close to the way in which a Layperson might reasonablype$rrn it-assuming that a layperson had occasion tope form such an action.

That definition permits and encourages a more meaningful dialogue than has heretofore been possible, albeit imperfect. This casting might be made more succinct, as, for example, the following effort from my publisher, Stephen Minch:

A natural action is one that offers a c h r , overt presentationalpurpose and does not arouse suspicion of a secret purpose.

I am not inclined, though, to strive for linguistic perfection at this time. I have no doubt that further refinement is possible. The more important contribution I seek from our defining statement is that it allow something of a checklist- approach to analysis.

(1) Is this move flamboyant?

(2) Are there overt extraneous actions associated with the move that would not exist were the secret part of the move absent? In other words, is it economical, or at least efficient?

(3) Is it reasonable to believe that a lay person might perform this action in this way if he or she had occasion to do so?

These checkpoints call for subjective judgments and relative definitions but some examples of techniques that clearly fail each test may help to clarify the criteria. The D'Arnico Double Lift, as it appears in Arthur Buckley's Card Control (1946, page 15), may be a fine flourish, but it would fail as a natural move under Rule One. It is unquestionably flamboyant. If one were portraying a flamboyant character as part of a performance, it might be completely acceptable to use such a technique; but it would not be natural, merely consistent with an atypical character. I believe natural implies a sense of normalcy. Without reference to a norm the term becomes almost meaningless.

The Panoramic Shifi, as described in the Jerry Andrus book, Andrus Card Control (page 34, 1976), would fail under Rule Two. However well-screened by the hands and by proper attention to angles, the overt actions required to perform the technique-particularly those of the right hand-are inefficient. This inefficiency may be masked in any number of ways but they are not inherent to the move. The move, therefore, is not inherently natural, even if it can be made so.

The Thumb Palm Vanish, as described in Bobo's New Modern Coin Magic (1966, page 251, would fail under Rule Three. It is not reasonable to believe that a non-magician would hold a coin clipped between the first and second fingertips and insert it into a well-formed hand by closing the opposite hand into a fist. Viewers would recognize that this is not a way anyone would transfer an object under normal circumstances. They would, therefore, regard the action as purposefully staged. When such a technique is well executed, it may deceive the eye but never the mind-and deceiving the mind is the fundamental goal of seeking naturalness.

I'm sure that someone can raise an argument for each of the three examples cited. This would not alter the legitimacy of the points they illustrate. I don't suggest that any of these techniques cannot be made natural, only that they are not inherently so. Again, an example may serve clarity. A widely debated example of the notion of "making" a move natural can be found in the Curry Turnover and its progeny. These techniques are not inherently natural, under Rule Three: A person would not handle the turnover of a card in the manner required. It would, at best, be questionable under normal conditions. There are, however, circumstances under which one might reasonably perform the requisite overt action. For example, when standing, without a readily available place to put the deck, and facing the need to turn over two cards at the same time, one might turn over one of the cards with the hand that holds the deck. Some performers have constructed sequences to provide these circumstances. It follows that if one is willing to choreograph a n application so the motivating circumstances prevail, one may make a move natural for that given situation. Such a move, however, could not perform yeoman service as a card switch. Hopefully, all this is now clear. Thus, with this as a preface, let us explore a popular move of our time and learn what we may.

THE DOUBLE LIFT It seems appropriate to continue the discussion with this technique because I know of no other that has generated so much inquiry on the subject of naturalness. Nevertheless, as one continues to see a host of abominable actions performed under the guise of "natural" double lifts, it would seem there remains room for still further examination.

To lay the groundwork, three approaches to lifts have come to vogue at this time. The "Pre-set" approach has long been the rage, perhaps because it is the easiest and, therefore, is most often the first learned. The "Hit," as popularized by Jacob Daley, lives to this day and has its adherents. The Push-Off, born from many fertile minds and popularized by Dai Vernon and friends, has many strong proponents. Dai Vernon, in support of his argument for the Push-Off, conducted experiments by handing random lay people a deck of cards and asking them to show him the top card. Based on Vernon's report, almost universally, they pushed off the top card. Then, applying a variety of grips and actions, they turned it over to show it. In theory, this argues that Vernon was correct under Rule Three. The problem with drawing this, or any other conclusion from these trials lies not in the result but in its method. Stated in scientific terms, the protocol is flawed. A lay person, when asked to reveal the identity of the top card of a deck, regardless of the words used, will take the most comfortable, expedient means of turning over the top card because all he wishes to do is show it. A magician, on the other hand, is often attempting to do something more, to aid the illusion being created. The magician demonstrates the top card. He is attempting to both show it and demonstrate that the card came from the top of the deck and that it is a single card. If you were to inform a lay person that his task was to reveal:

(1) the identity of the top card while demonstrating that it came off the top of the deck,

(2) that it is a single card and

(3) that it will be placed back onto the deck within moments,

you would, my experiments have shown, get a wide variety of responses. Some push the card off first but many carefully lift the card straight off the deck without pushing it OK Still others push the card off with the hand not holding the deck. They seem to believe this action proves that it is the top card being pushed OK Regardless of how the card is removed, they then take it in any of a variety of grips to show it. Because of this wide diversity in methods, when magicians select all manner of handlings, they are accepted without question by lay people. As a result, the dynamic surrounding the judgment of naturalness is very different from what has generally been thought. It follows that many, though not all, of the Double Lifts that have been created over the years may be judged reasonable under Rule Three, in that a lay person might use them. Most of the Double Lifts that have been abandoned, or should be, fail Rule Two, as they are inefficient. Inefficiency fosters suspicion because, beyond a threshold, it breeds a sense that what is being done is illogical. There is a need for this "efficiency threshold to be better understood, but by applying the concept in broad terms we arrive at the same conclusion about the naturalness of most

techniques. This is important because, in many instances, we break our fingers learning techniques that do little, if anything, to enhance performance or deceptiveness. Vernon was correct: The Push-Off is desirable, but it is desirable because it is efficient, not because it is universal.

With this preamble, I present one of my strongly preferred treatments of the Double Lift. It is easy and looks like a Push-Off. It incorporates an idea that Tenkai, Vernon, Marlo and Hamman may all have had years ago, but it takes into consideration all the goals of a Double Lift we've discussed. My Lift clearly proves that it is the top card that has been taken and that it is a single card. The lift is efficient and it is quite reasonable to assume that a lay person might handle cards in the same way, given our stated goals. I, therefore, proudly present, for the first time, the Two-Step Double Lift-one of many natural Double Lifts.

FORM A small fourth-finger break at the near right corner, under the two (or more) cards to be lifted. The method used to accomplish this will depend on the circumstances of the effect and will not be directly addressed here.

With the right hand, grasp the cards above the break as a unit in Overhand Grip. The right thumb should be on the near edge, near the right corner, and the fingers at the front edge. The right thumb and second finger will do most of the work.

Lift the cards slightly, more at the back end than at the front, and move them smoothly to the right. At the same time, move the left thumb to the right, as though you were pushing over the top card. On completion of this simulated push, without pause, lift the cards somewhat further 117 off the deck. I merely bring the front of the cards up so they are at the same level as the back. The distance between the card(s) and the top of the deck is no more than three-eights of an inch, and usually less. Release the double card on the outer right corner of the deck and hold it there, under the left thumb (Figure 1 17). The pretense is that your left thumb pushed the card to the right, then your right hand took hold of the card to move it forward. (The fake push is a Vernon notion, though our techniques differ.)

NOTE: How far to the right you'll move the card(s) depends on the lzngh ofyour thumb. You should be able to rest the pad ofyour left thumb on the rnicldle of the left edge of the card(s) and nlaintain secure control of them.

(THAT C'OMSTITUTES STEP 1 OF THE TWO-STEP DOUBLE LIFT)

I believe this initial sequence improves on the rationale behind the original Vernon idea, wherein the only reason for the right hand's presence is that it was going to turn the cards over. In the Vernon method, the grip during the turnover would eventually be at the near right corner, making the early presence of the right hand superfluous and potentially suspect under Rule Two. The reasoning underlying my sequence is that while the left thumb could, and probably would, push the card to the right, it couldn't readily move the card to the diagonal position in which it ultimately rests. It follows that the right hand was present to move the card to that diagonal position. One might ask why the card should be positioned in this way. The position demonstrates the card. The card is isolated in a way that speaks rational volumes. It says that the card came from the top of the deck and, almost as clearly, that it is a single card, all without a word.

Having isolated the card, the right hand releases its grip and moves to the right side, still palm down. It regrips the two cards as one at the right side, near the middle of the long edge. The right first and second fingers should take hold from above, the thumb from below (Figure 1 18).

When the right hand's grip is secure, release the left thumb's pressure completely but don't move the thumb. Instead, move the right hand to the right and upward slightly as the hand rotates palm up. If the left hand doesn't move out of the way, the card will snap off the front right corner of the deck as the right wrist rotates (Figure 1 19). This, while optional, helps to convey that the card(s) is a single one.

You can again snap the double card by pushing it under the left thumb and ) \

moving the entire lower right arm upward, from the elbow. As the double card comes out from under the thumb it will snap. Don't overdo this; once or twice is sufficient. It isn't really necessary at all.

NOTES: If you wish to turn the card(s) face down, back onto the deck, bring the left edge of the card(s) to the right edge of the deck. Allow the left fingertips to contact the back of the rear card. This will serve to guide the replacement. Lever the card(s) over book-fashion, with the right edge of the deck as the hinge. Handle this as casually as possible. If you wish to leave the double card face up, you can obviously place it back onto the deck in that condition or return it to whatever position you desire.

This second step can be adapted in a number of ways, depending on the requirements of the effect. If, for example, you need a different grip, as for one of the Marlo Changes (see Miracle Card Clzuzges, 1954) or the Collins- Goldin Snap Change (Far&? Card Magic, Part Tho, 1933, page 37; and Collins' Gems ofPersonalPrestidigit-dtion, 1952, page 15 (not published until 2003 in Edwin Dawes' Stanley Collins: Conjurer, Collector, and lconocht), you can retake the card in the requisite grip. The diagonal set position lends itself to nearly any need that might arise. This flexibility is yet another benefit of the Two-Step approach. A handling some will find of considerable interest can be found in my section of Ken Simmons' 1999 reissue of his Gzla~ded Secrets Revealed (page 9).

HISTORICAL NOTE: In Stanley Collins' last book, Gems ofPersonnl Pres- tidigitation, cited above, Collins claims this Change and having shown it, when in his early twenties, to Goldin, Houdini and Chung Ling Soo, several years before Victor Farelli included it under Goldin's name, in Farellii Cmd Magic (1933). While the Goldin attribution has long stood, Collins' story rings true.

The Two-Step Double Lift is not intended to replace every other Double-Lift technique, but it was my principle Double Lift for over twenty-five years. I have never, not once, been called on it by a lay person and, of course, most magicians are too "polite" to do so, even if they see something. (They just mumble to themselves.) This statement is not a testament to the naturalness of the movement. For the reasons cited above, lay people aren't likely to question even unnatural Lifts. It does, however, speak to the reliability of the technique, a factor that needs to be considered. I have seen some otherwise fine techniques that have the disastrous habit of spreading at the worst possible times. Murphy was an optimist.

THE WJ TWO-STEP DOUBLE LIFT

HIT VARIATION WE HAVE already encountered the Hit variation of this Double Lift in Step 5 of "Trapped Ace Surprise," page 20. However, this seems the right place to address the handling in a bit more detail. The Hit method is nearly as efficient as the Push-Off and is easier of execution. Its weakness, if it has one, is that it is does not seem to prove the card is single. If the situation doesn't require such proof, or other actions in the effect prove the point sufficiently, the Hit is acceptable. The Vernon notion can be used in conjunction with the Hit approach (an approach most often associated with Doc Daley) and helps make the approach more outwardly logical and thus more natural. One advantage of the Hit approach over many alternatives is that a break need not be previously obtained. Securing a grip on the desired number of cards is integral to the technique. Unfortunately many of those who use the technique lose sight of the important requirement that securing the multiple cards must remain secret. I was greatly pleased to learn that Steve Draun observes this same, all too common, fault in Secrets Draun jom Underground, (1 993; see "Double Lifts and Turnovers," page 14). We have also embraced a similar remedy. Thus, with a nod to Steve Draun's Heavenly Turnover, I'll describe my handling of the Hit technique, the WJ Two-Step Double Lift Hit Variation.

We will assume you intend to perform a Double Lift, rather than a Triple or Quadruple Lift, though the same approach would apply to each. With the deck held in Dealing Grip, use the left thumb to cleanly push over the top card.

NOTE: This genuine push-off precludes the use of this technique where the card second from the top must be concealed. In such instances, you may wish to begin by obtaining a break, then apply Vernon's Ijouble Lift, a one- handed simulated push-off approach (see The Ddi Vernon Rook ofMagic, 1957, page I 19). This negates the advantage of the Hit approach but may be necessary to preserve a consistent look in some situations.

When the card is side-jogged off the deck for about a third of its width, carry the deck to the right hand so the near right edge contacts the side of the first finger. This makes it very easy and logical to tip the deck back, necktie fashion, removing top of the deck from view. As soon as contact is made with the right first finger, the left thumb pushes off the second card to join the first (Figure 120). The right hand, at the same time, moves the top card back to the left and into alignment with the second card. When the two cards are perfectly aligned against the right first finger, that finger and the right thumb grip the right side of the card(s). You may find it helpful to curl the right second finger so it can assist in aligning the near edges of the cards. As in the original Two-Step Double Lift, raise the cards slightly, more at the back than at the front, and carry them forward and further to the right. Release the double card when it rests diagonally relative to the top of the deck (see Figure 121), pressing it against the top of the deck with the left thumb. The pretense is that you pushed the card to the right with your left thumb then took hold of the card with the right hand to move it forward. (This is quite similar to Steve Draun's technique.)

( THAT CONSTITUTES STEP 1 OF THE TWO-STEP DOUBLE LIFT HIT VARL~ TION)

Having isolated the card(s), the right hand can release its grip and pause to gesture or perform some other action. When it returns, it can regrip the two cards as one at the right side, near the middle of the long edge. The right thumb takes hold from above while the first and second fingers grip from below.

When the right hand's grip is secure, release the left thumb's pressure completely but don't move the thumb. Instead, move the right hand to the right and

upward slightly. Allow the left fingertips to contact the left edge of the lower card. The left fingers will serve to guide the turnover. Lever the card over book- fashion, with the right edge of the deck as the hinge. Handle this as casually as possible. The card will fall face up in an out-jogged position. If you wish to leave the card(s) face up, you can obviously use the lefi first finger to pull the card(s) square with the deck. More ofcen, you will want to duplicate the turnover action but release the card(s) to fall face squarely onto the deck.

NOTES: An argument can be made for performing the initial turnover so that the card(s) fall square with the deck or that a Heel Break be formed as they fall (the Altman Trap technique). This practice challenges the logic of having moved the card forward. However, it is not completely without logic, as the purpose for moving the card forward is as much related to demonstrating that the card came from the top as it is to positioning it

where will ultimately be displayed. Thus, this approach, while viable, is not dr logical.

'There will be those who argue that the necktie action used to cover the alignment of the cards, prior to their turnover, weakens audience conviction that a single card is being displayed. I acknowledged this point earlier when I stated, "it does not seem to prove the card is single." This must be kept in mind when choosing whether to apply the Hit approach. The alternative is to lose the no-break advantage of the Hit or risk exposing the secret portion of the technique. I can't make that choice for you, but I have made it for myself and this technique offers those who share my con- victions a way to salvage most of the desirable features of the approach. Having provided the tools, I leave it to your consideration.

A STUmT GORDON

WHILE DISCUSSING Double-Lift technique, it seems a good spot to mention a turnover finesse I use here.

In 1998, while helping Ken Simmons rewrite his book, Guardedsecrets Revealed (1988), he recounted the events surrounding his development and later West Coast performance of what he titled the "Simmons Pivot Turnover," a Double Lift turnover technique that appears in Larry Jennings the Cardwright (1988, page 114) credited to Stuart Gordon. At that time, based on the relevant available information, I concluded it had been miscredited. I have previously stated as much. A more recent conversation with Earl Nelson, at the Buffalo Get- together, changed my view. Simmons reported having developed the technique in the late 1970's. He later showed it to Jennings and Jim Patton during a visit to the Magic Castle; no doubt, this occurred. Ken believed, based on statements made at the time, that neither Jennings nor Patton had seen the technique previously. This too may have been true. Never having read or seen such a technique, presumably combined with the reactions of other informed individuals he consulted, Ken concluded it was original with him.

As it happens, that is all irrelevant in light of new information. Earl Nelson recounts that in 1974, when he relocated to California, David Roth showed him the technique, crediting Stuart Gordon. This clearly places Gordon's creation prior to Simmons, based on Ken's representation of when he developed the idea. Jennings and Patton being unfamiliar with the technique alters nothing. It does, however, explain why Simmons, in good faith, believed the

technique was his. It also explains his surprise and confusion at the inclusion of the technique in the Jennings book, credited to Stuart Gordon. Its history now clearer, the technique has always provided finesse in the handling of a Double. I present my variation here.

In the original Gordon technique the second finger secures the card through contact at the right forward edge. Employing the physics I used in my treatment of Marlo's "Flexible Count Grip" (Pasteboard Perpmsions, page 5 and page 54 of this work), I place my third fingertip directly on the forward right corner of the card(s) and my thumb on the near right corner (Figure 122). The mechanics are otherwise essentially those Max- well described for the Gordon technique: I slide my thumb over the undersurface of the Double, until the thumb converges with r the first finger at the middle 124 of the right side. This action naturally moves the Double to a vertical position, back outward (Figure 123). The hand completes the turnover by rotating outward at the wrist (Figure 124). Apart from feeling more secure and comfortable to me, using the third k' finger leaves the second finger free to take over the primary hold, freeing the first finger for the role it is about to play. After the turnover, the first fingertip moves to the forward right corner (Figure 125) and pivots the Double counterclockwise, so that the near right edge contacts the fleshy pad at the base of the thumb. It also

pushes the two cards inward until the thumb meets the first finger at the corner (Figure 126). The first finger on the corner and the edge contact with the base of the thumb provide secure alignment control as the card slides inward.

NOTE: With practice it is possible to reliably push the card inward without the right edge moving as deep into the hand as shown in Figure 126. This is preferable but not essential. You will find that the crease at the base of the thumb will serve as a track in which the Double can slide if you wish to employ this slightly riskier version of the technique.

THE UNLOAD SUBTLETY

W~TH MANY forms of the Double Lift it is both possible and desirable to turn the double card down, unloading one, and at the same time have it appear that the card(s) was never redeposited onto the deck. The origins of the following technique seem shrouded in controversy. Back in the mid- 1960's Larry Jennings developed it after studying a similar but far more difficult procedure by Dai Vernon, published in The Gen (Vol. 19, No. 7, November 1963, page 175). The Jennings technique circulated through the underground, but was never published. In 1968 Juan Tamariz independently discovered the same technique and eventually contributed it to Pabuhr (Vol. 7, No. 1, January 1982, page 970), and later included in his book, Sonata (1 99 1, page 57). The Tamariz description was, as is expected with this artist, replete with thoroughly thought-out details and an excellent touch by Arturo de Ascanio. It turned out Scotland's Gordon Bruce had also privately been exploring the same ground for some time, and his contributions to the sleight were published four issues later in the same journal (May 1982, page 1024). A friend of Bruce, Allen Jamieson, pointed out that the concept dated back to Stanley Collins (see Collins' Conjuring Melange (1947, page 970). Another piece was added to the puzzle when a manuscript by Fred Braue, provisionally titled Sleights and written in the early 1960's, was finally published in 1985 in The Fred Braue Notebooks, &Volume Three. There Braue briefly described "The Braue Turndown" (page 25), which is the basic handling that Tamariz and Bruce elaborated on without knowledge of Braue's work. The technique was shown to me in the early 1970's by Derek Dingle, who learned

it from Jennings. There is also a functionally related technique Daley attributes to Vernon, in The D a b Notebooks (Item 22). It may be that Daley's reference alludes to the Collins technique. More likely, it pertains to what Lewis Ganson describes on page 70 of Further Inner Secrets of Card Magic (1960)-clarified in "Double Lift and Leave" in the December 2001 Gmii (Vol. 64, No. 12) on page 53. (Note: This Vernon procedure is different from that cited above.) Martin Nash published a variant ofvernon's handling, the Ghost Switch, in Any Second Now (1 977, page 152).

The idea most like mine, however, is offered by Michael Close in his book, Workers 4 (1994, page 46). What I've developed are refinements, which include an enhancement that appeared in a recent publication. Despite considerable effort-and assistance, for which I am grateful, from Joe Ferranti, Arie Vilner, Jim Maloney, Aaron Shields, Joshua Jay, Matt Field and Harvey Rosenthal-I have been unable to locate this description; and there is probably more to the modern genesis of this technique of which I'm unaware. You should find my version more reliable, less angle-prone and more psychologically and visually deceptive. The Unload Subtlety, as I refer to it, is performed as follows:

We will assume you are hold- 127 ing a double card as depicted in Figure 127, though essentially the same technique could be used from almost any palm-up, right- hand grip in which you could securely hold a Double.

The illusion we wish to create is that the card is moved forward and turned down so that it falls

\ into a fonvard and right-jogged

0 position in the left fingers. To achieve this look, the card is openly prevented from falling flush because it is caught between the left first finger and thumb and instantly pushed to the right by the left thumb. It should be apparent that the card never actually comes to rest on the top of the deck. This is not too difficult to achieve, since it never does.

In the process of turning down, catching and pushing off the card, the card just displayed-the card on the face of the pair-is unloaded onto the deck. The mechanics are relatively simple but must be properly timed to achieve an optimal illusion. The left edge of the double card should be moved over to the deck and flush with the right edge, which allows the left fingers to contact the rear card of the Double. The Double should be clearly out-jogged as you begin

to turn it $ace down (Figure 128). This out-jogging is an important feature of this handling that is not normally given attention, though Tamariz mentions it. The illusion is enhanced because the logic of the move is more apparent.

The second critical element of this handling is that the left first fingertip extends past the top of the deck for almost the full length of its outer (distal) phalange. This detail is akin to Stanley Collins' technique and Michael Close's, and appears as well in the unlocated contributor's version. The projecting fingertip prevents the rear card from falling flush with the top of the deck.

/ The next crucial element is that the upper card of the double is not moved out of alignment with the lower one or released until the cards are at an acute angle to the top of the deck. I wrestled with the reliability of the technique until I remembered something Tamariz had stressed: that the moment of release had to be delayed until the double card had rotated beyond perpendicular. It is at this last moment that the right thumb slides the card at the face inward and the right fingers slide the card at the back outward, until the card at the face is aligned with the top of the deck, or slightly further inward (Figure 129). The cards are then released, but the rear card can fall only as far as the left first fingertip (Figure 130, in which the tilt of the card has been somewhat exaggerated for clarity). My additional touch flows from this. The left thumb immediately presses down on and pushes the top card to the right. This not only moves the card sideways but cantilevers it as well (Figure 131). Thus, the card never fully contacts the top of the deck. As you push and lever the top card, if the card that has just fallen onto the deck is misaligned, align it now. When properly performed the illusion of the displayed card never contacting the deck is nearly perfect. Nevertheless, not everyone will be persuaded it is the best way to go. Some will consider it too much work.

MY AMBITIOUS CARD ROUTINE

JANUARY 18,1969 FINAL

THANKS TO uncounted man-years of development, representing the toil of a host of innovative contributors, all Ambitious Card routines today are essentially personalizations. It has been asserted that such personalized routines no longer contribute to the existing glut of Ambitious Card material. Following that line of reasoning, some seem to argue, no other Ambitious Card routines should see print. I strongly disagree with this proposition, and I intend to hold my routine up for examination by way of making the point. I fully realize that none of you are likely to use this routine as written, however much it is of a piece. You will-as I did with others-borrow, adapt and modify its parts in personalizing your own routine. This is as it should be, and you are welcome to do so. I believe my routine makes a genuine contribution, but that judgment is ultimately yours.

My presentation coherently holds my routine together through a carefully chosen number of iterations, almost every one different from the others, yet each similar enough to remain completely true to the plot and premise-in marked contrast to the gross departures included in many routines. Nearly every iteration in my routine introduces some new, original, modified or novel element, whether presentational, methodological, technical or perceptional in effect-condition. I believe that these elements, including refinements that reflect thirty years of development and experience, permit me to bring an insight that more than justifies its inclusion in this book. Moreover, I've invested too much

of myself in the development of this routine, and too many magicians who have seen it-some on numerous occasions-impatiently await its publication, so that they may be permitted to perform it.

I'll assume you already know the Ambitious Card plot. Starting from the beginning, I depart from the typical approach, I use a face-up Moveable Card Pass as my opening. As best I can determine, I was the first to conceive this idea-not the technique, of course, which is usually used as a control, but the application. (I recently learned that Paul Cummins independently developed the same idea many years after I did.) This opening sequence positions you to have the card signed, while it's on the face of the deck, and prepare for a Triple Lift, which greatly facilitates the first two iterations, making them appear very fair.

The recurring presentational element that drives my routine is established in the first conventional demonstration of the effect: my statement that I'm placing the card into the middle when I'm actually placing it elsewhere. Of course, the spectators disagree with the statement, though often that dispute is not voiced. This "conflict" motivates the next near-duplication of the previous sequence and presentationally impels the balance of the routine. From that point on, each sequence is different and, in various ways, slightly more impossible. Further, until the closing sequence, you maintain the pattern of the card being inserted into the deck, the spot being questioned and the card returning to the top, where you can begin again. The number of iterations-seven-was modeled after Vernon's routine-though mine is one iteration shorter because I work more slowly than the Professor did.

"Coming Up in the World," my third sequence (the fourth and fifth iterations), is now classic and included in nearly every modern Ambitious Card routine. Alan Ackerman stated that it was "One of the three most important moves of the twentieth century." This statement allows me great pride.

My next sequence, using the Pass or the Covered Side Steal, is unique and original with me, though it seems others have adopted the sequence since I started doing it some thirty years ago. Here again, the history should be known. Fur- ther, this sequence puts the lie to claims that the Pass can't be done under fire. It can; it has, through thousands of performances; I do it.

The modified action on the Hofiinser Change, as I perform it, is referred to in the text as "The Peel Change." The technical difference from the Hofzinser Change is small but important, and the application is novel. It is new and very strong-people literally jump when the card changes and reverses at the same time. This is a phase that many will, I'm confident, adopt, now that it's published. It is one of the easiest and most strikingly visual Ambitious Card

moves extant. You may not like this move, as it presents little technical challenge, but your audiences will.

The palm-off of the top card, as I perform it, is standard in almost all particulars, but few working performers regularly use a Palm Transfer in their work. I have for many years and I do to this day. Moreover, the Simulated Shuffle Cover Action, with the card Palmed, has been adopted by others but is original with me, though some may have independently discovered it as well. All that said, the Card to Wallet ending includes a technique that Derek Dingle and I worked out together many years ago (circa 1974), for speed-loading a wallet. This allows you to load a wallet about as fast as you can get your hand into and out of your pocket. It is long overdue that the history of this technique be shared, particularly since Frank Garcia, and perhaps others, seem to have insinuated the technique was theirs. I hasten to add that it has always struck me that the Card to Wallet is a non-sequitur ending for the Ambitious Card plot. Moreover, at least in the case of my routine, it is weaker than the cumulative impact of the balance of the routine. Nevertheless, it is the ending I use, and if one is going to employ it, one should use the best combination of techniques available. That should include my Palm Transfer and the Speed Load. These simple touches are shared here, detailed for the first time in print.

I have always had some dissatisfaction with the presentation of the Ambitious Card plot. All Ambitious Card routines, including mine, suffer from some as yet unidentified missing presentational element. My dissatisfaction is based on my feeling that there should be something more to the premise than there is in any routine I've read or seen, even my own. Honesty demands that I admit this-though I can't help but believe that others have felt it and failed to confess it. Nevertheless, I feel that my routine better balances the presentational elements that must be addressed in an Ambitious Card routine; it's just not perfect. It's all it can be but not all it might be. Whatever my hope that someday I'll find the missing presentational hook, I highly commend this routine for your consideration. Use what you feel fits your style and integrates well with your own efforts. Carefully consider, if you will, the internal logic and progression of the routine. All these elements contribute and can take you a long way toward improving your own treatment of this classic plot. I'm confident everyone will find something useful in studying this construction.

REQUIREMENTS: You will need a normal deck of cards and a wallet of your choice, from which to produce the card at the end of the routine. There are a wide variety of gimmicked wallets, including the Washington (A.K.A. LePaul, A.K.A. Jennings) Wallet and the Mullica Wallet. I have used a few of these at various times. I have never noticed a significant difference in reaction from spectators. Use the type with which you feel most comfortable. I will tell you

flatly, I am a proponent of what has come to be known, however questionably, as the Balducci-Kaps Wallet. I have owned one since the earliest models were made by Willie Schneider for Ed Balducci. 1 have used one, almost exclusively, for well over thirty years; I'm not about to change now.

Spread the deck face up between your hands and slightly in-jog the card second from the face in the process. Address a spectator with the request, "Name any card you see." As soon as the card is named, I say, a bit too emphatically, "Where the heck [depending on the crowd, this expletive may be stronger] is that?" This keeps focus on the card, since I've observed that people tend to look away once they've voiced a choice. When I've located the named card, I openly separate the spread just above the point where it lies. The named card thus becomes the card at the face of the left-hand portion. This emphasizes that the card is in the middle. I then reunite the two portions of the spread.

Execute Marlo's Moveable Card Pass (New Tops, Vol. 9, No. 3, March 1969, page 27) to bring the named card to the face of the deck.

THE MOVEABLE CARD PASS

To refresh the recollection of those who may have over-looked or forgotten the Moveable Card Pass, the following brief description should serve. The technique is quite easy to perform. With the deck spread from left hand to right, place your left thumb on the exposed portion of the card you wish to move (the target card). In this case, this is the named card. Your left fingertips contact the undersurfaces of the cards to the left of (beneath) the target card. The length of your right fingers contact the undersurfaces of the cards to the right of the target card. Bending your arms at the elbows, raise both hands until the upper surfaces-in this case, the faces-are fully obscured from the view of the spectators.

Simultaneously, bend your left thumb, dragging the target card to the left without displacing any of the other cards (Figure 132). The target card should slide out of the spread until its right side clears the card above and to the right of it, which is held by the right hand.

As soon as the target card is freed, apply downward pressure with the right spread on the left spread. At the same time, move the hands toward each other, closing the spread. The right-hand portion of the spread should pass under the target card, which continues to be held in position by the left thumb

(Figure 133). When the last of the right-hand cards is sure to pass below the target card, the move is effectively done. The deck will still, however, be in an unsquared condition. Your right hand can release its hold and take its time in moving to Overhand Grip, where it completes the squaring. The target card will be uppermost as you finish squaring the cards.

NOTE: It isn't necessary, or even particularly helpful, to look at your hands as you perform this move. One can readily learn the feel of the technique. Feel is actually a better gauge, as the eyes tend to lead one to make the action larger than is necessary for success. Look at the cards as you learn it initially but practice it while you watch TV or in the dark; you'll develop a finer technique. In performance, I look at the spectator to whom I'm working and 1 usually ask a question. I find this the best approach.

During the necktie action of this sleight, look at the spectator and say, "Approxi- mately how far from the fdce of the deck would you say your card is?" The spectator will think a moment. While the deck is held with its back toward the audience, square the spread, forming a fourth-finger break at the in-jog you created earlier; that is, under three cards.

Regardless of where the spectator guesses the named card might be, lower your left hand to show the card and say, "You're close." Try not to sound clever with the remark; it is intended to be amiable, not sarcastic.

NOTES: I have not altered the handling of the Moveable Card Pass given from that described by Ed Marlo. My sole contribution is how I apply the technique. It would appear from the published record that Marlo had two primary applications for his technique. His principle application was as a control, as is reflected to some degree in the name he gave it. It is, when executed with a face-down deck, a fine card control. His other application is as a means of secretly culling cards-akin to the Under-the-Spread Cull and the Marlo Prayer Cull, an expansion of the Hohinser technique. It is this application that comes closest to mine. I do cull a card but, distinct from the Mario notion, the result of the cull is revealed almost immediately. The difference parallels those of a Double Lift and a Top Change. Both turn on exchanging one card for another, Illore or less secretly. The perceived results, however, are quite different. The difference in audience response is also parallel. One may object to my claim of originality for having conceived the

idea of applying this technique in rhis, more immediate, way. Placing that objection :%side without dismissing it , I maintain that this application contributes to the Ambitious Card plot. 'The response elicited from an audience when this sequence is well performed and properly timed is exceptional. No other application of rhc technique produces a reaction close to it in type or intensity. If the discovery of an application of this strength is not worthy of recording, my judgment on what constitutes entertaining magic is fundamentally flawed. I'm confident rhat is not the case.

If I'm working for a small group andlor there aren't other distractions, 1'11 use a different, superior, presentational ploy for this sequence: While the specrator is looking off, thinking or, having answered, looking at me as I speak, I lower my left hand. The named card is then staring up for all to see, yet they don't see it, as they are looking elsewhere. This is somewhat like the loss o f focus that is produced in the Card Under Glass. Whatever the spectator's answer, I repeat it. 1 then slowly allow my gaze to lower to the face of the card. When 1 see it, I jump slightly, as though startled. 'l'his triggers the spectator to do likewise, as the fact that the card is on the face of the deck registers. This usually initiates a pleasant laugh. I then say, "You're close."

4 Have the spectator initial the face of the named card. Some address must be given to this matter. My routine, like most others, is designed to be performed in walk-around situations. Often there is no table available. This makes signing a card physically awkward for the spectator. I, therefore, usually request the spectator's initials only, unless a bar or other such surface is very close. Without a table, juggling the deck, a Sharpie (my pen of choice) and its cap can be inel- egant for the performer. The best solution I've found is to remove the pen with my right hand and hold it by its cap. I allow the spectator to pull the pen from its cap and initial the card while I hold the deck with the card on the face. With my right thumb and first finger I take back the pen from the spectator while holding the cap with my curled fourth finger (Figure 134). I can then re-cap the pen with just one hand (Figure 135).

If you try to take back both the pen and cap, or have the spectator try to insert the pen into the cap while you hold it, you are very likely to get ink on your hand unintentionally. Some sort of mark is important but not as important as one might think in this routine. This is related to my construction. Since the card is named from a face-up deck and its vanish from the deck occurs before its revelation in the wallet, and since that vanish happens with the deck in the spectator's hands, the idea of duplicates is logically eliminated in the minds of spectators. Even so, the presence of a mark ties the spectator to the card, which does contribute to the impact. Moreover, in routines constructed differently from mine, an identifying mark may be imperative.

After the card is initialed, I execute the Two-Step Double Lift Hit Variation (here, to be precise, a Triple Lift), but other forms of Double Lift will also serve. At the completion of the Lift, your right hand should be holding the three cards as one, by the right near corner, between the right thumb above and the fingers below. Use the triple card to lever the deck face down in your left hand. Flip the Triple over, face down onto the deck.

With your left thumb at the front left 1 136 corner of the deck, openly pull down the bottom card of the deck and insert the top card (the spectators believe this to be the named one) into the opening ~ou've formed, second from the bottom (Figure 136). Push it square. As you do so, say, "I'll place the card in the exact middle or center of the deck." Some spectators may grumble that it's not going into the center. Most will be polite and not say anything, but they know. In any case, continue.

Ask the spectator where the card is, saying, "Roughly, how far from the top of the deck would you say the card is?" The spectator will probably tell you, "Second from the bottom," but all manner of guesses are possible. Pause for a moment, as though you are surprised by the response, then say, "Let's begin again." Simultaneous with the delivery of that line, execute the Two-Step Double Lift (Non-Hit Variation). Display the face of the named card, then flip the Double face down onto the deck and immediately remove the top card. (You can use the previously described Gordon Turnover Variation, page 164, and Unload Subtlety, page 167, to accomplish this.) While your right hand holds the face-down card, say, "I place the card precisely in the middle of the deck." Insert the card near the bottom. It should be apparent to the spectator that it is going only a few cards fiom the bottom. Push it square.

8 "Now, roughly, how far from the top of the deck would you say the card is?" Your assisting spectator will likely respond that it is near the bottom or on the top. Regardless, simulate a Two-Step Double Lift as you say, "You're getting very close. Ixt's begin again." Raise the face-up card about six inches above the deck and drop it, allowing it to flip face down as it falls. You may not catch the card correctly every time. Sometimes it will land face up on the deck, in which case you simply turn it face down on the pack. Either result is fine. The reason for the drop is to reinforce the singularity of the card without having to say anything about it.

COMING UP IN THE WORLD , n y

(A.K.A. THE LOAD-UP MOVE)

Give the deck an open Slip Cut somewhere close to the middle, using your left thumb to peel the face-down card off the top of the deck onto the lower packet. (This actually is the Ambi- tious Card.) It should be drawn into a position out-jogged for about half its length (Figure 137). Place the upper packet onto the lower one so that the top packet is in-jogged for about a quarter of its length relative to the bottom packet. As soon as the top packet is in position, riffle its two lowermost cards off the right thumb and form a thumb break at the rear of the packet (Figure 138). Obtaining this break is covered by saying, "You don't believe me for a minute. I'll show you. This is really the [name the Ambitious Card] and it is really in the middle." Slide the top packet square with the near edge of the bottom packet, secretly releasing the two cards below the thumb break as you immediately begin to turn the left hand palm down with the bottom packet (Figure 139) to show the jogged card protruding from the front. The right hand should remain close by, but separated from, the left-hand packet. Extend your left s

first finger over the front edge of the protruding card (Figure 140) and pull it flush with the packet while simultaneously turning the left hand palm up again and pushing the top card to the right. The spectators should, without question, believe that the card you've pushed over is the Ambitious Card.

10 Insert the protruding card into the middle of the right hand's packet (Figure 14 I), saying,"That's the middle of the deck." Place the left-hand packet on top of the right-hand packet and square the entire deck, securing a fourth-finger break below the top two cards as you do so. "How far from the top would you say it is!" Regardless of what the spectators say, respond, "I think you're starting to understand the game; now we can start to play." As that line is being delivered, execute the Two-Step Double Lift. It will seem the card has returned to the top of the deck yet again. Turn the two cards face down, back onto the deck.

NOTE: Many individuals like to fan the right-hand packet for the insertion of the card. Since I don't fan cards in front of lay audiences, I dolit add this touch, though it does not change the technique in any significant way. The use of the fan was a part of the Marlo's "For the Unambitious." Others have taken to placing the card in the middle of the right-hand packet and the right-hand packet in the middle of the left-hand packer, noting this as the "middle of the middle." This practice is inconsistent with my presentation in this routine but is fine for other presentations and applications.

HISTORICAL NOTE: I originally contributed the preceding sequence to Frank Garcia's book, Super Subtle CardMiracles (1 973, page 165), where he titled it "Coming Up in the World." I call it the Load-Up Move. The entire sequence can be used as is or it can be employed to produce the set-up for more or fewer than the two iterations 1 desire.

Since its release, some confusion over the history of the technique has arisen, in large measure because so many have republished it without credit, assuming it was too old to trace, without checking to see if that is true. Others, for reasons only they can offer, have applied all manner ofodd crediting, despite

the evidence. I thought 1 had put the matter to rest when I published the history in The Ml~gical Record and Thoughts of' Wesley James, but it appears that additional qi~estions have arisen. Thus, to address those questions, and set the record straight, 1'11 define yet again the salient elements.

As best I can piece it together, sometime around 1946, as an outgrowth of something he saw at an Abbort's Get-'lbgether, Ed Marlo developed a technique for achieving a position similar to the one 1 reach during my Load-Up Move. In other words, within the context of an Ambitious Card sequence, Marlo added a card above a card inserted into the center of a deck. The principle benefit of the Marlo technique, as he saw it, was that the position was achieved after the card was inserted, rather than by slipping the card down ;zto the deck or using a Swing Cut to arrive at the position. 'These are not benefits to be hastily dismissed and they are the features Ed felt distinguished his approach.

I created my technique and the procedure that flows from it in 1968. I showed it to Ken Beale and A1 Cooper in 1969 and to Frank Garcia and a few others in 1970, at about the same time 1 had a discussion with Ed Marlo about the procedure, though not the technique. All this occurred before the publication of J. Stewart Smith's "To the7'bpn (Pallbea~ers Review, Vol. 6, No. 6, April 1971, page 413), Ed Marlo's "For the Unambitious" (Kdbbala, Vol. 1, No. 2, October 1971, page 1 1) and Tom Ellis' "Super Rise" (Pallbearers Review, Vol. 9, No. 6, April 1974, page 721) or the Fulves emendation of the Ellis credit (Pallbearers Review, Vol. 10, No. 9, July 1975, page 985). 1 confess, I was not aware, nor did I become aware, of Eddie's technique or Smith's prior to the publication of mine and, in fact, did not learn about either until much later. I surely didn't know about either when I developed my technique in 1968. Alas, I'm getting ahead of myself.

In 1970, in one of our fairly frequent Sunday morning phone conversations, I described my sequence to Ed, albeit without full details. My assumption, though I am not certain, is that Ed combined my procedure with his technique and the result was "For the Unambitious," which, as noted, was dated June 1971, roughly two years after I'd shown it to Beale and Cooper and a year after I'd shown it to Garcia. This was also roughly a year before Eddie's dating. I don't think Eddie was trying to steal anything from me. I think Ed saw the method of loading a card above the target card as the defining element of the technique. As Ed himself stated, in a conversation with me in the late eighties, my technique is easier, more reliable and more broadly applicable; it just wasn't what he was trying to accomplish. That probably explains why he never discovered it. The procedure is not the defining element and, therefore, didn't need to be separately credited.

As 1 later learned, Ed had shown his technique to a few people over the years but thought relatively little of it until, perhaps prompted by the appearance of the J. Stewart Smith technique, he allowed Jon Racherbaumer to publish it and reflect the date June 1971, while making the point that his technique dated back to the mid-1 940's.

How one credits the sleight largely depends on what one thinks defines it. There are those-notably Darwin Ortiz-who persist in citing the Tom Ellis item, though it appeared after mine, it allows only the addition of one card and it breaks no new ground in terms of procedure. I am at a loss to understand that thinlung. Others, recognizing the core concept, appreciate that only my technique can be used in a practical manner for any n~imber of cards that may be required, a feature that contributes mightily to the broad utility of the technique. If the defining element is the loading method, most people, I think, apply mine. If it is the display technique with the one-handed squaring atld push-off; I think most people apply mine. If it is the handling of the card after the switch has taken place, which I consider window dressing, some apply mine (a procedure that takes place completely in the hands), some Smith's (a procedure similar to mine but involving tabling the deck) and some Marlo's (the card is inserted into a fan).

From my perspective, most of those who use the move use my handling for the portion of it that accomplishes the secret result and enables the switch; a few substitute Marlo's use of the fan, others Garcia's idea of putting the middle in the middle, a few table the deck as did Smith. Pat Page has added the idea of having the card show up in the performer's mouth. Normally it is the technique that defines a sleight, not what one does with the cards after the technique is complete. In this case it seems there are those who, for whatever reasons, want to make an exception to that convention in the case of this sleight. I still consider the core idea to be Vernon's Interlock Vanish used as a one-handed switch; all the rest is decoration, albeit appealing decoration. Each will make his own decision.

Duplicate the actions of the first iteration of the sequence. In other words, cut the deck and slip the card down, this time about an eighth of the way from the top. The card should be out-jogged for about half its length. Start to push the card into the deck but stop when just the white border protrudes. Let the spectator finish pushing the card into the deck, explaining, "It will help give you a feel for how far down it's going."

"Roughly, how far from the top of the deck would you say the card is?" No matter how the spectator responds, turn over the top card, simulating the actions of your Double Lift. Say, "I think I understand the problem. If this card

is face down among all the others, it's confusing. It's hard to tell where it is. I'll place the card into the exact middle of the deck, but face up, so you know where it is." Insert the card face up into the middle of the deck, but do so quickly, blocking the spectators' view of the front of the deck in the process. The idea is to assure that the spectator does not know exactly where in the deck you placed the card.

"You don't seem convinced. I'll show you again." Spread the deck until you reach the face-up card. Add, "You see, face up in the middle." Square the deck, forming a break over the card above the face-up Ambitious Card. Execute the Edge Pass or the Squeeze I'ass (see pages 339 and 342), using the following sequence: With your right hand, take the deck and turn it on edge, saying, "Now you know the card is somewhere in the middle of this deck." Rotate the deck face down executing the Pass and continue, "If the card comes to the top, you'd know it because the card is face up." Use your right hand to lift the deck and show the card at its face, adding, "If the card goes to the bottom, you'd see it because you'd be loolung at the back of a card." Turn the deck face down again, placing it back into your left hand and obtain a break under the top two cards as you square the pack. This is facilitated by the reversed card.

NOTE: There are circumstances under which I have opted to use a Side Steal under a top-card cover (a Covered Side Steal) in preference to the Pass, to position the face-up card second frorn the top, in preparation for the upconling Peel Change. This is more a decision based on performing conditions than any other factor. When I perform seated-and I don't usually do this routine seated-I'll use the Side Steal. Under most other conditions, unless the group I'm performing for is particularly large, thus presenting angle problems, I use the Pass. Finally, for the sake of completeness and for the extremely important technical contribution it makes, I'm including the VTJ Side Steal here. If my experience with cardmen to whom I've taught my technique is echoed among my readers, this handling will be widely adopted.

THE WJ SIDE STEAL DECEMBER 1 5, 1968

There is a strange history to the Side Steal. For many years it was considered an essential move; it then fell into relative disuse. Still more recently, it is again enjoying a resurgence of interest and popularity. I believe the reason for its fickle past is, at least in part, that few people do it well or invisibly. This is due in large measure to the considerable exertion of force required to squeeze the deck, as part of the extraction. The exertion of force, biophysics being as they are, always involves muscle tension, which can be (and too often is) communicated to the

audience, albeit subliminally. My discovery of a new, tension-free extraction method, combined with its other inherent benefits, make my Side Steal as efficient a card control as one could require. I have read numerous descriptions of Side Steal techniques, and while mine is related to many of these, it nevertheless differs from them. The closest relative is Marlo's Bold Steal from his Side Steal book (Revolutionary Card Technique, Chapter 4, 1957, page 9). The Bold Steal is a reasonably workable Side Steal but I believe my Side Steal has notable advantages: It is very quick in execution; it is sure, regardless of the condition of the deck and it is totally invisible and indetectable if properly applied. Try it a few times until you get it working; I predict you'll use it.

I usually hold the deck in Peek Position and have a card sighted in the usual way. I, of course, form a fourth-finger flesh break after the peek as per standard practice. (Alternately, as in the case of this routine, the card can be above a fourth-finger break arrived at through your chosen method.)

While still holding the break with your left fourth finger, also pick up the break with your right thumb as your right hand takes the deck into Overhand Grip. The thumb should hold the break at the extreme left near corner of the deck (Figure 142). The right second, third and fourth fingers cover the front end of the deck. Your right first finger should be curled lightly on the deck. The deck is held by the left hand in dealing position but with two alterations: I I

(a) The left thumb extends straight along the left side of the deck, completely screening that side.

(b) The left first finger sits on the front right corner of the bottom of the deck, touching the right fourth finger.

Because the break is being held by both the right thumb and left fourth finger, if you apply pressure with the heel of the left thumb against the side of the deck, with some assistance from the right thumb, the upper packet can be made to pivot against the right second finger, which provides counterpressure. Without your hands appreciably moving, the near end of the upper packet swings to the right, producing a step (Figure 143).

Depending on the size of your fourrh fingertip and the condition of the deck, you may need to move the lower packet slightly one direction or the other; typically rwo white-border-widths is sufficient. The left thumb hides this step from the top and left side.

Note that only the left hand moves to produce the step. The right hand is not significantly involved. Its primary task at this point is to hold the upper packet. What little motion there may be in the right hand, which may occur as a by-product of the l e h a r d pressure, should pass for squaring.

As the step forms, the tip of the left fourth finger will contact the card at the face of the upper packet. This is the card to be stolen. It may, depending on your hand, require that you lower the near end of the lower packet slightly, to find a comfortable position.

Move the left hand to the right as 144 - the fourth fingertip maintains contact with the bottom card of the upper packet. The card will pivot out the near right side of the deck (Figure 1 44).

The right fourth fingertip and thumb come into contact with the card as it pivots, and both grip the card with a pressure across the diagonal corners (see Figure 145, in which the right hand is made transparent).

The left thumb moves to the upper left corner of the deck, just forward and to the left of the curled right first finger, and applies downward pressure to hold the deck in place, without putting pressure on the portion of the deck through which the card being stolen will travel. \

NOTE: Should you feel any resisrance to the extraction or if you sense more than one card is coming out, pull inward with the right fourth finger and thumb, applying counterpressure from the left thumb to keep the deck stationary. This will allow you ro break the friction or stickiness that is hanging up the extraction. You won't need to do this very ofren, but because of this extra touch you should be able to use this Side Steal even with decks in the worst condition.

The left hand next moves the deck away from the right, leaving the card to be held by the right hand (Figure 146). As long as the tip of your right second finger aims at a point farther left than the left eye of the spectator farthest to your left, the right hand's card should not be seen.

The left hand, which has moved ahead of the right, is followed by the right hand, which adds the card to the top of the deck. (If the card is to be removed from the deck completely, it is a simple matter to convert to Tenkai or Marlo Palm I'ositions [see New Taps, Vol. 6, No. 1, January 1966, page 161, particularly if you can rest your hand on the table. It is not as easy to convert directly to other palm positions without returning to the deck, so I don't try. The nature of a Side Steal, even one as rapid as this-and I assure you this is as quick a Side Steal as you could ever require-is that both hands must remain in contact with the deck for a period of time with nothing to do other than the squaring that is supposed to cover nearly every move. This is a questionably unnatural thing to do. Since your hands have been together for a slightly extended period, there is a moment when the hand leaving the deck is suspect. It is, therefore, a bad time to palm a card. It is better to add the card back to the deck, pause, patter, etc. Let it become evident that you are not holding a card and then, when the hands do come together, briefly, at a later point, palm the card.)

NOTE: Some may feel that this Side Steal is exactly like Marlo's Bold Steal. Let me point out that while the grip on the card being extracted is certainly the same, the means of positioning the card for that grip is quite different. The most notable difference between my technique and every other that had seen print to che time I developed it or in the thirty years after, until the Roberto Giobbi description in Cnrd College, Volume 3 (1998, page 759)) is the use of a step to facilitate extraction. It is this step that makes contact with the left fourth ibger easy and sure. Every other Side Steal technique requires either that you buckle the bottom portion of the deck or, as in Marlo's Side Steal, that the fourth finger curls into the gap formed by a break. Neither is true of my steal and, as a result, the steal is light, fast and sure, regardless of the condition of the deck.

I have one other important tip on the Side Steal. This tip applies to many other techniques that share the same issues. Notable among these are the Zingone Pass, the Hokinser Bottom Slide control and its progeny, the Spread Pass and a number of variations of Direct Insertion steals. In sum, any sleight that benefits from pivoting your body during its execution. The tendency among many-it's fair to say most-magicians when performing these types of techniques is to

pivot at the waist or hips. This causes them to move from a relaxed, unrotated, position to a less relaxed, if not quite tense, rotated position. Moreover, doing so causes tension to increase during the technique. This is precisely the opposite of what should occur. Spectators have amazing sensitivity to this type of body language. 'This subliminal awareness gives rise to unarticulated suspicion. They sense something untoward has happened, without knowing why they feel that way.

In addition, the mind-muscle connection must be engaged when increasing the amount of torque, while only the neuro-spinal link is called into play in relaxation movements. The result of all this bio-kinetic processing is that your timing is far more likely to be wrong if your body is competing with your hands and mental processes. Why confront all these problems when there is an easy solution, albeit one that has not been explored by most magical thinkers? Here it is:

Orient your body to the position in which you will end, rather than the one from which you start. This is most easily understood when you're working standing, but it applies when seated too. Since we're discussing the Side Steal, we'll use it as an example. The angles are best served when you're facing the leftmost viewer, because the card is held in Bold Steal Position. Your audience will, perforce, be to your right. If you oriented your body, through the rotation of your hips and the planting of your feet, to face the spectator who will peek at a card, as most performers do, you would then move to a twisted and, therefore, more tense position as you perform the Steal. (The alternative is to adjust your body orientation just before you begin, an approach that extends the period the hands are together without justification.) If, however, you follow my recommendation, you will orient your body toward the left and twist right as you have the card peeked. Afterward, all you have to do is relax and your body will rotate naturally into its more relaxed position. The rotation will be smoother, more natural and more naturally timed. Moreover, your hands won't have to compete with your body for brain power. I realize this may all sound like theoretical gobbledygook. Try it three times at home, by yourself, with any move that meets the criteria; your choice. I'm sure you'll become convinced. If not, re-read what I've written or decide I'm full of bull. The kinesiology is undeniable; it must work.

Finally, I wish to refer anyone who does learn my Steal to Marlo's excellent work on the Side Steal. He has contributed a great deal of fine thinking to the move and many, if not all, of the techniques he discusses can be adapted to my Steal technique. They present a formidable combination.

That completes the description of my Side Steal technique. In this application, I use, as I've mentioned, a Covered Side Steal, which is a Bill Simon idea (EJgeive Card Magic, 1952, page 112). To do a Covered WJ Side Steal, the extraction procedure is precisely the same, until the moment the card being stolen is free of but not yet extracted from the deck. At that point, the right second finger

and thumb tighten sufficiently to assume control of the deck. This permits the left thumb to move inward, toward the near end, and leftward, in preparation for pushing the top card to the right for about half its width. The left thumb does this and the right second finger and thumb shift pressures to hold both the top card and the stolen one (Figure 147). The left hand reasserts control over the deck. The right hand moves rightward and turns clockwise at the wrist as it raises the top card toward your face. You can also move the hand closer to your body, to reduce angle problems. This action of removing the top card is coordinated with the line, "If it comes to the top, you'd see it.. ." You place both cards on top as you retake the deck and square it. Then continue the routine as described in Step 13, showing the card at the face of the deck and forming a break under the top two cards.

14 Execute the first step of the Two-Step Double Lifi Hit Variation. We are about to perform a sequence I refer to as the "Peel Change." It is a variation of the Hok- inser Change but with a different stroking action. The two cards (held as one) should be gripped by the right hand at the right near corner. Flick the double card by putting it under your lefi thumb and pulling up (Figure 148), causing it to snap from under the thumb. The card(s) should be moved toward the face of the assisting spectator. Repeat the snap a second time. The third time allow the left thumb to make firmer contact with the top card and drag it onto the deck (Figure 149). As you execute this snap, move the newly revealed face-up Ambitious Card closer to the spectator's face than you have previously. If you move the card close enough, the spectator will jump, even though your proximity causes him no

real fear of being struck. The patter line that coincides with these actions is "If you watch closely, you can actually see it as it comes to the top." At the moment that sentence is completed, you should begin the first stroke; the change should occur on the third stroke. Continue the snapping action several more times, with each snap being lighter and closer together in time. There should be no patter during the actual stroking action, nor at the moment of the change; it would diminish the visual impact. If you perform this technique properly, you will be impressed with how strongly spectators respond to it. If your timing is wrong, the response won't be as good but it will still be strong.

As the audience is responding, flip the Ambitious Card face down onto the deck. You now secretly exchange this card for the one directly beneath it, using any Second Deal with which you are comfortable. For many years I used my WJ Front Bottom Deal here. (See The Magical Record and Thoughts of Wesley James, 1997, page 10.) During the last few years I have generally adopted the Marlo Change for the purpose. It appears as part of "Two Card Passe Passe" in Alton's Sharpe's Expert Card Conjuring (1968, page 82). Very recently, however, I've switched to my Sure Theory Second Deal (see Paste- board Perpensions, 1990, page 28). I suspect that these choices are more a matter of habit than anything else. All are equally acceptable. If you choose to use the Marlo Change, you will need to obtain a break under the second card from the top of the deck. This is easily acquired, as you simply maintain a break under the peeled card when you execute the Peel Change in the previous Step. Whatever form of Second Deal you choose, place the card taken into your right hand, apparently fairly, into the middle of the deck, leaving it out-jogged for about a quarter of its length, as you say, "I'll convince you this time."

NOTE: In this context, I consider the Marlo Change to be a type of Hit Second Deal, related to those explained by him in Seconds, Centers, Bottoms (1 960, page 60).

Push the card square and execute Vernon's Topping the Deck (Select Secrets, 194 1, page 7 or Dai Vernon? Further Inner Secrets of Card Magic, 196 1, page 35). Other techniques might be equally workable, but the blocking I use is as follows: Take the deck into your right hand as you hold out your left hand, palm up and flat, saying, "Hold out your left hand like a table." Transfer the deck to your left hand as you say, "I'm going to give you the deck." Perform the Vernon Palm and move the deck to your left fingertips. Move your right hand away with the card palmed as you look to see that the spectator's hand is in position. Square the cards very briefly as your right hand retakes the deck and places it onto the spectator's left hand.

THE SIMULATED SHUFFLE-A PALM COVER CIRCA 1965

Once you have the card Palmed, say, "Give the deck a shuffle." Begin to gesture with your right hand, which holds the Palmed card. The left hand then joins in pantomiming an Overhand Shuffle with both hands. This shows the left hand empty and strongly suggests the right hand is empty as well. (I was told this was a Vernon idea but he denied it when I asked him in 1991. To the best of my knowledge, it was popularized by Bruce Cervon, who may have developed the idea independently. Nevertheless, I developed it in the mid-1 960's and have used it routinely since that time. I cannot judge whether the idea was seen by others and appropriated or developed without my work as a model.) Continue your patter, "When you're satisfied it's lost, look through the deck so you'll know where the card is. That way you'll know exactly how far it has to go to get to the top, or you can position it in the middle."

THE JAMES PALM TRANSFER APRIL 1967

Simultaneous with the line, "When you're satisfied it's lost.. ." you complete the right hand's up and down action of the Overhand Shuffle gesture for the last time. When the right hand comes down, it straightens and rotates, permitting an easy transfer of the palmed card from the right-hand Full Palm to Gambler's Cop in the left hand. As soon as the transfer is complete, the left hand falls toward your side as the right hand gestures toward the spectator. You should understand what the spectator observes as a result of the combination of the Simulated Shuffle cover action and this Palm Transfer. First the left hand is seen empty, though the right hand motion is the focus of attention; then the right hand is seen empty, as the left hand falls briefly to the side. As a result, both hands are seen empty and any suspicion that might conceivably exist is allayed.

The assisting spectator will at some point show some confusion or conster- nation at not being able to find the card. You can accelerate the process by asking, "What are you looking for?" You will be told the name of the spectator's card. Respond with an emphatic, "I'm sorry.. ." The spectators will look at you quizzically. "I should have told you, the [name of card is a haunted card. At least it haunts me. I always take it out of the deck, because otherwise it's the card that everyone picks and they blame me for it and-it's a long story. I keep it in my wallet!"

THE SPEED LOAD-A WALLET LOADING TECHNIQUE CIRCA 1973

As you deliver this short monologue, your left hand is busy at your side, moving the card in Gambler's Cop to a sort of Front Palm with all four fingers wrapped

around one end of the card (Figure 150). (My dear friend, the late Russell Barnhart, refers to a similar position as "Master Palm.") The lefi hand next moves to the left edge of your jacket, just below your lapel. Feed the edge of the card closest to your wrist under your jacket as you take hold just below where your lapel begins. Once the card is concealed by the jacket, slide the hand up, until it has hold of your lapel, and pull your jacket away from your body. Your right hand moves toward the opening you've just created. Stop just before your right hand enters your jacket and clearly show the hand empty by exaggeratedly wiping your brow, adjusting your glasses or some similar action. Finally, move your right hand all the way into your jacket, as though reaching into your inside jacket pocket. Actually, you move the right hand all the way to your left armpit but break the wrist back sharply and extend your right fingers to grab the card you hold behind your lapel (Figure 15 1). As soon as you've grabbed the card, rotate it in your fingers so it is aligned to be loaded into your wallet. With a Balducci or Washington Wallet, for example, the card should be oriented vertically and held at your fingertips. Jam the card - - into your wallet, grab the wallet securely and withdraw it from your pocket. As the wallet is being withdrawn, your right fingers will be wrapped around the end of it, where it was just loaded. If the card isn't perfectly loaded, you can finish driving it in by pulling the wallet against the innermost phalanges of the fingers. With just a little bit of practice, you will find you can load the wallet as rapidly as you can get your hand into and out of your pocket. Viewed from outside the jacket, it appears that the empty right hand did just that and no more. It is uncanny how rapidly and convincingly this sequence can be performed.

NOTE: This is rhe technique that Derek Dingle and I developed one late night, at a bar called "Mikado," in New York City. It was a joint effort and I a n no longer determine exactly who came up with which part of it. Such is the nature of ideas that grow from brainstorming sessions. I am certain that when I performed the technique for Frank Garcia, about two days after Derek and I had developed it, Frank was incredulous that I could be doing what it was clear 1 was. He had me perform it dozens of times and

eventually teach it to hinl in detail, then watch him perform it until he had mastered it. At some time thereafter, it was reported to me, he did a series of lectures in various parts of the country. During those lectures or in subsequent post-lecture sessions, he would perform the technique and allow or encourage those for whom he was performing it to believe that the technique was of his creation. From that day to this, some people who have taken to using this Speed Load technique, which has never been published in detail, have assumed it to be (;arcia's idea. I might also mention that Gary Kurtz has an excellent touch on loading a card into an inside jacket pocket or wallet that can be applied to many types of wallets but does not readily lend itself to use with the Ralducci wallet (see "The Empty Hand," page 5 1 of Unexphinnble Acts, 1990). I recommend it for those who prefer other types of wallets.

Bring the loaded Ambitious Card from the compartment in your wallet-and enjoy the audience's reaction.

CLOSING NOTES: As I observed earlier, I have long felt that the performer must set up at least a rudimentary reason for the repeated insertion of thc card into the deck. My reason, albeit contrived (not placing the card into the middle when I say that 1s what I'm doing), allows for the repeats. As I've also mentioned, I havc never been completely happy with this presentational approach, nor with the Card-in-Wallet ending for an Ambitious Card routine. These matters, however, have attracted little attention from the magic community at large. I'd be extremely pleased to find or learn of a better presentational device. Nevertheless, the plot is so fundamentally sound that even without this element it works for almost all audiences. I experimented at one time, briefly, with the idea of doing this routine without patter, and the plot still worked. 1 suspect that the reason more attention hasn't been paid to this void is that the plot seemingly always carries the day. I may never find a way to satisfy my desire for a better presentation for the Ambitious Card plot but by raising the issue I hope I'll motivate others to consider the matter. If you come up with anything, please share it. Don't heed those who assert that there's nothing left to contribute to the Ambi- tious Card plot. Remember, there were those who wanted to close the patent office in 1900.

FALSE DEALS

DEALS ALL CONVENTIONAL False Deals are Switches. Whether the top card is switched for the second card, the third card, the nineteenth card or the bottom card, is irrelevant. All such techniques switch the top card for some other card. Stated starkly this makes False Deals seem a relatively unimportant tool. After all, we have a wealth of other switching techniques. False Deals are important however because, unlike other switching methods, they appear no more than the action one must perform to move a card from a packet or the deck to somewhere else. All other switching techniques require another action be added to provide the opportunity for the switch. No such frame must be provided for False Deals, making these sleights as nearly perfect as any card move can be. Moreover, the switch is one of only three direct accomplishments of any card move. In spite of Fitzkee's larger list of ends that may be achieved by card sleights (The Card Expert Entertains, 1948, page 30), all techniques can be shoehorned into the switch, control or steal category. Viewed from that perspective, False Deals are very powerful indeed. One may dismiss this view as "stretching" but it is a pragmatic view validated by the enormous collective effort that has been invested in developing techniques for executing them deceptively. Over many years, with the help of a great many talented thinkers, a broad range of techniques have been created. Their efforts are the subject of this section.

In the pages that follow, we will systematically examine the approaches that have been taken to conventional False Dealing techniques. We will also look at some less conventional techniques and even some theoretical approaches. To avoid this being a completely theoretical analysis, however, I've included several magical effects and routines that employ False Deal techniques. Some of these depend on False Deals almost exclusively; others use them much

more sparingly. Each effect or routine demonstrates some useful function of False Dealing.

No exploration of this type would seem complete if it did not introduce some new techniques for False Dealing. So, although I've released a number of Bottom, Second and Center Deal techniques in my previous publications, I've included some important new techniques here. Some are refinements of known techniques, while others forge into unexplored areas. This is not, however, a primer on Deal technique. If you wish to learn how to deal Seconds, I recommend Bill Simon's Efectiue Card Magic (1952, page 71). Jean Hugard's recounting of Simon's tutorial on the Second Deal in that volume is one of the finest pedagogical efforts in all of magic's literature. Ifyou wish to learn a Bottom Deal, I know of no finer effort than that of Stephen Hobbs in Gene Maw and the Art of Bottom Dealing (1 994). The Center Deal has never, to my knowledge, been adequately addressed in print. Allan Ackerman's effort in describing his One-Handed Center, in Herei My Card (1978, page lo]), is noteworthy for the caliber of the technique, but his description cannot be considered adequate for the beginner. My own revisiting of the Ackerman approach (The Magical Record and Thoughts of Weshy James, 1997, page 75) is no better. Perhaps it is just as well that one must have a background and working understanding of False Dealing techniques before undertaking to learn a Center Deal. They are among the most technically challenging sleights in card magic.

If you've stayed with me this far in my introduction, I'm persuaded you'll find what follows informative and enlightening. It is not, however, light reading, but then you'll deal with it.

BOTTOM DEALING A DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVE

. - 1 HIS ESSAY was originally written as a monograph in 1978. I endeavored to update it for this book, but there may be some recent bibliographic oversights. The analysis is, nevertheless, as valid today as I believe it was when I wrote it.

Whenever cards are dealt, an observant viewer would be able to describe some aspects of the deal. Such an observer would not be able to name these factors as we can, but they are readily apprehensible. These are the kind of factors that are equally relevant to the description of legitimate deals. While these "Appearance" factors and the "Technical" factors described in the second portion of this investigation have crossover effects, it is useful to segregate overt Appearance factors from covert Technical ones. We can further segregate covert Technical factors from overt ones. Because it helps to do so, I have, and the third portion of this treatise addresses overt Technical factors.

APPEARANCE FACTORS GRIP

There are a small, finite number of ways a deck of cards may be held when dealing from the bottom. It is my purpose here to recognize those I feel are worthy of separate denotation, without qualitative consideration of factors of dealing technique. The list of denoted techniques is comprehensive without necessarily being exhaustive. It is not my position that all possible grips have been discovered, to say nothing of explored; nor would I hold that I am aware of every existing technique.

FUIL GRIP-'The most "natural" way to hold a deck of cards is the way in which most card players hold them. There is reasonable dispute on this subject. Some maintain that all four fingers at the side of the deck (commonly referred to as Full Grip) is the most natural hold (Figure 152). I t appears that Marlo was responsible for the designation Full Grip, which was and is sometimes called Four-on-the-Side Grip, a less than euphoni- ous name. Marlo was also responsible for many, though not all, of the currently known techniques for dealing Bottoms from Full Grip.

MECHANIC'S G R I P - S O ~ ~ dealing "experts" argue that moving the first finger around to the front of the deck (commonly called Mechanic's Grip) is equally natural. I believe both arguments have merit. All else being equal, Full Grip is to be preferred, as Mechanic's Grip has a bad reputation (largely due to Scarne) in certain quarters. In any event, Mechanic's Grip seems to have been the grip of choice for manipulation as early as 1680 (see Charles Cotton's The Compleat Gamester) and remained popular through Jonathan Green's 1843 An Ejcposure of the Arts and Miseries of Gambling and John Philip Quinn's 188 1 Fooh of For- tune. Not all of these sources specifically address the issue of Bottom Dealing, but each suggests or illustrates decks being held in what has come to be known as Mechanic's Grip. While it is not clear who coined the term Mechanic's Grip there is consensus that it is distinguished by the presence of the first finger at the front of the deck. There its hnction is to help exercise control. It has never been argued more forcefully than do I that the diagonal pressure between the first finger at the front and the lowermost point of the crease below the base of the thumb, provide the control necessary for Bottom Dealing in this grip (Figure 153). These two control points assist by freeing the other fingers from the task of holding the deck, thus allowing them to get out of the way of the exiting card.

S.F. GRIP-Perhaps the earliest generally recognized Bottom Deal grip variation, though surely not the first developed, is that described in John Nevi1

Maskely ne's 1 894 work, Sharp and Fhts. The position described by Maskelyne is somewhat akin to Mechanic's Grip in that the first finger of the gripping hand is in front of rhe deck. It differs from traditional Mechanic's Grip in that the deck is held higher and further forward in the hand, similar to the starting position common for many Bottom Palms (Figure 154). Few have seriously explored the S.F. Grip, other than Marlo and Warren Wiersbie (see Second, Centers, Bottoms, 1960, page 78) both of whom appear mistaken as to what constitutes the Grip.

ERDNASE GKIP-S. W. Erdnasek 1902 book The Expert at the Card Table established a new grip from which to deal but it is worth noting that Erdnase, who was generally quite careful about laying claim, does not do so for this grip. Nevertheless, the terms Erdnase Grip and the Erdnase Bottom Deal are nearly universally accepted. The distinguishing characteristic of the Erdnase Grip is that both the first and second fingers are on the front end of the deck (Figure 155). m i l e Erdnase also shows the first finger as around the left front corner of the deck, this would only be possible for those with fairly long fingers, a point which Erdnase does not address. Erdnase is relatively strict about this position and illustrates it repeatedly. He even argues that this position is critical to proper execution of the deal. I take Erdnase at his word, defining Erdnase Grip as what Erdnase says it is, but I do not limit the definition any further than necessary.

STRADDLE GRIP-For many years after Erdnase no new grips seemed to appear, but in fact another novel grip was being explored by Walter Scott (see Eddie McGuire's 1930 work, Phantom at the Card Tdble, page 23), Dr. James Elliott (in Dai Grnoni Ultimate Secrets of Card Magic by Lewis Ganson, 1967, page 172) and perhaps others (Figure 1 56). Straddle Grip-sometimes known as Elliott Grip-never gained wide acceptance as a Deal- ing Grip, but I am unwilling to dismiss it, as both Scott and Elliott were highly praised for their exceptional technique. At the same time, I am not persuaded that Straddle Grip was first applied by either Scott or Elliott and I am, therefore, unwilling to accept the designation Elliott Grip.

MASTER G ~ ~ - M a r l o was a clever, sometimes cagey, man. His description of Master Grip in Second, Centers, Bottoms (page 7) was perhaps Marlo at his

cagiest. As Eddie described it, the element that distinguishes Master Grip from all of its predecessors is that control is exercised by placing the tip of the first, second or third finger directly on the outer right corner of the deck. It is hard to believe that no one had thought of doing this earlier. I recognize there is room for disagreement here. Surely, others had made the adjustment from the front of the deck to the corner of the deck to improve their leverage. What others failed to recognize was what they were doing. Part of Marlo's genius was a detailed awareness of what his hands were accomplishing. Rules of the game being what they are, Marlo got it into print first and Marlo will "justifiably" receive credit for it, however much some may begrudge him.

157 MODIFIED ERDNASE GFUP-Once Marlo had established Master Grip there was little doubt that anyone experimenting with it would discover that it has some very desirable features and only a few drawbacks. That said, it is a short step from Mechanic's Grip to Master Grip and just as short a step from Erdnase Grip to what has come to be known as Modified Erdnase Grip. One can argue long and loud and rename them to please, but Master Grip is to Mechanic's Grip what Modified Erdnase Grip is to Erdnase Grip. In short, both are the Master Grip versions of pre-existing grips. The naming convention confuses the issue. Mechanic's Grip with the first finger moved to the corner is Master Grip and Erdnase Grip with the second finger moved to the corner is Modified Erdnase Grip (Figure 157). The problem is that Master Grip is not really a grip at all, but an example of control-point theory. (Marlo was always good with concepts but not always with language.) Viewed from the perspective of control-point theory, the scope of Marlo's Master Grip claim becomes clearer. Marlo must have known this. If there were any doubt, Marlo saved us some debate by describing both Grips in print. On page 7 of Seconds, Center, Bottoms he describes the Master Grip concept as it relates to the use of the first finger at the corner and a rather low position for the deck in the hand. On page 28 he discusses shifting the position of the inner corner and, on page 29, shifting the outer corner to the first, second or third finger. Finally, as if to cover his tail, on page 100, he applied what was clearly a description of Modified Erdnase Grip to a Center Deal. In short, if you're dealing with a finger on the corner of the deck, you're in some form of Master Grip. I accept the designation Modified Erdnase Grip, but only because it is now common parlance and more convenient than designations like First-, Second- and Third-Finger Master Grip. What some may find confusing is that Darwin Ortiz and Gene Maze, leading proponents of the Bottom Deal, have become associated with two different, published, definitions of Modified

Erdnase Grip. I believe Darwin is correct in his definition in The Annotated Erd- nase ( 1 991, page 72). I differ with Steve Hobbs in his characterization in Gene Maze and the Art of Bottom Dealing (1994, page 2). (Gene confirms that he deals from Erdnase Grip not Modified Erdnase Grip, though he doesn't bring his first finger as far toward the corner as Erdnase describes.)

PSEUDO GRIP-This is another of Marlo's useful but questionably chosen nomenclatures. What Marlo calls Pseudo Grip is not so much pseudo as disguised. The deck is held in either Mechanic's or Master Grip, but the cards are beveled forward to obscure the position of the forefinger and give the illusion of all four fingers resting at the right side (Figure 158). The specific idea relates to the notion I referred to earlier. Since some individuals feel that Full Grip is the most natural appearing grip, it follows logically that if one cannot deal from Full Grip, a deal that appears to be done from Full Grip is the next best thing. In 1967, Marlo contributed a deal to the N m Tops 1967 Trick Annual (page 40) that did precisely that. The deal is excellent, regardless of whether it appears to be from Full Grip or not. It is soft, relatively quiet and quite reliable. In any event, as is too often the case, we are saddled with the designation Pseudo Grip even if I would prefer Disguised Grip.

NO GRIP-Last but by no means least, as of 1978 we have Bottom Deals with no grip at all, just the deck lying on the fingers. Two versions of this breed of deal appear in Ken Krenzel's 1978 book The Card Chsics of Ken Krenzel (pages 226 and 229). Ken is clearly a proponent of such approaches, as he offers still another, the Gravity Bottom Deal, in his more recently released Close-Up Impact! (1990, page 188). Both the Fingertip Bottom Deal and the Thumb- Grip Bottom Deal (not really a grip as I define it) require moderately large hands and are, therefore, unworkable for me. I do not conclude, however, that other No Grip deals would necessarily be as problematic, dismissing the consideration of their desirability.

While on the subject of gripless deals it is worth mention that both Marlo and I have developed techniques for dealing Tabled Bottoms. Marlo contributed his in Seconds, Centers, Bottoms (page 92) while mine appears in Epilogue,

No. 18 (1 973, page 167) and The Magical Record and Thoughts of Wessley James (page 18). The elements that make for a useable Tabled Bottom are completely different from those that relate to other Bottom Deals and thus will not be explored further here. They are mentioned merely for completeness.

TAKE

Grip is 11ot the only factor that defines or distinguishes a deal. There are others, some apparent, others technical, each having an impact on the other. Among the apparent or overt characteristics is the Take. The Take, as I define it, is the visible manner in which the card is taken from the deck. Unlike the Grip, the Take is frequently dictated by the circumstance in which it is applied, rather than the technique being employed. Nevertheless, the Take is as related to legitimate deals as it is to false ones.

STANDARD TAKE-The most common Take is face down into an essentially palm-up hand, in preparation for a face-down Deal or Sail (Figure 159). I term this a Standard Take or Normal Take. More Bottom Deal methods have been applied to this form of Take than any other.

STUD TAKE-For some purposes and in some games of chance, cards are turned up as they are dealt. One of the most common occasions in which this occurs is in the game of Stud Poker. This manner of Take is thus referred to as a Stud Take. Here are two approaches to the Stud Take.

Overhand and Underhand Stud Eke-When a card being dealt is turned over it is generally turned end for end rather than side for side. Even so, there are two ways the card can be turned. They are sometimes termed Overhand and Underhand. In an Overhand Take the right hand is palm down when it grasps the card, and the back end of the card passes over the front end during the turnover (Figure 160). Conversely, during an

Underhand Take, the right hand is palm up when it grasps the card, and the near end of the card passes under the front end (Figure 161). This

might not be worth distinguishing were it not 'that they have both technical and application related advantages and disadvantages for magic, though not for gaming. Thus, for magical purposes, they are not always interchangeable. As an example, an Underhand Take deal can be performed so a viewer never sees the back of the dealt card. This can be used to facilitate a Color Change or to hide the use of a double-faced card. This would be impractical, if not impossible, with an Overhand Take.

N o TAKE-The final Take designation might be called No Take in that there is no taking hand. Such deals are perforce One-Handed but there are a number of different techniques that may be applied.

I have excluded from this portion of the discussion some other Take variations. These include: Deep Take, End Take, Scissor Take and Back-End Take, to name a few. These variations are more closely tied to technique than to a viewer's perception of the Take function. They are, therefore, more related to Action than Take and will be addressed in that section.

TECHNIQUE FACTORS

COVERT

To this point I have only examined the overt elements of the Bottom Deal. These factors, as stated earlier, apply equally to legitimate and false deals. The next two sections relate to those elements that generate a Bottom Deal and

make it deceptive. These factors distinguish the Straight Deal from the Bottom Deal. The two sections address different aspects of the Bottom Deal: Covert and Overt. The distinction will become apparent.

BUCKLE-The only covert factor essential to the Bottom Deal is a method for moving the card from the bottom of the deck to a position where it has or can be taken from the bottom. The earliest "detailed description of a Bottom Deal technique of which I am aware is that on pages 1 16-1 18 of S b a p and Flats. The Deal therein described is a " R i p technique, but it is probable that even then, in 1894, there existed techniques that buckled the bottom card to facilitate extrication ( e ~ ~ c a t i o n in this context means freeing, the first of the two-step process). Erdnase describes a Bottom Deal in which the third finger is responsible for the buckling of the bottom card and sliding it from under the balance of the deck (page 52). It is highly probable, nevertheless, particularly in light of the history discussed in the Mechanic's Grip section, that Bottom Deals utilizing the second finger as the buckle and extrication means were contemporaneously in use. This may not be a provable assertion through the early literature but, as the use of the second finger has been widely explored in recent years, the point is nearly moot aside from the historical interest of the question. More recently, I've become aware of a technique for using the fourth finger as the buckle and extrication means. This technique is the creation of Hippy Torrales. I think very highly of the Torrales approach and included it in my book, Pateboard Pqensions (1990, page 23). To round out the discussion, it may be worth mention that experimentation with a first-finger buckle and extrication has occurred and has generally been deemed unworkable. It is too apparent that the bottom card is being dealt, as nothing screens the buckle action. I am aware of only one Bottom Deal (Marlo calls it the "MSF One Hand Bottom or Modified Sharps and Flats Bottom Deal" in his Second, Centers, Bottoms, page 84) that utilizes the first finger as the extrication means but it is not a buckle technique. I don't wish to sound dismissive of this approach as I am aware of an unpublished Tom Gagnon technique (the Lateral Bottom Deal) that uses the first finger as the means for extraction with exceptional deceptiveness. Just for completeness, there is also a Carmen D'Arnico One-Handed Bottom (Second, Centers, Bottoms, page 70) that uses the thumb as the extrication means. It too does not employ a buckle technique.

PUSH-m~-Having run out of fingers on the Grip hand, we move to the use of the Take hand as the buckle and extrication means. Marlo gave us the Push- Pull Bottom Deal as part of his Cigar Bottom Deal discourse in New Tops 1967 Trick Annual (page 39). In this technique the bottom card is buckled slightly by contact with the Take hand's second finger (that's the "Push"). It is then extri- cated and extracted by the Taking hand (that's the "Pull").

This completes my examination of the current state of Buckle methods. I recognize that there are fine points relating to which part of the finger is used to create the buckle and which direction the fingers move to accomplish the extrication. I do not dismiss the importance of these matters. Rather, I consider them impor- rant finesses and personal adjustments. They can be crucial to the workability and effectiveness of a deal but they do not significantly change the method.

PRE-LoosEN-A~~ that has been said about methods for buckling and extricat- ing the bottom card thus far relates also to the use of the Buckle as a means of preparation for the extraction of the bottom card. This is not the only way these methods may be employed. One may also employ a buckle action with the anticipation that another means of extracting the bottom card, usually a "strike" method, will be used. Such application of the buckle action is functionally distinct from the methods discussed earlier. To distinguish the two, I've elected to term this second function a "Pre-Loosening." I recognize that most of the previously described buckling methods can be used to create this Pre-Loosening effect but they are not the only Pre-Loosening methods. Marlo discussed the use of a finely unsquared Faro (something like an Impromptu Svengali Deck) as a method of accomplishing the same end. This idea, in the context of a center deal, first appeared in Marlo's "Special to the Expert," which was inserted into copies of Second, Centers, Bottoms (1960) for those who purchased the book from Eddie. The same information was included in a similar manner in copies of Unexpected Curd Book (1974, page 239). Its application to the Bottom Deal appeared in The Olrum File, Vol. 1, No. 6, June 199 1, page 4. The most readily available source, however-apart from Randy Wakeman's video, Ed Marlo: Sec- onds, Centers &Bottoms: The Video, 2000-is Curd Finesse I1 (1992, page 176), where it is renamed the "Greased Bottom Deal." I have experimented successfully with the use of a full-deck squeeze as a Pre-Loosening action. Other, yet undiscovered, Pre-Loosening actions may be possible. In any case, Pre-Loosen- ing would be performed in preparation for a Strike- or Rip-style Deal. We will examine such deals next.

STRIKE OR RIP-The Strike or Rip family of Bottom Deals appear to have gained currency in the 1930's. They remain popular to this day. For the sake of clarity, there is a distinction between a Strike and a Rip, though only experienced Bottom Dealers are likely to appreciate it. The distinction is most analogous to the difference between a Strike Second Deal and a Take Second Deal. In other words, it turns on contact area and contact duration. It helps to think of it this way. A Strike is hard, tightly focused and of short duration. A Rip requires a purchase before the pull and, thus, has a softer contact of longer duration. The distinction is meaningfd because of the difference in look and feel the two approaches produce. There are no rigid rules about which must be used at any

given time. Still, as a general guideline, Strike Deals work better for deals into one pile. Rip Deals are preferable when you're dealing a round. At the card table, one might choose a Strike Deal for head-to-head Gin Rummy. One might choose a Rip Deal when dealing winners to a partner in Draw Poker. That's the best explanation I can offer at the moment. That said, hereinafter I'll use the term "Strike" to include both Strike and Rip Deals, except where specificity is necessary.

Moving along, a Strike Deal can remove the card from the bottom in three principle directions: Front, Back or Side. Each will be discussed.

Front-The S.F. Bottom Deal, referred to earlier, was the first Rip-style Bottom Deal described in print. In the S.F. Deal the bottom card is withdrawn from the front of the deck. This is the path of least resistance as there are not, or need not be, any fingers to block the extraction. Still, the Front Take Bottom Deal is probably the least explored of approaches. There are at least three primary reasons for this apparent contradiction: Taking cards from the front is difficult to cover, for obvious reasons. The direction of the Take in a Front Bottom Deal is inconsistent with normal card-table practice. The Front Take is psychologically wrong, as it is precisely the way a lay person would suspect you could remove the bottom card. All that said, the first item I ever allowed to appear in the literature of magic was the WJ Front Bottom Deal (published in M-U-M, Vol. 62, No. 2, July 1972, page 2 1 ; and later in The Magical Record and Thoughts of Wesley James, page 10). That technique addressed each of the cited drawbacks with some measure of success and yielded an easy-to-execute Bottom Deal. The only other Front Bottom Deals of which I am aware are one-handed: Marlo's MSF Deal and Tom Gagnon's Lateral Bottom Deal (as yet unpublished), both mentioned earlier.

Back-The next least obstructed path from beneath the deck is out the back. Here too, no fingers impede the exit. This is both a blessing and a curse. The lack of impediment makes removal of a card easy but the unavailability of a finger makes assuring the removal of only one card problematic. With few exceptions, developers of Back-Take Bottom Deals have addressed this problem by moving the bottom card out the back diagonally. (The exception is the Easy Bottom Deal, reported by Gerald Kosky in More CardManipuLztions, No. 2, 1939, page 15. Kosky had been shown this sleight by a gambler.) This allows the fourth finger (and sometimes the third, when the diagonal is sharp enough) to guard against more than one card being taken. Marlo's Havana Deal (in the manuscript by the same name, published by L. L. Ireland in 1948), Jennings' Gambler's Bottom Deal (Epilogue SpecialNo. 3, Part One, n.d., page 258) and my Back-Right Bottom Deal (Pateboard Perpensions,

) are all examples of this style of action. I am fond of this approach to the Bottom Deal and will, no doubt, continue to use and explore it in years to come.

Side-'She most obstructed path from under the deck is from the sides, and both sides have been utilized. The thumb side by D'Arnico, Krenzel and A1 Gallo, the finger side by nearly everyone else who has developed a Bottom Deal. When cards are taken from the finger side of the deck, contact with the bottom card may be made by reaching between the first and second fingers or between the second and third fingers. Both have been investigated with a fair degree of thoroughness. The best deal that makes contact between the first and second fingers is the Artanis Bottom Deal (ms. circa 1946) but the description in Expert Card Tech- nique (1940, page 20, is more widely available and more standard in its approach to this type of deal. The first description of such a Deal in print may be Tarbell's 1927 effort (in his original mail-order course, Lesson 35, page 19, which later appeared in Volume Two, of the Tdrbell Course in Magic, 1942, page 185). Fred Braue, too, developed a Bottom Deal in which the right third finger was used to extract the bottom card through the space between the left first and second fingers (Fred Braue on Fake Deals, 1978, page 3). The exploration of contact between the second and third fingers was handled by Marlo with the Cigar Bottom Deal (New Tops 1367 Trick Annual). Hippy Torrales also uses the space between the second and third fingers for his deal (Pateboard Perpensions, page 23). To my knowledge, the only unexplored contact space between the fingers is that between the third and fourth fingers. My preliminary efforts and analysis suggest that this gap has little to recommend it. Nevertheless, someone may prove me mistaken. That exhausts the Strike Bottom Deal possibilities. It also completes my examination of the Covert elements of the Bottom Deal. New developments in this area are rare, so I don't expect significant changes to occur. The next two topics are much more likely to reveal change, if not progress, over time.

OVERT

The scope of the Action elements of Bottom Deal technique is quite wide. It includes everything and anything that makes a deal easier, smoother or more efficient. Everything, in fact, except techniques that create deceptiveness or illusion. These relate to Cover.

Because this topic is so extensive, I cannot take as systematic an approach as I have in previous sections. I am not, however, unaware of how useful such an

analysis would be. For the time being, I can only offer that there are at least three recurrent problems in efforts to create deceptive Bottom Deals. These are:

(1) Hiding the finger drop and/or flash in Side-Take Bottom Deals, whether Buckle or Strike type. The Artanis idea of strongly beveling the deck is extremely helpful in masking this problem. The Deep Take introduced by Marlo is also helpful.

(2) Noise. Tremendous effort has been invested in trying to reduce the "pop" noise made by Strike Deals and the friction noise made by Buckle Deals. Cardini (not Marlo) introduced the Wrist-Turn Deal, in The Tarbell Course in Magic, (1927 mail-order course, Lesson 35, page 19; and later, Volume 2, 1942, page 185). Dr. Daley created the Left Take-Left-Hand Deal (see Jacob Daleys Notebooks, Item 308; Larry Jennings' T.N.T. Bottom Deal is a variant of Daley's concept). Marlo gave us the Missing Finger Deals (Second, Centers, Bottoms, page 85). All these approaches were, in part, an effort to address the noise problem.

(3) The third problem is the psychological one. Psychological problems don't always lend themselves to psychological solutions. A number of individuals have endeavored to use physical actions to create a sense of casualness. Three such ideas are Audley Walsh's Scissor-Take Stud Bottom Deal, which appears in the Tarbell Course in Magic, Volume 2 (Method 3, page 187), Tony Giorgio's Toss Take (unpublished) and the End Take-Snap Over Bottom Deal (an unpublished Al Gallo technique that was slated for a Karl Fulves book that never saw publication), championed by Ken Krenzel. Of course, ideas like Necktieing, Wrist Swinging and Carrying, at least in theory, are aimed at these problems. It is an arguable matter how well they succeed.

Much more could, and should, be written on this subject. For now I will conclude by saying that too many Bottom Deals have been reinvented and claimed by uninformed, under-informed or dishonest newcomers to the scene, who have more ego than honor. Deal development is stifled by such individuals filling book pages with the same old techniques in, at best, new combinations. Such efforts are to my way of thinking "rip-offs."

The last issue I'll address is perhaps the area of greatest frustration to me: Cover. Part of this issue relates to the creation of a visual illusion that the top card is being taken when in fact it's the bottom one. This is distinct from creating the

visual-psychological illusion that the top card must have been taken because no other card could have been. I refer to the first case as a "Positive Illusion" and the second case as a "Negative Illusion." Though I have written about it before, for the sake of completeness, creating the visual-psychological conviction that the top card must have been taken because no other card could have been is a Nega- tive Illusion. It differs markedly from the more pure, aarmative optical illusion that the top card is being taken, which constitutes a Positive Illusion.

I wish there was much more to be said on this subject but there simply hasn't been much contributed on the matter. Marlo titled one of his Deals the Illu- sionary Bottom Deal (see New Tops, Vol. 8 , No. 3, March 1968, page 36; and MINT Volume I, 1988, page 356) but it is nothing of the sort. He was arguably more successful with a psychological ploy he called the IBD (Immediate Bottom Deal) in Fulves' Pallbearers Review (Vol. 4, No. 5, March 1969, page 245). My Long Stroke concept (part of the Back-Right Bottom Deal from Pmteboard Pe'erpensions) takes a serious stab at creating a Positive Illusion but falls short for packets larger than about fifteen cards. At the time of this writing, no one I have seen has developed a technique that produces a full-deck Positive Illusion Bottom Deal. When I consider the dumbfounded looks I get when I broach such matters with most Dealers, or the argument I get from others, I don't hold much hope for the near future. Nevertheless, the Bottom Deal, in its capacity as a switch, is among the most powerful tools in the entire arsenal of card magic. It should increase in popularity in years to come. I am hopeful that my contributions in the following pages will help speed the day.

FOLLOW THAT CARD I1 APRIL 16, 1991

ALPHA

THE FIRST two phases of this routine borrow from the plot of Herbert Milton's "Sympathetic Clubs." The third phase is of the Follow the Leader type, and the fourth combines the "sympathetic" idea with Vernon's "Travelers" effect. The structure, except for the third phase, is based on a dealer item by Bro. John Harnman called "Follow That Card." The original Hamman effect utilized eight gimmicked cards and some, in my opinion, gratuitous handling. Nev- ertheless, the plot sparked my interest. I am not convinced that my handlings of the various phases are the best possible. My choices were, in some measure, motivated by a desire to have all of the counting displays appear the same. That may seem inconsequential but, I believe, in a routine of this sort, consistency relaxes suspicion and thereby enhances the effect.

SET-UP: Openly remove all of the red Fives, Sixes, Sevens, Eights, Nines and Tens. Remove also the Ace through Four of Spades and Ace through Four of Clubs. Arrange each Ace through Four in that order from the face.

PHASE I EFFECT: The performer displays and deals the Ace through Four of Spades in a row across the table. He does the same with the Ace through Four of Clubs. He counts off twelve red cards and places three face down on each face-down Club. He next mixes the order of the four face-up Spades. When he displays the packets, the Clubs are seen to have magically reordered themselves to match the rearranged order of the Spades.

1' With your right hand, pick up the Spade packet face up in Deep Overhand , , Grip. Using your left thumb, draw the Ace off the face of the packet, pulling

it into left-hand Dealing Grip. Continue by drawing off the 'Two, followed by the Three in like manner. Finally, put the Four on top of the other three cards. Square the packet, turn it face down and deal the four cards into a row, from left to right, across the table.

Pick up the face-up Club packet and take it into Deep Overhand Grip. You are about to apparently duplicate the actions of the first count. Draw the Ace off the face of the packet into left-hand Dealing Grip. Continue by drawing off the Two, but as you do, steal the Ace back under the right-hand packet. Perform the same action with the Three, drawing it into the left hand while stealing the Two back under the packet. Drop the Two, Ace and Four, as though they were one card, onto the Three.

Square the packet and turn it face down. Deal the packer as follows: Bottom Deal-'lbp-Top-'Ibp, from left to right, in a row between you and the Spades. It should appear that both packets have been handled identically and, therefore, are in the same order on the table. The actual situation is that the Spades run from left to right Ace-Two-Three-Four, while the Clubs run from left to right Four-Three-Two-Ace.

Pick up the packet of red cards and turn them face up. Duplicate the peeling action used in the earlier display to peel off the first three cards from the face. Turn them face down and place them onto the leftmost Club (supposedly the Ace, actually the Four). Perform the same actions, placing three cards onto each of the other three Clubs.

Turn each Spade card face up and place it back in the spot it occupied. Explain that the cards have a sympathetic effect on their mates; for example, "If I move the Spades, the Clubs should follow." Transpose the Ace of Spades and Four of Spades. Follow by transposing the Two and Three of Spades.

Pick up the leftmost Club packet and, simulating an Elmsley Count, fairly reverse count the packet. Turn over the top card, revealing that the Four of Clubs has followed the Four of Spades. Square the packet, leaving the Four face up on top and place it back 162 onto the table, nearer to you and in alignment with the [T [m] Spade of the same value.

Continue the sequence, per- ( * *:I 1 9 [ * forming the same actions of Step 6 with each of the other packets. At completion, the tabled cards will be as shown in Figure 162.

PHASE I1

EFFECT: The performer says, "Perhaps you'd like to see that again." He reassembles the cards. Removing the Clubs, he deals them face down on the table behind their Spade mates. Now he allows the spectator to arrange the face-up Four through Ace of Spades in any order, while he places three red cards onto each of the Clubs. Believe it or not, when he counts and reveals the Clubs, the cards match again.

8 Pick up the Ace of Clubs packet and place it onto the Two of Clubs packet. Pick up the combined packet and place it onto the Three of Clubs packet. Finally, put the combined packets onto the Four of Clubs packet and pick up the entire group.

9 Take the packet into what Marlo termed "Prayer" position. (This position is distinguished by the hands holding their respective cards in Dealing Grip, the fingers of each hand being free to extend above the ends of the cards they hold. In effect, the cards in each hand are thumb-palmed along their sides. This allows you to screen the cards when they are in spread condition (Figure 163), preventing the audience from determining the relative positions of the cards in the spread.

Spread through the face-down cards, out-jogging the first three face-up cards (the Ace, Deuce and Three). When the Two is out-jogged it should also be positioned to the left of the out-jogged Ace for about a quarter of its width. The Three should be positioned about a quarter of its width to the left of the Two. When the Four is on top of the left-hand packet, the right fingers, extending under the packet, slide the face-down card above the Four slightly downward and to the right (Figure 164). When the left hand now moves to out-jog the Four, it travels a bit farther left and a bit farther outward. This allows the Four to clear the displaced card above it (Figure 165). Your left hand moves back in after out-jogging the Four and pushes over the final three cards. This places four cards below the out-jogged Four.

NO'I'E: It's easy to miss the point of this procedure in all the details. You are trying to reach two objectives under the guise of one innocent procedure. You are openly out-jogging the Ace through Four of Clubs, but you're secretly culling one of the red cards, to position it for an upcoming move. You're also arranging the out-jogged cards in a wider spread-configuration than would typically occur by out-jogging them. The wider spread allows the out-jogged cards to provide a better screctl for the actions of the Half Pass that will follow.

After all the face-up cards are out-jogged and the one card is displaced, form a left fourth-finger break above the four lowermost cards as you partially square the packet. change your right hand's grip to pinch the right side of the packet above the break, the thumb above, the fingers below (Figure 166). With a Half Pass, reverse the four cards below the left-hand break and carry them forward as the left hand moves to strip out the out-jogged cards. This resembles the Vernon Strip-Out Addition with a Half Pass added.

After the Half-Pass Strip-Out Addition your left hand will be holding eight cards as though they were four. Without pause, lever these left-hand cards face down onto the right-hand packet. Square the packet quickly but fairly, then deal the top four cards, left to right, across the table in a row. The audience should believe the cards dealt are the Four through Ace of Clubs; they are actually four red spot cards.

"From these [indicating the red-cardpaket] I'll place three onto each card." Turn the red-card packet face up in your hands. As you spread the cards in front of you, so only you can see them, tell the spectator, "Pick up the Spades and spread them in front of your face, like this. Find the Four and place it in front of any one of the cards on the table." While your packet is spread, secure a left fourth- finger break above the Ace of Clubs, which is the fourth card from the rear of the packet. Square the cards as you lower them, so the audience can only see the face of the uppermost card. At the same time transfer the break to your right thumb.

Execute a Pull-Down on the bottom card of the packet, the Four, and peel off the red spot card on the face and the rear card (the Four) into left-hand Dealing Grip in perfect alignment. It should appear that only one card has been taken. This is the Veeser Concept at work. Peel the next red card onto the left-hand cards, forming a fourth-finger break between the lower two cards and the upper

one. Feed the edge of the card above the left hand's break into the gap formed by the right rhumb break (Figure 167) and in a continuing motion, as the hands move together, drive the card into the break and flush with the right-hand packet. As the hands separate, the lefr thumb peels the next red card from the right-hand packet onto the left packet. It should appear that, to this point, you've merely peeled three cards into your left hand, and indeed that is how many it now holds.

NOTE: It will take a bit of work to make this sequence smooth, but it should appear that you've just peeled a card onto the hce of the left-hand packet. I believe this can be an extremely useful technique, applicable in a wide variety of situations, because it permits multiple, intermittent unloads during a Biddle-rype Display withoi~t disturbing the bottom stock.

Rotate the left-hand packet face down and place its three cards onto the face- down card behind the face-up Four of Spades. The Four of Clubs is on top of this packet, with three red spot cards beneath it. Pause for a moment, then say, "Find the Three and place it above any other card on the table."

Repeat the same sequence described in Step 13, pulling down the bottom card of the packet, then peeling off a red card from the face with the bottom card (the Three of Clubs) into the left-hand Dealing Grip. Peel the next red card onto the left-hand cards, forming a fourth-finger break below it. Feed the edge of that card into the gap in the right hand's packet and drive the card flush as you peel the next red spot card from the right-hand packet onto the left hand's cards. Finally, rotate the left-hand packet face down and place its three cards onto the face-down card behind the face-up Three of Spades.

"Put the Two above any of the remaining cards on the table." The next three cards are handled in a manner similar to that described in Steps 13 and 15. You pull down the bottom card of the packet, then peel off the first red card and the bottom Two of Clubs into the left-hand Dealing Grip. Peel the next red card onto the left-hand cards, forming a fourth-finger break below it. At this point the sequence deviates from the earlier ones. Steal the card above the break onto the rear of the right-hand packet as you peel the red card at the face onto the left-hand packet. Again, rotate the left-hand palm down and place its cards onto the face-down card behind the Two of Spades.

You should be holding only three cards, which are two red spot cards with the Ace of Clubs between them. Say, "Place the final card, the Ace, above the

unoccupied card." When the spectator has done so, take the top two cards as one into the left hand, simulating a peeling action. This is best done by using the lefi fingertips to push the rear card of the packet to the right, rather then trying to peel off the top two cards as one. As soon as the two cards are in the lefi hand, do a Pull-Down, forming a fourth-finger break between them. Take the single card held by the right hand onto the lefi hand's cards, stealing the card above the left hand's break back into the right hand. Both hands should be drifting to the left as this is done, so that the face of the card held by the right hand can't be seen. This should not arouse suspicion, as the spectators have watched this sequence performed three times before and will not be paying careful attention. Finally, deposit the right hand's card onto the left-hand packet. (This is a variation of Edward Victor's E.Y.E. Count, which is a three-card version of what is commonly referred to as the Stanyon Count.) Immediately rotate the left-hand packet face down so the face of the packet is not seen. Place the three cards onto the face-down card behind the Ace of Spades.

NOTE: The total sequence described in Steps 13-17 probably reads as overhandled but should appear to the spectators to be the simple act of placing three red spot cards onto each of the four cards, just as you did in Step 4. Don't be put off by the seeming complexity. Properly performed, it can look like nothing untoward has occurred or could have.

Pick up the leftmost Club packet and perform an Elmsley Count, apparently just reversing the packet. Turn over the top card, revealing that the Club matches the Spade. Square the packet, leaving the card face up on top, and place the packet back on the table behind the corresponding Spade card. Repeat these actions with each of the other packets, from left to right across the table. The values have apparently followed sympathetically.

PHASE I11

EFFECT: The performer offers to eliminate the red cards and does so. He shows the Ace through Four of Spades and Ace through Four of Clubs, then turns both packets face down on the table. "Not only does the order of the cards demonstrate their strange affinity, but so do the suits." He switches the leader Aces and the Twos follow them, the Spade following the Spade, and the Club the Club. Switching the follower packets, the suits again follow. Saying, "They're incredibly persistent," the performer switches both the follower and the leader packets-and once more the suits follow.

NOTE: This phase differs significantly from the original Hamman Third Phase. Rather it resembles the well-known Follow the Leader plot, employing a Dr. Daley ruse. (See Phoenix, No. 220, January 12, 195 1 , page 878.) 1 find this effect is easier for an audience to follow, yielding a stronger response.

"Some people feel that the red cards make the process hard to follow. I'll eliminate them." Pick up the Ace of Spades and place it face down, starting a pile on the left side of your working area. Pick up the Two, Three and Four of Spades, adding them, one at a time, face down, in order, on top of the Ace of Spades. Continue by picking the Ace through Four of Clubs, in order, off the tops of their respective packets and adding them face down onto the Spades.

Pick up one of the red-card packets and turn it face up in your left hand. Pick up a second red-card packet and add it face up to the packet already held in your left hand, secretly forming a break above the bottom four cards of the packet. As your right hand picks up the third red-card packet, your left third and fourth fingers squeeze the four cards below the break, then release them, creating a near-end crimp. Add the red cards from the right hand face up onto the left- hand cards. Complete the process by adding the last of the red cards face up to the left-hand packet and square it. Turn the packet face down, side for side, and place it to the right side of your working area. The near-end crimp will later allow you to easily lift off three red cards one-handed. This will prove useful.

"We'll use only these cards." Pick up the Spade-Club packet, turn it face up and hold it in your right hand, from above. "The Ace, Two, Three, Four of Spades and the Ace, Two, Three, Four of Clubs." As you are saying this, peel cards off the right-hand packet into the left hand as follows: Peel the Ace of Spades fairly into the left hand. Peel the Two of Spades onto the Ace, forming a break between them. Steal back the Two under the right-hand packet as you peel off the Three of Spades onto the left-hand packet, but maintain a fourth-finger break below the Three and a right thumb break above the Two (Figure 168). Peel the Four of Spades, then the Ace of Clubs fairly onto the left-hand packet. As you continue, peel off the Two of Clubs and steal all the cards above the left-hand break, so that the Two is peeled onto the Ace of Spades. Release the cards below your right thumb break as you peel the Three of Clubs onto the Two of Spades. The audience should not be permitted to see the Two of Spades as the Three of Clubs is peeled onto it. Lastly, take the Four of Clubs onto the Three of Clubs. If you were to spread the packet at this point, it would appear, from the face, as Four of Clubs-Three of Clubs-Two of Spades-Ace of Clubs-Four of Spades-Three of Spades-Two of Clubs-Ace of Spades. You have transposed the Two of Spades and Two of Clubs.

22 Kiffle the packet at the back, openly looking for the dividing point between the Clubs and Spades, and lift off all the cards above the Four of Spades, separating the cards into two four-card groups. Turn both packets fiice down and place them on the table. Lift off the top cards (Aces) from each packet and place each face up in front of its packet.

23 "Not only does the order of the cards demonstrate this strange affinity for each other, so do the suits. If I switch the leader Aces, like so ..." Do as much. "Not only do the Twos follow the Aces but the Spade follows the Spade and the Club the Club." Turn the Twos face-up and place them onto their matching Aces.

24 "If I switch the follower packets.. ." Again suit action to words by switching the positions of the two face-down packets. "Not only do the values follow but the suirs as well." Simultaneously, turnover the top cards of both face-down packets, revealing that the Threes have followed both in suit and value.

25 "They're incredibly persistent. Even if I switch both the follower packets and the leader packets.. ." Swap the positions of the outer left face-up packet with the inner right face-down packet, then swap the outer right face-up packet with the inner left face-down packet. "Still both the values and the suits follow." Turn over the last two face-down cards, revealing that the Fours have followed.

PHASE IV EFFECT: To prove conclusively that the Clubs follow the Spades wherever they go, the performer puts the Ace through Four of Spades into various pockets chosen by the spectators. Instantly the Ace, Two, Three and Four of Clubs are shown to have vanished from among the red cards and the twelve red cards are spread on the table to prove it. Rapidly, with hands seen empty, the performer draws the pairs-Aces, Twos, Threes and Fours-from their respective pockets.

26 With your right hand, pick up the twelve red cards lying to your right on the table. Put this in the center of your working area but, with a Bold Steal, cop the top four cards. That is, grasp the four cards in Marlo's Bold Steal position, which is essentially Overhand Grip but with the back of the hand turned toward the leftmost eye in your audience (Figure 169, your view, and Figure 170, the audience's view). Picking up just the four cards is facilitated by the crimp you created earlier.

As you move the red cards say, "As you've seen, the red cards aren't necessary; they only act as media. I'll show you what I mean. I'll take the Clubs." Reach out and grasp the Club packet with your palm-down left hand. Turn that hand palm up and allow it to rest near the edge of the table. "Pick up the Spades for me." As you say this, gesture with your right hand, which conceals the stolen cards. The spectator will reach for the Spade packet. Under cover of this activity, bring your right hand toward your left. When your right hand is just about to grasp the left-hand cards in Overhand Grip, lap the left-hand cards by pushing sharply with your left first finger on the front end. The right hand above will provide cover. Leave the right hand's cards in the left hand. Nothing will appear to have changed. (This switch utilizes the Marlo-D'Amico Propelled Lap, which originally appeared in New Jinx, Vol. IV, No. 38, June 1965, page 158. The switch is also related to an old, standard cold-deck technique.)

Take the red-card packet from the table and add the supposed Club packet (actually four red cards) to the top and give the combined packet an Overhand Shuffle. "I'll mix the Clubs with the red cards. O r maybe you'd prefer to do it?" Exchange packets with the spectator, giving him the red cards to mix and then hold between his palms. You take the Spades and reverse their order by performing a legitimate face-up count, bringing the Ace of Spades to the face.

Pause to say to the spectators, "I have nine available pockets: two front pants pockets, two back pants pockets, two inside jacket pockets, two outside jacket pockets and one breast pocket. I'll place the Ace in one pocket, the Two, Three and Four into others, but you can chose which card goes into which pocket." As you speak, retrieve the lapped cards, adding them face up under the face-up Spades. Ask, "Which pocket gets the Ace?"

NOTE: As an alternate handling for general use or when you're standing and carit use your lap, you can replace Steps 26 and 28 with a face-up Mul- tiple Shift, reversing the order of the Club packet before insertion. Steal the Clubs into Gambler's Cop before giving the red packet to the spectator to hold; then take the Spades face up, adding the Clubs below them.

If the spectator names a pocket on your left side (other than the inside jacket pocket or the outside breast pocket), or if he names the inside jacket pocket on the right side, execute a Pull-Down on the bottom card of the packet, the Ace of Clubs, and peel the face card and the bottom card into left-hand Deal- ing Grip, in perfect alignment. It should appear that only one card, the Ace of Spades, has been peeled o E Place the two cards, as one, into the pocket the spectator has named.

If the spectator names a pocket on your right side (excluding the inside jacket pocket) or the inside jacket pocket on the left side, the right thumb should

contact the top card at the front left corner, while the right second finger contacts the bottom card at the same corner and the right first finger rests on the front left corner. The top and bottom cards should then be drawn forward, in alignment (Figure 171), until they clear the front of the packet. Rest the near lefi corner of the double card on the packet and keep it in position with the left thumb long enough for the right hand to move to right-hand Dealing Grip (Figure 172). Flash the face of the card to the audience, then place the two cards, as one, into the designated pocket.

Repeat this process to deposit the Two, Three and Four into spectator- selected pockets, using whichever technique, Step 29a or Step 29b, the circumstance requires.

NOTE: If you're using the Multiple Shift-Gambler's Cop handling, you will need to pocket the cards in the opposite order: Four, Three, Two, Ace. This, obviously, doesn't alter the working of the effect.

Have the spectator set the red cards at the middle of the table. Form your hands into a tent over the packet, temporarily screening it from view. Pause a moment, then abruptly pull your hands away and say, "It's amazing but they're gone. I know you don't believe it, but they are." Spread the red cards face up across the table. Ask the spectator, "Where did I put the Ace of Spades?" When reminded of the proper pocket, reach very fairly into it and remove the two cards it contains, backs to the audience. Slowly and dramatically reveal the Ace of Spades and Ace of Clubs. Rapidly announce the pockets that hold the other cards and at a brisk pace remove the two Twos, two Threes and two Fours. Take your bow and applause. You deserve it and so does your audience.

NOTE: As you can see, the effect steadily builds: first, the cards change places as the magician chooses; second, they change places as the spectator

chooses; third, they inexplicably follow each other, both in suit and value; and fourth, they vanish from before their eyes and jump into four different pockets. And all this with absolute ease and no funny business or gaffs. I'retty good, eh!

P1C.A. CHEATING JANUARY 24, 1969

BETA

IN LATE 1968, I began toying with the idea of delivering lectures on "How Cheaters Cheat." I felt I knew enough and that I had sufficient technical competence in almost all areas. The one thing I could not do at the time was a deceptive Center Deal. Not wishing to be caught in the situation of being asked about a Center Deal and not being able to demonstrate one, I resolved to do two things: I'd learn a Center Deal and work out a way to convincingly simulate one to cover me until I did. On January 24, 1969, I recorded in my private notes my first version of a simulated Center Deal demonstration. I called it "P.K.A. (Professionally Known As) Cheating" because I viewed the routine as cheating at cheating.

I used the effect periodically over the years, making minor changes along the way. By 1973, when I signed to deliver my first full series of gambling lectures, it had evolved considerably. By that time I could deal a Center but, frankly, I lacked the confidence to use it under performance conditions. Further, I had come to like the response I was getting when I performed the original effect. As I later learned, many others have also developed Pseudo-Center Deal demonstrations. Never- theless, as you'll see, this effect distinguishes itself through subtle persuasions.

I did eight lecture dates that year and I did the effect in every one of those performances. What is recorded here is the version I used in those lectures. By the following season I'd changed the lecture and since then I've used the effect only at an occasional hospitality suite. Still, in its place, I highly recommend the piece.

next table were attendees. After the performance, while standing in the lobby, one of the fellow magicians approached me. To this day his corn- ment confounds me. He said, "You must have done that a long time. I can understand how you can stick your finger into the deck and take the Aces out of the middle but how are you able to hold a break? It looks like you're doing nothing." You can decide whether the comment was a compliment or an insult. You can, however, have confidence that the responses of lay audiences are less ambiguous.

JUNE 4, 1973 FINAL

FOR ALL the effort, published and otherwise, Paul Curry's "Open Prediction" plot and Stewart James' condition-defining "Fifty-One Faces North" have drawn from the fraternity, Marlo's variation, the Spectator's Open Prediction (suggested obliquely in The Cardician, 1953, page 189, and directly in The Hierophant, No. 1, 1969, page 12) has elicited relatively little response. Nor- mally, one might conclude this meant the variation was unappealing. In this instance, what I believe it means is that the variation is too challenging. I like a challenge, so here goes. It has a cocktail-party oriented blocking. As described it has seen perhaps fifty or sixty performances. The patter was transcribed from an audiotape created at a hospitality cocktail party for Miles Labs. It is a composite of three performances. Whatever you think of the method and handling, the presentation sets it apart as something special.

SET-UP: Begin with a deck in a memorized or calculated stack. I'm now using the Bart Harding stack (published as a monograph by Harding in 1962, later contributed to the December 1988 issue of The Magic Circulrzr, Vol. 82, No. 89 1, page 246, and currently available from Alan Shaxon with his additional ideas and application). I prefer Harding's stack because it allows me to quickly calculate the position of any card from its suit and value. (I originally used the so-called Si Stebbins stack, from which such calculations are less easily made.) If you know another stack, feel free to substitute it. I don't advise sequential or new-deck order as they can't be easily destroyed by a brief shuffle performed by a spectator. (You'll understand why this matters as the explanation proceeds.)

I began my patter for hospitality-room groups, "By now you've probably figured out that what you're seeing are not just card tricks but magical vignettes featur- ing playing cards. This next diversion is unique. If you live a hundred more years-and I hope you do-and see a thousand more magicians-you hope you don't-you're unlikely to witness anything like this again. It highlights one of life's interesting conflicts: fairness and risk. As successful businessmen, I'm sure you'll understand."

"To begin, either one of us could make a prediction. Since I'm the performer, it would be expected of me and fair if 1 did it. Letting you do it is riskier and, therefore, more exciting; so you name a card. [Spectator does so.] Very good! But to be fair, I have to offer you the opportunity to change your mind."

After you learn the spectator's choice say, "King of Clubs [or whatever is chosen] it is." Using simple estimation, casually cut the deck, bringing the card to the bottom or very near it. Glimpse the bottom card and determine how far off you are. At the same time say, "Did you see that card or did you just think of it?" Displace the remaining cards to the top, bringing the predicted card to the bottom unbeknownst to your audience. Justify your brief look at the cards by saying, "You understand, it wouldn't be fair if you know where the card is. In fact, before you start, one of us should really shuffle the deck. I probably shuffle better than you do, which might increase the risk, but you might not quite trust me. I can't take that risk, so you shuffle-if you think that would be fairer?" Get the spectator to agree to shuffle.

Depending on angles, use a lefi-handed Gambler's Cop or Bottom Palm to steal the predicted card. Hand the deck to the spectator to shuffle. While he does so, put your hands behind your back and load the card, its face toward your arm, into your lefi sleeve.

NOTE: On one occasion I wanted to use this effect at a ~ o o l party, where a jacket would have been inappropriate. I wrapped two magnets in gaffer's tape and pinned one inside the back of my left trousers leg, at the height where my left hand hangs when relaxed. The second magnet adhered to the first through the cloth and I was able to hold out the card by trapping it between the magnets. Sliding it out when I needed it again was reasonably easy. File this away. You never know when it might come in handy.

Returning to the patter: "Now I could deal through the deck and look for the King of Clubs or I could let you do it. Which would be fairer?" The spectator should say himself. "Okay, you'll deal; but would it be fairer if you dealt face up, so everyone can see and keep things honest, or face down? You could miss it by mistake." Get the spectator to agree to face up.

(1 "Turn the cards up one at a time and deal them into my hand." After about ten cards have been dealt into your left hand, interject, "Hold on a moment-as you're dealing through, I could tell you when you should stop, or you can choose when you should stop. One way or the other, somewhere along the way you should stop. Which do you think would be fairer? In this case, 1 think, fairer and riskier coincide."

7 While you're talking, drop your left hand to your side 1 74 and add the sleeved card face down under the face-up packet (Figure 174). This sounds more difficult than it is. Try it a few times and you'll see what I mean. Square the packet before you allow the spectator to continue the deal. He will agree that he should choose when the deal should stop. Say, "Have it your way. Continue looking." Eventually, the spectator will stop. If he doesn't stop by mid-deck, encourage him to do so.

8 When the spectator stops, say, "To be fair I have to offer to let you change your mind. [Assuming he doesn't change his mind.] Deal the next card face down. [AJer he deals:] Before you continue, let's keep this one in view like this, where we can see it, just to be fair." Out-jog the face-down card on the packet.

9 Allow five or six more cards to be dealt, then stop the spectator again with, "You know what? Hold on a minute. Dealing one at a time is very suspenseful and all, but you've already made your choice. To save time, turn all the cards face up and give me four or five at a time, but look closely for the King of Clubs." The spectator will eventually run out of cards.

10 Indicating the out-jogged card say, "Neither one of us knows at this point if this card is the one you predicted or if there simply was no King of Clubs in this deck." Slowly rotate the jogged card out of the deck and hold it at your right fingertips. "You understand the risk here? If your prediction is wrong, you're gonna look kinda bad. But if your prediction is right, I'm gonna look very, very good. That being the case, which would be fairer: if I turn it over or if you do?" Get the spectator to agree to turn over the card.

1 1 Place the face-down card onto the face of the face-up deck, jogged to the right for half its width. Hold out your right hand to illustrate how the spectator is to hold out his.

12 "Hold out your hand." While you're doing this and he moves to comply, loosen the bottom card in preparation for a Bottom Deal. When the spectator has his hand out, execute a Back Right Bottom Deal with a full wrist turn, extracting the bottom card at the near right corner. In other words, hold onto the card you

intend to deal with your right fingers and move the left hand away, turning it palm down as it leaves. Don't look at your hands and don't rush. Your patter, however, should continue quickly: "Keep your first finger on the card but don't look yet. I don't want to be too close when it happens." Place the dealt card onto the spectator's palm, gesturing with your lefi first finger to show how he is to put a finger on its back.

NOTE: 'The later evolution of my Back Right Bottom Deal, without the loosening or the full wrist turn, appears in Phtehoard Z'eyen- >ions (page 19). The earlier version, described above, is better suited to this effect but has less general utility. Habit being a powerful force, I still use the Back Right Take, as described, with the heavy wrist turn, but I no longer loosen the bottom card unless the cards feel notably sticky. The Dalcy Left- Take, Left-hand Bottom Deal, cited earlier, or the Jennings T.N.'I: Bottom Deal from Dai Vernon's Kevehtions ((1984, page ii) and 7i;e C h i c Magic of Lnr~y Jennings (1 986, page 14 1) would serve almost as well.

IS As you step away, move your left thumb to the back of the reversed card on the deck. Pull that card to the left, riding it around the left edge of the pack (Figure 175) as you partially turn the deck face down in your hand. The action is like the beginning of a Hofiinser-Herrmann Pass: Your left fingers, at the right side, pull down on the side of the deck, rotating it until the side of the deck lies flat against the face of the reversed card (Figure 176). You can then pull the reversed card around the side of the deck, revolving it face up and sliding it under the face-up deck (Figure 177). Allow the deck to settle face up, back into dealing position (Figure 178). Performed as your hand falls to your side and as you make a body turn to the left it is well covered but it is not an invisible move.

Pretend the spectator has said something and respond, "You know, you're right, we both shared the risk, we should both share the reward. It's only fair." Turn the deck up where you can see its face. Look at the faces of the cards again as you approach your helper. "King of Clubs, hum." With a sense of trepidation, say, "Go ahead, look." As soon as the spectator turns up the card, give him the Queen Anne salute. In other words, drop to one knee and bow your head as though you were about to be knighted. It's a rather exaggerated bow that also shows humility.

NO?-ES: If you are performing walk-around and don't want to re-stack the deck after every performance, it takes only minor patter adjustment to convert this efkct to a standard Open Prediction treatment. It works well in thar form also.

If you are confident in your ability, you can do the effect without a stack. I have on occasion. As you start talking about making predictions, spread the deck between your hands, looking at the faces as ifyou're considering which card you might predict. Whcn the spectator states his choice, pretend not to hear it. Actually, locate the card, get a break above it and perform aTTurn- over Pass as you drop your hands saying, "And your prediction is.. .?"

Execute a Top Palm and hand the deck to the spectator to shuffle. Do the Simulated Shuffle Palm Cover with your right hand a few times and conclude with a I'alm Transfer to left-hand Gambler's Cop. (This sequence is fully detailed on page 188.) It is a pattern I use a lot, so I am confident of its deceptiveness. It appears to show both hands empty. Pick up the action at Step 4, placing your hands behind your back and loading the card into your sleeve.

There is a tendency to feel guilty when you deal the bottom card. The action is under surprisingly little scrutiny. Remember, the spectator thinks he's seen every card you're holding. As long as he's convinced your hands are empty except for the deck, a switch would explain nothing, so he's not looking for one.

This is one they'll talk about. After all, you told them how good it would be. Don't be surprised when they agree.

SECOND DEALING- A DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVE

IN SECOND D m , as in Bottom Deals, an observant viewer can discern some of the distinguishing elements. Such an observer would be recognizing appearance factors. As in all False Deals, these factors are as relevant to legitimate deals as false ones. For that reason, many of the observations made in the grip discussion on the Bottom Deal apply to Second Deals as well. They will not be restated here. Instead, after a few comparative comments and a brief historical overview, I will proceed to the technical considerations. Ultimately, it is the "technical" factors that are defining for magical purposes.

APPEARANCE FACTORS

GRIP

Full Grip, Mechanic's Grip, S.F. Grip, Erdnase Grip, Straddle Grip, Master Grip, Modified Erdnase Grip, Pseudo Grip and No Grip are all possible for Second Deals. Techniques for dealing Tabled Seconds have also seen print (thanks to Ed Marlo in The Cardician, page 69, and Second, Centers, Bottoms, page 94). These grips and others are all viable because grip is a less crucial matter in dealing Sec- onds than in dealing Bottoms. The reasons are, or become, apparent to anyone learning both types of deals. Stated simply, when dealing Bottoms, generally one must control the entire deck. When dealing Seconds, only the top portion of the deck must be controlled to a greater degree than would be required during a legitimate deal. Once one has reasonable mastery of their chosen method, the hand receives enough tactile feedback to allow the necessary added degree of control to be exercised with minimal adjustment, grip notwithstanding. That

said, it remains true that some grips lend themselves more readily to some techniques than others. These combinative considerations become readily apparent once one begins adapting a given technique to a particular grip. Very little more need be said about grip in the context of Second Dealing, so we can move on.

TAKE

Standard Take, Stud Takes (both Overhand and Underhand) and No Take or One-Handed are all as useful to the Second Dealer as to the Bottom Dealer. In addition, End Take and Snap-Over Deals are fairly common for the Second Deal (see LePaul's Improved Method in The Card Magic of LePaul, 1959, page 85, and the Joe Berg Second Deal in Volume 2 of The Tarbell Course in Magic, page 192, as examples). It is also worth mention that there are a number of more "flourishy" Takes, including the Shooting Second Deal (see "A Rapid One-Hand Second Deal," The CardMagic ofLe Paul, page 89), the Chinese Second Deal (Dai Vernon? Inner Secrets of Card Magic, 1959, page 71) and the unattributed D'Amico "Black Jack" Second Deal (Buckley's Card Control, 1946, page 1 19), to name a few. The most important point to make here is that, as much as in the Bottom Deal, the Take grows from application and drives method.

TECHNIQUE FACTORS

Just as the Bottom Deal may be said to distill to two major approaches, Buckle and Strike, so it is with the Second Deal. Nearly all Two-Handed Second Deals are either Push-Off or Strike. Within these broad families are a wide variety of techniques, all of which fall into the category of Push-Off (Two Card, One Card or No Card) or Strike. The following pages will look at some of the more important variations in a more or less systematic way. At the same time, it should be recognized that to a far greater extent than in Bottom Deals, no analysis can be fully comprehensive. This overview should, nevertheless, help to illuminate this poorly understood subject.

COVERT

Playing cards of the type we know today, it is conjectured, were invented in France in the late 1300's. They first became widely available from a source in Basle, Switzerland (ref. Greater Magic) in the mid-1400's. Considering those dates, it is difficult to believe that serious card cheating didn't begin for some fifty years, yet that is as far back as their known published history extends. 1509 is the approximate year the Liber Vagdtorum by Joh. Froschauer was published in Augsburg, Germany. In this booklet are mentioned, albeit most briefly, such practices as false dealing, controlled cutting and concealing cards outside the deck for later use. In Italy, references to dealing the bottom card were cropping

up about the same time, and in the anonymously authored Opera nuoua doue fdcilmente potrdi imparare piu giuochi di mano et altri giuochi piaceuolissimi & gzntili come sipotra leg;ge[n]ab uedere etfacilmente irnparare (published in Flor- ence around 1520) there appears a clear mention of dealing Seconds, along with descriptions of the Slick Card and Shiners. By 1559, in France, there appeared Le mespris & contennement de tous iewc de sort compose Oliuier Gouyn de Poic- tiers, in which not only the practice of dealing from the bottom but also from the center are mentioned. In English, we have G. W.'s A Manifest Detection of the Most Vile and Detestable Use of Diceplay, and Other Practices Like the Same (1 552), which included some card-cheating methods along with the advertised dice cheating; Robert Green's A Notable Discovery of Cozenage (1591), which expanded entertainingly on the previous booklet; and Samuel Rid's The Art ofJugling or Ledgerdemaine (1 6 12). (I am grateful for the remarkable research of Vanni Bossi and Bill Kalush, who have recently discovered the first three works mentioned and provided the information I've given. I have personally only perused a copy of The Art ofJugling or Ledgerdemaine.) To the best of my knowledge, none of these old works offer any technical descriptions of gambling sleights. The methods they relate in any detail are non-sleight-of-hand techniques, which were easier to explain. Nevertheless, the mentions of various False Deals in these works make it clear that they existed in the sixteenth century and probably had since a week after the introduction of playing cards. More to the point, no one, to my knowledge, has ever resolved which came first, the Two-Card Push-Off or the Strike type Deal. The earliest, however vague, reference to the latter appears in Quinn's Fooh of Fortune (1891) but both Maskelyne (Sharps and Flats, 1894) and Erdnase (The Evert at the Card Table, 1902) describe Push-Off techniques. Still, by 1914, Theodore Hardison (Poker) provides a detailed description of a Strike type Deal. By 1933, Judson Cameron (Cheating at Bridge), was characterizing the Strike approach as "preferred." There are other clues that lend themselves to a line of speculation. The Punch Deal makes Strike type Deals nearly mandatory. That being the case, and since gambling catalogs going back to the 1880's advertise "nail pricks" and Rid mentions that card cheats of his time would "play upon the prick" (though without defining the practice), it is probable that Strike techniques existed and were in use. A more interesting speculation is whether George Devol-stronger on color than on detail-who describes a suspiciously "peg-like gadget in his 1887 memoirs (Forty Years a Gambler on the Mississippi] was describing a Punch. If I understand him correctly, his description suggests that the Punch Deal and thus, in all probability, the Strike type Deal existed as early as 1839, but it almost surely came into existence no later than 1860. With this matter unresolved, I'll dismiss it and begin my exploration with the Push-Off approach because, if for no other reason, it fits my didactic preference.

~'usH-OFF-LC~ me begin by saying that my developmental view of the Push- Off approach is chronologically incorrect and I know it. I take this seemingly odd approach because it helps my understanding of the Second Deal. I could readily appreciate argument for a different perspective. What is important to me is functional relationship rather than chronology. I pay homage to the developmental relationship only in passing, as it is largely irrelevant for the purposes of magic. There are, historically, remarkably few magic-related uses of the Second Deal and in nearly all instances method is irrelevant to the application.

'Ityo CARD PUSH-OFF-The Two-Card Push-Off Second Deal is well exem- plified by two major approaches. One is best typified by the description in Erdnase (page 5 8 ) , where the deck is beveled, giving the thumb access to the front edge of the top two cards. The other is described in Expert Card Technique (pages 13-16), where the thumb's pressure forces some of its flesh over the edge of the top card until it engages the second card. There is even a combined technique described in BucMey's Card Control (page 120). These approaches are all difficult to execute reliably because one must confront many variables. The brand and condition of the deck, the moisture and softness of the thumb's skin and the number of cards in the deck all have significant impact for even the most experienced Two-Card Push-Off Dealer. I surmise that, were it not for the excellent illusion these deals create, even given the characteristic push-off action common to such deals, they might well have fallen completely from favor. As it is, the Two-Card Push-Off Second Deal has fallen from most popular (based on the literature) to a distant third behind other techniques (based on personal observation). Such is the stuff of progress.

ONE-CARD PUSH-OFF-Many of what are often thought of as Two-Card Push-Off techniques could more accurately be called One-Card Push-Off or Multi-Card Push-Off techniques, depending on one's perspective. I prefer the designation One-Card Push-OK The literature in the earliest period of their published development (Sharps and Flats, The &pert at the Card Table and later in Marlo's Side Push-Off Second Deal, page 41 of Second, Centers, Bottoms) called for pushing off cards from the top of the deck in a rough spread. The thumb could then be placed on the upper card while the fingers of the gripping hand immobilized, or sometimes helped to push out, the second card. The taking hand could then remove the second card while the top card was retained or adjusted back toward the top of the deck. Such deals were fairly easy of execution but produced only a limited illusion, even of the negative type. (Just as a reminder, a negative illusion is the appearance that the top card must have been taken because no other card could have been.) Perhaps the best example of this type of deal is described as "Another method on page 59 of Erdnase. Deals of

this type have completely fallen from favor, with the exception of a few individuals who still use this approach for End-Take style Deals.

The One-Card Push-Off techniques that remain and grow in popularity today are the progeny of the Vernon New Theory Second Deal (Dai Vernon? Further Inner Secrets of CkrdMagic, 1961, page 52). Ron Bauer has discovered that the essence of Vernon's New Theory Second appears in Dariel Fitzkee's translation of Maurice Sardina's 1 949 book, The Magic o f Rezvani, attributed to Rezvani (page 26). It is worth mention that Charlie Miller is therein reported to have been impressed with Rezvani's performance. In light of the close association between Miller and Vernon, it is difficult to believe that Vernon would not have been made aware of Miller's observations prior to 196 1. Reviewing the Fitzkee description will permit each reader to reach his own conclusions about how much Vernon may have added to or refined the then ten-year- old technique. My judgment is that, while poorly described, all but the Take mechanics are the same, though the timing of the top-card movement may be argued. It is, nevertheless, likely that Vernon, not having witnessed the Rez- vani performance, may have re-invented Rezvani's technique based largely, if not solely, on Miller's description.

In any case, my friend Russell Barnhart has published his treatment of the One- Card Push-Off in a pamphlet called Two Second Deak (1974). Derek Dingle has a One-Handed version that combines elements of the comical "Snow-Shoe Second with the "New Theory" or One-Card Push-Off to produce a Deal that is no joke. It has one of the finest Positive Illusions of any deal I've ever seen. It appeared as "New Theory on Vernon's New Theory Second Deal" in Derek's 1982 opus, The Complete Works ofDerek Dingle (page 160). My own treatment of the New Theory Second addresses the problems many experienced with the Vernon deal: ease and reliability. Many found the Vernon deal exceptionally difficult because deck condition was such a major issue, making the deal unre- liable because one too often came up "empty" (with no card at all). Much of the problem is psychological because the fundamental, defining element of the New Theory Second is easy. The New Theory, in my opinion, is that the tip of the thumb can push the top card while the inner part, near the joint, pushes the second card. I am persuaded that my Sure Theory Second Deal solves all of the problems. It is, in my biased opinion, the best of the breed to date (see Pasteboard Perpensions, page 28).

NO PUSH-OFF OR DM THUMB-If one conceives of the relationship between Two-Card Push-Off and One-Card Push-Off Deals as purely numerical, the next logical thought is a No-Card Push-OE As it happens, there are No-Card Push-Off Deals. They can be thought of as bridging the gap between Push-Off Deals and Strike type Deals. The three principal No-Card Push-Off

deals are the Master Method of Walter Scott (The Phantom of The Card Table, circa 1930, page 1 O), the Ghostly Second of Vynn Boyar (Ghostly Second, 1949) and the No -'lbuch Theory Second of Marlo (Second, Centers, Bottoms, page 124). These techniques incorporate a theory that has come to be known as "Dead Thumb." They are actually Strike Deals. They are called Dead Thumb because the thumb of the gripping hand moves only because the thumb of the taking hand pushes it. I confess that the fundamental notion behind these deals has never persuaded me. That notion, to wit, if no catd is pushed off, the only card that could have been taken is the top card, is at the core of all Dead Thumb Deals. In my opinion, building the entire theory of a deal on a negative illusion is a highly questionable practice. Moreover, having seen a handful of individuals perform such deals and having experimented with them myself, I remain unconvinced that they succeed even on their own terms. It may even be argued that "freezing" the thumb draws undue focus to the top of the deck.

S ~ N K E - I ~ you aren't convinced by the logic or illusion created by Dead 'Thumb Deals, you can go back to pushing off the top card, but this time with no effort to move the second card. Once the top card is out of the way, however slightly, one can "strike" the second catd with the side of the taking thumb, driving it over the fingers' side of the deck. When the edge of the struck card is over far enough, the second finger and thumb of the taking hand can complete the removal of the card. While this is done, the thumb of the gripping hand can pull the top card back flush with the deck. That's the essence of all Strike Deals. In the heyday of the Strike Deal, dealers would brag about how little they moved the top card, how fine their "brief" was. This attitude was born of the same misguided notion as the Dead Thumb Deals: If the top card does not move, then it must be the top card being dealt. When I first learned the Strike Second Deal (from Expert Card Technique) I learned it this way. Boy, was I wrong.

T A K E - S O ~ ~ time in the early 1960's I met and became friendly with Francis Carlyle. When he saw that I could already deal an "acceptable" Second, and a Bottom (after a fashion), he elected to "set me straight." It was Francis who taught me the idea of the Take Second Deal. (The designation is mine though the technique was his.) Francis insisted that it didn't matter how far you opened the brief as long as you opened it at the right time. According to him, the right time was when the thumb of the taking hand was over it. He reasoned that as long as the thumb was over it, a viewer could not determine the size of the brief. The outgrowth of this thesis is that the brief could be opened wide enough to permit the entire pad of the taking hand's thumb to contact the second card. The gripping hand's thumb could then wait until after the taking hand's second finger had a hold on the second card before pulling the top card back. This Take approach allows a much softer, smoother,

more reliable and more natural looking Deal. The interesting thing is that many former Strike Dealers, once putting ego aside, have gradually converted to more Take style Deals without acknowledging, or even necessarily recognizing, that they have done so. It has never been clear to me whether Carlyle actually invented this modified approach. I know he claimed the specifics of his way of dealing it, but perhaps not the underlying concept. He never published this technique but after his death it was included in Roger Pierre's The Magic of Francis Carlyle (1 975, page 163) without resolving the scope of Francis' claim. Finally, while he describes a form of Strike Deal, Bill Simon, in his book Effective CardMagic, offers the best pedagogical approach to Second Dealing I have ever read. While the text may or may not have been written by Jean Hugard, the pedagogy was Simon's. It should be required reading for anyone who wants to learn to do a Second Deal. He also describes some of the most interesting Second Deal effects extant.

SIDE S1'RIKE-A more obscure form of Strike Deal, not often seen, moves the point where contact is made to the finger-side edge of the deck. There are few descriptions of this type of deal in print (but see Marlo's Movie Second and Deep Second in Second, Centers, Bottoms, pages 54 and 56 respectively). While I've never put in any serious work on this type of Deal, the few people I've seen use them have gotten a strong negative illusion from a very natural looking Deal. Slydini had a version (New York Magic Symposium, Close-Up Collection One, 1982, page 65). Krenzel's version of Slydini's Deal appears in the same volume (page 68). Finally, in Richard Turner's two-volume video, The Cheat, he performs an interesting hybrid of the Push-Off and Side Strike techniques. The Side Strike concept is worthy of further exploration.

OVERT The scope of action elements related to Second Deal techniques is wider than those for Bottom Deals. The definition of such elements, however, remains the same: everything and anything that makes a deal easier, smoother or more efficient, except techniques addressed at creating deceptiveness or illusion. Deceptiveness and illusion relate to cover. Because the scope of this topic is so wide, I can no more readily take a systematic approach here than I could for the Bottom Deal, however useful such an analysis would be. This section will, nevertheless, touch on the major points.

Most of the Action elements applicable to the Bottom Deal apply to Second Deals as well. In fact, some, such as the Necktie, are more effective. Wrist Swinging, Wrist Turning, Bobbing and Reverse Necktieing (an approach advocated by Simon Lovell in Second to None: A Specialist Book on the Art of Second

Dealing, 1993) are also useful to the Second Dealer when used judiciously. A problem tends to arise when it is assumed that if a little action is good, more is better. As a result, some False Dealers begin to look like sailors sending sema- phore. 'l'hey fail to realize that their actions become "tells" that can be read from across the room. What is most troubling about the excessive action is that it is so prevalent many perpetrators have only a vague idea of why they are using it. Why, as an example, would one work on a Dead Thumb Second and then hide the illusion they've worked so hard to perfect by taking the top card out of view with a Necktie? Is there some fundamental flaw in their Second Deal that must be covered, or is it that they've chosen deals that produce no illusion and are trying to hide that fact? If lack of illusion is the problem, and one can't, for whatever reason, use a more deceptive deal, then a small Necktie action is sufficient. If a lazy top card is the problem, f~u the problem, don't incorporate a Wrist Swing or, worse, an Elbow Swing. One might add an action to match one's Bottom Deal but that's a different issue. You get the idea. The state of Second Deal development has advanced far enough to make the need for heavy action rare. My best advice is to confine any action except Carry to +one deck- thickness up and down, &one deck-width side to side and *a half deck-length front to back. That's about a three inch by six inch by six inch space. More is excessive. Less is more.

There are at least three recurrent problems to be faced in efforts to create deceptive Second Deals. These are the timing and motion of opening the brief in a Strike or Take Second; the difference in the action of the returning thumb after dealing a Top, when compared to a Second; and the noise due to friction that occurs when the second card is dealt but not when the top card is dealt. I am persuaded that the Take Second approach holds the answer to the first problem. My most recent efforts (see the Option Second Deal, page 254) are as close to a perfect answer as I know to this problem in a Strike type Deal.

The second problem, thumb action disparity, has, to my knowledge, never been properly addressed in print. The advice I've heard, from those "experts" who have spoken on the issue, is "Make the Top look like the Second." In other words, slide the thumb back after each card is dealt, since you have to slide it back after the second card is dealt. I disagree. To my way of thinking, this becomes a tell, even when you're not False Dealing. It is better to learn to use the thumb to pull the top card back only as far as necessary for the gripping fingers to contact the edge. The left fingers can then take over pulling the top card square, leaving the thumb free to lift and return to its position on top of the deck in preparation for the next deal. This is much closer to what the thumb does after a normal deal.

It requires some work to break the old habit of sliding the thumb, if that's how you learned, but it's worth it for the improved appearance.

The third problem, noise, is, in my experience, an over emphasized drawback for magicians. It is rarely quiet enough, or the audience close enough, for a viewer to hear the noise discrepancy. That's not to say it does not exist. In the few instances where the problem could become pertinent, one need only talk while dealing to mask it. I hope that noise is the biggest problem I ever face in a Second Deal.

When the problems cited above are coupled with the goal of creating a visual illusion, they combine to become a formidable task indeed. Nevertheless, the creation of a visual illusion that the top card is being taken when the second card is actually dealt is key and must be addressed. As in the Bottom Deal, both positive and negative illusions are possible. Creating the visual and psychological conviction that the top card must have been taken because no other card could have been, is still defined as a negative illusion. This differs markedly, as it does in the Bottom Deal, from the more pure, affirmative optical illusion that the top card is being taken, which constitutes a positive illusion. In the case of the Second Deal, a positive illusion is assuredly attainable. Properly executed-no mean feat-the New Theory Deal and other One-Card Push-Offs (Barnhart's, Dingle's and mine) can all create a positive illusion. The Top-Card Chase Second Deal (sometimes attributed to Dr. Elliott but often associated with Persi Diaconis and described by Frank Garcia as the All-Angle Second Deal in Super Subtle CardMiracles, 1973, page 9 1) is believed by some to create a positive illusion. The defining element of the Chase Deal is that the top card moves after the second card, in the direction of the egress of the second card, as the second card is being taken off the deck. The object behind this practice is to create an improved visual illusion. I have never seen this alleged illusion myself. I think the "Chase" action creates a good psychological, though negative, illusion, but that's all.

In sum, the Second Deal is easier to gain basic proficiency with than the Bottom Deal. This can mislead one to conclude that the Second Deal is easy to master. The things that make Second Dealing difficult are the fine points. It can take years to analyze, learn and coordinate all the actions and covers required to turn a working Second Deal into a smooth, reliable, natural and deceptive one. Learning to have an objective eye may be the most difficult skill of all when it comes to Second Deals. In spite of the heretofore limited applications to which the Second Deal has been harnessed, I am glad I have spent the time I have working on them. Applications will come another day. A few are included here for your edification and to prove the point.

THE MOON 1s MADE OF BLUE CHEESE

SEPTEMBER 19, 1971 ALPHA

THIS EFFECT grew out of playing with a Hideo Kato effect, "Where Has It Gone?" (Genii, Vol. 34, No. 1 , September, 1969, page 16). A Marlo version later appeared in Hierophant, No. 2 (1970, page 63) under the name, "Over Here of Course!" This Marlo effort was followed by a Roy Walton treatment called, "Gone to Earth" (Hierophant, No. 4, 1970, page 187). In the same issue Marlo replied to the Walton approach with "Fly Me to the Moon" (page 189). All these treatments are methodological explorations. In any case, I liked the original Kato effect but felt it needed a blow-ofE This approach does it. It's a cute interlude that has been effective as part of a longer program of effects. It's also an opportunity to use your Second Deal in an unusual way for an effect that is surely worth doing for lay audiences. The explanation of the routine may make it sound very sleight-intensive. Clearly, the routine is not without its technical demands, but to the eyes of the spectators it appears very clean.

EFFECT: From a shuffled deck, the performer deals a group of fourteen cards alternately face up and face down. A spectator names a card from the group. The card is made to vanish. When it reappears, its back has changed color and it is the only card in the deck with an odd back.

REQUIREMENTS: Seven odd-backed cards are needed, preferably blue- backed cards in a red-backed deck. It doesn't matter what the seven cards are, but you should know their identities, so you can move their red-backed

duplicates to the top of the deck or remove them. This allows you to go into the routine in the middle of a series of other effects.

SIT-UP: Place the seven odd-backed cards on the bottom of the deck and remember the top and bottom cards of the seven. Either openly or prior to performance, do one Off-Center Faro Shuffle (Straddle type) and Slough-Off from the bottom. This alternates the blue (odd-backed) cards at the bottom of the deck. Spread through the deck face up until you reach the top card of the seven blue-backers. Check to make certain there are no duplicates among the alternated group; there should not be. If there are, rearrange the cards to eliminate the duplications. In any case, spread one card beyond the last blue-backed card and cut the cards at that point. This places the alternated set-up second through fourteenth from the top. Setting up in this manner makes it possible to go into the routine during a series of effects. If that isn't a consideration, use whatever method you like to reach the necessary arrangement.

Deal an Underhand, Necktie, Stud Second and place the dealt card face up on the table. Lower the deck and deal the new top card face down onto the face-up card. Continue dealing in this manner until you see the remembered bottom card of the seven odd-backs appear face up. Deal one more face-down card.

NO'I'E: This method of concealing odd-backs with a Necktie Stud Second was used by Alex Elmsley in a trick titled "A Strange Story" that he came up with around 1964. It was contained in a set of his private notes that circulated through the underground for years. See The Collected Works of Alex Elmslg M h m e I, page 401. W'hile I was not aware that Elmsley had developed the idea, I'm happy to recognize his claim. This is not the only way to get to this position. You could load the odd cards on the bottom of the deck, eliminate the Faro and alternate Underhand Stud Bottoms and tops to create the same situation. I prefer the Second Deal approach.

Place the deck aside and pick up the packet. Spread the cards between your hands and have someone name any face-up card.

As soon as it's named, form a break under it and remember the face-up card above it. Close the spread, maintaining the break.

Cut the packet, bringing the named card lowermost in the packet. This cut should be one of several that apparently rearrange the cards in a random manner.

Deal the packet into two piles, one face down, one face up, until you see the card you noted (not the selection, but the one before it). Deal it normally onto the face-up pile but deal the next two cards (the final two) as one onto the face-down pile. This is technically a Double Deal but with few of the typical alignment issues. This deal results in showing that the named card has vanished

from the face-up group it was in. However, suspicion will naturally turn to the hce-down cards.

Pick up the face-down packet and form a break under the top three cards. This is fairly easy because the top two create an auto-break. Turn the packet face up, maintaining the break. (The Tenkai-Marlo Pivot-Step, page 75, will do the job quite well.) Begin to deal the cards face up onto the face-up pile, in-jogging the first card dealt, and dealing two cards as one, just before you reach the bottom card (this is facilitated by the break).

Pick-up the packet, forming a break below the in-jogged card, and cut the packet at the break. Turn the packet face down and slowly spread off cards from the top until the face-up selection is reached.

NOTE: If you object to the unexplained cut, you can perform a Turnover Pass. I actually prefer the Pass, but I make the choice based on the angles. While it is true that the cut is unjustified, it is also not particularly suspicious. If you handle it casually, it will go by without arousing undue thought in the audience. It does not, in my experience, weaken the effect.

With your right hand, remove the selection and lay it face up on the table. You can spread the top card of the left-hand packet safely. As you place the selection on the table, necktie the packet slightly and push off two cards from the top of the left hand's packet, securing a break below them, between the regular and odd-backed cards.

Lap or, if standing, use a Gambler's Cop to steal all the cards below the break as you gesture toward the selection. Add the remainder of the packet to the deck and spread it face down as you comment that if any of the other cards had been named they would have turned face up. "But they didn't vanish. When something vanishes it's because it wasn't directed elsewhere, so it goes to the moon. And, of course, anything that goes to the moon is affected by the color of the moon; and the moon is made of blue cheese." Reveal the selection to be odd- backed as you say, "blue cheese." "This may not explain much to you, but it does to me. Anyway, that's my story and I'm stickin' to it."

NOTE: This closing bit of patter is obvious nonsense that should be delivered with your tongue firmly planted in your cheek. After all, nonsense can be fun and enjoyable. Isn't that why we do this stuff? The final comment, "That's my story.. ." was closely associated with Dai Vernon. When I showed him this effect in the early 1990's, he broke into a big toothy grin and launched into a story about the origin of the line. Unfortunately, as was his wont, he got sidetracked into a different story and I never did learn its origin.

SYMPATHETIC BLACKS SEPTEMBER 10,197 1

BETA

IN VOL. 8, No. 12, September 1908, of Ellis Stanyon's Magic (page 90) he discusses the use of a glass with a tinfoil-backed card. This special card effectively converts a normal glass into a mirror glass. Applying this method to accomplishing a packet switch, I believe it possible that a method was developed for the effect known as "Sympathetic Clubs." I have not, however, been able to determine where this method may have seen print. The trick, accomplished with double-faced cards, has, through association, occasionally been attributed to Nate Leipzig (see Hilliard's Greater Magic, 1938, page 562; and Dai Vernon? Tribute to Nate Leipzig by Lewis Ganson, 1963, page 176). However, in response to the appearance of the trick under Leipzig's name in Greater Magic, Ted Annemann, in Thejinx (No. 53, February 1939, page 380), published a full description of the trick while firmly asserting that it was the invention of British professional Herbert Milton. While Milton never published or autho- rized publication of the trick, he is on record as having performed it at a Magic Circle club meeting on October 6, 1920 (see The Magic Wand, Vol. E, No. 9, November 1920, page 149); and during Leipzig's 1922 British tour the two men met and traded ideas, as attested by Peter Warlock, who was present at Milton's 1920 performance of the effect and remained friendly with him throughout his life. Warlock, in reminiscing about Milton in the Magic Circular (No. 604, April 1960, page 118), wrote, "To Leipzig, permission was given for the use of 'Sympathetic Clubs', and it proved to be one of the most popular items in this great artiste's repertoire." Thus, shortly after his meetings with Milton in 1922, we find Leipzig ordering a set of the necessary double-faced cards from Will

Goldston (see Dai Vernon? Tkibute to Nate Leipzk, page 177). Clear attributions of the effect to Milton by Dr. Jacob Daley (see Phoenix, No. 21 8 , December 15, 1950, page 870) and Ted Annemann, two of Leipzig's acquaintances in the U.S., leave little room for further argument, especially in the absence of any claim of origination by Leipzig himself This brings us to the present effort.

EFFECT: The thirteen Clubs are removed from a deck that has been shuffled by both the performer and a spectator. They are openly arranged in numerical sequence, shown, dealt into a face-down pile and placed aside. The thirteen Spades are also removed, in whatever order they happen to fall in the deck. They may be mixed. The spectator is permitted to chose one of the Spades, which is openly reversed in its packet. After the appropriate magical gestures and incan- tations, the Clubs are revealed to match the arrangement of the Spades in all particulars, including the value and position of the reversed card.

SET-UP: Separate the black cards from the reds and place the Spades in the following order: 8-King-3-Ace-6-5-7-4-2-9-Jack-1 0-Queen. The Clubs, in no particular order, should be intermixed with the Spades. Thus, from top to face, the order is Spades (in the listed order, the Eight is the top card of the deck) with Clubs intermixed, then the red balance.

Give the deck a few Zarrow Shuffles. (See the discussion of ideal shuffle combinations on page 294.) Split the deck for one last shuffle, dividing it so one packet contains all the blacks, the other all the reds. Change your mind and push the halves of the deck toward a spectator and let him riffle them into each other. This simply disperses the Spades and Clubs throughout the deck without altering their order. This is the Jordan-Finley Shuffle Principle.

HISTORICAL NOTE: While Karl Fulves discusses this subject in far greater detail in Charles T jorhn: Collected Tricks (1 975, page 1 19), and seems to reach another conclusion, Henry Hardin who shared a friendship with both Jordan and Arthur Finley (a fact attested to in Thejim, No. 97, page 596; also see No. 1 1 9, page 70 1, which offers a Hardin trick that displays his interest in simulated shuffles) would seem to provide the path through which Jordan exchanged ideas with Finley. While it was Ruhs Steele who first raised questions about the source of some of the Jordan material, it was well known, through Vernon, Sam Schwartz and other New York magicians, that Finley freely shared his work on the C. 0. Williams idea that appeared in Stanyon's Magic (Vol. XIII, No. 12, September 19 13, page 100, item 14), which was the forerunner of Jordan's work, as he hlly acknowledged in his introduction to Thirty CamdMysteries. Finley's desire to keep his name out of print provides motive for Finley allowing Jordan's uncontested claim to the principle.

Openly go through the deck and remove the entire Club suit, laying them in a face-down pile on the table. Be carehl not to disturb the order of the Spades. When you're done, square the talon and place it aside.

Pick up the face-down Club pile and openly arrange it in numeric sequence without revealing that sequence. The Ace should be at the face of the packet, followed by the Two, etc. Make it seem a bit difficult to arrange the order of the cards, perhaps making a mistake and then correcting it. You might also wish to comment that the Ace can be either high or low.

Explain that you will show the cards in order. Take the packet face up into your right hand in Deep Overhand Grip. You are going to go through the cards quickly and nonchalantly, showing their order. In the process, you are going to rearrange the order in a definite way without the spectators realizing it. The following list, which must be memorized, represents the sequence you will execute:

RELEASE: A-3-6-7-9-1- - Q-K - -

HOLD: 2-4-5-8-1 0

You will note that the Seven and Jack are underlined twice to indicate that two cards are dropped onto them. The Six is underlined only once, indicating that only one card is dropped onto it. The sequence should be performed at a brisk pace, as follows: Peel off the Ace fairly. Peel off the Two but steal it back under the right-hand packet and hold a right thumb break; this is done as you peel off the Three legitimately. Peel off the Four but take it under the packet adding it below the Two, still maintaining the break, as you peel off the Five. Steal the Five back under the packet but hold a separate right thumb break as you peel off the Six. Release the Five onto the Six as you peel off the Seven. Drop the Two and Four onto the Seven as you peel off the Eight. Steal the Eight under the packet as you peel off the Nine legitimately onto the Two, forming a right thumb break between the Eight and the right-hand packet. Peel off the Ten but steal it back under the packet, adding it below the Eight as you peel off the Jack. Drop the Eight and Ten onto the Jack as you peel off the Queen. Peel off the King fairly onto the Queen. The order of the packet, unbeknownst to the audience is, from the face: King-Queen-8-1 0-Jack-9-2-4-7-5-6-3-Ace.

Turn the packet face down in your hands as you comment, "That's it, all the Clubs, in order." Begin to deal them face down rapidly onto the table counting them out loud, one through thirteen, but to this pattern: The first card is dealt with a Bottom Deal. Because it is the first card, Marlo's "Immediate Bottom Deal" (Pallbearer? Review, Second Folio, Winter 1968, page 21 9) works well here, if you are comfortable with the move, but almost any Bottom will serve. The second card is dealt with a Second Deal. The third through eleventh cards

are dealt normally. 'I'he twelfth card you deal is a Bottom, but you have only two cards in your left hand. The last card is counted as thirteen, snapped and used as a scoop to pick up all the cards on the table. The following notation will act as a reminder:

DEAL: Bottom-Second-Top 3- 1 1 -Bottom-Scoop

The scoop is logically acceptable bur the card that is being used as the scoop should be miscalled as the Ace. I start to deal the last card, stop, apparently change my mind, and comment, "And the Ace can be high or low." This miscall of what should be the King (but is actually the Eight) as the Ace is sort of subtle. You don't actually say the card is the Ace. If you did, someone might question it. Stated as a proposition, your statement is true, so people will accept, unevalu- ated, that the card you're using is the Ace. I have never been challenged on this ruse. The order of the packet, from the face, is now: 8-King-3-Ace-6-5-7- 4-2-9-Jack-10-Queen. This is the opposite or mirror order to the Spades.

'The tabled cards, having been scooped up, are in general disarray in your hands. Spread them hrther and obtain a break under the seventh card from either end of the spread, the Seven of Clubs, as you say, "All thirteen Clubs in perfect numerical sequence." Set up for Marlo's Future Reverse as follows:

You begin by side-jogging the card, using the dynamics of the Side Steal. I've described these in detail on page 182, so I'll not redescribe them here. The card should be extracted far enough to allow you to clip the front right corner between your right third and fourth fingers at the point where the middle knuckle of the fourth finger contacts the side of the third finger. Do this as rapidly as you can, but don't yet do the reverse. When you reach that position, stop the steal and transfer your hold on the packet to your right hand alone. With your left hand pick up the deck and give it face up to a spectator, asking him to "Deal through the deck and remove the Spades as you come to them." Don't make any comment about the order of the Spades unless the spectator shows a sign of trying to put them into order or to take them out in groups as they are removed. They should be removed in the order in which they occur but if this is conveyed it will arouse suspicion. As the spectator is removing the Spades, he will also be reversing their order. You must engage in light banter with your other spectators. Do nor insult the individual who is removing the Spades or disturb him in any way unless you must. (Men are a preferable choice for this task, so I use the masculine pronoun. I have found that women tend to be slower and more meticulous about the removal, which slows the effect unnecessarily.) During this period it is fairly easy to perform the Future Reverse. (See Marlo's Futare Reverse pamphlet, 1945.) Since the timing of the move in this piece is non-standard, I'll briefly review the technique here.

MARLO'S FUTURE REVERSE BROKEN FORM

Your left hand re-takes the packet into Dealing Grip. The left first finger must rest across the front of the packet, where it remains in contact with the right fingertips, to help screen the action of the move. Lower the right side of the lower portion of the packet-that is, all the cards below the clipped card-treating the left edge as a hinge (Figure 179). As this occurs, the right fourth finger applies upward pressure on the corner of the clipped card. These two actions combine to cause the left side of the clipped card to move downward. Eventually, the left side of the card will drop far enough to clear the right edge of

177

the lower packet (Figure 180). At that point, the fingers of the left hand apply pressure to the undersurface of the card, causing it to turn over, side for side, onto the lower packet (Figure 181). When this turnover is complete, the lower packet can be reunited with the upper packet, trapping the reversed card between them. You can then finish squaring the packet, which completes the sleight.

In my experience, this technique can either be performed quickly or quietly but not both. I opt for quietly, which demands that you perform it slowly. In part because the move must be performed slowly, both hands remain in contact with the packet for a fairly extended period. Such moments are always problematic, as there is nothing for the spectators to watch except the hands. In this case, because there is another action taking place (the removal of the Spades), the problem is ameliorated, but not completely eliminated. Separat- ing the initial extraction from the

Reversal divides the time during which both hands are in contact with the packet into two shorter periods. The first, covered by the squaring of the packet after it is picked up, allows the extraction and moving of the card into the right-hand Clip Position. I have found it best to wait until the spectator is nearly finished removing the Spades before bringing the hands together again to do the Reverse, and I call attention to the spectator by asking, "You're done?" when you know he's not. Under that cover, the Reversal can be completed. The Future Reverse, in my opinion, is neither completely invisible nor indetectable and, therefore, requires heavy misdirection.

Let's also recognize that the Spade removal process requires well-developed skills in audience management. If you don't have such skills, you are well advised to remove the Spades yourself. This isn't as strong as having an audience member do it but, done quickly with an air of insouciance, it will still play well. The problem with doing it is that it eliminates your opportunity to perform the Future Reverse. This requires that you do the Reverse before you begin the removal process. This is not an insurmountable problem but I have found it better to use Ken Krenzel's Square Reverse (Ajerthougbts, 1975, page 95) because of its rapidity. If you aren't comfortable with managing the spectator's removal of the Spades or with the misdirection necessary for the Future Reverse, I recommend the Krenzel sleight. Since this sleight is not well known, I'm including a brief description.

THE KRENZEL SQUARE REVERSE

While holding a break under the card you wish to reverse, turn your left side toward your audience. Adjusting the packet to a position a bit deeper in the hand then usual, straighten your left thumb along the lefi side of the packet. The thumb should completely screen the left edge. Your right hand, from above, grips the packet, the second finger resting at the front end, and the thumb at the rear, near the left corners. The other right fingers should be straight but relaxed.

In a light, quick, smooth action the left hand hinges opens the packet at the break and the wrist rotates a little past vertical, pivoting at the left side of the packet (Figure 182). This hand is holding the lower packet while the right hand holds the upper one. The left edges of both packets remain in contact. Move the lefi hand upward smoothly while the left edge of the right-hand packet remains in contact with the back of

the left-hand packet. At the top of the left hand's upward movement, the bottom card of the right-hand packet will come into contact with the pads of the left fingertips (Figure 183). When it does, apply inward pressure, dragging the card off the face of the packet and onto the lower packet (Figure 184) as the left hand returns to its original position. The bottom card of the right-hand packet is thus reversed on top of the lower, left-hand packet. Turn the left hand back under the right and square the cards very briefly.

It should appear that the left hand turned the entire packet on edge and ran it lightly up and down between the right second finger and thumb in a somewhat exaggerated squaring action. Your left hand will do almost all the work as your right hand simulates squaring. The complete sequence takes almost no time and can be covered with a single line of patter as you turn your body to place the packet to your right on the table. The key to making the move deceptive is lightness. If there is any tension conveyed during the action, the audience may conclude that something untoward has occurred. This suspicion would be the undoing of the move. The technique is not difficult; but if you can't do it well you probably shouldn't do it at all.

7 However you've elected to get the Spades out of the deck, the Clubs packet should now be on the table. Pick up the Spades from the table and spread them face up between your hands. They should be in order but check to make sure as you show them to the assembled multitude. If there are cards out of order, try, as casually as possible, to correct the error. Remember, at this point the spectators are not aware that the order of this packet is of significance. You may have to improvise patter to cover any card shifting and you can use moves like the Wedge, from Vernon's "Oil and Water" (Dai Vernon; More Inner Secrets of Card Mqic, 1960, page 22) and Slipduc (Ibidem, No. 9, March 1957, page 22), to assist you.

NOTE: I originally toyed with the idea of false shuffling the Spade packet to deal with occasions when, in one way or another, the spectator gets them out of order. After, as subtly as possible, rearranging them, a simple false

Overhand ShufHe would handlc it, but the impact of the effect was weakened because the question of order had been brought to the fore. This forces the shuffle to carry the burden of convincing the audience that the cards are in random order. Any time order becomes an issue, it is better if you can allow a spectator to mix the cards. Short of switching the packet after the shuffle, that isn't readily accomplished. Paul Curry provides us with a solution in the form of his Swindle Switch (Paul Cuwy Presents, 1974, page 8). The process is simple but persuasive. Afier explaining what you will do, start to deal cards from your left hand into a pile on the table. As you deal, ask the spectator to call "Swap" anytime he likes, as often as he likes. Take off each card, one by one, and ask, "Deal or Swap?" Each time he says, "Swap," comply by pushing the top card of the left-hand packet onto the card you're holding in your right hand, then set both cards onto the tabled pile. When you've gone through the entire packet, pick up the pile and repeat the process. Go through the packet twice this way and any audience should be convinced that the order is random. If you do this, you may actually find you've fooled yourself. While some will be inclined to use this technique all the time, you should be aware that although this Curry idea is quite effective, it is also a time-consuming process in what is already a long effect. If you find the idea appealing, you might be advised to reverse the order of the initial Spade stack, use a brief false Overhand Shuffle and one run-through with the Curry Swindle Count. I leave it to each performer to decide.

8 Once the cards are in proper order, spread them face down between your hands and say to a spectator, "I'm going to take cards one at a time, like this. At some point call out the word Stop." As you say this, marry action to words. Take cards from the left hand's loosely spread dealing position into the right hand, which holds the cards from above in an unsquared pile. You should already have taken three cards before you reach the end of your explanation. If you time it correctly, the spectator will say "Stop" as you reach the seventh card. If he does, hand him the face-down card and let him look at it and show it to the others.

If he stops you too soon, sight the seventh card in the left-hand spread and, as you square 185 the left hand's cards, obtain a break above it. Square the right hand's cards lightly against the left thumb and take all the cards above the break under the right hand's cards. Don't let the packets come together; rather, lift the cards above the break up to the right-hand packet (Figure 185). If you use a light touch you will find the action looks innocent because of the unsquared state of the cards.

Should the spectator fail to stop you soon enough, you'll need to form a thumb break above the seventh card, at the rear of the right-hand packet. When the spectator finally does stop you, perform the same kind of secret transfer just described, but drop the cards below the right-thumb break onto the left-hand packet.

Regardless of what the spectator does, he gets the Seven of Spades. While he is showing the card around, employ the Tenkai-Marlo Pivot-Step (page 75) to retain a break at the point where the Seven was removed, as you turn the packet face up. Lift off the cards above the break, exposing the Four of Spades. Have the spectator replace his card face down onto the Four. Close the spread and turn the packet face down.

Place the two packets side by side on the table before you and make mystic gestures over them as you announce the miracle of sympathetic response. You can talk about the empathy between twins, the Corsican brothers and the like. Push the Spade packet toward a spectator and have him turn the cards over one pair at a time, as dramatically as possible. The first five pairs will be in the same order. Take back all the cards from the spectator and arrange them resthetically in two rows before you. Turn both packets face up and remove cards one by one, simultaneously from both piles, continuing to reveal their sympathetic order, until you get to the two face-down cards. Comment on how not only the order but even the face-up and face-down condition has responded in sympathy. Reveal the face-down cards to be the same values. The last cards will be sitting as the final set of matching cards. Complete the display by placing them on the end of each face-up row.

You may wish to pick up one packet in each hand. Make a One-handed Fan with the right-hand packet and a One-handed Reverse Fan with the left-hand packet. Fan yourself with both fans and take a bow.

NOTE: This effect has gone through a number of changes over the years but always plays very strongly. It was briefly used as a closing effect-that's how strong it is. I later moved it to the middle of some of my hospitality- suite sets, where it serves as a powerful interlude. This brings me to the subject of routining-the magician's parlance for organizing. One must be almost as careful in the order of effects as in their selection. I have seen strong effects play very badly because they were placed in the wrong part of the act. An extreme example is "Out of This World." As an opening effect it would probably die. It's not that the effect is bad; it's simply that it takes too long to establish itself. "Sympathetic Blacks" is similar. You must establish that you are worth watching and that the attention the audience gives you will be rewarded. If you do so, "Sympathetic Blacks" is a blockbuster they'll talk about long after the show is over.

ETUDE FOB DEALERS

WHEN BILL SIMON mentioned "The Scarne Puzzle" in his 1949 book, Con- trolled Miracles (page 21), it is unlikely anyone anticipated where it would lead. It is doubtful anyone even noticed. When he published "Call to the Colors" in Efective Card Magic (1952, page 79), it aroused little interest because so few card men of that period could deal Seconds-not to mention Bottoms-well enough to use them under the conditions prevailing in the routine. Subse- quently, when Marlo explored the premise (Marlo Magaine, Nlume 2, 1977, "Bluff Call to Colors," page 226, and "Miracle Call to Colors," page 229) he spoke to a slightly larger audience, but still the plot generated little excitement. At about the same time, Martin Nash released his work on the plot, "Colors on the March" (Any Second Now, 1977, page 275). While it introduced a very clever new feature to the plot-dealing spectator-chosen patterns-it too garnered scant enthusiasm. More recently, Rent Lavand introduced his version via video, presenting the routine, for perhaps the first time, as "mystic and magical." It also appears as "Why Do the Colors Alternate Themselves" in the book Myster- ies ofMy Life (1998, page 53). Others, too, have visited the plot. You may wish to take a look at Roger; Thesaurus (1994), which contains a treatment by Jack Avis (page 186), and A Collection ofDrawing Room Deceptions (1999, page 202) for a Guy Hollingworth rendition.

My treatment may elicit no more enthusiasm than those before me; but it does address, if not solve, what I consider major problems with all the other works. First, I have eliminated almost all the Deal-Pick-UpDeal sequences of the prior treatments. This practice clouded and diminished the effect. Second, I have endeavored to cloak the proceeding with a shroud of magic. (All other

versions, with the exception of the Lavand presentation, appear as demonstrations of skill, a presentational approach I eschew.) How well I have succeeded in revitalizing this premise only time will tell. If it serves no other purpose, the effect is a fine etude for dealers. It allows the performer to practice dealing Seconds and Bottoms in one effect and to employ both normal and stud-style Takes. The tempo of the effect is similar to that of a Poker game and a single error will show up immediately. All in all, this new construct should add yet another argument for you to put in the time it takes to learn to False Deal. If you decide to, by all means review what Bill Simon has to say about dealing Seconds, and Marlo on all types of deals. Both men reveal great wisdom.

EFFECT: With assistance from a spectator, the performer openly arranges the deck in alternating red-black order from top to bottom. He explains and demonstrates that neither cutting the deck nor dealing the cards changes the alternating condition. The performer allows that it can, however, be affected magically. Demonstrating that the cards remain in red-black-red-black order, he applies "a little magic." The cards now fall in red-red-black-black-red-red order. Applying a bit more magic, the cards come off in black-black-black- red-red-red-black-black-black order. Adding still more magic he deals four reds-four blacks-four reds-then, with more magic, five blacks-five reds-five blacks. Finally, only four cards remain undealt. He passes them through his hand in a last magical gesture and reveals them be the four Aces.

SET-UP: Remove two red cards and leave them in your pocket or in the card box. Set two black cards, followed by the four Aces in alternating color order, in a packet (mine are set up, from the top down: Black-Black-Ace of Diamonds- Ace of Spades-Ace of Hearts-Ace of Clubs) in your lap.

Have a spectator arrange part of the deck into alternating red-black order as you do the same with the balance. The last card of the sequence, the card on the face, should be a black card. While it is not mandatory that the spectator help you arrange the de~k -~ou can do it all yourself-having a spectator help arrange the cards creates conviction on the part of the audience that the deck is truly in red-black order, as well as reducing the time necessary to set up.

As you slide the deck off the table, secretly add the packet from your lap to the bottom. You're about to lay in the stack right in front of the audience. You need to reverse the top pairing so that it is black-red rather than red-black. To make this adjustment, deal a Second as you apparently take the top card into your right hand, then take the next card under it. Lift the two cards, flashing their faces to the audience, as you say, "Remember, the cards alternate black and red.. ." Return the two cards to the top, then spread the deck face down between your hands as you add, "...all the way through the deck." Close the spread, forming a break below the top two cards.

"If I cut the deck, no matter how many complete cuts I make, the order is unaffected." Accompany this line with a Double Undercut, shifting the two cards from the top to the bottom. "And dealing cards doesn't alter their order either-as long as I deal an even number." As you speak the preceding line, deal the top four cards to the table: Top-Top-Second-Top. Pick up these four cards, without showing them, and place them back onto the deck. Add, "As you see, once you put the deck in order, it's hard to take it out of order unless you shuffle-or you can use magic. I promise I won't shuffle them, so only one thing can cause what you'll see, but don't ask me to explain it; I'm not sure I understand it myself."

Execute a Triple Turnover and deal the triple card face up to the table, as one. Be careful that the cards don't spread as you lay them down. The triple card will show as a black card. Deal the next card face up onto the triple card on the table. It will be a red card. Deal a Second, which will yield a black card. Add it face up to the tabled pile. The last card you deal comes off the top. It is a red card. You've dealt six cards as four, apparently in black-red-black-red order.

Turn the tabled cards face down and drop the deck on top of them. Pick up the deck and square as you repeat, "Remember, cuts and deals don't alter the red- black sequence in any way, but magic can." From the top down, the order of the deck is now: thirty-six cards in red-black order (eighteen pairs)-two blacks-four Aces-a black-two reds-two blacks-then red-black-red.

Say, "Without magic, because of the way we've arranged them, the cards would always turn up red-black-red-black." Deal the first four cards, turning them face up as you do so, and lay them on the table in a column from far to near, in an overlapping row on the left side of your working area. They will show as red- black-red-black.

Make a magical gesture (I pass my right hand dramatically over the deck) as you say, "If I only apply a little bit of magic, they turn up as red-red-black-black- red-red.'' The dealing pattern is Top-Second-Top-Top-Top-Second. Again, turn each card face up and form a column from far to near, in an overlapping row, to the right of the previous column.

Repeat the magical gesture as you say, "A little more magic causes a more marked departure. They turn up black-black-black-red-red-red-black-black-black." To obtain this pattern you must deal Top-Top-Second-Top-Top-Second-Top- Top-Second. Once again, turn each card face up and deal them into a column from far to near, in an overlapping row, to the right of the two previous columns.

Execute the magical gesture once again: "The more magic I apply the more drastic the departure from the red-black order. Now, they'll turn up red-red- red-red-black-black-black-black-red-red-red-red." The dealing pattern

required to yield this order is: Bottom-Top-Top-Second-Bottom-Top-Top Second-Bottom-Top-Top-Second. Create a column from far to near, face-up, in an overlapping row, to the right of the previous columns.

Perform the magical gesture for the last time. "It takes extremely powerhl magic to accomplish the next departure. By applying strong magic they turn up black- black-black-black-black-red-red-red-red-red-black-black-black-black- black." To produce this sequence you must deal: Bottom-Top-Bottom-Top- Second-Bottom-Top-Bottom-Top-Second-Bottom-Top-Top-Top-Top. This last column is also dealt from far to near, in a face-up overlapping row, to the right of the previous columns.

NOTE: This last dealing sequence is the most irregular but each sequence must be memorized in any case. As you become more familiar with the workings of the method, you'll associate the pattern of reds and blacks with the dealing pattern required to achieve it. I endeavored to work out memory aids for the pattel-11s but found them too slow and ultinlately unnecessary. The best learning system for me wa? to write out the patterns on index cards and lay them in a row across the table. While I was learning, I'd leave the index card for a particular pattern written-side up. Once I felt I knew the pattern, I'd turn it down. I found I could still visualize the writing. Eventu- ally, I didn't need the index cards at all. Actually, with the exception of the last five cards, the order is logical. I find that if I stop using the routine for a while, I will forget the patterns, but a few run-throughs bring the patterns back. That's the best advice I can give you on learning the patterns. It isn't nearly as difficult as it might seem.

You will be left with only four cards, the four Aces, in your left hand. Your patter line is, "To apply any more of this kind of magic could be hazardous to our health, but since I have only four cards remaining I can perform a minor miracle of a different sort. A simple pass through the hand and-instant four Aces. Pretty good, huh?" The pass through the hand is Vernon's Through-the- Fist Flourish (page 53). Deal the Aces in a face-up row across the table, near your audience.

TECHNICAL NOTE: I have not included suggestiotls for which deal techniques to use for the routine. As a practice routine, it doesn't much matter. Mix and match the techniques you want to practice. For performance, the Top, Second and Bottom Deal techniques should all look alike, but beyond that, use the techniques you know. I use my Sure Theory Second (Pdstebonrd Perpensions, page 28), dealt stud-style, and my unpublished treatment of Marlo's Havana Deal, which is also a stud-style deal. The original Vernon New Theory Second and Marlo Havana Deal can be used with similar results.

I'RESENTATION NOTE: As stated, it is a challenge to present this routine effectively. My presentation and construction, as well as the Ace climax, greatly ameliorate the problems. They do not, however, solve them completely under all conditions. Apart fro111 using it in your practice sessions, this routine is best saved for the conditions under which you tnight perform "Out of This World"-for what I call serious audiences. Under those circumstances, without undue distractions, audiences embrace it as a highly intriguing intellectual effect that is very special. The four Ace climax is truly startling. 'Try it; it's challenging at every level and in every way.

THE OPTION SECOND DEAL

ABOUT TWO years after I first learned to do a Second Deal well-thanks to Francis Carlyle-I was contemplating the subject of such deals. I theorized, not too originally, that the more closely the procedures for dealing Tops and Seconds paralleled each other, the more indistinguishable they would be. This is hardly a groundbreaking line of thought. I realized, however, that no matter how closely they matched, the one point at which these deals must differ is the moment of the Take. Since that is the most vulnerable moment, I reasoned, something must be done to enhance the illusion that the top card has been dealt. The technique that follows was the outgrowth of that reasoning. It is a deal that can be performed in rapid-fire fashion, and it has an excellent illusion, owing to an altered timing of the return of the top card. Give it a few hours' work-yes it's that easy-and you'll see how good it can look. Additional time and effort will be required to bring it to its optimum but by then, as you'll see, it will be clear it's worth it.

GRIP

Take the deck into your left hand (assuming you're right-handed), with the left near corner pressing into the crease between the thenar (base of the thumb) and the palm proper. The first finger should be curled around the outer end of the deck. The other three fingers rest along the right side. The tip of the first finger should rest about three-eighths of an inch from the right corner and protrude above the top edge of the deck, to serve as a registration point. The left thumb

rests diagonally across the top of the deck, pointing toward the first fingertip. It should rest lightly. Remember this thumb position; it is "home."

'I'he second, third and fourth fingers at the right side of the deck act as a gauge - -

to assure that only the top two cards are available. As with any deal, you must learn to automatically compensate to maintain this condition as the cards are depleted. It is critical that only the top two cards can slide over the right edge of the deck. To help further ensure this, a bevel, created by the thenar, aids your control (Figure 186). The tips of the three fingers at the side also help maintain the bevel so that the edges of no two cards, from top to bottom, precisely align side to side.

The position just described is fundamentally Mechanic's Grip. It will, perforce, vary from person to person, owing to variations in hand size and proportion. In spite of these differences, the three features of the grip that should be preserved are:

(a) Some distance between the first fingertip and the front right corner of the deck.

(b) The thumb pointing toward the first fingertip rather than the corner of the deck.

(c) The pad of the first fingertip extending slightly over the top edge of the deck.

The reasons these factors are important will I 1 0 7

become clearer as the explanation proceeds. For the time being, it should suffice to state that Point

provides space for the Take hand's thumb when it lands on the deck. Point b is motivated by the same requirement. Finally, Point c is required because the top card slides back across the top of the deck with greater than typical force. If the first finger didn't extend over the top edge, the returning top card would likely go past square. I \ 188 The first finger, therefore, acts as a stop.

PUSH-OFF

With light pressure on the top card, move your left thumb in a clockwise swivel from its base at the wrist. This action pushes the top card over the right edge of the deck. (Figure 187 shows the card being pushed over in mid-process. Figure 188 shows the deck at the completion of Y

the process.) When the thumb returns it will do so along the same path. There is nothing novel about this path but the top card does move a bit farther off the deck then is typical of Second Deals.

TAKE

TheTake action, whether the'top or the second card is desired, begins in the same way. The right thumb lands on both the top and second cards such that the line formed by the front edge of the top card transects the right thumbnail, corner to corner, when viewed from directly above. From this position the thumb has about equal purchase on both the top and second cards, giving you the option of taking either (Figure 189). The time that elapses between the push of the top card and the arrival of the right thumb is irrelevant. You are not trying to hide the opening.

By increasing the pressure on the card you want, which involves the slightest rolling of the right thumb, from the wrist, either forward or back, you can drag the target card to the right and slightly forward. The three left-hand fingers along the right side of the deck permit only one card to clear the right edge. They also maintain the bevel.

As soon as the right front corner of the target card clears the right side of the deck, the left thumb starts its swivel back to the left. This is earlier than typical of Second Deals. As a result, the returning card, if there is one, will pass under the right thumb with friction. This requires that greater than normal force be applied to the return action of the left thumb. It's a bit difficult to generate this force at first but with practice it will happen. Regardless of which card you took, your thumb moves back to its home position. When it reaches home it rises about a quarter of an inch and immediately returns to the top of the deck. At the same time, the right second finger moves up to press the right front corner of the target card more firmly to the right thumb. The right hand also continues moving to the right. This action should be crisp but not jerky. Eventually, the card will be completely clear of the deck, at which point it can be dealt as need dictates; usually a sail.

PRACTICE NOTE: This entire deal action can be very smooth and rapid. Nevertheless, it's a good idea to begin practicing the technique very slowly. Gradually, work up to a greater speed than you will ever require. As you vary your dealing tempo, you will find a rate at which the illusion is strongest. It is difficult to express this speed in normal terms. On a metronome it's about

a hundred-twenty beats per minute. That's about a hundred-twenty crxrcls per minute. This is about the speed that one might normally deal a game like Gin. Once you've found the right tempo, practice at that rate primarily, but practice dealing faster and slower as well. You will find the Option Second Deal a fine tool, worthy of your effort. It is best suited to card-table style dealing and lends itself quite well to a Punch Deal. It is too good a deal to expose in a gambling exposi., by turning the top card face up; but, because it can be dealt very rapidly, it rnakes an impressive demonstration deal. I have used it in that way for more than twenty-five years.

THE COUNTERVAILING MOTION PRINCIPLE

Because the top card is openly pushed over, we sacrifice the possibility of a negative illusion. Clearly, both cards are available. This increases the importance of creating a positive illusion. The early return action of the thumb contributes to this positive illusion. It takes advantage of an optical principle Vernon implicitly recognized in his New Theory Second Deal. This is essentially the same principle used in the standard Linking Ring display move. Specifically, that the eye cannot easily determine the source or direction of countermotions, only the existence of the movement. I call this the Countervailing Motion Principle.

It is something of a side issue, but, in light of what we do and the oft-heard "The hand is quicker than the eye," it is useful to understand the mechanism by which we "see." Researchers maintain that the eye detects motion in stages, through multiple passes at evaluating the visual data. The method the brain uses largely explains the limits of our resolving ability, as we shall see in a moment. The brain sees less than twenty-four images per second. We know this because movie film runs at twenty-four frames per second and to our eyes the motion appears continuous. We can think of each image we see as a frame of information. The eye, in fact, does not see these images as discrete frames, but the brain does process them as though they were.

Any single "frame" is only sufficient to inform us of the positions of the objects within that frame. To detect movement, we must compare two frames separated in time. We do this by comparing two images and determining whether there is a difference between them. Any change represents motion of some sort, though it doesn't tell us the type of motion or even which object within the frame is moving. Thus, the second stage in our evaluation endeavors to extract this additional data. We first determine the object that is moving. This is fairly straightforward, albeit prone to error. We detect which portion of the area in view has changed between the two frames. We then focus on that area to determine what object in that area is different. The play of light and wind and any number of other factors can lead us to erroneous conclusions, but we

learn to compensate mentally for these extraneous factors. The next thing we need to judge is the speed of the motion. A fast moving object may represent a threat, so we determine speed as rapidly as we can. Determining speed requires comparing three images. Most of the information in each of the three frames will not change, but that part that does is evaluated to determine the nature of the change. When the change is size related, the moving object is judged to be approaching or retreating. This information can be critical because it may inform us of impending danger. When the change is location within the frame, without a change in size, we judge that the motion is lateral and, therefore, not so immediately threatening Only after the threat potential of motion is determined can our attention turn to making finer distinctions. Such distinctions are non-critical, so our vision has not adapted for such purposes. When only one object in our field of view is moving, direction and speed are fairly easy to judge. When multiple objects within the frame are moving, it is nearly impossible to make determinations about the details of the motion and we often reach erroneous conclusions. There are so many examples of this in daily life we tend to disregard them. The bolo, the stroboscopic effect, the knee-through-knee illusion of the Charleston and the spiral on the hypno-disk are all examples of this type of misjudgment of motion. In magic, we talk about phenomena such as the larger motion hiding the smaller one. We use the previously mentioned display move to create the illusion that a Linking Ring or a circle of rope is being passed through the hand. In broad terms, this is the Countervailing Motion Principle. There are a number of variations of this principle but they are all predicated on the inability of the eye to correctly resolve the interaction between two moving objects. Since this principle exists, it is usel l to identi@ it when it is at work and to exploit it when we can.

MISCELLANEOUS FALSE DEALS A DEVELOPMENTAL SNAPSHOT

IT IS only when one attempts to list the variety of False Deals that one real- izes how many different types there are. That realization gave me pause about addressing them as a group. The fact that the literature contains so few descriptions of techniques and that one sees so few individuals perform most of them puts the subject back into perspective. I certainly don't want to give any Deal short shrift; at the same time, I have no desire to repeat myself unnecessarily. So, with the awareness that so little is written on the subject that almost anything I add will be helphl, I have put pen to paper. Still, a significant portion of what I could say about Center Deals and Botop Double Deals I have already said about Bottoms. A significant amount of Two-Card Push-Off Second Deal information applies as well to the Top Double Deal, Thirds, Fourths and Fifths. These pages will, therefore, primarily endeavor to standardize nomenclature, provide some historical perspective, offer some thoughts about applications and open some new horizons with a group of Theoretical Deals that explore areas that may prove worthy of future investigation. At some future date I may attempt a more detailed view of the Center, Third, Fourth and Fifth Deals. Until then the cited sources should provide a sufficient foundation.

APPEARANCE FACTORS GRIP

Center Deals, Double Deals (both Top and Botop), Third, Fourth and Fifth Deals, Greek (also known as "Minus One") Bottom Deals, No Deals, Swap

Deals and all the Theoretical Deals share essentially the same Appearance Factors, with each other and with the Second Deal, Bottom Deal and legitimate deals. Grips, therefore, can be, and are, all over the deck, including most of the grips common to Seconds and Bottoms. The Center Deal uses some of the largest deviations from the more or less standard set of False Deal grips. This is not surprising, since Center Deals require that a particular point within the deck be kept available for the taking of a card while allowing legitimate deals to be performed. Whatever grip one chooses, as in all False Deals, the technical details of method are defining. Nevertheless, the level of detail in this section will not rival that of the previous Deals I've explored. Again, I'll simply cite those sources I've discovered. Those sources and my other writings on Deals will have to suffice to put the grip issue into perspective.

TAKE

There is nothing inherent in any of the deals under consideration that precludes the use of a Standard Take, Stud Take (either Overhand or Underhand) or No Take (One-Handed) for any particular application. That is not to say that methods for every type of False Deal have been developed to employ every type of Take. Rather, the literature is so sparse in the exploration of these techniques that many combinations of Deals and Take types remain unpublished, if not undeveloped. It is clearly the combination of technical difficulty and limited application development that has inhibited popularization, proliferation and publication of new methods. Just as with the principal False Deals (Bottoms and Seconds), Take grows from application and drives method. The future, therefore, holds many opportunities for the intrepid explorer, but successful explorers must be visionary.

TECHNIQUE FACTORS

COVERT

Most of the False Deals under discussion are in the veritable infancy of their technical development. Many have no more than two or three entries in the extensive literature of card technique. Perhaps the only False Deal within the scope of this document that can be said to have progressed beyond the infant stage is the Center Deal, and the Center is no more than a toddler. A look at some of the more important, though scant, variations amply endorse this opinion. Still, no aspirations to comprehensiveness are entertained. I'm not persuaded that further comprehensiveness would serve any additional purpose at this time. This foray into the subject should merely help to frame this under- explored area and provide a sketchy historical view. If it motivates thought it will have served.

CENTER DEAL-The Center Deal has a nearly mythical history, documented in a little-known article by Bruce Elliott and James Tuck in Saga magazine (March 1952, page 51). The article was titled "The Search for the Middle Deal." It recounted Dai Vernon's tenacious effort, throughout the 1930's, to track down a man rumored to deal from the Center of the deck. The man Vernon eventually found was a card cheat named Allen Kennedy who, Vernon maintained, taught his technique to him. More recently, Karl Johnson has revisited the subject in two interesting articles, "The Magician and the Cardsharp (Ameri- can Heritage, May 2001, page 56) and "Dai Vernon and His Quest for Allen Kennedy's Center Deal" (Genii, December 2001, Vol. 64, No. 12, page 28). 'To date, no properly detailed description of the Kennedy Deal has seen print, but Ross Bertram, Nelson Downs, Charlie Miller and Luis Zingone were all reputedly taught the technique by Vernon. (The description that appears in Ross Bertram's 1978 book, Magic and Method of Ross Bertram, page 80, is, in my opinion, inadequate; and, though better, so is David Ben's description in the December 2001 issue of Genii, page 42.) The first additional methods, also probably attributable to Vernon, appear in Expert Card Technique (1940, page 23). Tony Kardyro offered a method he called the "Master Deal Supreme" (Kdrdyroi Kdrd Konjuring, 1955, page 1). This was followed by Marlo's offerings in Second, Centers, Bottoms (1960, page 96) and "Special to the Expert" (a privately issued addendum to Second, Centers, Bottoms). (Marlo states that he learned the Center Deal by watching Zingone on film. In spite of Marlo's denial, some insisted he actually learned from Charlie Miller and that it became a source of friction between Miller and Vernon.) Marlo added some additional thoughts on the subject in the March 1975 New Tops (Vol. 15, No. 3, page 28). Martin Nash further explored Marlo's conceptual approach in Sleight Unseen (1979, page 322). Another, fairly obscure, version was contributed by the enigmatic Dom Paolino (Genii, Vol. 3 1, No. 2, October 1966, page 9 1). Fred Robinson of England is also rumored to have had a treatment that has received high praise from the few who witnessed it. Unless it is hidden away in some old issue ofAbra or Pentagram, it has not seen print. Thanks to Bill Kalush, I have in recent years become fond of the Allan Ackerman Center Deal from his booklet, Herei My Card(1978, page 101).

The utility of the Center Deal for the card cheat is fairly apparent: It spares him the need to "beat the cut." This, however, has not served as compelling motivation for mechanics to embrace the task. Few, if any, working cheats consider the Center Deal much more than a curiosity. Magicians have been at least as shortsighted in their appreciation of the move. The most obvious task to which the Center Deal can be applied is as a substitute for the Side Steal (to which

it is related) or the Pass, in their capacities as Controls (see my "Middle Deal Control Swindle," Apocalypse, Vol. 18, No. 7, July 1995, page 2521; and The Magical Record and Thoughts of Weslgrjames, page 73). This lack of perceptive- ness is somewhat difficult to fathom, as moving a card from the center to the top or bottom of the deck typifies what Centers, the Pass and the Side Steal can do. If that isn't enough, the Center Deal can be harnessed into a role as part of a Botop-like Change (I call it "The Centop Change"). A One-Handed Center can be combined with Irv Weiner's "Fake Insertion" technique (Hugard's Magic Monthly, titled "Control of One Card to the Top," Vol. XV, No. 6, November 1957, page 67) to produce an even more convincing version of that move. More starkly, the One-Handed Center can be employed to produce a Center Curry Change or a Center Kardyro Kard Change (see M-U-M, Vol. 50, No. 10, March 1961, page 603; or Kdrdyro? Kdrd Change Supreme, 1962). The idea should become clear; once you have the ball, you can run with it. To prove this point, let me interrupt this discussion briefly to insert one interesting application.. .

A HAND TOO FEW DECEMBER 27,200 1

BETA

O N DECEMBER 22nd, in a brief but rich session, a serious, young card-worker, Rick Franceschini, showed me his handling of a well-explored plot, the card sandwich. To this plot, by virtue of method, he had added some interesting elements not otherwise possible with the same directness. I considered Rick's treatment immediately interesting, as I informed him, but somewhat flawed by his less than optimal exploitation of the features he had made possible. There- after, despite the season's festivities, I found my thoughts returning to these matters, which by now I saw as a challenge. The day after Christmas, I showed a number of solutions I'd developed to my good friend Eliezer Rodriguez. Guided by his feedback, I recombined the best of my ideas into one sequence. While this new construct depends heavily on presentation for its logic and power, it does so in a novel way. Thus, I will include significant portions of my presentation along with the handling, though some of the presentation flows from choreography rather than patter. Further, I should warn the reader, this is a technically demanding method, as was Rick's. The impact, however, is outstanding.

There are four major techniques employed in this moderately quick effect, and they happen in rapid succession, with little margin for error. You will perform a Gambler's Cop and Add Back, a D'Amico Spread, a One-Handed Glimpse from a Spectator Peek, and a One-Handed Middle Deal. If that's not challenge enough, the hands do not come together during most of the effect. Hang in there with me on this one; the pace may seem daunting.

EFFECT: After a spectator has been handed a pair of matching cards-we will use the red Queens-he is given the deck to shuffle as the performer takes back

the pair. Then, while the performer holds the two face-up Queens spread in one hand, the spectator peeks at a card in the deck held in the perfbrmer's other hand. The performer immediately announces, "It's done!" On looking at the pair, a face-down card is seen to be trapped between the face-up Queens. The performer looks at the face-down card and announces the name. The spectator agrees that is the card he peeked at. The card is immediately withdrawn and handed to him to confirm it is his. Everything may be examined and left with the spectators.

SET-UP: The deck you use for this effect must be in reasonably good condition. Openly remove a color-matched pair of cards. I prefer the red Queens but any color-matched pair may be used. This can be done openly, thus requiring no set-up, but the tempo of the effect is expedited if the pair has been located prior to your presentation.

As I perform it, the following opening lines are delivered with a clear sense of tongue-in-cheek. I think of these introductory remarks as somewhat like a Professor Harold Hill monologue in Meredith Wilson's The Music Man. I have resisted the inclination to employ the style even more blatantly, though some may be inclined to do so. I fear the effect would be diminished if framed within too strong a characterization. You begin, "You are about to witness an effect the likes ofwhich you may never see performed again-not that you've ever seen it before. The reason is simple, the effect requires more hands than the average performer sports-that's two. As you can plainly see, I have no more than the customary number of appendages, but with your assistance, your kind assistance, I hope to work around this obvious shortcoming. If you will lend me your eyes, your ears and two of your hands, employing both of mine we will still be one short but I think-in fact I'm more than reasonably confident-we can work around this deficit, albeit with some loss of grace. If, I say, ifwe are able to get through the requisite machinations, you should witness a feat so astounding it will boggle the mind and dazzle the eye. Your grandchildren may hear tales of this event."

Hand a spectator standing in front of you one card of your pair to hold in each of his hands. Square the deck and steal the bottom card into Gambler's Cop. It doesn't matter what the card is but only one card should be copped and the deck should be moved toward the fingertips of the hand from which you deal. (For the sake of explanation, we'll adopt the common right-handed bias here.)

"I'm going to ask you to shuffle the deck, for which you'll need two hands, so I'll take the two cards you hold. You take the deck I hold. This won't be pretty but we'll get it done." As you are saying this, transfer the deck from your left hand to your right and, turning slightly to your right, reach forward with both hands toward the spectator. Look briefly at the spectator's right hand, then look at your right hand as you place the deck into the spectator's left hand. At the same time,

with your left hand take the card from the spectator's right hand, sliding it over the card hidden in Gambler's Cop. With your right hand, immediately take the second Queen from the spectator's left hand in the action of leaving the deck there, and transfer this card to your left hand, placing it under the double card it already holds.

NOTE: Depending upon the size ofyour audience and the distance between you and your spectators, the angles arising from the use of the Gambler's Cop may prove unworkable. Full Palm in the lefi hand obviously offers f x less in the way of angle constraints and may be substituted. 'The change to E:ull Palm need have no significant impact on the handling of the impending Add-On, but it will in all likelihood make the sequence appear a bit more ''cozy." You nnlay also find the curvature created in the card will dictate the choice you make in the next sequence. I will trust the reader to balance the considerations and make the choices appropriate to the venue.

At this point, you have a few alternatives: You can square the three cards, taking them at the fingertips of your palm-down right hand, and perform a D'Amico Spread (Classical Foursome, 1956, page 8), showing what appears to be the two face-up Queens with nothing between them. Alternately, you can use Marlo's Pivot Spread (Classical Foursome, page 22) to arrive at almost precisely the same position. Keep your right hand, with its two-card spread, held away from your body.

Extend your left hand, take back the now shuffled deck from your assisting spectator and maneuver the cards into position for a Spectator Peek. Explain that he is to "Push back the corner of the deck at one point and peek at a card." As soon as you've caught your break below the card, look directly at the spectator and ask, "Got it?" The spectator should look back at you to say, "Yes." At precisely that moment, spread the Queen packet, so the face-down indifferent card shows. Whatever response you get from your spectator, seemingly repeat, "I got it-look!" Your eyes should travel to the three-card spread.

Turn your left hand over, maintaining the break it holds and converting it to an inner right step. Point at the spectator as you catch a glimpse of the index corner of the card at the step (Figure 190), and say, "You've just peeked at a card-and

190

one has jumped over." Look back to the spread as you maneuver your right hand so you can see the face of the face-down card between the Queens, but without exposing its face to the audience. As you see the card, casually name the card you just glimpsed and ask, "Right?" This

will stun many spectators because there is, from their perspective, no way you can know the card, never mind having caused it to jump across.

What you will do next is, in my view, the toughest part of this effect. You need to convert from the position in which your left hand is holding the deck to the position you require for the One-handed Middle Deal you will use. In the process, you'll need to convert the step you've been maintaining so you can deal the spectator's card. How you do this will, perforce, depend on which One- Handed Middle Deal you use. We will discuss those considerations in the next few paragraphs, but the action should simply look as though you remove the face-down card and hand it to the spectator. While this is not the only way one could reveal the identity of the card, it should be treated as though it were the most logical course.

MIDDLE DFAL CONSIDERATIONS: I use the Middle Deal described as "The Ackerman Center Deal (Modified)" in T/ie Magirick Record and Thoughts of Wesley James (page 75). This is a treatment of Allan's "Varia- tion of the One Hand Center Deal" from his 1978 book, Herei My Card (page 101). In this instance, because only one Middle is dealt, the two techniques are essentially interchangeable. A key consideration, regardless of the technique chosen, is that the hand that holds the deck must be able to achieve the required grip wirhout assistance from the opposite hand. It is also important, in my opinion, that the Deal be performed without a full wrist turn, though Rick Franceschini employed one in the version he performed. The reason behind my thinlung is that it would be nearly in~possible to perform a Wrist-Turn Middle under the prevailing conditions without flashing the break, unless the action is made quite broad, in which case it would become suspicious. I do not suggest this is universally true, but in this situation we don't have a completely conventional application of the Middle Deal. For these reasons, the demands of the Middle Deal here are greater than typical for Middle Deals generally or even for One-Handed Middle Deals.

I submit that the illusion to strive for is that the face-down card is slid from between the face-up Queens, and its isolation is apparently maintained by heavily right-jogging it on top of the deck. Carlying the card in this position toward the spectator will give you a brief moment to prepare for your Middle Deal, which, given the circumstances, must use a Buckle-out technique. An instruction directed to the spectator, such as, "Hold out your hands, both your hands!" will assure that you reach the target point for p u s Deal before your spectator is ready to receive the card. 'The Deal itself should be performed almost straight down into the spectator's hands, with just a bit of lefnvasd movement at the end to make sure the dealing hand is

clear of the dealt card at the completion of the Deal. This action may not come immediately, if you aren't accustonled to it. With practice, assuming you get enough kick from the left fingers and mininlal friction from the packets, it creates an excellent illusion of the withdrawn card merely dropping into the spectator's hands with a light downward toss-a rather disarming look. Of course, the right-jogged card is pulled onto the top of the deck as the left hand turns at the wrist in the act of dealing the Middle onto the spectator's hand.

CYI'HEK CONSIIIERATIONS: While a wide array of handling variations would be available for managing the initial stages of this effect, I don't believe any would be significantly cleaner in appearance than that offered here. ?'he options narrow once the spectator has peeked at a card, since only one hand is available. I believe the Middle Deal to be the most expeditious method of acco~n~lishing the necessary result, though it is by no means the only method. With some alteration to the blocking and choreography, a One-Handed Pass could be used to reposition the peeked card. This would allow the use of a One-Handed Bottonl Deal. While there would be much to otherwise recommend it, the difficulties of converting from a break below the selection to a break above the selection largely preclude the use of a Second Deal, Kardyro Change, Curry Change (and any of its variants) or, best in my opinion, Marlo's Visual Retention Change (Hierophnnt, No. 5, 1971, page 239). It is interesting to me that while the younger generation of card-workers invests tremendous energy in laying claim to minor handling variations of overly familiar plots hung on questionable improvements, truly useful goals such as a simple, efficient way to establish a break above rather than below a spectator peeked card attract no attention whatever. I suspect this is a simple failure to apprehend those areas of the card-workers toolbox where the needs are most real; or perhaps such prosaic accomplishments are merely too unappealing to attract attention. In any case, we must await the day.

In closing, I don't imagine most performers will wish to end the effect as I do but, at my publisher's prodding, I'm including the closing monologue 1 use for the effect. It's delivered in the style and, loosely, the cadence of "Trouble in River City'-which is to say, as though you were rapping. It's meant to be fun, so have fun with it. "I know, I say I know your thought-you're thinkin' that's great, you're thinkin' that's fine, you're thinkin' 'that fool' [these h t f our words are deliueredns nn aside, as though they had con~ejionz n spectatop.1. Remember the Maine, like they taught you in school; remember Plymouth Rock and the Golden Rule! Cause now ya got trouble-right here in [nnme of city where you are] City! With a capital T and that rhymes

with C and that stands for-Cool'" "Cool!" is delivered out of meter, in a style reminiscent of Oscar Brown, Jr. in his song, "But I was Cool," from his Sin & Soul album. For those unfamiliar with this piece, the best guidance I can give is that the word is delivered in an exaggerated and ironic style. If you decide you want to use this presentation, by all means check out the Oscar Brown, Jr. or Albert Collins versions of the song. The change of style breaks the character and ends the presentation. Your audience should be smiling; they've seen an amazing effect and a vignette that harkens to a fun theatrical piece.

MISCELLANEOUS FALSE DEALS

(CONTINUED)

DOUBLE DEAL-It may be argued that the Double Deal is insinuated in Erdnase, with no technical detail, by Illustration 26, page 59. It was certainly in use as a means for dealing extra cards to oneself or a partner. That, of course, is the purpose for which it would be most useful to a gambler. For the magician it has many additional uses. It should be apparent that the Double Deal has some of the functionality of a Double Lift. It can also be applied to False Counts. It is in that capacity that the Double Deal was used by Jack Merlin of . . .And a Pack o f Cardr fame, in his excellent "'Lost' Ace Trick" in Expert Card Technique (page 233). Charlie Miller raved about this piece. Of course, Marlo made a contribution in this area as well. His offerings are presented, as might be expected, in Second, Centers, Bottoms, which also includes an odd treatment, from S.F. Grip, by Warren Wiersbie. It is worth noting that Marlo's Two-Card Throw (Marlo in Spades, 1947, page 5) and Cliff Green's Impeccable Double Lift (Professional Card Magic, 196 1, page 148) are hnctiondy One-Handed Top Double Deals. Both techniques can be thought of and used as such.

It is fairly apparent that the Double Deal was first performed by dealing the top two cards as one, using a Two-Card Push-Off technique-probably one similar to that described in Erdnase. It is interesting to note that Mississippi riverboat casinos were known to use prepared decks, called "Sand-Tell" Decks-a precursor of magic's rough and smooth principle-to allow a Double Deal from a Dealing Shoe. Oddly, magicians have not given any form of Double Deal much focus. Jerry Sadowia describes a Top Double in his 1987 book with Peter

Duffie, Inspirations (page 103), and Danvin Ortiz does likewise in his 1988 book, At the Card Table (page GI), and again in 1995 in Carhark (page 147). I should probably mention that the distinction between Double Deals in which both cards come from the top of the deck, and those in which one comes from the bottom, the other from the top, has been implicitly recognized by others. The designations "Top Double Deal," "Botop Double Deal" and "Centop Double Deal," while hopefully evident in meaning, are my own. (See also Theoretical Deals on page 275.)

The Double Deal taught in Expert Card Technique (page 27), as used by Jack Merlin, is a Botop Double Deal. Stephen Hobbs describes a Gene Maw treatment from Erdnase Grip in Gene Maze and the Art of Bottom Dealing (1994, page 23). Both Marlo (Seconds, Centers, Bottoms, page 107) and Martin Nash (Sleight Unseen, 1979, page 334) have offered Centop Double Deals. If the Double Deal were easier, it could become a very popular technique, because of its relationship to the Double Lift. As things are, no form of Double Deal is often performed.

THIRD, FOURTH AND FIFTH D ~ s - T h e earliest mention ofThirds-though not Fourths or Fifths-appears in Dariel Fitzkee's translation of Maurice Sar- dina's The Magic of Rezvani (1 949, page 28). In 1955, Tony Kard~ro's book k;trdyroi Kdrd Konjuring described the first method, however impractical, for dealing Thirds (page l ) , while allowing for the possibility of application to Fourths and Fifths. Marlo teaches an approach to Fourths and Fifths (in Seconds, Centers, Bottoms) and is the first to offer a practical technique for such Deals. His Unit Control Theory (page 11 1) and other ideas made these Deals more than mere dreams, but actually workable under certain conditions. For individuals who have facility with both Push-Off and Strike Second Deals, Thirds, Fourths and Fifths are fairly easy additions to the arsenal. In spite of this, magical applications are nearly non-existent, except for those by Marlo and RenC Lavand (see MagicJiom the Soul, 1993, pages 84, 92, 108, 109, 110, 116, 125, 160, 1 63, 1 8 1, 1 82 and 1 87; and Mysteries of My Life, 1 998, pages 53, 68 and 87). Martin Nash (Any SecondNow, 1977, page 275), David CarrC (The David C a d Collection of Advanced Card Magic, Glume 1 video) and I (Pasteboard Perpensions, "ELEVaceOR," page 50) are among the few who have published applications. A fairly obvious use of these techniques would be dealing Fifths to maintain the Four Aces on top of the deck in a Four Ace routine. This simple example demonstrates how utilitarian such a technique could be. Were it not that most Third, Fourth and Fifth Deal techniques require a moment to set and a heavy, continuous necktie if deceptiveness is to be maintained, their utility might be more often exploited. My Theory Thirds discussion, on the following pages, may change this situation.

THEORY THIRDS MARCH 30, 1993

AS I'VE mentioned, in Pmteboard Perpensions I described a variation of the Rcmani-Vernon New Theory Deal, which I called "The Sure Theory Second Deal." Now, by adding a variation of a Take technique by Marlo, which he employed in his Push-Pull Bottom Deal (New Tops, Vol. 7, No. 12, December 1967, page 4 I), I've developed a new way of dealing Thirds. This new approach has at least one advantage over previously published techniques: There is no pre- positioning required when this technique is applied. The top of the deck can be viewed between deals. In other words, there are no step-jogged or fanned cards being controlled by your thumb, as in prior techniques. This is, in my opinion, a significant improvement and gives the Deal its merit; but this merger of concepts produces the potential for other uses of the Theory Thirds approach. The reader will find some of these exploited in the techniques that follow and may devise his or her own as well.

One other point should be made here: This technique is not easy to acquire. If you don't have a background in dealing both Push-Off and New or Sure Theory Seconds you will find the learning curve quite steep. Be assured that the Deal is workable and can fill your existing and foreseeable need for dealing Thirds.

GRIP

Hold the deck in Mechanic's Grip. Your first finger should be at the outer end, the other fingers along the right side. The first finger should extend above the front edge of the top card.

PUSH-OFF

Bend your left thumb slightly and place the left side of its outer phalange at the extreme left outer edge, resting on the top surface of the deck (Figure 191). With sufficient pressure, a tiny crease of flesh will be forced over the edge of the second card. The cards may tend to bevel slightly, producing contact between the thumb and the upper surfaces of both cards, but it is preferable that this not occur. The two cards should be controlled by their / edges alone.

Move your thumb to the right. The two cards should move rightward, passing over the left fingertips. The left first finger, at the front, acts as a guide, of sorts, so the cards move in a straight line across the deck. This is a feel that one devel- ops with practice.

NOTE: While the idea of pushing off two cards by using the flesh overhang of the thumb dates back at least as far as Expert C h d Echnique, the idea of applying that flesh to the left side of the deck, rather than the front edge, stems from an Earl Nelson Double Lift technique taught on his Earl Nehon Video Workshop, Volume 2 (1 984).

As you continue the push, the inner part of your thumb will contact the third card down. This is the same technique used in the Rezvani-Vernon New Theory Deal. If you continue the push, the third card too will pass over the fingertips at the right side of the deck. Figure 192 shows the position, i

but with the misalignment of the top two cards exaggerated for clarity.

TAKE

Hold your right hand, thumb uppermost, about six inches to the right of the deck. Move this hand about three inches to the left as the left hand moves about the same distance rightward. As the hands approach each other, slightly necktie the deck. This is not a rapid action; rather it is performed at a smooth, even tempo. Eventually, the right thumb will contact the extreme right edge of the doubled cards, driving them back toward alignment with the deck. At the same time, the instant after contact, the left fingers straighten, pushing the third card farther to the right. When the technique is clicking, the doubled cards w d act

and feel like a single card and the third card will almost jump from beneath the double card to under your right thumb.

At the completion of this push-back action, the card that is third from the top will be jogged to the right for about a third of its width, with your right thumb above it. The top two cards will be essentially square with the deck. If you find the third card rotating as it moves l e h a r d , concentrate on equalizing the pressure exerted by the left fingers as they straighten. Ultimately, once the third card is side-jogged it is a simple matter to press up with your right second finger and down with your right thumb to grasp the jogged card and carry it to the right, clear of the deck. There should be no appreciable pause between the pushing of the upper two cards to the left and the grasping and carrying of the third card to the right.

Your left fingers should begin to curl back toward the deck before the jogged card clears the right side, although they cannot complete this action until the card clears. If you time the action correctly, your second and third fingers will be re-aligning the deck against the base of your left thumb before the removed card reaches the table. Applying forward pressure will align all the cards at the front by driving them against your left first finger. The Deal is complete when the deck is hlly square. Other than the Two-Card Push-Off, maintaining the squareness of the deck is the most challenging part of the deal. You can anticipate that gaining assurance with it will be the last step of mastery.

NOTE: In Marlo Magazine, Volume 3, 1979, Eddie identifies and employs an additional action to enhance the illusion of his Natural Second Deal (page 65, Step 6). Vernon had applied essentially the same idea to a Bottom Deal. That action also applies well here. Add a left-hand wrist-turn at the moment of the Take. It is astounding how much this improves the look of the Deal in instances where you are dealing straight down to the table.

One more idea some may find appealing is to hold the right thumb parallel to the right edge of the pushed-off cards. If this approach is taken and you maintain close alignment of the doubled cards, the necktie may be avoidable. Some will find the Parallel-Thumb Take to be "unnatural"; you can make your own determination.

FOURTHS, FIFTHS, ETC.

When I began practicing the preceding technique, I experienced a fair amount of difficulty ensuring that the Two-Card Push-Off that began the action yielded only two cards. This is not a unique problem with Two-Card Push-Offs but the problem seemed exacerbated by the straight, rather than the more traditional arced, Push-Off. I began experimenting with holding a two-card fourth-finger break while dealing. The break is unnecessary if the deck isn't sticky, but it can

be usehl when it is. Nevertheless, some may find dealing easier when using the break. In any case, this practice taught me that with a break below three, four or more cards I could deal fourths, fifths, etc. You may find this useful as well. (Also see "Adding Differentiation'' on page 276.)

Now that you understand the Theory Thirds concept, the following techniques will be both easier to understand and to acquire.

THE UNDIFFERENTLATED MIDDLE MARCH 30,1993

After experimenting with the Theory Thirds approach, I came to realize-mostly because of my misses-that fourths, fifths, etc., were possible. I reasoned that almost any number of cards could be pushed as a block and the technique would still work. I began pushing random-sized blocks, determined by where my thumb happened to fall, then applying the Theory Thirds Take. It worked. Having determined that it worked, I was still unsure of the utility of the technique.

It then occurred to me that there were often occasions when one would need to maintain stocks at both the top and bottom of the deck and still deal. Under such circumstances, one wouldn't care where the cards came from in the deck. One would, however, have to obtain them from somewhere in the middle. This technique is ideal for such a purpose and can be considered as an alternative to the use of a Bottom Deal under circumstances when only a top stock needs to be maintained. It may be considered an alternative to a Greek Bottom Deal when the goal is to maintain the bottom card and still get access to a card from elsewhere than the top stock. Moreover, since this technique requires no Get-Ready, one can readily use it in Deal-Switch situations. As an example, if you had four Aces face down on top of the deck and needed to apparently deal them to the table, dealing four Undifferentiated Middles would serve as a Deal-Switch. This could eliminate the need for a more complicated, fiddly and probably less logical display before the deal.

GRIP

Hold the deck as you do for Sure Theory Seconds or Theory Thirds but, depending on the size of your hand, slightly deeper. You want to be able to hide a substantial portion of the front edge of the deck.

PUSH-OFF

Instead of pushing a controlled number of cards from the top, as in the two deals just mentioned, move your left thumb farther left and down slightly, contacting the front left corner of the deck. If you now move the thumb to the right, you will move a block of cards of undetermined size ahead of it. From the

front it should not be possible to see the block because it is partially under the left thumb. The thumb cannot conceal the block by itself however, so your left first finger and the deeper grip you've assumed assist in obscuring it. (Figure 193 shows a front view of the rather unusual position of the deck, with the left thumb moved slightly aside to expose the configuration of the cards.) If you have a top stock, it's easy to push over at least that number of cards to preserve it. The hrther down the side of the deck the left thumb makes contact, the more cards will move over. It is nearly impossible to control the exact number reliably with this technique.

TAKE

As the hands approach each other, slightly necktie the deck. The right thumb will contact the extreme right edge of the block and will then push all but the lowermost card of the block back to the left. At the same time, at the moment of contact, the left fingers straighten, pushing that card farther to the right. When the technique is clicking, the block will slide back to the left as though it were a solid unit and the lowermost card will almost jump from beneath the block to under your right thumb.

During the action just-described, the right first finger should cover the front right corner of the block (Figure 194). At the completion of the action, the card at the bottom of the block will be jogged to the right for about a third of its width. The cards above it, having been pushed back by the right thumb, will be essentially square with the top of the deck (Figure 195).

Once the card is side-jogged, it is a simple matter to press up with your right second finger and down with your right thumb to grasp the jogged card and

carry it to the right, clear of the deck. It will take some work, but you can learn to perform this Take with no pause between the pushing of the block and the grasping and carrying of the middle card to the right. As soon as it is clear, curl your left fingers inward, tightening them on the deck. Also apply pressure forward, aligning the cards at the front by forcing them against your left first finger. The Deal is then complete and the deck square.

ADDING DIFFERENTIATION As I continued to work with the Undifferentiated Middle, I began to recognize that a means for differentiation was possible. I attempted to use a technique I thought would address the need. After a little experimentation, I found a way to make it work. The following additional touches will allow you to deal from whatever point in the middle of the deck you wish.

GRIP AND PUSH-OFF

If you begin the Undifferentiated Middle but hold a left fourth-finger break below the middle card you wish to deal, you can, with just a little extra practice, push off all the cards above the break. It is somewhat an acquired feel that comes with experience. Fundamentally, you need to learn where the left thumb needs to fall so it will overlap the edge of the block you want to move. You'll also need to learn the angle at which pressure must be applied by the left thumb. For me, it helps to think of aiming the pressure at the middle of the extreme right edge of the bottom card of the block I want to push over. That imagery may not work for you but it's a starting point. Experiment and you'll find the point you must target in your mind to make the technique reliable.

TAKE

As in the Undifferentiated Middle, as the hands approach each other, slightly necktie the deck. The right thumb will contact the extreme right edge of the block and push all but the bottom card of the block back to the left. At the same time, at the moment of contact, the left fingers straighten, pushing that card farther to the right. Again, the desired card should almost jump from the center and under your right thumb.

The right first finger, just as in the Undifferentiated handling, covers the front right corner of the block, and the Deal is completed as previously described. Because you need to acquire the break again after each card is dealt, your left fingers, beginning with the fourth, need to curl back toward the deck before the middle card clears the right side. If you time the action correctly, your fourth finger will catch the upper packet as it drops, after the middle card clears. The second and third fingers will re-align the deck against the base of your left thumb and forward pressure will align the front of the deck against the left first finger. Give it some practice and you will find the technique quite reliable.

MISCELLANEOUS FALSE DEALS

(CONCLUDED)

GREEK BOTTOM DEAL-The earliest mentions of the Greek Bottom of which I'm aware occur in Koschitz's Manual of Usefil Information (1894) and Theodore Hardison's Poker (1914). Neither Koschitz nor Hardison explain a method for the Deal. From then until now, the Greek Bottom Deal has been a technique that allows a Dealer to substitute the card second from bottom for the top card. I have no idea how the appellation "Greek" came to be applied. The technique was first conceived to address the problem presented by the burn card in one-deck Black Jack games. The one-deck game is nearly a thing of the past but some casinos and card rooms still "cap" the bottom of the deck with a blank or plastic card to prevent players from glimpsing the bottom card. Since most of these games are dealt by the house, the technique would only be useful to a crooked house-dealer working in concert with a player. This may, in part, explain why there are so few known techniques. The first Greek Bottom Deal technique waited until 1970 to see print: Allan Ackerman's Minus One Bottom Deal in Magic Ma& Efects (page 24). Later, in Kabbak Volume 3 (1976), Marlo shared his thinking in "The Multiple Minus Bottom" (page 106). Martin Nash provides an approach, albeit limited in application, in his Any Second Now (1 977, page 19 1). Andrew Wimhurst adds to these techniques in his Down Under Deah (1998, page 29). I know of no other published technique, but I understand that the best existing method is a currently unpublished one by Fred Robinson. Tom Gagnon has shown me

a One-Handed Greek Bottom Deal technique with very interesting applica- tional implications.

I confess that the Greek Bottom Deal has little to recommend it to magicians. It would allow a performer to flash the bottom card both before and after the deal in a Stop-type effect but that hardly seems worth the effort, and there are other ways to reach the same end (see my "l?K.A. Cheating," page 21 9). It also allows an alternative means of faking a Center Deal. This, however, seems an odd application considering the other alternatives. On the other hand, Bottom Dealers should not find adding the Greek Bottom to their repertoire very taxing. Nevertheless, if you're just learning False Deals, you can safely leave "the Greek" for last.

NO DEAL AND SWAP DEAL-The terms "No Deal" and "Swap Deal" are moni- kers of my invention. They refer to two unique classes of techniques that are either theoretical (no technique currently exists) or are based on ideas by my dear, departed friend Johnny Benzais. The Benzais idea is sometimes called the Deal Cop. (When it first appeared in Lorayne's Close-Up Card Magic, 1962, page 269, it was dubbed the JB Kard Kop.) The concept behind the No Deal is that a card is either taken from the deck and stolen as it is dealt, for later disposition (a Deal Cop), or it is never taken in the first place, even though the actions of dealing are simulated (Theoretical). One can readily imagine how useful the functions that derive from these techniques could be. The most obvious uses being Counts for more or less, position displacements (see my "1-2-3-4 Rise" in Mr. Gadfly, Vol. 1, No. 3, September 200 1, page 20) and, more directly, steals. (see "A.E. S.S. E.M. IOU" in The Magical Record and Thoughts of Wesley James, page 92). Few individual techniques would be more flexible or more broadly useful. The Benzais Cop is quite easy to learn if you use the proper grip (S.F. Grip without the first finger in front). Marlo thought enough of Johnny's technique to have devoted a few pages on it to his thoughts in Advanced Finger- tip Control (1970, page 140).

HISTORICAL NOTE: On page 142 of that book Eddie mentions that Persi Diaconis claimed, in a private conversion with him, to have shown this sleight to Benzais. Of course, I can't confirm what was actually said at that meeting. However, prior to his untimely passing, Johnny told me he came up with the technique and an application, and showed it to Persi, who immediately came up with other applications. I believed Johnny then and still do, as he was always honest with me. I can add nothing more to this puzzling contradiction of claims.

The "simulated deal" approach is almost completely unexplored territory. The closest approximation is "Rub-a-Dub-Dub from Expert Card Techniqw (page 301), and that's not very close. It is an interesting challenge. Lennart Green of Sweden has a wonderful technique that can be applied to this purpose.

He calls it the Snap Deal. When Lennart deals a card, palming it in the action, then secretly adds it back to the deck as he apparently deals another card, his Snap Deal meets the definition of a No Deal. Lennart's Deal is not yet widely used but now that his booklet, The Snap Deal (1 995), written by Tom Stone, has been released, it may gain greater currency. In Issue 5, October 1998, of Ken Simmons' O m , I contributed my Oil and Water routine, titled "Olive Oil on the Side" (page 5), which uses the Snap Deal as a No Deal.

The Swap Deal is not only my designation but my concept. If one could steal one or more cards from wherever they may reside in the deck and swap them at will for the top card, in the act of dealing, one would have a deal that could substitute for most other False Deals in many situations. In theory, any of the previously mentioned No Deal approaches could be applied to the Swap Deal. Other methodological approaches might also be feasible. Marlo and others have published or developed methods for producing a palmed card while making it appear that the card is being removed from the top of the deck. Such techniques could probably be applied to the Swap Deal concept but, for the sake a purity of concept, I have limited candidates to techniques wherein both the Steal and the Swap are accomplished in the apparent act of dealing. Under that constraint, techniques that swap previously stolen cards, however they may be acquired or concealed, for dealt cards do not qualify.

The exchange aspect of the Swap Deal can be covered by any of a host of perfectly normal actions one might perform as part of dealing a card. I plan future discourses that will explore this concept and other approaches at greater length and in hrther detail. For now it should suffice to say that I see these two concepts, the No Deal and the Swap Deal, as the way of the future. A good Double Deal (the standard forms and some of the Theoretical ones) and the No Deal create powerful Card Switch combinations. The Swap Deal can replace every False Deal except the Double Deal and No Deal. These two Deals are exceptions because their function relates to number rather than identity. In case you can't tell, I'm enthusiastic about the potential of these two concepts.

OVERT

The scope of overt action elements related to False Deals is as wide as it is for Bottom and Second Deals, and like those Deals is as fully encompassing: everything and anything that makes a deal easier, smoother or more efficient, except techniques addressed at creating deceptiveness or illusion. This section will offer some observations on some of the major elements as they relate to False Deals.

Most of the action elements applicable to the Bottom Deal and Second Deal apply to other False Deals as well. In fact, for some False Deals-such as

'Thirds, Fourths and Fifihs-actions like the Necktie are essential, or nearly so. Wrist Swinging, Wrist Turning, Bobbing and Reverse Necktieing are also useful to this type of False Dealer. If nothing else, they allow the dealer a greater margin for error. Many Center Deals rely on integrated deck motion to screen their overt techniques, changing them to covert ones. One might normally think of these as a consideration of deceptiveness but in these instances they are more related to allowing the opening to be widened greater for extraction, which affects ease of execution. My best advice here, as in the Second Deal, is to confine actions to +one deck thickness up and down, +one deck width side to side and +half a deck length front to back. That's about a three inch by six inch by six inch space. Again, more is excessive; less is more. Easily the most important thing a dealer can do to make Deals easier is to practice. Not just any practice, though it all helps, but "overload practice. Practicing Bottom Deals, Botop Double Deals or Center Deals with more than a full deck makes Deals with fifty-two cards or fewer easier. A1 Cooper, my old friend and an expert Bottom Dealer, was fond of practicing his Deals with a glove on his gripping hand. It improves one's sensitivity. I find practicing with decks in a wide variety of conditions-borrowed decks are particularly good-a useful way of forcing your hands to learn fine compensation skills. Whatever works for a given individual is worth trying.

There are some very real problems faced in every type of False Deal. The Center Dealer must hide the opening of the deck. The Third, Fourth and Fifth Dealer must hide the state of the stepped, jogged or fanned cards on top of the deck. The Top Double Dealer must assure that the cards come off in alignment. The Botop Double Dealer faces an even more difficult version of the alignment problem, plus the need to screen the cards as they come together. Every Deal must be seriously analyzed and considered before it can be used with any hope of deceptiveness. The Center Dealer can use a deeper Take, which can help conceal the opening of the deck. The Botop Double Dealer can use the same Deep Take to help in hiding the top and bottom cards converging. The Top Double Dealer can combine careful Take-hand finger positioning with a longer than usual Take stroke to increase certainty that alignment problems will be mini- mized or concealed. These suggestions can't address every problem with every False Deal. No single discussion of this size could adequately do so. Rather, I offer some suggestions for particular problems. More importantly, the examples offer tools that may be employed to address other problems. Ultimately, knowledge, experimentation and experience are the most powerful tools. There are few problems that can't be overcome with careful consideration and the judi- cious use of the appropriate tool.

When the problems of deceptiveness unique to each Deal are satisfactorily addressed, there remains the matter of illusion. The creation of the visual illusion that the top card is being taken, when it is actually some other card or cards, or no card at all, is key to the illusion, positive or negative, and must receive careful attention. Even if one decides to sacrifice illusion for other values, it should be a conscious choice. The matter of note here is that there are means of assisting illusion that can be used for many different types of Deals. These may be thought of as principles for assisting illusion. My Deep Thumb Take (see my Back-Right Bottom Deal in Pateboard Pe'erpensions, page 19) is an example of such a principle. The countervailing motion phenomenon that is operative in the New Theory Second Deal and its progeny can also be considered a principle. A number of others no doubt exist. Some may not be universally agreed upon (see my observations on the Chase Second Deal, page 236), while others will find nearly universal acceptance. It can take years to analyze, learn, coordinate and incorporate all the actions and covers required to turn any False Deal into a smooth, reliable, natural and illusionary one. As always, developing an objective eye may well be the most difficult and useful tool of all. It's worth it.

THEORETICAL FALSE DEALS

In addition to the No Deal and Swap Deal, I've conceived a number of other deals that could theoretically exist. In other words, they would exist if there were techniques to accomplish their tasks. I'll not go into a lot of detail about any of these deals. I'll merely list them here: the Second-Third Double Deal, the Middle Double Deal, the Middle-Middle Double Deal (Middles from two different spots) and the Middle-Bottom Double Deal.

Some of these Deals have no apparent gambling applications that are not filled by existing techniques, but each could have magical applications that might be tapped. Some thought will reveal these applications and, with effort, methods may be devised. Someday we may think of some of these Deals as common, particularly if the No Deal concept catches on.

SUMMARY

There is, at some level, a critical mass for False Deals. When enough cardmen have acquired facility with a given False Deal, applications begin to appear. On the other hand, with so few applications for False Deals in print, relatively few cardmen are motivated to invest the time and effort necessary to acquire the requisite dealing skills and thus to develop additional, new applications that employ them. I can only hope that, with time, applications and proponents will come. Until then, we must love False Deals for themselves. My sincere hope is that the ideas I've included here will help speed the widespread acceptance and use of False Deals.

--

SHUFFLES

FALSE RIFFLE SHUFFLES

LOOKING AT False Riffle Shuffles analytically, all other considerations aside, they all must, at some point, deviate from legitimacy. While that statement might seem fatuous, the instant at which this deviation occurs determines the last moment the shuffle can be fully scrutinized by viewers. That is an often overlooked but fundamental consideration. From that perspective, the shuffle that deviates earliest is the Zarrow. A One-Shuffle Zarrow begins its deviation in the split before the shuffle. The point of deviation in a Two-Shuffle Zarrow is after the interlace but before the telescoping process. In the Strip-Out Shuffle, the point of deviation, while harder to pinpoint, is during the telescoping process and before the point of apparent coalescence, which I call the "moment of conjoin." Finally, the point of deviation for the Push-Through Shuffle is slightly before the "moment of conjoin" but later than in a Strip-Out. Three things can be reasoned based on the following observations:

(1) The Push-Through deviates later in the shuffle process than any other False Riffle Shuffle.

(2) There need not be a direct correlation between the point of deviation and the ultimate deceptiveness of a shuffle.

(3) You've probably never thought about False Riffle Shuffles in this way.

Addressing these points in reverse order will, I believe, be most productive to my agenda. False Riffle Shuffles break down into a series of discrete but contiguous steps, stages or phases. Each has a definable beginning and end. Each stage is associated with a dynamic, transitional procedure. In the hope that providing

a nomenclature will facilitate discussion and refinement of these procedures, I define them as follows:

Every riffle shuffle begins with the Split. It then proceeds through the Interhe process to the Alignment phase. This is followed by a Telescoping action that ends in the Conjoin. In the case of a legitimate shuffle this is the point of coalescence. The shuffle proper concludes with the Square. Shuffles generally then continue with a Cut, Strip or Resplit, but such stages and their associated actions should be considered as separate from, though contiguous within, the shuffle. Each of these stages can benefit from analysis particular to the type of shuffle in which they are being performed.

Point 'livo above is opinion but important to keep in mind. It would be easy to mistakenly conclude that the later in a shuffle the point of deviation occurs the more deceptive the shuffle. Following that logic, the Push-Through would be the most deceptive shuffle. In practice, the point of deviation only dictates which stages of a shuffle the performer can emphasize, and therefore sell. In a Strip-Out the Alignment phase is strongest, while the Telescoping phase needs the most careful analytical attention. In a Push-Through the Telescop- ing phase has a stronger look than in the Strip-Out but requires attention to other intrinsic details. For the Zarrow the moment of conjoin should support the greatest scrutiny. (In practice, most practitioners emphasize the Interlace phase of the Zarrow and bull their way through the rest.) Let me hasten to say that emphasizing the correct phase of each shuffle is not common practice, nor is it necessarily easy. It requires careful thought to properly construct a shuffle technique that capitalizes on its strongest elements and hides its weaknesses. Clearly, if the critical areas cannot be identified, they cannot be specifically addressed. All that said, I should go on record with my bias. Unlike the late Ed Marlo, Dai Vernon and currently Darwin Ortiz, among others, I am not fond of Strip-Out Shuffles. I recognize their strength for block transfers and that Strip-Outs permit presentational emphasis through an exaggerated Tele- scoping phase. I am not, however, persuaded of the strength of the Telescoping phase illusion, no matter how slowly it can be performed. Since I am not fond of Strip-Out Shuffles, I have invested considerable analysis, time and effort in both the Zarrow and Push-Through Shuffles. These preferences led me to the first point listed above.

Since the Push-Through deviates from legitimacy later than any other False Riffle Shuffle, one can sell the Shuffle longer than any other type. This can be extremely useful in some instances. When this sell is most critical to the application, I am inclined to use what I refer to as the Merlin Push-Through. It is an asymmetric technique that differs from the Dad Stevens approach that Vernon advocated (see The Vernon Chronicles, Volume 1, 1987, page 44) in that it is more

open. This feature, which I will describe in detail, was first shown to me by the late Frank Garcia. He attributed it to Jack Merlin. I have checked the published record of Merlin's work and none of it includes the point that distinguishes this shuffle; but as Merlin was reputed to withhold, if not actually mislead, in his writings, it may well be that this technique was in fact his but never saw print. To confuse matters further, in 1973 Garcia included a Top-Stock False Shuffle in his book, Super Subtle Card Miracles (1973, page 87). The technique he describes is a less effective application of Merlin's concept. In the same book, Garcia seems to credit the idea to Joe Christ (see page 214). Of course Marlo addresses the technique in his seminal, Rz@ Shu@ Systems (1959, "New Push Thru-Second Method," page 83). More recently, Steve Draun came very close to the same technique in his excellent book, Secrets D r a u n j o m Underground (1993, page 28). With its paternity unresolved, this may be the first time the full Merlin technique, as I understand it, has been published.

Sometimes any effort to emphasize the fairness of a shuffle serves to call it into question. In such instances, which are common, it is best merely to perform the shuffle as a Gestalt. Insouciance is the key to deceptiveness under these circumstances but the visual elements are no less demanding. The shuffles I use are the Zarrow and the Strike Push-Through. The Strike Push-Through is a shuffle I have developed and refined over the years. It includes a number of elements that have not seen print until now. Some of these, though developed independently, parallel unpublished work of the late Frank Thompson. I learned this during one of the few sessions I had with him. We discussed my developments at the time and he asserted that he had similar work (which I don't dispute). I was then and am now pleased to know that my thinking guided me to the same ideas as a man as clever and knowledgeable as was Frank. May he rest in peace.

Truth to tell, my favorite False Shuffle is the Zarrow. I will admit to having spent as much time analyzing the Zarrow as any single move, with the exception of the Pass. During a two-year period I spent a chunk of every day analyzing, thinking about and practicing my Shuffle in front of a three-way mirror or video camera. I'm satisfied that it paid off, and I hope you will be too. My approach to the Zarrow shuffle is detailed at length, starting on the next page. Because the Zarrow is a deceptively easy move to do, however badly, the devil is in the details. Enjoy the details!

THE ZABROW SHUFFLE

IN MY years of doing magic I have seen many people perform many different False Riffle Shuffles. Of all I've seen, as done by both magicians and cheats, none have been as deceptive as the Zarrow Shuffle (The New Phoenix, No. 346, July 20, 1957, page 2 10; and Dai Vernon2 More Inner Secrets of Card Magic, 1960, page 49). No Push-Through or Strip-Out, no matter how fine the brief or how smooth the action, can compare, and for riffle stacking the Zarrow Shuffle is nearly ideal. Having written this, let me hasten to add that I had not, until recently, seen a Zarrow that was completely indetectable, though many were invisible. (The recent exception is Gary Plants' work on the Zarrow, publication of which is planned for the near future.) The distinction I'm making here is, I believe, an important one. It is very possible for a sleight to show no visible sign of its execution yet be detectable because of the actions associated with it, what are called "tells," a term borrowed from card mechanics. An obvious example may help you to understand the distinction. Let us suppose that you saw someone take a card in Overhand Grip. If he then rotated his hand palm up to show the face of the card, then placed the card on top of the deck, you might suspect that he had done a bad Double Lift. You didn't see him set the break for the Lift, nor did the Double spread, so this form of Double Lift would have to be considered invisible. People, however, don't normally handle cards in the manner I've described. You would therefore suspect that something untoward was being done. What has been done need not be discernable; the simple arousal of suspicion flags the move. Thus a move can be invisible but not indetectable.

Back to the matter at hand, I have been fortunate in meeting, on a number of occasions, with Herb Zarrow, a fine and intelligent gentleman. He has done

his shuffle for me and it is totally invisible and as nearly indetectable as any I have seen. Until recently, no one had come any closer to indetectability than Herb, though others have reached his level in this area. (Fuller details on Herb's method appeared in Karl Fulves' Rzfle S h u f i Technique, Part 1, 1974, page 24.) I sensed that a Zarrow Shuffle that was both invisible and indetectable was possible and I elected to attempt to create such a technique. If others, trusted brothers in the fraternity, are to be believed, I have succeeded.

THE PROBLEMS

There are at least four visible clues that a Zarrow Shuffle is being executed. As it turns out, there are also significant kinetic problems that are not so much seen as subconsciously registered. If the kinetic factors were the sole problems, they would probably be insufficient to tip off the Shuffle, but they act as subliminal flags that alert the mind. As a consequence, the eye looks more critically at other aspects of the Shuffle in which they occur and at each subsequent shuffle. When this happens, something is almost certain to be seen. The visible problems to which I refer have, to some degree, been identified by others as well, and solutions have been published. My treatments of these visible problems might equally be replaced by other published treatments. My approaches are included here only for the sake of completeness. I make no special claim for their efficacy. I do, however, believe I was the first to identify and solve the two kinetic problems-as I choose to term them-discussed below. The problems are as follows:

VISIBLE:

(1)The lifting of the right hand's packet as the packets move toward each other has been identified by others. It is caused by efforts to aid the clearance of the right-hand packet subsequent to the unmeshing.

(2) The visibility from the front edge of the right-hand block moving through the space under the top block. This problem, also recognized by others, is caused by an incorrect choice of entry angle for the block or incorrect finger positions at the front edge.

(3) Excessive spreading of the top "shade" cards, principally of the left-hand packet. This is caused by fear of Problem 2 and the mistaken belief that this shade is needed for deceptiveness.

(4) Too large a right-hand action as the packet is unweaved and pushed into the left-hand packet. This is caused by general apprehension that the packets won't unmesh, or a mistaken understanding of the correct mechanics of the technique. In addition to the "suspect

actions" just defined, I have identified two kinetic problems, which are more subliminal than visual.

KINETIC:

(a) The deck should bind as it is pushed together (telescoped), as it does in every legitimate shuffle. Since no bind occurs, the viewer is subliminally tipped off to the unmeshing and, as the bind would take place before the completion of the Shuffle, the viewer is likely to notice any discrepancies later in that Shuffle or in subsequent ones. It makes Problem (B), which I'm about to discuss, more acute. (Roberto Giobbi does mention the binding problem in "The Zarrow Dynamic" section of Card College, W u m e 3, 1998, page 630, and, assumedly, his 1994 Grosse Kartenscbule, Band 3; but this comes more than twenty years after I first identified and addressed this problem.)

(b) In a legitimate shuffle, because the cards interweave, the edges of the deck, when the hands move away to square, show the effect of that meshing in the form of cards at close intervals being minutely out of alignment. I call this phenomenon "edge break-up." No Zarrow Shuffle I have ever seen pays the slightest attention to the lack of such break-up-until now.

WJ ON THE ZARROW APRIL 1970

Prepare for the Shuffle by undercutting more than a third but less than half of the deck to the right. The smaller the portion you take, the smaller the block you will have to screen later. Thus, unless the application demands it, slightly less than half is preferable. (See NOTES, at the end, on the question of cutting the top or the bottom to the right.)

Bring the packets together so that they form an inner angle of 160-165 degrees. An angle smaller than 160 degrees may be suspect, but significantly greater angles make the unmesh more difficult.

Riffle the cards together lightly. The lighter the riffle the easier the unmesh. (See NOTES for further discussion of this point.) It is generally desirable to release a block of about five cards from the right-hand packet before "freely" interlacing the two portions. O n hard surfaces, as many as ten cards are helpful. O n hard or slippery surfaces, you may elect to forego this initial five-card block on the right in favor of an eight- to ten-card block on the left. In such cases, you would lay down the bed on the left, then the five on the right, after which the balance of the deck can be shuffled. It is better to allow the interlaced cards to fall in blocks

of five to seven rather than to approach a card-for-card interweave, but it is not crucial. If the specific application for which you are using the Zarrow doesn't dictate otherwise, the last cards from the right hand should fall while three or four cards from the left-hand packet remain. You should know whether it is three or four, as you must shuffle under the same number in the second Shuffle. You can "slur" (spread over) the top few cards of the right-hand packet in a line to the lefi but in line with their packet. This slurring should not be pronounced, as it can be a tip-off to the Shuffle. The screen suggested in Vernon's description of the Zarrow is not necessary or, I believe, desirable.

Grasp the packets lightly with your second and third fingers positioned along the outer edges of their respective portions, the fourth fingers at the outer corners, first fingers curled onto the backs of the packets and the thumbs resting about a third of the way back from the adjacent ends (Figure 196).

Both hands now press down and move to the right and back, slightly slurring the packets (Figure 197); then, as if correcting for this, move the hands back to the left (Figure 198). This causes a set of 197 small steps to form along the sides of -4sie both packets, because of the bevels you've created, thus beginning to produce some edge break-up. These , r\n

adjustments should be done with- A /.

are noticed at all.

out emphasis and a if by accicicnt. 1-hc!. must sccni incidental if [hc!.

The side of the right thumb must make firm contact with the surface of the mat at a point under the near side of the right-hand packet. This position is critical. The thumb being under rather than at the side of the packet causes the right- hand packet to inscribe a wider arc than it otherwise would when the packets are rotated together, as they will be in a moment. This larger arc causes the unmeshing of the packets and continues the break-up of the edges. Moreover, positioning the right thumb under the packet prevents the right hand's cards from falling toward the table when they are unmeshed.

Both hands rotate on their thumbs in an outward arc. It should require no more than about ten degrees of arc to unmesh the packets. As soon as the unmeshing is complete, stop the rotation but be sure the length of the right thumb supports its entire stock. Don't allow these cards to drop. Instead, the right thumb drives the lower cards of the packet up to join the top card, but the top card should not rise at all.

The surrounding fingers begin pushing toward each other at an acute angle of five degrees, without actually gripping their packets. At the same time, both hands move a bit to the left again, in a line parallel to the left-hand packet. This causes additional steps to form in the packets. The right-hand push, which happens fairly rapidly, ends when the corner of the right packet hits behind the left second fingertip. When the right packet encounters this fingertip, a binding is simulated that would occur in a genuine shuffle. The Shuffle would be vulnerable to scrutiny at this point if the fingers where not blocking the audience's view of the front edges of the deck. Be sure the fingers are angled to effectively screen the edges (Figure 199,where the corner of the right-hand packet is exposed for clarity). It isn't necessary for the fourth fingers, which are doing most of the screening of the corners at the moment, to touch the table surface to do their job effectively They need only be lower then the top of the lowest packet.

199

Move both fourth fingers to the outer ends of the packets. The hands will assume a sharper angle to the table, nearer perpendicular, and will continue to mask the front edges of the packets to the right and left of center (Figure 200).

The fourth fingertips press against the table as you straighten your fingers until they are perpendicular to the tabletop. This drives the packets slightly inward. To the audience the deck will appear to be telescoping in as it would in a genuine shuffle. Eventually the packets will be telescoped for all but a half inch on each side, which will be hidden by the third finger of each hand at the front. The fingers all around the packets now loosen their grip so that they form a frame around the deck without restricting its

motion. The next movement is the most difficult to acquire. It's one of those "feel" things that abound in sleight-of-hand. It is also a most critical modi- fication to the Shuffle. Both fourth fingers simultaneously, kick forward and toward each other. The inside edges of the fourth fingers lightly contact the ends of the extreme front corners of the packets. Figure 201 shows the fourth-finger positions before and after the kick action. Combined kicks from the fourth fingers and the way the packets, on both the left and right, rebound off the other fingers, serve to produce what I call "packet shatter," making it appear as though an interweave had taken place. This touch finishes the telescoping of the packets, which lie at a modest diagonal angle to each other.

The hands now move away from the deck to take up positions alongside it for a normal side-squaring action. At the left rear corner you will see (and feel) a step. As you perform the squaring action, turn that step into a break. Your first Shuffle is complete.

Do a second Zarrow Shuffle, undercutting at the step and shuffling under the same number of cards you did in the first shuffle. Everything about this second Shuffle is identical to the first except, perhaps, the thickness of the packets. The deck is back in order; or, if you cut top to the right for the first Shuffle and bottom to the right for the second, they will be in order after cutting at the break. The break can be ignored after the second Shuffle if you've cut the bottom to the right for both Shuffles.

NOTES: For purposes of this discussion the Zarrow Shuffle is any Shuffle in which a table-rifled deck that has been meshed in the Shuffle is later

unmeshed and inserted below one or more cover cards. I will not enter into the Zarrow-Shank debate.

When you shuffle, you should shuffle with a light touch. I believe this true for all shuffles, false or genuine; it makes the shuffles easier in their execution. In the Zarrow Shuffle, a heavy or tight shuffle will impede the unmeshing and encourage tip-off actions; for example, lifting or too big a swing. Conversely, too light a shuffle looks affected and can appear studied and suspicious. One should cultivate 3 happy medium. A general guideline is to always shuffle lightly enough to make a clean Push-Through easy, but no lighter.

I have for some years pondered the question of how many shuffles are required to convince a viewer beyond reasonable doubt that the deck has been mixed, and how many shuffles is too many. The numbers are, perforce, unprovable. Like the nuclear particle, they are also affected by the attempt at measurement (the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle). The efFect on the viewer is affected by a wide variety of psychological factors. Nevertheless, my empirical sense is that three is the most convincing and, therefore, the ideal number. The maximum is, in part, contingent on how quickly you shuffle, but in no case is it greater than six, with five being the general maximum.

My conviction that three shuffles are ideal has led me to create numerous three-shuffle combinations. I will confess that I most often use a Push- Through followed by a two-shuffle Zarrow, ending in a cut; or I might reverse the order of these shuffles. For purposes of this discussion, only the two Zarrows will be examined. I prefer cutting top to the right, so the top cards are seen to be buried in the first Shuffle. This choice also forces a cut after the second Shuffle, which is psychologically sound. If you prefer, or your application requires that you cut the bottom to the right, you can create the illusion of a top-to-the-right cut by using the following procedure:

THE TABLED WNNIPEG CUT M A Y 14, 1975

Extend your right first 202 finger about five-sixths of the way across the top of the deck. The left thumb forms a break at the point where you chose to divide the deck (Figure 202). The right thumb and fingers grip the lower block, / and in one short hop-like

action move it to the right (Figure 203) and clear of the left-hand packet.

The first finger creates the illusion that it is the top

~ - - - - - - that moves to the right. This move is a tabled ver- /

sion of Me1 Stover's "Winnipeg Cut." (See Garcia's Million Dolhr Card Secrets, 1972, page 93. Others may argue that another designation is more historically accurate. Argument, for example, could be made for calling it the "Marnase False Cut;" see Kzbbah, Vol. 1, No. 4, December 1971, page 32.) Using the Tabled Winnipeg Cut, you can split the bottom to the right and finish without a cut, while still apparently burying what viewers believe to be the top of the deck.

RECAP

The action of my Zarrow differs in many ways from other published handlings. There are five essential points, however, that most distinguish it from others:

(1) The unmesh is accomplished by the differing arcs produced by the different thumb positions on the two packets. This cannot be perceived by a viewer, because the arcs are too similar to be distinguishable and because the thumbs are largely hidden by the packets.

(2) The right thumb is used as a shelf, which prevents the right-side cards, when they unmesh, from dropping. When the right thumb is properly positioned, the unmeshed cards move up, toward the top card of the right-side stock. This completely eliminates the need for lifting the right packet, if ever there was one.

(3) The left second fingertip, at the front, being used to stop the entry of the right-side cards, simulates the binding that would occur in a legitimate shuffle. The lack of bind is, generally, after the lifting of the right-side packet, the most serious and common tip-off that a Zarrow Shuffle is being performed. If the hands properly screen the front edges of the deck, it is impossible for a viewer to determine the reason for the bind. They are inclined to conclude that the cards are binding against each other.

(4) The telescoping action (I sometimes substitute a jiggling action), produced by straightening the fingers, perpetuates the binding illusion. Magicians have for year used this telescoping in Push- Through and Strip-Out type Shuffles, and it occurs naturally in genuine shuffles. 1 am, I believe, the first to apply it to the Zarrow.

In so doing I have made it possible for all False Shuffles and genuine shuffles to appear identical when properly executed.

( 5 ) The fourth-finger kick, when combined with the two slight leftward movements of the deck-one before the unmesh and the second after the simulated bind-produce "packet shatter." This break-up of the packets allows the hands to leave the front of the deck to square the cards at the completion of the Shuffle, revealing that the deck appeats to have been shuffled. To the viewer, looking at the condition of the deck, it should truly look as though the packets were intenveaved. No other Zarrow technique has considered this issue.

If your efforts to apply my techniques fail to shatter the packets, it is probably the result of too firm a grip. As this failure is the third biggest tip-off of a Zarrow, it is worthy of attention and practice. Properly shattering the packets makes the deck condition visually indistinguishable from that of a genuinely shuffled deck.

I suggest you try incorporating these changes into your Zarrow Shuffle. You will find it takes a while to get comfortable with them; but once they become second nature the Shuffle is amazingly deceptive and no more difficult than inferior techniques. I have viewed hours of video tape of a mixture of my genuine and Zarrow Shuffles and I can't distinguish one from the other. That's as tough a test as you will find; try it.

I have included three effects in these pages that utilize the Zarrow to varying degrees ("Fair Risk," page 223, "Sympathetic Blacks," page 240, and "I'll Put Money On It," which follows). They will, I hope, provide you with incentive to learn or re-learn the Zarrow Shuffle using my revisions. Good luck, happy Zar- rowing and thank you, Herb, for sharing your marvelous technique with us.

I'LL PUT MONEY ON IT OCTOBER 30, 1973

THERE ISN'T a great deal to say about the history of this effect. Its ancestors are fairly apparent: Vernon's "Triumph" (see Stars of Magic, Series 2, No. 1, 1946) and U. F. Grant's untitled card-locating coin effect (Item 3 in Grant's 1940 monograph, 50 Kute Koin Tricks). The most familiar version of the Grant plot is probably Larry Jennings' "Coin Cut" (The Gen, Vol. 23, No. 2, June 1967, page 33, and later, L a y Jennings on Card and Coin Handling, 1977, page 14). My effect does not apply the methods of Vernon, Grant or Jennings. However, since it is related to Grant's plot, it is also peripherally related to Bob Dreibeck's "Tosheroon," (The Gen, Vol. 23, No. 11, March 1968, page 250), which is a card change under a coin rather than a location effect. My effect is not the same as any of those I've cited. Rather, I believe I've created a new combination of effects that is unique. I am cheered that it has also proven very effective with the public. I hasten to add that I truly appreciate the contributions of all these men, through their respective effects. Differences not withstanding, this routine would not exist without the foundation of their prior efforts.

EFFECT: The performer has a card selected and returned. The deck is tabled and half is turned face-up and riffle shuffled into the face-down portion. After demonstrating the face-up and face-down condition of the cards, a second shuffle is performed. The performer then states he is so confident he can straighten out the mess and find the spectator's card that he'll "put money on it." Upon cutting the deck, a half dollar is seen to be resting on the back of a card. That card proves to be the selection-and the remainder of the deck has returned to its proper orientation, all facing the same way.

METHOD 1 (BASIC)

REQUIREMENTS: A deck of cards with a convex, longitudinal bridge which provides some space underneath, when it's face down, in which to hide the required half dollar. The effect must be performed on a close-up pad or other cushioned surface.

Keep the half dollar hidden in the left hand or under a tabled spread as you have a card selected.

It is of course possible to have the selection returned to the deck, then controlled to the top via various means. A coin in Finger Palm in the left hand interferes very little with many control techniques. At various times I've used the Double- Undercut, the Mahatma Control and a simple Hindu Shuffle. While some attention must be paid to angles, all these are easily accomplished with the half dollar in left-hand Finger Palm. Alternately, have the card returned, face down, to the top of the deck.

Arrange the deck on the table in riffle shuffle position, with the coin on the mat under the deck.

NOTE: I have successfully used so many handlings to accomplish this sequence (Steps 1-3) that I'm disinclined to endorse one over another. I have, on occasion, even gone so far as to hide the half dollar under the deck during a previous effect. I usually hide the coin under the deck as I spread the cards between my hands for a selection to be withdrawn. I use whatever control strikes my mood. It is then a simple matter to place the deck onto the table, as one does for riffle shuffling, secretly loading the coin beneath it. I could go into great detail about finger positions and such but a few attempts will teach you more than hundreds of words; it's easy.

Undercut the deck to the right, without moving the upper packet to the left, turn the right-hand packet face up, and execute the following shuffle pattern. Release cards from the left-hand packet first. Continue interweaving the cards lightly until there are about twelve cards held by the right thumb and only one held by the left thumb. Release half the cards the right thumb holds, then the one from the left thumb, and finally the remaining cards from the right. With the left first finger, push the top card of the left-hand packet to the right and slightly forward (Figure 204).

Continue with the mechanics of the Zarrow Shuffle, as previously discussed, through the rotation of the packets and the resulting unmeshing of the interweave. At that point, rather than moving /'

the right-hand packet leftward, into the left-hand packet, move the right-hand packet backward for about half its width (Figure 205). Now complete the shuffle as previously explained in my description of the Zarrow. It's easy to make too much of this departure in technique. The tight-hand packet merely follows a different path on its way into the left-hand packet. This variation, which I call the "Diagonal Rear-Entry Approach," is, I believe, attributable to Derek Dingle. It is useful in this instance because of the single left-side cover card (the selection) and the BlockTransfer during the Shuffle. I believe it improves the deceptiveness of the Shuffle under these conditions while making it appear a bit sloppier.

5 Cut the cards at various points as you say, "Some cards face up, some face down. Some cards are face to back, some are back to back." As you say, "back to back," lift off the cards above the uppermost reversed card (the selection). As you replace this portion, form a left thumb break at the rear edge. Next, using your right hand, cut the portion of the deck lying below the thumb break and above the central division between face-up and hce-down blocks to the right (Figure 206). In other words, pull out the center block, the top card of this being the selection, while the bottom card is the lowermost face-up card. As you place the right hand's packet onto the legs, completing the cut, use your left thumb to maintain the break at the division between the face-up and face-down cards. The top card will now be the face-down selection.

NOTE: It is worth mention here that the tinling of your cuts to show face- up and face-down cards should reflect your character as a performer. If you profess that skill is the cause of the effects you create, stating the condition of the cards you are abour to cut-e.g. face to face-before actually doing so is consistent. Someone skillful enough to rapidly locate, separate and right all the reversed interwoven cards would certainly have the skill to decide whether to cut to face-to-face or back-to-back cards. On the other hand, if

you profess that the phenomena you offer your audiences are the result of external forces, arcane means or other outside causes, you would not know the state of the cards you cut until you have done so. As a result, the timing of your patter should reflect what you are observing. This simple timing adjustment and the acting that would accompany it give consistency to your performance. Such matters add to one's credibility as a performer. My bias aside, it is not critical which choice you make; but your choice should be consistent with your professed relationship to the magic you perform.

With your right hand, cut the block below the break to the right and turn this face-down packet face up. Shuffle the packets together, making sure cards fall from the left-hand packet first and last. This second shuffle is not false, but it should simulate the actions of your Zarrow Shuffle in all particulars.

Give the deck one more cut, bringing the lone face-down card to just below the middle of the deck. Make the cut a bit sloppy, justifying your hands moving over the deck to square it. As they do so, form a break above the face-down card with your left thumb. Your hands should be arched over the deck as they do during squaring.

Slide the deck forward, lifting the back edge slightly, and leave the coin on the pad surface. Move the right thumb so that it can press on the near edge of the coin. Continue moving the deck forward until the front edge of the coin clears the back edge of the deck. The coin will tip up at the front (Figure 207). Sliding the deck backward and the coin forward, it should enter the break in the deck (Figure 208). With the right thumb, push the coin into the break. %u will find that the angles on this loading action are not as demanding as it might at first appear. With a bit of attention to detail you can screen it from most angles, provided the audience is not significantly above your - -

eye level as you sit at the table, and is not seated extremely close to you.

Once the load is complete, you can, as I sometimes do, squeeze the deck by the long edges, re-establishing the bridge in the deck and thus the space, now within the deck, for the coin to rest. Your hands can come away from the deck

but should rest to the right and left of it, fingers curled loosely. This may not always be necessary, but it is a good habit since it screens the gap caused by the coin, preventing it from being seen prematurely.

"If I said I could straighten out this mess of face-up and face-down cards instantly, you might or might not believe me. But if I said I could straighten out this mess and find your card, you would probably think I was crazy. Well, that may be true but I'm sure. I'm so sure, I'll put money on it!"

Cut the deck at the coin and place the cut off portion to the right. Lift off the face-down card with the coin on it and place it directly in front of you. Move the remaining packet to the left. Slide the coin back, off the selected card.

Ask for the name of the selection and reveal it saying, "Then that's your card."

Spread both packets back toward you at the same time, revealing all the cards face up and add, "And I believe that straightens the mess."

NOTE: The revelation of the selection and the righting of the deck are shown as two steps. This is done to stress that there are two distinct effects and that they should not be rushed, blurring them together. You do not, however, want to stop between these steps. Your energy-as expressed through voice and body language-should build as each layer of the climax is revealed. A brief pause between the steps is acceptable but not mandatory. There should not, however, be a pause in your energy, which should build steadily to the final climax.

METHOD 2 (TABLED REVERSE)

The method used in this treatment offers another means of loading the coin. This method offers some angle and timing advantages under some performance conditions. It also changes the configuration of the deck at the point of the revelation. Some may prefer this double impact, in which the coin and the identity of the selection are revealed at the same time.

It should be noted that the cutting sequence used to show face-up and face-down cards intermixed, described in Method 1, Steps 5-6, while not redescribed, can be used in this and the other methods as well.

Have a card selected and noted. Ask that it be placed on top of the deck, or control it to the top. Table the deck, secretly loading the coin beneath it. This sequence is identical to Steps 1-3 of Method 1.

Undercut the deck to the left but don't move the upper packet to the right. Instead, bring it straight down so the coin will not be seen. Turn the left-hand packet face up.

5 Perform a Zarrow Shuffle, making sure that only a few cards fall from the left- hand packet before cards fall from the right. This helps to protect the hidden coin. Continue interweaving the cards lightly until about eight cards are held by the left thumb. Release these on top and do the Zarrow insertion under this block. It will help if you lift the deck at the rear as the packets are pushed together, at least until the right edge of the left-hand packet clears the left edge of the coin.

6 As you finish pushing the packets together, allow a step to form above the lower block of face-up cards (below the face-down block) and convert the step to a break as you square the deck. Undercut the deck at the break and complete the cut. The deck will now consist of about half a deck of face-up cards followed by the balance of the deck, face down. The top card of the face-down block will be the selection. Form a break at the division between the face-up and face-down blocks. Add one card from above the break (the bottom card of the face-up block) to the top of the lower packet.

7 Cut the portion of the deck above the break to the right and turn over the packet. Shuffle the deck, making sure that cards fall from the right-hand packet first and that you hold back the last two cards on the left until all the right-hand cards have been released.

8 You are about to execute my variation of a Marlo embellishment on Russell Barnhart's Table Reverse (Ofthe Tap, 1945, page 10). As you telescope the deck together, stop when the packets are merged for about half their lengths. Slide the deck forward until it clears the coin as you lift the front edge of the deck, pivoting on the back edge. The coin will be resting on the table behind the deck (Figure 209). Your hands move up along both sides of the deck but only the right hand makes contact with the top of its cards. The top two cards of the left- hand group should be allowed to fall onto the table, over the coin (Figure 210).

You should now be looking down at the selection. Use your left thumb to slide these two cards back on top of the deck (Figure 21 1). You should continue to see the selection as these cards are pushed back onto the pack. With the same thumb, slide the coin onto the deck, on top of the two just-reversed cards (Figure 212) and finish telescoping the deck square.

Conclude the shuffle by using your right hand to grasp the deck, first and second fingers on the face of the face-up deck, thumb on the reversed bottom catd (the selection) and the coin (Figure 2 1 3). Place everything into your left hand, the deck going to Dealing Grip with the coin beneath it.

Holding the deck face up, cut about half the cards to the table. You must now transfer the packet that remains in your left hand, with the coin hidden below it, onto the tabled packet. This can be accomplished in one of two ways. Talung the packet into Overhand Grip, you can extend your right fourth finger across the underside of the packet, pinning the coin against the bottom at the right

edge (Figure 214)) as you carry 214 the packet to the table. Depend- ing on the flexibility of your hands, this may prove difficult. The other alternative is easier but, arguably, more suspect. Curl your left first finger under the packet until it contacts the coin. This allows you to slide the coin across the bottom of the packet as you shift the packet to left-hand Pinch Grip with the assistance of the right hand. You can now carry the packet to the table and add it to the cards there. Square the deck as you tilt it onto its long edge. Revolve the deck face down, with the coin near the rear edge, in riffle- shuffle position. A face-down card shows on top.

Say, "If I can find your card now, it would be pretty impressive, and I'm so sure I've found your card I'll put money on it." Cut the deck at the coin. The face- up card below the coin is the selection. This is the moment of double impact referred to earlier. Place the cut-off portion to the right.

Lift off the face-up card with the coin on it and place it in front of you.

Move the remaining packet to the left, and slide the coin back, off the selection as you get the spectator to confirm that it is his.

Spread the two packets back toward you and reveal all the cards face down as you say, "And I believe that straightens the mess."

METHOD 3 (No ~ R N )

This approach adopts the Marlo notion that using just one shuffle, without the second or open half deck reversal, enhances the effect. I reserve judgment on the general correctness of this assertion, but I believe there is merit to the idea in this combined effect construct.

The opening selection and return process is the same as in Method 1. You conclude with the deck tabled and the coin concealed beneath it.

Follow Steps 4-7 of Method 2. This will take you through the completion of the first Zarrow Shuffle and the Undercut that follows it. At the completion of these steps, the top half of the deck will consist of face-up cards, while the cards in the bottom half are all face down. The selection will be the top card of the face-down block. Form a break below the selection.

8 You are about to perform a variation of Marlo's "No-Turn 'Triumph-First Method" (Hierophant, No. 3, 1970, page 145), which depends upon Russell Barnhart's Table Reverse from Marlo's Off the Tap: Lift the back edge of the upper packet, hinging it on its front edge until the packet is perpendicular to the table on which it rests (Figure 21 5) . From your perspective, you will be looking at the face of the selection. The face-down portion of the deck is still resting on the table. Shift your grip on the perpendicular packet, holding it with light inward pressure of the fingers of both hands on its ends. This will enable you to extend your thumbs to the near edge of the tabled packet (Figure 21 6). Press down and push with the thumbs. The tabled packet should slide along the table, its front edge rising as it travels up the near surface of the perpendicular packet (Figure 217). Along the way, it will trap the tabled coin.

I Pz~sb coin forward

with packet

The packet will conclude its forward excursion on edge behind the first packet. All the cards will be facing the same way, except the selection, which will be reversed, with the coin next to it, in the middle. Allow the entire deck to hinge forward, face down onto the face of the card furthest from you. This quick reversal is accomplished under the guise of squaring the cards at the completion of the shuffle and, therefore, should be handled casually, without much apparent attention.

Reveal the coin and selection simultaneously, then the straightened condition of 2.7 ""

the deck, just as you did in Method 2, Steps 10-13.

NOTI': It is not relevant to these treatments, which all rely on the Zarrow Shuffle, but to save you some effort, my unpublished notes titled "Sim- plex-I'll I'ut Money O n It" include methods char do not employ the Zarrow Shuffle or any other traditional False Shuffle to produce this effect. I mention this because a number of magicians who have seen this version have pointed out that the Slop Shuffle and other approaches could eliminate the traditional shuffles completely. I have explored this territory but have elected not to include those explorations in this already large book. These versions, in my opinion, are inferior to those presented here.

METHOD 4 (COUP DE GRACE)

This emendation was suggested by Derek Dingle on February 2, 1974. He offered no method. Mine, which follows, will be found no more difficult than the previous three but is, if you have the opportunity to set up for it, considerably more effective. As I was working on this text, I realized that the handling I've most often used in my hospitality-suite work differs significantly from my earlier notes. The method described next reflects the handling that has seen the most real-world performances.

EFFECT: Same as above, but with the addition of a color-segregation kicker.

SET-UP: Secretly arrange all the red cards above all the blacks. The first black card, at the twenty-seventh position, should be in-jogged slightly less than the width of a white border.

Spread the deck in your hands and have a card selected.

While the card is being noted, close the spread while maintaining the in-jogged card. When you're ready to proceed, cut off the cards above the in-jog and have the selection returned directly onto the in-jogged card. Catch a break below the selection and replace the cut-off portion, burying the card. A bit of time delay is helphl here, so a little patter would be wise. Before you move to table the deck, however, start a Side Steal of the selection but stop with the edge of the card protruding to the right about the width of half a border.

Set the deck onto the table, in position for a riffle shuffle, with the jogged card protruding slightly from the near edge and the coin hidden beneath the deck. It is easy to form a break above this jogged card, which you now do.

NOTE: While the sequence just suggested is quite workable, I have often used others. Frequently I convert the in-jog of the twenty-seventh card to

a fourth-finger flesh break below the in-jogged card. I then execute a Riffle Peek Force of this first black card while concealing the coin in the hand that holds the deck. Often I do not even know the identity of this card; it is the position that is important. Once the card has been peeked at by the spectator; I start the Side Steal, stopping when the card slightly protrudes from the side, as described. I then table the deck, loading the coin beneath it, and form a break above the side-jogged card.

Having become lazy over the years, with increasing frequency I use a pencil-dotted Joker (or, in a pinch, a corner crimp) as the divider between the colors. This spares me the effort of having to maintain control of the twenty-seventh card in-jog until after the selection has been removed from the deck, and allows me to set up long in advance.

Cut the cards above the break to the right, without moving the lower packet to the left. Turn the right-hand packet face up and begin a riffle shuffle by releasing about five cards from the left-hand packet, then completing a light interweave of the remaining cards. Hold back the top card, the selection, on the left, so it falls last. Using the Zarrow dynamic, slip the right hand's packet into the left's, under the single cover card. Dingle's touch not withstanding, this requires that your Zarrow technique be very good, as you have only a single cover card.

NOTE: I originally used an odd display sequence at this point, in an effort to convitlcingly convey the face-up and face-down condition. I now use the well-known and clever Daryl Martinez "Puerto Rican" Cutting Display (Sccrets of a 'Pz~erto Rican Gambler, " 1980, page 6 1). This display is not essential to the routine but it is a strong convincer. If you know it, use it.

The condition of the deck at this point, from the top down, is the face-down selection-all the face-up red cards-all the face-down black cards. Break the deck above the face-down black stock and cut this block to the right. Openly reverse these black cards And begin a second Zarrow Shuffle by releasing about five cards from the left-hand packet before completing a light interweave of the cards of both packets. Hold back the top card, the selection, on the left, so it falls last. Zarrow the right hand's packet into the left's, under the single cover card, and form a break below the black cards.

With an Undercut or a Double Cut, bring the red cards to the top and form a break above the face-down card, the selection, that is just below the red stock.

Load the hidden coin into this break, using the technique taught in Method 1, Step 8 (page 300).

NOTE: If you prefer the simultaneous revelation of the coin and face-up selection, you must form the break made in Step 6 below the selection.

Then, as the coin is loaded, push a bit harder, driving rhe coin deeper into the deck. You can now rotate the deck face down. 'This allows the double- i~npact finish and a further alter-ation in the multi-climax sequence, which 1'11 discuss shortly.

Conclude by revealing the coin, turning up the selection, then displaying the righting of the deck (Method 1, Steps 9-1 2). However, before you spread the packets say, "I thought it would look nicer if I put the selection right in the middle of the deck, so I did. You may wonder how I know that this is the exact center of the deck. It's simple-all the black cards are on this side and all the red cards are on this side." Obviously the line should be timed to the appropriate actions.

NOTES: If you turn the deck face down, as suggested in the Note following Step 7, you will be able to delay revealing the final color segregation. First, reveal the coin and the face-up selection; then ribbon spread the two packets to display the righting of the face-up and face-down cards; finally perform simultaneous Ribbon Turnovers or pick up the spreads and respread them face up to expose the color segregation. 1 generally use the sequence described in the text but I have used this alternate sequence as well. I believe performance conditions dictate which will play best. Only experience will teach you the proper circumstances in which each ending should be used.

It has been suggested that the appearance ofthe coin is something of a non sequitur in this routine. I don't believe this is any more true than Inany other surprise productions. Nevertheless, one could, using two coins, introduce one coin, vanish it, then cause it to reappear in the deck. It might even be possible to perform Method 3 without a duplicate coin. I will leave such explorations to those who are troubled by the unforeshadowed appearance of the coin.

COLOR TRIUMPHANT CIRCA 1973

FINAL

LET ME begin by making it cleat that I do not consider this treatment a revolutionary improvement on Derek Dingle's beautihl routine as it appears in Dingles Deceptions with Card? and Coins, written by Harry Lorayne (circa 1966, page 3). Nor is it a Zarrow-based effect; but while we are on the subject of Triumph effects I thought I'd include it. I consider Derek's routine to be the culmination of the Triumph-Color-Changing Deck routine, the best extant. I have been performing this version for many years to wonderhl audience response and wish to "pull your coat" to this marvelous routine. There are some differences between my handling and the original, and I take full responsibility for them. I have included the exact handling I have used through hundreds of performances. Enjoy it-and thanks, Derek.

EFFECT: A card is selected and returned to the deck. After two failed attempts at finding the card by cutting to it, the performer offers to do something more interesting. The deck is cut into three packets and one is turned face up and shuffled into one of the face-down packets. The third packet is then turned face up and shuffled into the already face-up and face-down packet. After a few cuts the deck is spread across the table to reveal that all the cards are face up except one, which proves to be the selection. The deck is then respread and proves to have a completely different back color and design from the selection.

REQUIREMENTS: One regular deck of white-bordered cards and three cards from a deck of a different color and back design. (I have sometimes used a Rain- bow Deck-a Clark Crandall idea-in conjunction with this routine.)

SET-UP: Position one odd-backed card on top of the deck and the other two odd-backed cards about one third of the way down from the top. Place the deck into a card box that matches the odd-backed cards.

NOTE: I've never used this effect as an opener, though such use is common for color-changing deck routines. I always perform an opening effect or two with a deck of the same color and design as the odd-backed cards. I then put the deck away, perform a non-card effect or two, then reintroduce the deck. I am sure the audience assumes the deck they see me introduce for this effect is the same deck I was using earlier. This cannot help but reinforce the idea that the cards are of the odd-backed type.

While Derek used a Peek Force, I prefer to use the old-style, front-end Riffle Force for reasons that will become clear. Form a break above the top card of the two odd-backed cards that sit a third of the way down in the deck. To use the Riffle Force without flashing the backs, you must start with the cards held above the spectators' line of sight. Since I begin the routine standing, this is easy. While holding the deck in left-hand Dealing Grip, move the right hand to Overhand Grip and lift the front end higher than the back. Riffle the deck at the middle of the front end, allowing the cards from the bottom to escape from the tip of your right second finger, and instruct the spectator to call "Stop" at some point. Regardless of where the spectator actually stops you, separate the deck at your break and deal off the top card in front of him. Everyone will see two odd-backed cards, the one you are dealing and the one left on the talon.

Reassemble the deck, retaining a break. When the spectator is ready to return the selection, cut at the break and have the card replaced onto the same odd-backed card it previously rested above. Square the deck after the card is returned. If you accept the idea of doing flourishes, this would be a good time to make a Pressure Fan with the faces of the cards toward the spectators, and comment that their card is lost in the deck. If you do a fan, don't look at the faces yourself.

As you square the deck, pick up a fourth-finger break below the spectator's selection and a thumb break above it. Cut off all the cards above the thumb break. The audience will see the back of the spectator's selection briefly, but they will be unaware it is his card. It appears to be yet another of the cards, another odd- backed card. Turn the packet you have just cut off face up onto the balance of the deck. Say, "This isn't your card?" The remark is more a statement than a question, but it has a hint of question in the delivery. With your right thumb, grasp the card above the fourth-finger break, adding it to the upper packet, but create a right thumb break above the added card. Immediately move the lower

packet downward and to the left, so its back will be seen. In a continuing action, turn this packet face up in your left hand as you repeat, "And this isn't your card?" The spectator will agree. Put the two packets together, adding the reversed card from the upper packet to the face of the lower packet but maintain a fourth-finger break between the packets. This sequence is an old technique for reversing a card in the center of the deck. It works well here because it shows only odd backs. This center reverse is, I believe, Clyde Cairy's (see The Phoenix, No. 264, September 19, 1952, page 1055; the Cairy trick mentioned there has so far eluded me) but includes touches from Irv Wiener, although it is often mistakenly credited to Fred Braue (referred to as the Braue Reverse on the basis, it seems, of its appearance in Royal Road to Card Magic, 1949, page 191).

4 "That's two down, fifty to go. You don't seem to like this method of finding a card. I have a better way." As you speak the line, spread the upper portion of the deck from left to right. Exercise care not to reveal the reversed card as you spread. Square the deck again, inserting the tip of your left fourth finger into the break you've maintained, and execute the Tenkai-Marlo Pivot-Step. That is, move your left thumb under the deck and push upward to lever it over, pivoting it on its right side. The fourth-finger break causes a step to form. This should appear casual. The top of the deck and the step both show odd-backed cards (Figure 218). A bit of care must be taken with this procedure to prevent cards other than the card at the top of the step and the card at the top of the deck from flashing, but it can be done reliably.

5 With the right hand, retake the deck into Overhand Grip and square the cards, converting the step back into a break. Undercut all the cards below the break to the top of the deck and square it briefly while maintaining a break between the packets. Retain the deck in left-hand Dealing Grip and separate the hands as soon as the squaring is finished.

6 You are about to divide the deck into three packets. Cut off all the cards above the break and gingerly place them to your right on the table. Be careful when you release the packet that the top card remains square with the top of the packet. As the right hand returns to the deck, the right second finger contacts the extreme left front corner and the right thumb grips the extreme left near corner of the deck. Curl the first finger on top of the deck. Lift about half the packet at the back only and pull downward with the left fourth finger, as though doing a Pass. Through this action, cause the lower packet to reverse partially, arriving at a position roughly perpendicular to and along the left side

of the upper packet (Figure 219). Push upward with the left third fingertip to cause the packet to complete its reversal. Resquare the lower, reversed packet as you retake it into Dealing Grip by pulling inward, toward the left thumb, with the left fourth finger. Continue to raise the upper packet (Figure 220) and place it onto the table, in the middle, again exercising care. This packet reverse, based on Bruce Cervon's Half Reverse Cut (Epilogue, No. 6, July 1969, page 42), will take a bit of work. It should not be performed quickly but there should be no break in rhythm. This slight technical variation (I think improvement) also differs from the technique Derek uses. When properly executed, it looks as if the deck were simply cut into three packets; that's all. Smoothness is of the essence for this sequence to be deceptive. I might add that I have never been able to get this move to look right if I did it seated, but when I'm standing, it looks fine. Finally, place the last packet, which is reversed, except for the uppermost card (the selection), on the table. Harry Lorayne noted that the three packets you form should not be tabled too close together, to prevent the accidental spreading of a packet other than the one you're taking. I have never had this problem, but it is good advice to be careful.

I sit down as I deliver the following line: "What I propose to do is confuse the cards into telling me which one is yours. Here's how I do it." Now seated, I continue, "I'll shuffle some cards face up and some cards face down." Grab the packets at either end; the packet on the left is a face-up packet except for its top card. Turn the packet at the right face up and spread it a bit as you drag it back toward you. This spreading should appear accidental.

Square both packets and riffle shuffle them together on the table. Drop at least one card from the right-hand packet before you begin dropping from the left- hand packet. Also make sure that the top card of the left-hand packet is the last to drop. Make sure the face-up cards in the left-hand packet don't flash during the shuffle.

With your right hand, take the third packet, which is face down. Turn it face up, allowing it to spread a bit. Again, this should appear unintended. (If you inten-

tionally spread the face-up packets you should, logically, spread the "face-down" one, which you can't. It's better not to spread any packet rather than arouse suspicion by openly treating the packets differently.) Shuffle the face-up right-hand cards into the supposedly face-up and face-down left-hand packet. Make sure the single odd-backed card from the right packet falls first and is followed by the odd-backed card from the left packet. You can then shuffle freely, but release the top (odd-backed, selected) card last. Care must still be exercised to prevent the face-up condition of the lefr packet from being revealed in the shuffle.

Form a break near the middle of the deck and do a Tabled Slip Cut, which takes the top card (the selection) to the middle without disturbing anything else. As you complete this cut, form a thumb break above the selection. "I now have a mess of face-up and face-down cards." During your comment, form a second thumb break below the uppermost (face-up) card, then perform a Double or Triple Cut to shift this card from the face (top) to the rear (bottom) of the deck, making the first cut at the break above the face-down selection so that face-up and face-down cards show during the cut sequence. If you wish, when you make the first cut, you can show that the lower packet has a back on both sides. This helps to reinforce the face-up and face-down condition, while at the same time showing two odd backs. This Double Cut of the top card to the bottom adds a cover card to what will become the top of the deck. This will be needed later. (This is Derek's method; see Alternate Clean-Up for the handling I use.)

"I created this mess and I'm responsible for cleaning it up. If I wiggle the fingers of both my hands over the deck [suit action to wordc]-it stretches my fingers and feels really good. It also has a magical effect, causing every card in the deck to face in one direction-except one. You believe me, don't you?" The audience will disagree; some will say "Yes," others "No." Pretend to hear only the yes responses. "Good. Then I don't have to show you." The audience will grumble. "I can't get away with anything with you folks." Address the spectator who selected the card. "What was the name of your card?" When he names it, ribbon spread the deck widely across the table, revealing all the cards face upward except for one. Remove that card and show it to the spectators, who will agree that it is the selection.

Pause for a moment to accept your applause; then say, "I thank you for your appreciation but it really wasn't all that difficult. The cards are marked. I'll show you." Turn the selection face down and say, "On the back you'll notice the red [or blue] markings-here this will help." Pick up the ribbon-spread deck and square it. Turn it face down and spread it across the table without exposing the two odd-backed cards second and third from the top. "See how you can tell because of the little marks. This card is just a little different from all the others." I have never failed to have the audience break into spontaneous applause at

that point. Accept it graciously and busy yourself by picking up the deck and squaring it. Then turn the deck face up and with a Double Cut bring the lowermost card (the cover card) to the face. With a Bottom Palm or Gambler's Cop, steal away the two odd-backed cards in your left hand, place the deck onto the table, pick up the selection with your right hand, take it into your left, and put it into your left outside jacket-pocket, unloading the two palmed cards while you're at it. You're then free to continue with the same deck.

ALTERNATE CLEAN-UP: In Step 10, instead of moving a cover card into position with a Tabled Slip Cut and Double or Triple Undercut, I frequently form a break above the two odd-backed cards and simply lap them off the bottom of the deck as I pick it up. A cut, in the hands, brings the selected card to the center and I end as described, but with the deck completely clean. The lapped cards can later be picked up from the lap in a palm and disposed of in the pocket under the guise of getting rid of the odd-backed selection.

NOTES: This is a very strong routine and should not be overlooked. I'm not sure exactly how Derek credits this effect other than as stated in his book, Dingles Deceptions, but I see a clear relationship between this and Brother John Hamman's "Face Up-Face Down Surprise" from 7he Card Magic of Bro. John Hamman S.M. (1958, page 32). As mentioned in Lorayne's Afterthoughts, following the description in Dinglei Deceptions, Bill Simon's "Four Packet Shuffle" (Skightly Se~zsutiortal, 1954, page 21) is the major predecessor. The Tabled Slip Cut is sometimes erroneously credited to Ed Marlo, who deserves credit for the multiple-card Tabled Slip Cut (suggested by The True False Cut in Expert Card Conjz~rillg, 1968, page 20), but the single-card Tabled Slip Cut is a card cheats' technique.

The only technique in this routine that is at all demanding is the packet reverse used in the lay-down of the packets, and even that isn't dificult. I cannot emphasize enough how brilliantly Derek's routine is constructed. While I believe my technical changes are significant, I have not tampered with the fundamental structure. I believe this routine alone would earn Derek Dingle a place in card magic's hall of fame, if there were one-and there should be. I hereby nominate him.

THE MERLIN PUSH-THROUGH

THE SPLIT

SPLIT THE PACK, taking less than half from the top to the right. Place the adjacent inner corners together, just touching, with the packets at an approximate 165-degree angle to each other. (This angle has more to do with consistency with my Zarrow Shuffle than it does with the Push-Through technique.) Regrasp both packets along the sides, near the far ends, with the second, third and fourth fingers at the front side and the thumbs of each hand at the near side. All fingertips should rest on the table. The first fingers are curled, the first joints or the fingertips resting on top of their respective packets (Figure 221). These positions are not absolutely critical. Some people hold the packets for tabled riffle shuffles differently. The hand positions, however, should be absolute mirror images of each other. I like an Open Shuffle Position, as described, but a Closed Position, with the hands nearer the adjacent ends of the packets, is not precluded. It is important that you have full con-

I trol of the packets and you must shuffle lightly.

THE INTERLACE

Raise the thumbs, lifting each half of the deck, and slightly move both packets diagonally forward and toward each other. The cards should not visibly

bend. Release about a half-dozen cards from the left thumb. (If you're shuffling on a hard surface, you will find it helpful to create a larger bed on which to shuffle. You might want to drop as many as fifteen cards from the left thumb before the right-hand cards start to fall.) With no break in rhythm, drop about five cards from the right-hand stock. Still without pause, continue the actions with both thumbs until all the cards have been released and interlaced. Cards should fall from the left thumb last. I must stress, lightness is the most critical factor in this interlace process, regardless of the condition of the cards.

THE ALIGNMENT

When the corners are interwoven, move both hands toward the outer ends of the packets. Frame the extreme front corners with the second and third fingertips. That is, position the third fingers on the outer ends, near the front corners, and the second fingers on the front side of those corners. The balls of the thumbs should contact the near edges at the corners (Figure 222). The first fingers remain curled on their packets.

Squeeze firmly and lift the cards almost, but not quite, to the point of raising them off the work surface. Rotate the packets until they are parallel with each other, with roughly half the length of each packet interlaced. The packets should not bind.

You will now adjust the alignment of the cards in preparation for telescoping. To accomplish this, keep your second fingers on the front edge, but shift them to the extreme

/ corners of their respective packets. The thumbs take up the equivalent positions on the near edge. When this position has been achieved, press firmly. The cards will align perfectly along the horizontal plane (Figure 223). This adjustment also "adds some air" between the cards, to further prevent binding. You can now let the deck settle back onto the table; your lifting of it has served its purpose.

THE TELESCOPE

This next procedure is the most difficult aspect of the Merlin Push-Through to describe, but it is the essence of the Shuffle. I refer to it as the "Pinch-Through." Move your left second fingertip to the left front corner. Make only light contact. Your left thumb should move to a point on its packet about a third of the length from the left end, along the near edge. The thumb should also make only minimal contact. The right hand will perform most of the early work.

The left side of the right first finger moves to contact the right side of its packet (the original top portion) near the front corner, and your right thumb shifts about a third of the way in from the right end on its edge of the packet (Figure 224). With the side of the right first finger, push the right packet forward and to the left. At the same time, slide that finger firmly back, toward you, as the right thumb slides to the right along its edge (Figure 225), until the thumb and first fingertip meet at the corner (Figure 226). This is a pinch-like action.

You can, to some degree, control the amount of the original right packet that will extend through the left end of the left packet by how you perform the pinch action. Two major factors influence this distance: ( I ) The greater the angle at which you push the packet forward, the farther through the front edge the right front corner will move. (2) When the right first finger makes its initial contact, the closer it is to the near edge, along the right end, the greater will be

the portion of the right packet that can be moved through. Just over a white border's width is sufficient; any more is unproductive.

NOTE: Some may prefer to use the right second finger to push the right packet, leaving the right first finger free to screen the front edge of the deck. I see this as a matter of choice, dictated by application. It does hide the angling of the right-hand packet, which you may feel is desirable. I find this approach prevents selling the precise squaring action that is part of the strength of the technique. Were I to use this technique for more than one shuffle of a sequence, I would probably switch to the more screened second- finger push. When used for just one shuffle, as I most often do, I like ro stress the squaring action.

THE CONJOIN

The next action is crucial. Move the right second finger to the front right corner and grasp the deck firmly between that finger and the tip of the right thumb (Figure 227). The left thumb pushes the protruding jog at the left near edge to the left and forward. The left second fingertip, rolling clockwise, helps to enlarge the amount of the original right-hand packet that comes through on the left. It comes farther through when you pull the packet, using pressure against the side of the original left-hand packet for leverage. It's difficult to understand this odd leverage until you actually try it. If you've done everything correctly, you'll have about three-eighths of an inch of the former right-hand packet protruding, telescoped from the left side. This completes the push-through process, creating an apparently coalesced condition. In actuality, the telescoped position is reasserted with the original top of the deck extending to the left. Pause briefly to check your grip and allow the apparent condition to register.

THE SQUARE

Squeeze the deck firmly between the second fingers at the front and the thumbs at the rear. As the thumbs apply pressure, move them a quarter of an inch to half an inch along the near edge, toward their respective ends. At the same time, move the third fingers inward, toward your body, pressing lightly against the ends but firmly into the work surface. This combination of actions actually helps to increase the sureness of your grip and to assure that the strip-out you are about to perform will be complete and successful.

THE STRIP-OUT

Use your right hand to hold the original left-hand packet stationary, but raise the entire deck a bit over an inch. In doing this, move the original right portion diagonally back about an inch and to the left about two inches (Figure 228), until it clears the current right-hand packet. Move the latter straight down to the table and release your hold on it. Next, move the right hand back to take the left hand's packet and carry it directly above the tabled packet. After a very brief pause, place this packet firmly onto the tabled stock and square the reassembled 228 deck. It should appear that the left hand took its packet from under the right hand's packet. The space under the right hand's packet is created at the moment of the strip- out to aid the illusion that this is what has happened.

NOTES O N THE BEVEL: The reliability of this or any Push-Through Shuffle can be markedly improved by beveling the deck hom left to right, top over bottorn (Figure 229), before beginning the Split, and maintaining the bevel throughout

229

the Strip-Our process. The problem is that the bevel is something of a tell. Moreover, if the bevel is less than about three-quarters of an inch it has negligible benefit. Each performer will reach his own conclusions about the desirability of this "insurance," but you should at least experiment with it in practice sessions. I find the bevel most useful with new decks, which tend to be slippery. The only fully viable technique I've found for creating the requisite bevel condition is to place the left end of the deck on the table and tilt it to the lefi. Then you can sit the deck flat on the table. I've experimented with beveling an already tabled deck with little consistent success.

AN ALTERNATE STRIP-OUT PROCEDURE

This alternative procedure is an absolute gem. I almost elected to withhold it, but since its forerunner has now seen print, I'm releasing it for those, like myself, who find an extra note of finality in a Triple Cut. The technique is closely related to the Aronson Strip-Out, (Simply Simon: The Magic of Simon Aronson, 1995, page 65). The sequence can be used with other Push-Through Shuffle techniques, and I often do so. Here we will apply it to the Merlin Shuffle.

When you initially split for the shuffle, take more than a third but less than half the deck to the right. When you then shuffle, make certain that you leave about a third of the deck, at the bottom, unwoven on the left side. Also make sure that the top card of the right-hand packet is released before the last card of the left-hand packet. Perform the push-through technique as taught. At the completion of this action, use your left thumb to slightly lift all the interwoven cards at the near side (Figure 230). This will enable you to form a right thumb break below this group at the right near corner. The left fingers then grip only the interwoven cards that project on the left side.

NOTE: As Paul Cummins pointed out when I showed him this technique, the break can be dispensed with. I find it helpful in facilitating the Strip- Out that is about to occur, and in the formation of the packets in the cut sequence that follows. Paul did not find the break usehl. I suggest you learn the sequence while using the break. You can elect to perform the sequence without the break once you're comfortable with it.

Simultaneously move the right hand diagonally forward to the right and the left hand diagonally backward to the left. The left hand moves back a bit more than the width of the deck, and left about half the width of a deck. The right hand stops a bit more than two deck-widths forward and a deck width to the right. This strips-out the interwoven cards under cover of the larger action of the right hand's movement.

Release all the cards below the right thumb's break, creating a forwatd pile, somewhat to your right. Carry the upper portion back diagonally about half the width of a deck and to the left about the same distance. Release the right hand's cards to the table at that point, creating a central second pile. Meanwhile, the left hand continues to hold its packet, nearest you and a bit to your left. The three packets form a diagonal column (Figure 23 1). With your right hand, take the left hand's packet and place it onto the center packet. In a

continuing action, pick up the combined center packet and place it onto the far packet. This reassembles the deck and every card is in its original position. If this is the last shuffle of a sequence, as I think it always should be, the deck will be reassembled in front of a person to your right. This is the person to whom the deck would normally be passed for the cut. In my experience, this triple cut usually persuades that person to tap rather than cut the deck. This makes it a very powerful technique when you've just put in a stack or switched in a cold deck, as it avoids the need to beat the cut. It also argues strongly for the persuasiveness of the shuffle and cut sequence.

THE STRIKE PUSH-THROUGH

FOR A NUMBER of years (1969-74), Al Cooper and I spent uncounted hours on the phone and in person discussing, primarily, three types of moves: False Deals, the Pass and False Shuffles. Thus any of my treatments of False Shuffles from those years bears a significant measure of Al's influence. I rarely get to speak with Al these days. He has moved away and is far less active in magic. It is, nevertheless, with warm memories and a solid vote of thanks to him that I present this shuffle.

THE SPLIT

Divide the pack, carrying less than half from the top to the right. Place the adjacent inner corners together, just touching, with the packets at an approximate 165-degree angle to each other. (Vernon seemed to favor approximately the same angle.) Release all grips and regrasp both packets along the sides, near the outer ends, with the second, third and fourth fingers at the front edge and the thumbs of each hand at the near edge. The gripping fingers should rest on the table. The first fingers are curled on the tops of their respective packets. As I've mentioned in previous shuffle descriptions, these positions are not absolutely critical; different people shuffle differently. It is only important that you have full control of the packets and that the hand positions be absolute mirror images of each other.

T H E INTERLACE

Raise the thumbs, lifting each half of the deck, and move the packets diagonally forward and slightly toward each other. Release roughly a half-dozen

cards from the left thumb. Without pause, continue the action with both thumbs until all the cards have been dropped off and interlaced, cards falling from the left thumb last. Again, lightness is essential, regardless of the condition of the cards.

THE ALIGNMENT

When the corners have been interwoven, move both hands to the outer ends, grasping the front edges at the extreme corners with the second and third fingertips. The balls of the thumbs should contact the near long edges at the corners. The first fingers remain curled above their packets (Figure 232).

Squeeze firmly and lift the deck almost to the point of raising it off the work surface. Rotate the packets until they align lengthwise, with roughly half the length of each packet interlaced. The packets may bind.

Adjust the alignment of the cards by moving your second fingers to the front edges at the points where the meshed ends of the packets lie. The thumbs take up the equivalent positions on the near edge. Press firmly, causing the cards to align perfectly along their sides (Figure 233).

When the two packets have been aligned and partially telescoped, the hands should be removed from the pack. The spectators will find nothing out of the ordinary in the appearance of the deck at this point.

T H E TELESCOPE

Again the hold must be adjusted. This time move the hands to the outer ends, placing the second fingertips on the front edges at the extreme corners. The third fingers, which should be in full contact with the sides of the second fingers, should touch the ends at the extreme front corners. The balls of the thumbs should contact the near long edges of the packets just outside of their respective midpoints. The first fingers remain curled on top of the

packets (Figure 234). With the hands in these positions, telescope the packets, pushing them into each other, until they are interlaced for about three-quarters of their length. Because the ends of some of the cards may not have been square with the other end in their packet, this telescoping will serve to even them. Release the deck completely.

THE CONJOIN

You are about to perform the critical and defining procedure of this technique. Move both hands back over the deck. The balls of the thumbs should lightly contact the near edges, just outside the midpoint. Simultaneously press diagonally inward with the second and third fingers of each hand on their respective far corners of the interlaced packets. This forces the inner corners against the thumbs, which regulate the extent to which they break through the near edge. As long as the inner corners break through beyond the midpoint of the deck, the packets will pass through each other (Figure 235). During this action the outer edge of the pack, which the onlookers can see, should present a more or less normal appearance but for a slight inward V that will form. To mask this V, which is the only tell that the shuffle is anything but legitimate, slide both hands and the deck inward toward your body. When this action is complete, there will be diagonal jogs at both inner corners (Figure 236). In practice, these jogs should measure about a quarter of an inch. They can be as much as half an inch without presenting a problem. /' As soon as the corners break through, press them forward and outward with the thumbs. This will complete the push-through process (perhaps more correctly, angle through) and produce a brief conjoin that appears to be a coalescence. Actually, it serves to move the pack into a telescoped position, but with the original right-hand packet protruding from the left side and vice versa. The second and third fingers at the fronts of each packet screen the protruding portions

from view. As a result, the "breach," or protruding portions, can be fairly broad, as great as half an inch. Pause only very briefly at this point; just long enough to secure your grip.

NOI'E: 'The action of this conjoin amounts to simultaneously striking the front cornerr of the deck with the second and third fingertips of each hand and moving the deck inward, toward you, as you angle the packets inward and then through each other. It is this action that defines and distinguishes this technique fro111 other approaches to the PushThrough. It will take some practice to become sure-fingered enough to perform this deftly. You should, however, be aware: If you can't perform it at a brisk but unhurried pace, it is better not to use this technique at dl. Under marly other conditions, though, a slight inward slide can be useful cover for a Push-Through.

THE SQUARE

Okay, you've just completed the strike action and the packets are in position to be stripped apart. Squeeze the deck firmly between the second fingers at the front and the thumbs at the near edge, on their respective ends of the deck. The thumb pressure should move the thumbs about a quarter inch outward, toward their respective ends. This will appear to be part of the squaring action. In fact, the squeeze and thumb slide help to ensure that the coming strip-out will not leave cards behind. This squaring action, too, is very brief.

THE STFUP-OUT

Because you moved the deck inward earlier, it is now sensible to move it forward. With your left hand, hold the original right-hand packet in place but lift the entire deck about three inches as you move the original left-hand portion forward and to the right about half the width of a deck. Release this, the stripped-out packet, onto the table. The right hand then returns to take the original right-hand packet from the left hand. Drop that packet onto the tabled one. Every card is in its original position.

NOTE: While I've described the Conjoin, Square and Strip-Out as discrete entities, in execution they form a seamless, unbroken series of actions, accompanied by a bit of attitude. The thought behind the attitude should be "That ought to do it." Done well, this is a lovely, disarming shuffle. You should keep in mind that the distinguishing features of the technique are the strike preceding the inward tnovement that masks the moment of the Push-Through action, and the ballistic strip-out action subsequent to the brief squaring action. It takes a bit of work to learn the feel ofthis dynamic; but if you try it you'll find that the strip-out is completely invisible and the attitude significantly helps in convincing viewers that all is fair.

NOTE O N THE STRIP-OUT ACTION: While I don't recommend using the Alternate Strip-Out action from the Merlin Push-Through with this Shuffle, I often use the forward strip-our with lift, as employed in this Shuffle, with the Merlin Shuffle. 'I'he more flexibility one has with a technique, the better.

AN ALTERNATE STRIP-OUT PROCEDURE

One shuffle is rarely sufficient to convey a sense of thorough mixture to an audience. Thus, two Push-Throughs may be the minimum requirement. The transition between the first and second shuffles in such instances is best handled as a Resplit Strip-Out. The first adjustment that should be made for this two- shuffle sequence is that the split for the first Shuffle should take the top stock to the left rather than to the right. The Shuffle then proceeds as has been described. The Resplit Strip-Out technique is then performed as follows:

With the hands in the positions described after the Conjoin, just prior to the Square, lift the deck an inch or so and move the hands apart and forward in outward arcs. The packets should clear each other in time to allow the arcs to be stopped with the packets at a 165-degree angle to each other. Table the packets and re-shuffle. The original top stock will now be on the right. You're set to perform the Shuffle as it was first described, including the ballistic strip-out action.

THE CRAND-BEER'S PREDICTION

NOVEMBER 9, 1973 BETA

THIS EFFECT is a treatment of the now classic Card in Matchbox. Generally, I would see no reason to include yet another handling of this idea. (Matt Schul- ien, Eugene Burger and Tony Giorgio have all featured this item and influenced my interpretation.) Nevertheless, I think you will find this version has some interesting features that distinguish it from others. The method is a clear outgrowth of a Peter McDonald routine called "The Gambler's Prediction" from his inspirational book Highly Mediocre Tricks (no date, page 6). I think you'll find that, whether or not you use the piece as written, you'll use elements of it in constructing variations of your own. Here is what the spectator sees:

EFFECT: The magician has a card selected and signed. The spectator then places the card into a packet comprised of approximately half the deck. Tossing a matchbox onto the table, the magician says it contains a prediction. The spectator opens the box and counts the matches within, finding, perhaps, eleven. On counting down eleven cards in the packet the spectator finds his card is not there but in the matchbox from which he took the matches.

REQUIREMENTS: A deck of cards and one duplicate card, lightly pencil- dotted on its corners. You will also need two identical matchboxes, one containing matches-roughly eleven will do but as many as fifteen is reasonable. The other matchbox is empty. I also use a pair of tweezers, which are carried in the left-side jacket pocket.

SET-UP: Place the pencil-dotted card directly above its duplicate, on top of the deck. I'lace the matchbox that contains the matches on the table. The empty box, with its drawer open, is in your lap.

You are about to have a card selected in what appears to be an extremely fair manner. In fact, the card will be forced. The procedure is an offspring of a Senator Crandall method that originally saw print in Alton Sharpe's Expert Card Conjuring (1968, page 77); also see "Hyper-Warp" in this volume, page 92). Spread the cards across the table in a wide but slightly sloppy ribbon. Have a spectator touch the back of a card and draw it forward but not out of the spread. Take pains to assure that the spectator feels satisfied that his choice was completely fair. Allow him to change his mind, etc.

Pick up the spread, leaving the selected card jogged forward as you arrange the deck in your left hand. Get the spectator to state again that the protruding card is the one he wants. Square the deck, forming a fourth-finger break under the top two cards. Swivel the jogged card out of the deck and drop it on top as you say, "That's the one you want? You've got it." Perform a Hit-style Triple Lift as you say, "We'll all look at it together. The [name of card] ." (In our example, the card will be the Queen of Hearts.) Have the card signed and allow the ink to dry. Confine the spectator's signature to the central portion of the card. This is most easily accomplished by making the request with the words, "Place just your initials in the very center of the card."

NOTE: A question often arises in situations such as this, when a card is to be signed but the arrangement under it should not be revealed: Should you remove the card to have it signed or have it signed while it remains on the deck. Frankly, each has its drawbacks. If the card is removed, so it can be signed while off the deck, you need to perform a wrist turn, carrying the deck out from under the card while keeping the top of the deck out of sight until the card is returned to it. This can be awkward and constraining. O n the other hand, having the card signed while it's on the deck is both risky and a bit too "cozy" to be conlpletely comfortable. As a general rule, it is probably better to take the card off the deck, but when angles are tight or the audience is seated at the table on which I'm working, I feel uncomfortable with keeping the top of the deck out of sight or the deck tabled face up. In such situations, I'm inclined to have the card signed while it's on the deck. It takes a bit of spectator management to make this work. I find that allowing the spectator to hold the deck in his or her own hands makes it less likely the hidden cards will be revealed, though some may consider this choice counter-intuitive. The spectator will not find it odd, if the instruction is given properly. Try saying, "Take your card and sign it on the face.

You'll find it easier if you lean on the deck." This will be accepted as true if the table is covered with a tablecloth, felt or a close-up pad. If those condi- rions arc not present, the instruction may seem more odd, but it will rarely be challenged. For further thoughts on this topic, see the Note on page 8.

2 Turn the triple-card face down and immediately push the top card off the deck to the right for about half its width. At the same time, push the card second from the top over slightly and get a break under it. Square the top card with the card above the break and use your right first finger to push the double card forward as though it were one, out-jogging it . At least it appears that the first finger pushes the card. Actually, it is your right thumb, at the near end of the double card that does the pushing (Figure 237). This is essentially the Cliff Green Double Lift (Proofessional Card Magic, 196 1, page 17). Remove the double card from the deck and insert it about three-quarters of the way into the center. Turn the deck face up, flashing the face of the duplicate. The fact that the signature is not seen will not arouse suspicion. While the face of the duplicate is exposed to the audience, secretly push the extra, lower card (the non-duplicate) flush, unloading it into the deck.

NOTE: You could deal a Second, allowing you to insert a single card into the deck, but you would then have to get rid of the unwanted top card later in the effect. I don't like the trade-off in this instance, though others may not agree.

3 Change your mind and, turning the deck face down, remove the duplicate card, positioning your right fingers across the face. This will hide what would be the signature as you flash the face of the card and place it face down on the table.

4 Table the deck and instruct the spectator to cut off about half, handing you the upper portion. Ask your helper to pick up and shuffle the lower portion, then replace it on the table. As the spectator complies, lap the top card of the packet you hold. It will, of course, be the spectator's signed selection.

NOTE: If you choose to use a Second Deal in Step 2 you will need to lap the card second from the top. This should present no problem-you just deal a One-Handed Second into your lap-but you need to be aware of the requirement.

5 Have the spectator cut some cards lej-handed from the tabled packet. Make a big deal of the fact that the cut must be made with the left hand. (It really

doesn't matter but it provides an interesting red herring. Such bits of business can afford opportunities for fun in long exposition phases.) Have the spectator replace the selected card at the point where the deck has been divided and bury it with the cut-off portion. While this card is believed to be the selection, it is actually the duplicate. The spectator may reshuffle the packet and table it.

Draw attention to the matchbox that has been lying on the table, claiming that it contains a prediction. Open the box and dump its contents into the spectator's hand. Have the matches counted as you close the box and place it slightly to your left on the table.

Have the spectator count down a number of cards equal to the number of matches. Watch as the deal is made, to determine if and when the duplicate is dealt. The pencil dot will give it away. As the cards are dealt, fold the selection in your lap. You can use the technique known as the Mercury Card Fold, detailed in Expert Card Zchnique (1940, page 304), if you don't already have a favorite folding method. (If you use a smaller matchbox, you may wish to use Tommy Wonder's Two-Second Card Fold from The Books of Wonder, Volume I, 1996, page 136.) Insert the folded card into the matchbox in your lap and close the box. By the way, if the duplicate happens to fall at the correct position, you have a miracle of a different order. I'll allow each reader to figure out for himself how to reap the most advantage from this. If it isn't the last card counted, as will usually be the case, proceed to the revelation.

NOTE: I don't like to sit with my hands in my lap for any length of time. For that reason, I have taken to performing the card fold with my arms crossed over my chest, placing my right hand, with which I execute the fold, behind my left bicep. This provides more than ample cover for the fold, which takes mere seconds. This allows me to drop my hands to my lap much more briefly to load, close and palm the box.

As the spectator is completing the count, Front Palm the matchbox in your right hand (Figure 238). Pick up the tabled matchbox with your left hand, taking the box into Spellbound position, at the tips of your left fingers with your thumb above. Your left hand should be tilted back far enough so that, when the matchbox is released, it falls into Finger Palm and cannot be seen by the audience. Switch the matchbox held in the left hand for the one in the right using the Spellbound technique. In other words, move the right fingers, holding the loaded matchbox, in front of the box displayed in

your left hand (Figure 239). Release the box from the left fingers, into left-hand Finger Palm. At the same time, use your right thumb to push the Front Palmed box from the right fingers to the right fingertips (Figure 240). Then place the loaded matchbox on top of the tabled deck.

NOTES: The most difficult part of this switch is handling it casually. Strong Itan~say-style misdirection is called for here. That is to say, look at the Jeft-hand matchbox as the right hand starts toward it, but look up at the spectator and speak as the right hand reaches the left to take the box. As a result of this timing, the spectator will not be looking at the hands at the moment the switch takes place. In other words, while the technique is like a Spellbound-style coin change, the execution is like the Kamsay Vanish. Even though they are not looking at the action, the switch will go unquestioned if you handle it casually, as though it were unimportant. At the moment of the switch, the audience has no reason to think that the matchbox is relevant.

Though I don't use it now-old habits die hard-in the past I have used 'Iony Giorgio's one-handed switch (published three times in Genii: in Vol. 34, No. 5 , January 1970, page 221; in Vol. 58, No. 7, May 1995, page 520; and in Vol. 66, No. 5 , May 2003, page 62. The third explanation is the most detailed.). It is an excellent alternative. The Giorgio handling is essentially an old dice switch.

9 Place your left hand into your left-side jacket pocket, leave the empty matchbox behind and remove the tweezers.

Use the tweezers to lift off the top card of the tabled packet, with the matchbox on top of it, and isolate the card and matchbox on the table. Pick up all the cards from the spectator's packet and spread them face down between your hands as you remind him that he could have put his card anywhere in the packet and that, because of the shufne, even he couldn't know where his selected card war;-but you knew in advance. Close the spread, forming a break below the pencil-dotted duplicate. Continue, explaining that, before the effect began, you

predicted where the card would be. To prove that these aren't idle words, stare that you'll bet that his card is "sitting right there." As you say this, gesture toward the tabled card and the matchbox.

Have the spectator lift the matchbox and look at the card beneath. At the same time, use a Side Steal to secretly extract the duplicate from the packet (see the WJ Side Steal, page 181). The spectator will deny that the tabled card is his selection. Lap the stolen card as you explain that you didn't say it was the card on the table. Spread all of the cards face up on the table, to prove that the chosen one is not present. Have the spectator open the matchbox and remove the folded card, open it and acknowledge that it is his selection, with his signature. Take your applause.

PASSES

THE PASS The girl who can't dance says the band can't play.

-Yiddish Proverb

'T&E MOVE that separates the men from the boys, the great reputation maker, the shining star in the cardician's firmament is the Pass. Of all the moves in the arsenal, it arouses the most controversy. Magicians divide sharply along battle lines. Some say it can't be done invisibly; others argue it can. Some say it isn't needed; we have other techniques for producing the same result. Others argue for the directness of the Pass. Each individual tends to choose sides based primarily on whether he can do a Pass. The truly interested observer finds both sides are right and both sides are wrong; and I say that as one who feels very confident about the indetectability of my Pass. The problem, it seems to me, arises from misunderstanding the move. No Pass can be done invisibly without the hands being in motion. The reason is simple: The two packets cannot be made to clear each other without movement occurring at the top, at least one side and the bottom of the deck. With three areas to cover, it would be an unusual position at best that would allow the Pass to be completed without a flash of some kind, somewhere. By that definition, the Pass cannot be made invisible. Many, if not most other moves would fail the same invisibility test. The Pass must be done with the hands in motion. Fortunately, this is the normal state of affairs. The Spread Pass can be totally invisible from the front and the right. The Turnover Pass is invisible from all sides except the bottom, but the hands and the deck must be in motion and no single action is satisfactory for every situation. Marlo's Wrist-Turn Passes are invisible from most angles but they have a tell-tale action. Riffle Passes, in the hands of Derek Dingle or Ken Krenzel,

or even myself, are invisible, but they have a great deal of movement associated with them. The Jiggle Pass, Black Pass, Sprong Pass and many others can and have been done invisibly. There is, at least in my mind, no doubt that the Pass can be done invisibly. The problem is the action, timing and tailoring to the situation in which the sleight is to be used. Amazingly, most, if not all, magicians I have seen use the Pass have succeeded at making it invisible to the eye, but not deceptive to the mind. The reasons vary. The Pass must flow from the action that precedes it to the action that follows it, and it rarely does. I could probably write another ten pages on this subject, but I'll include here instead six new Pass treatments that illustrate the point.

Almost every description I have ever read of the Pass is wrong in at least one major respect, the initial action of the top packet. Only once have I heard an explanation of the Pass (one that is available to the magic public) that is correct on this major point. I won't name that source because, while the individual executes the Pass very well, it's always evident, at least to me, that he's doing a Pass. Part of the reason I know he is doing the Pass is his hand positions, and part is his cover action or, more correctly, lack thereof. His attitude and body language, however, are the big tip-offs. I raise these points because they are the main reason most magicians know when their fellows are doing a Pass. This need not be true; but the foregoing factors coupled with my earlier comments contribute to the belief that the Pass cannot be made indetectable, which, of course, is what is really meant by "invisible." The six Passes I'm including, each in its way, are incorporated into actions that make them indetectable. The attitude and body language you'll have to work out for yourself, but I will give you one important tip: Stop looking at your hands. It is bad enough that when most Passes are performed, both hands must be on the deck. If your eyes are also on the deck it is clear to anyone watching that there is nothing else worth watching. Misdirecting becomes nearly impossible. With this in mind, read on.

Each of the following Passes approach the problems of the Pass uniquely. I will warn you, because they approach the task of creating an invisible and indetectable Pass from a different perspective from most approaches that have seen print, they may be difficult to understand. For most Pass techniques, cover is an afterthought. In these Passes, technique and cover are integrally related. They can only be truly understood with cards in hand. Even then it will take effort to get any of them working well enough to permit one to evaluate the elements that produce the increased deceptiveness. Trust that each has been used under fire and I am fully confident of their deceptiveness and invisibility.

PASSES but the last described in this section start from the Basic Position. All modifications will be noted within the descriptions of the individual techniques.

Hold the deck in left-hand Dealing Grip with a break held by the flesh of the fourth fingertip. When it comes time to execute the Pass, the fourth finger will enter this breakhowever, all my Passes are done with as little of the fourth finger as possible in the break while still allowing me to maintain control of the packet. Do not insert the middle phalange into the deck! This is one of the hardest tendencies to fight, since there is a strong inclination to dig deeper to compensate for a lack of fourth-finger strength. This tendency must be resisted or the top packet will swing wider and lower as it clears the bottom one.

The left second and third fingers are curled around the right side of the deck. The front right corner of the deck rests firmly against the inside edge (not the surface) of the left first finger. Figure 241 shows the left hand's grip, with the right hand omitted. You must be able to control the top :

packet of the deck with this grip and you must be able to tip the packet rapidly to its edge with only the fourth fingertip under the upper packet.

NOTE: The most important difference between these first five Passes and most others, which points up the mistake in every published description of the Pass, is this ability to control the top packet with very little fourth- finger purchase. This control also takes the longest to develop. Until it is sufficiently developed you will be inclined to drag the top card of the

lower packet along with the upper packet. Most people don't have enough strength in their fourth fingertip to maintain the necessary control, resulting in the use of too much finger or the aforementioned drag.

Speed is important to the indetectability of the Pass, though not to its invisibility. You need explosive strength to attain this speed. This involves the white (fast twitch) muscle fibers, which are harder to develop. The difference between f " ~ twitch and slow twitch muscle fibers has never, to my knowledge, been explored as it relates to sleight-of-hand. It is the difference between the musculatures of weight lifters' (fast [witch) and body builders' (slow twitch) development. It might be possible to develop techniques that increase the speed ofthe Pass by emphasizing these fibers but I have not concentrated on doing so, as I have already developed the requisite strength and speed.

Finally, anytime both hands are in contact with the deck there must be an apparent reason, apart from the actual one, that this contact occurs and is sustained. Apart from the Automatic Pass, where the reason is left to the performer, each of the Passes I offer includes its own internal reason. This doesn't give one license to maintain the suspicious position, both hands on the deck, for any longer than is justified by the covering rationale. You must, therefore, be extremely comfortable with the Basic Position and any adjustments to it required by the particular technique you intend to perform. Any adjustment to the position of the deck in the hand that holds it-the left in all these Passes-that is not part of the apparent action, increases the duration of the suspect hand position. This must always be considered and reduced to a minimum. This argues for always practicing the Pass in its complete performance frame, including the actions that precede and follow it.

The position of the right hand must also be understood. The first finger and thumb are the gripping fingers. The first finger holds the extreme left front corner of the bottom packet, the thumb the extreme left back corner of the same packet (Figure 242). The second fingertip, which does major work in

242

some of my Passes, must extend far enough past the bottom card to be able to exert upward pressure on the bottom of the deck.

NO'I'E: While many will argue against the use of the second finger as a source of motive force, a little experimentation will assure you that the pull of the second finger can be made totally indetectable. Any perceptible movement of the second finger is, to the extent it is noticeable, attributed to slormal squaring. Watch yourself square a deck at the fingertips and you will notice that most of the work is done by the right second finger and thumb, and the left second finger and thumb.

THE EDGE PASS CIRCA 1969

IS HAS been my general-duty Pass for more than twenty-five years. I am assured by magicians that it is invisible, and by lay people that it is indetectable. Learn it well and it can change your thinking about the Pass. The major innovation embodied in this Pass is the movement of the deck from edge-on to front-tipped-down via a diagonal rolling action. I wish I could say it's easy, but it isn't. Expect it to take about six months to master if you don't already do a decent Pass, and perhaps a month if you do.

Take the deck in the left hand with a minimal left fourth-finger break at the near right corner of the deck: the Basic Position just described. Assume also the Basic Position right-hand grip. Immediately, rotate your right hand to the right without changing the hand's grip. The right hand and deck together form the shape of a letter D (Figure 243).

The left hand, which should have rotated as well, inserts the end of the fourth finger into the deck while you firmly maintain your right-hand grip. Because of the way my fingers bend and the size of my hands, the fourth fingertip rests at a diagonal angle across the inner right corner of the bottom packet, but this may not be the case for all hands. With the deck held edge-on in this manner, the left hand has reasonable flexibility in its movements as long as the fourth finger maintains its position. I will frequently straighten my left fingers, excluding the

fourth, and lift the deck away from the hand to exhibit a looseness of grip. If that is done, the left fingers must re-establish the grips described under Basic Position. Simultaneously, both hands roll the deck downward in the direction of the forward lefi corner as the right second finger exerts upward, compensat- ing pressure, but not pull, and the lefi second and third fingers pull inward (Figure 244).

If you have done everything correctly, you should find that you've executed the major portion of the Pass. The original upper packet is below the original lower packet. All that remains is to remove the left second and third fingers, reunite the packets and press down with the left thumb while your right thumb riffles upward at the near end. Next, bring the deck back to the edge-on position, the edge aimed toward the eyes of the primary spectator. Curl the left first finger and riffle the left front corner. That's it.

NOTES: This is not a Riffle Pass, inasmuch as the riffle in no way contributes to the action of the Pass. The riffle is an after-action that is included to justify the extended duration the deck is held in both hands. As I've said, the two-handed grip is an unusual position and one frequent tip-off that a Pass has been or will be done.

When the deck is on edge there is a tendency for the break created by the fourth fingertip's entry into the deck to produce a line on the upper edge. If you run your left thumb along the edge and experiment with your right hand's grip you can minimize this line. Then, if your grip is firm but not tight, you will not have a problem with the line being seen and tipping off the existence of the break.

The entire Pass, start to finish, should flow smoothly. There is no jerking action at any point. When you do everything correctly, the Pass will be both

invisible and indetectable, being perceived as an elaborate, perhaps even ritualized, sq~~aring process.

I have been using this Pass under the toughest of all conditions, "My Ambitious Card Routine" (page 170), with the spectators staring at it, but without it producing a visible result, for many years.

THE SQUEEZE PASS

-IFIERE HAS been an on-going debate about when the Pass should be performed-immediately, as in the Spread Pass, or after a delay, as Malini advocated. I believe to a great extent the question must be decided by the cover action. The previous Pass, the Edge Pass, would be delayed, while this Pass, the Squeeze Pass, must occur almost immediately in most instances. I know of no Pass that looks as much like a true, if slightly exaggerated, squaring action than this one. I've been able to use it with other card men watching and on completion they were still waiting for me to do the Pass.

Assume the Basic Position. With your hands held at about groin level, tip them down sharply. It is hard to give you the exact angle but it should be approximately thirty-seven degrees (Figure 245). A mirror or, better yet, a video camera will confirm the angle for your hands, which will vary with your height and the distance from your spectators. Simply increase the angle until no part of the Pass action can be seen.

Bend all five right fingers, as though you were squeakg somethi& tow& your palm. At the same time, bend your right wrist slightly to the left. Almost instantly you will feel the upper packet clearing the lower one. At that instant, pull with your left second, third and fourth fingers. The two actions, the squeeze of the right fingers and the p d of the left fingers, should occur at almost the same instant.

Immediately continue with a light squaring action, by bouncing the sides of the deck between the fingertips of the second and third fingers and the thumbs of both hands. As the squaring goes on, the right first finger should move to a curled position on top of the deck.

NOTES: With work, the amount of "squeeze" both hands apply can be reduced to a negligible level. It will then appear that the squeeze is part of the bouncing squaring action. It is lightness in this I'ass that makes it indetectable; the invisibility is contingent upon finding the correct angle of the deck relative to the eyes of the spectators.

Unless the deck is somewhat messy (unsquared) to begin with, as it would be after a spread for the replacement of a card or a dribble replacement, you should find a logical reason to leave the cards in an untidy condition. The Cardini-Okito idea of springing the cards between your hands while maintaining a break (ascribed to Cardini in Card Control by Arthur Buckley, 1946, page 5 I ; and to Okito in Paul Rosizi? Magical Gems by Rufus Steele, 1950, page 50) is a workable approach if it fits your style, and if you can't find another means lslore directly related to the effect being performed.

Some readers may find the explanation of this Pass a bit cryptic. Having reread it many times I'm confident that all the information required is contained in the description. What makes this Pass difficult to understand is that three actions occur almost simultaneously. The right hand twists the front of the upper packet to the left, the left fingers pull inward strongly but briefly on the upper packet, and the right second finger and thumb pull upward strongly but briefly. This causes the packets to transpose with extreme rapidity. As soon as this transposition is complete, the hands switch to a light, fingertip squaring action. It will take some work to teach the muscles to synchronize properly but once learned this is an astonishingly fast, exceptionally light Pass that appears to be a fingertip squaring action.

This Pass is best judged with a video camera set where you expect your target spectators' eyes to be when you employ it; you would have to stand too close to the mirror. The camera should guide the spatial orientation (tilt and rotation) of your hands. My general guidance is that a line extending directly along the left edge of the deck but rotated upward would pass by the leftmost eye of your spectators; and a line across your right knuckles, if rotated upward, would pass to the right of the rightmost eye of your audience.

THE PIVOT SIDE-JIGGLE PASS

AUGUST 1975

IN THE Squeeze Pass, I described a slight right-wrist pivot-action to the left as part of the movement responsible for causing the packets to clear. The essential action of the Pass, however, is accomplished by the squeeze; the pivot could be dispensed with altogether and the Pass would still be quite workable. In this next Pass, the impelling force, the force that does the work, is a more marked right-wrist pivot-action accompanied by an opposite action by the left wrist and followed by a series of similar right-wrist pivots of varying magnitudes and speeds. These pivots look like a side-jiggle action. This can be combined with the front to back jiggle employed in the more widely known Taylor-Elias Jiggle Pass (Epilogue, No. 18, 1973, page 168).

Begin with the deck in Basic Position, with your hands held around waist level. The deck should not be hlly squared at you move into position for the Pass, so that a squaring action is justified.

Pulling rightward and down with the left fingers, as one normally does in a Classic Pass, the right hand rotates or pivots counterclockwise at the wrist. After this initial rotation, the hand returns clockwise. This moves the bottom packet, as it becomes the top packet, sharply to the right, then back to the left. Simul- taneously, the left hand twists the front of its packet (the original top packet) to the right. The total distance moved by the right hand's packet is no more than two inches at the front left corner. Figure 246 (next page) shows the deck in both positions.

The Pass is completed with the first squaring side-jiggle. Both wrists pivot in opposite directions at the same time in this initial jiggle. Don't stop moving. Instead, follow the first jiggle with at least two more smaller, quicker ones. You may also like the look of finishing the sequence by moving the deck out to the fingertips for a slow All-Around Square-Up.

NOTE: This may be the fastest pass ever devised. It is uncanny how quickly the packets transpose. This speed recommends it strongly but it does have more of the characteristic look of a Pass, owing to the pivot action. For this reason this Pass may best be applied as a card control when you want to make a point of how painstakingly fair you're being. Finishing your jiggle actions with an All-Around Square-Up lends credibility to that notion. Perception of the pivot is lost in the follow-up side-jiggle and square-up action.

THE DIAGONAL PASS CIRCA 1963

ASSUME THE Basic Position with the left hand only and allow the hand to relax. Start to bring the hands together and, as you do, begin to speak. You need to say something that will explain taking the deck from your left hand into your right. You might, for example, say, "I'll let you shuffle the cards," or "I'll keep the deck on the table."

As soon as the right hand reaches the 247 deck, and as the line you are speaking is completed, you should be in Basic Position with both hands. Start to move the hands apart, diagonally and downward to the front right; but the right hand, which grips only the bottom packet, must stop short as soon as the left hand's packet, which turns face up as it completes the first half of the Pass, reaches a point under the right hand (Figure 247).

The instant the hands arrive at this position, the right hand starts back in the direction from which it came. The left fingers flip their packet face down again (Figure 248) and add it back to the bottom of the right-hand

packet. Your words, which should indicate that you've changed your mind and wish to do something else, should be said as your hands move inward together. Don't look at them!

The instant the packets are rejoined, the right hand should move away to point or reach for something. Almost any excuse will do.

NOTE: This Pass, which is both invisible and indetectable, is very much dependent on your acting ability. If the audience believes you simply started to take the deck, then changed your mind, they will never suspect a Pass. This is, however, because of its cover action, a Pass that should not be used more than once in a performance. Fortunately, this is the easiest Pass of those included in this section. Careful consideration to the timing for the delivery of the lines and the execution of the Pass must be given, but you'll find that once mastered this Pass is extremely reliable. The best suggestion I can offer is that you use it for a specific effect into which it can be integrated logically, and use other forms of the Pass for more general duty. I should point out that while the techniques are quite differenr, the idea of taking advantage of the face-to-face packet position in a Pass is an outgrowth of working on the technique described in "Vernon on the Pass" in Dai Nrnon? Ultimate Secrets o f Card Magic (1 967, page 1 12 of the Supreme Magic edition; page 84 of the L&L edition). It is, arguably, also related to a Dr. James Elliott technique (see Farelli's Card Magic, Part One, 1933, page 14).

THE AUTOMATIC PASS

7h1s IS an interesting and very deceptive Pass in that it seems to do itself. If your hands are in the correct position, your problem will lie in controlling it to assure that it does itself only when you want it to and not before.

Begin from the Basic Position in the left hand only. You will need to speak a cover line as your hands come together. The line must have a tone of resigna- tion or otherwise give you a reason to take a deep breath. A line that justifies a sigh would also work. You might try, "I guess I missed your card [sigh]," or you could deliver a line that's too long for one breath, such as, "You've put your card back into the deck, which has no crimps, breaks, bends, mirrors, rubber bands, trapdoors or concealed assistants [breathe deeply]." Any such line will work.

Just as you are completing the line, your right hand assumes its part of the Basic Position. Simultane- ously, wrap your left fingers around and onto the deck as far as they can reach, with the fourth finger thrust deep into the break and the left front corner of the deck resting on the base of the first finger (Figure 249). You cannot look at this when executing the sleight so you must learn to move to this position by feel.

When the deck has reached the desired position, grip it firmly (not tightly) and lower your hands a few inches in coordination with your sigh or breath. You'll have to experiment to find the exact spot for you-each person's wrists vary in flexibility-but you will reach a spot at which the natural tendency of the wrists

to rotate will cause the two packets of the deck to move in such a way as to do a Pass that is similar to the Squeeze Pass but without the need for the right fingers to squeeze. What you must explore-in practice, not in performance-is where the spot at which the Pass wants to do itself occurs for you. You must move to that position but prevent the Pass from occurring by not allowing your wrists to rotate naturally. When you breathe or sigh, relax your wrists, allowing them to do what they want to do. The Pass will essentially do itself. As soon as it does, you must immediately lift your hands, which will rejoin the packets. Because of this lifting action you should endeavor to keep the downward motion of the hands as small as possible. This requires that you find the exact spot for your wrists, the point where the Pass will occur if you let it. Move only that far. In this way, the distance you will have to raise your hands to rejoin the packets will be reduced to a minimum.

NOTE: When this Pas is being done correctly it will look like the deck shook ever so slightly and that's all. In the context of the larger movement of the breath or sigh, such a movement is natural (in the bio-physical sense) and above suspicion. Moreover, a deeper than normal inhalation or exhalation provides excellent misdirection. Breathing is generally regarded as a natural occurrence, rather than one calculated to distract. It is, therefore, not suspected.

Hopefully, I've made my point, and by doing so have encouraged you to practice the Pass with a new perspective. You will, I believe, find that the move is a fine, useful and very streamlined way of accon~plishing many things. One must open one's thinking to create contextual frames for the Pass. By so doing, one can find many other ways to employ various forms of the Pass indetectably in a wide variety of performance situations.

THE ANOMALOUS PASS

I N MARLo's MGAZINE, No. 5 (1984, page 262) there appears a description of what Marlo calls his "Unconventional Passes." Marlo apparently felt that his description of the first of these left something to be desired. He attempted, slightly more successfully, to describe it in the November 1989 issue of New Tops, in a contribution titled "Detailed Unconventional Pass" (Vol. 29, No. I I, page 37). More recently, in his charming book, Drawing Room Deceptions or Eti- quette of Deception (1999, page 122), Guy Hollingworth shares a related idea.

The Pass Eddie teaches in these two efforts is accomplished by moving the bottom packet of a deck around the left side of the top packet. This is an unusual path for a packet to follow in a 250 Pass. It is made possible by locking the lower packet between the fleshy pad at the base of the inner phalanges of the right third and fourth fingers and the space below the fleshy mound at the base of the left thumb (the Thenar). This spot on the left hand is roughly the equivalent of Classic Palm position for a coin. The arrows in Figure 250 indicate these points on each hand. It may vary slightly in your hands.

Repeatedly throughout Marlo's write-ups, he makes reference to the consideration of relieving or reducing the strain on the right hand. The strain to which

Marlo refers is both real and apparent to spectators. It is even evident in the photos of Marlo's hands that accompany the New Tops article. It is perhaps even more evident in my hands, which are smaller than were Marlo's.

I hoped I could develop a technique that would solve the problem of strain. After some experimentation, I am satisfied that I have, and that the technique is easier and notably less angle-prone than the Marlo technique. This modified technique, which I call "The Anomalous Pass" motivated a change in the cover action. It is this change that accounts in large measure for the improved angles for my procedure. The combination of revised grip, rotation of the top packet and the cover action constitute my claim to originality for the Anomalous Pass.

THE ACTION The deck should be held in left-hand Dealing Grip, with a break held above ten to twenty cards from the bottom (and no more). While it is not important to the mechanics of the move, it contributes to the logic of the cover action (a fingertip squaring motion) if the top portion of the deck is relatively unsquared, as it would be after the return of a selection. While the dealing position used in this Pass is not unusual, it is specific: The left thumb lies along the left side of the deck. The tip of the thumb should extend past the front left corner. The near left corner should contact the left palm at a point about an inch to the right of the point used in the Marlo Unconventional Pass, at the ridge above the hypothenar. Figure 25 1 illustrates the approximate position. The exact position will vary slightly, depending on hand size. I Your right hand takes hold of the deck as though to square it. Both hands should be centered directly in front of your body, about level with your dia- phragm; thus it can be done seated. As the right hand grasps the deck, its grip is slightly deeper than normal. The right third and fourth fingers contact the bottom packet. The fleshy pad of the fourth fingertip makes contact at the right front corner. The third finger touches the edge of the top packet with the soft flesh of the middle phalange.

A lot of words have been spent on the description of the hand positions, but these positions must be thoroughly learned so that they may be arrived at automatically. As soon as the right hand has taken hold of the deck, the right fourth finger exerts diagonally inward pressure on the bottom packet, trapping it between the right third and fourth fingers and the left palm. At the same time, the right thumb lifts the near end of the top packet until that packet is perpendicular to the top of the trapped bottom packet. This requires rotating the right hand clockwise and

palm lehard . Figure 252 shows your view of the packets from above, revealing their relative positions. The top packet is rotated on end. Figure 253 shows the hands from the front. Notice that the trapped bottom packet cannot be seen by the spectators, but they can see the back of the top packet.

When the packets and hands have achieved the positions illustrated, the bottom packet is completely screened from the front, left and right. Shift your grip on the vertical top packet from the right hand on the ends to the left hand on the sides, fingers on the front side and thumb on the near side.

Move both hands or, better yet, rotate your body to the right until the spectators are looking at the face of the top packet. As soon as that position is reached, slightly twist the bottom packet in a clockwise direction, pivoting on the left-hand contact point. After this very short pivot, the left forward corner of the bottom packet will clear the inner edge of the original top packet and start to move back to the left (Figure 254).

NOTE: The best way to handle this type of body rotation is to set up for it in advance. In this case, you should be turned to the right. This is easily accomplished by swiveling in your seat and placing your feet on the ground in this position. (The same concept can be applied standing.) Twist to the left just before you begin the Pass. When it's time to rotate your body, all you need to do is relax and your body will rotate naturally into its more relaxed rightward position. The rotation will be smooth, natural and automatically properly timed. This is discussed at somewhat greater length in connection with the Side Steal (see page 184).

Immediately pivot the right hand's packet back to the left. The lower edge of this packet will slide upward along the inner edge of the left hand's packet

(Figure 255) until the left edge of the right hand's packet is stopped by the left thumb. The packet will then be resting on the left hand's packet but in-jogged for approximately a third of its length (Figure 256).

The left fingers now grip both packets. Extend your right fingers until they contact the front edge of the under ~acket (Figure 257). Pull the lower packet back until its front edge is behind the left thumbtip, square with the upper packet. This completes the Pass within an action that appears outwardly to be an end-for-end turn of the deck in the fashion of an All-Around Square-Up. You can now move the combined packets forward into normal dealing position. To the audience, it should appear that you simply rotate the deck onto its end, square it and move it back to dealing position. You never move quickly, and there is never any strain on either hand. The pass will seem odd to you at first, but it is invisible and indetectable to an audience.

TOOLBOX

LOW LATERAL PALM IN THE course of toying with a deck of cards, card workers can and have produced many amazing techniques and concealments. What is, perhaps, more surprising is that new discoveries continue to occur regularly. In the summer of 1979, while toying with a deck, I made what seemed at the time a discovery that could revo- lutionize card magic. I was wrong. Someone else had made the same discovery more than twenty-five years earlier. He had published it, and card magic had not been revolutionized by it. I guess I have no future in soothsaying.

Somewhere between Lateral Palm (as first described by Jim Steranko, Steranko on Card, 1960, page 18) and Clip Steal position (as defined by Ed Marlo in Revolutionary Card Technique, Chapter 4: Side Steal, 1957, page 22-although this position was first described by Arthur Buckley in Triple Climax, 1921) is a palm position described by Ellsworth Lyman (M. UM., Vol. 44, No. 1, June 1954, page 30). For reasons unknown to me, Lyman called the position Cloyes (pronounced Klow-ee) Palm. Bruce Cervon, in his book Ultra Cervon (1990, page 125), applies this position to what he loosely-and in my opinion incorrectly-defines as the "Free-Turn Principle." (Cervon's concept is not a principle but rather a broadly defined cover action.) Unfortunately, the Palm position, the "Principle" and the Free-Turn Pass (Cervon's most noted application) have become confused. This and other factors have obscured the utility and scope of the Cloyes Palm. For that reason, among others, I propose to rename the Cloyes Palm "Low Lateral Palm"-a more apt moniker-with full credit to Ellsworth Lyman, and to offer some exciting new applications for this truly under-appreciated grip.

While, as I've said, I first employed this position in 1979, I began exploring it in earnest in May of 1993. Most of the material described herein was devised in

and around that time. I did not immediately commit these ideas to my notes. The techniques have been continually refined, using the mirror and video tape to he1 the analysis. In addition, I have received feedback and ideas from a few of my most trusted magic friends. Finally, I've tested the material by incorporating it into my performances. I am now, as a result, solidly persuaded of the strength of these techniques.

I do not envision Low Lateral Palm replacing Lateral Palm in all applications. Techniques like Dan Garrett's Spin Change and Lennart Green's Snap Deal do not lend themselves to the use of Low Lateral Palm. Nevertheless, for those applications to which it can be applied, it is at least marginally superior in a variety of particulars. In applications involving larger packets, add-backs to the deck (Cap- ping) or those that have angle considerations, Low Lateral Palm has significant advantages. Large packets are better supported and more secure in Low Lateral Palm. Adding or stealing cards from a packet or the deck can be handled more naturally using Low Lateral Palm. Finally, as a general matter, because the grip holds the card(s) lower in the hand, the angle considerations are less demanding. No individual benefit of Low Lateral Palm may be sufficiently persuasive argument for its adoption. Cumulatively, the benefits are compelling.

THE POSITION

To begin, one needs to understand exactly where Low Lateral Palm position is in the hand. The easiest way to convey this information is to guide you through the process of putting cards into the position. Begin with your right hand relaxed before you, palm to the left, with the fingers more or less straight. Take a group of ten cards and hold them parallel to the floor by the middle of the left edge, at your left fingertips. Now place the front right corner of the packet into the fork between the right third and fourth fingers, directly at the base. Next, curl the right fingers inward until the right second fingertip rests on the front left corner of the packet. Adjust the second fingertip until it extends far enough past the corner, around to the left, to hold the packet with no assistance from the left hand (Figure 258). Be aware that in practice the curled third and fourth fingers can support the cards from below but, for our current purpose, use only the second fingertip and the area at the base of the third and fourth fingers where they join. That's the basic Low Lateral Palm position. The hand should be in a relaxed curl. The cards are quite secure. Hold some cards in this position for a few minutes every day, while you're watching TV for example, and you'll become quite comfortable with it in no time.

In the next few pages, I'll share with you a considerable amount of information on this position. I'll begin with the technique that started my exploration of this extremely useful concealment and go on to share enough ofwhat I've learned to, hopefully, give impetus to my original prophecy. m e r e there's life there's hope.

T H E DEAL-OUT SUBTRACTION SEPTEMBER 12, 1979

ALPHA

Most magicians who spend any significant time with cards have used some of that time thinking about variations of the celebrated Secret Addition and the more recently introduced Secret Subtraction (the J. K. Hartman technique). I'm no exception. While looking for a substitute that could be performed away from the deck, while standing, I came up with what I've dubbed the Deal-Out Subtraction. It uses a novel combination of ideas (including Low Lateral Palm) and, when the circumstances for its use prevail, it is extremely fair looking. No possibility of a switch would enter the mind of either magician or lay person (though magicians rarely believe, when watching such things as Ace assemblies, that you've laid down the Aces unless you leave them face up, in which case they will then assume you're using double-facers). I have on occasion used this as a substitute for the Secret Subtraction in conjunction with my "L.S.D Aces." (See Epilogue, No. 16, November 1972, page 147, and Stop Fooling Us!, 1989, page 35.) It has always proven most effective. 1'11 describe it as I use it in that situation, though it is clearly applicable in many others as well. Ifyou try it (getting past the idea of the "strange" palm position) you'll find it very deceptive.

SET-UP: You are holding the deck in your hands, and the four Aces are on the table. There are many other ways to begin; but, for the sake of learning, this will be clearest.

Either palm two cards in left-hand Gambler's Cop or get a break under two cards. If you use the Cop, put down the deck to your left and pick up the Aces as a face-up spread, adding the two face-down, copped cards to the Ace packet as you square it. If you formed a break, add the two face-down cards to the face-up Ace packet as you square them over the deck (you needn't actually place the Aces onto the deck). Lift away the Ace packet with the two extra cards and place the deck to your left, fairly close to the edge of the table. Regardless of the method you use for the Add-On, you want to end up with a packet of face-up Aces in your hands with two face-down indifferent cards below them, and the deck tabled to your left.

After calling attention to the card on the face of the Ace packet, turn that card face down and put it under the packet. Do the same with each of the other Aces until you've shown all four. (This hide-out principle was described by Martin

Gardner in his 1942 booklet, Cut the Card (page 14), and was later used in the better-known Unlimited Count by Norm Osborn from the Marlo and Osborn manuscript Unlimited ( I 953). Here it merely conceals cards, as in the original Gardner application.) From the top down, the face-down packet will now consist of two indifferent cards followed by the Aces.

Take the packet into a Forward Dealing Grip in the left hand. The important feature of this grip is that both front corners of the packet should extend beyond the left first finger (Figure 259).

Deal the top three cards face down onto the table, left to right, in front of you. As you deal, move the left hand out alongside the spot to which you deal each card. In other words, don't take the card with your right hand and carry it to the spot. The taking of the card and the tabling of the card should occur at essentially the same location.

After dealing the third card, move both hands back toward the middle and closer to you. As the hands travel, the left thumb slides the top card of its packet to the left. The card will rotate on the major crease between the thumb and first finger at the outside edge of the hand (Figure 260). As you move this card, your left hand should be cocked leftward at the wrist and your right hand kept close but in front of the left, acting as a screen for the action. A slight turn to the left may also help.

When the left hand has arrived at the spot where the last card is to be dealt, to complete the T-formation, it stops. The right hand continues as though taking the card. The front right corner of the lower two cards beneath the top card hit the right hand at a point on the pad of flesh below the base of the third and fourth fingers. The right second finger curls around the front end so its tip can grip the left front corner of the packet under the pivoted top card-and you have achieved Low Lateral Palm (Figure 26 1). These grips on the packet (in this case, two cards) and the packet itself are hidden by the ~ivoted card and the right hand.

As soon as the right hand's grip on the packet is secure, it moves, in an unhurried manner, to the right, pinching the top card between the right thumb and first finger, in preparation for dealing & it to the table. The left hand comes along, as though helping to carry the card to the table, pulling it to the left sufficiently to aid its clearance of the cards palmed in the right hand. The left hand also acts as a screen from the lek side (Figure 262).

As soon as the final card is dealt, the right hand moves unhurriedly to the left, over to the tabled deck. It descends to the deck, adding its cards to the top, then picks up the deck for use in whatever way your effect requires.

NOTE: Under most conditions, turning to the left is sufficient cover. Adding the left-hand screen merely makes the technique more usable when the angles are demanding. Further, when the technique is applied to switch out other combinations of cards, or more cards, you may need to change the open display-and-duck procedure to create the displacement needed for the cards to fall to the positions your application requires. This is fairly easily accomplished once you understand the switch sequence.

LOW LATERAL CONTROL NOVEMBER 23, 1995

I worked on this technique, off and on, for nearly two years. During that time, it went through numerous changes and a lot of tweaking. I did not, however, see fit to commit it to paper. I now feel confident enough in the absolute deceptiveness of the technique to record it. It is quickly becoming my Control of choice in a wide range of situations. It is not angle-proof but the angles are not difficult when you follow the proper choreography. I believe I've considered every salient detail in the way I'm now performing the technique. For that reason, learning it precisely as described will likely spare you considerable reinvention and abandoned effort. Please learn it as written before altering or adapting it.

Before continuing further, I want to mention that the work of a number of other fine cardmen has heled my efforts. The basic Side Steal approach is modified from an unpublished technique that was popular with Mike Skinner in the early 1970's. The extraction grip is a minor adaptation of Marlo's Bold Steal position. One of the Add-Backs was suggested by my brainstorm-buddy, Carl Albright; another is built on his concept. We are all in large measure the

sum of our influences but, as far as I am aware, the remaining elements of this technique are my own.

OPENING POSITION: We'll assume a selection has been withdrawn from the deck and is about to be returned. Other circumstances can lend themselves to the use of the technique, but this is my favorite at the moment.

Spread off a portion of the deck and break the spread at some point. The spread portion should be held in your right hand. The balance of the deck is in a light Dealing Grip, loosely squared in the left hand.

Have the spectator return the selection to the top of the left-hand cards. Make no particular effort to square the selection with the other cards of the packet. Spread it off and raise your hand to give the assembled multitude a last look. (It is a good idea to offer this last flash anytime you're having a card returned in this way. It helps to justify not allowing the spectator to put the card back where he wants.) After this last display, the card need not be squared completely. It can be left slightly jogged (less than two white border widths) to the right. Alternately, you can square it, establishing a fourth-finger break below it.

With your body oriented somewhat to the left and your feet planted, twist your body slightly to the right as your left hand carries its cards to the right-hand spread. Let the two groups of cards meet lightly. As soon as they do, push up gently with the left second and third fingertips from beneath on the right side of the selection.

Push the spread closed far enough to permit the right hand to release its hold on the cards and, staying close, move to Overhand Grip. The right hand regrips the deck to achieve control of the upper group, all the cards above the selection. Push this entire group to the left as the left second and third fingers straighten - -

while applying upward pressure to the right. This carries the selection to the right. Immediately move the pad of the right thumb to the near left corner of the selection, and the middle phalange of the right fourth finger to the far right corner. If either of these two corners is obstructed by other cards, pressure from the fourth finger or thumb-whichever has contact-will allow you to push the opposite corner clear.

Once you have hold of the card in this modified Bold Steal Grip (deeper than the position Marlo describes in that the grip is with the middle rather than the outer phalange), you can move the selection to the right until it extends for half its width from the balance of the unsquared deck (Figure 263, shown from beneath).

NO'TE: Sonletimes you won't require it, but you should move the left thumb across the deck and apply light downward pressure. This will help to ensure that only the selection moves to the right. In the most extreme cases, when the cards are particularly slippery or sticky, you may have to twist the selection slightly to free it from the other cards. Finally, if the deck becomes too unsquared or the upper portion moves too far to the right, you may have to move the entire upper section to the left. You can do so by rightening the grip of the right fingers and moving the lefi thumb along the left side of the deck. This will enable you to semi-square the deck without losing control of the selection.

Your right side must be turned at least slightly away from the audience when the next actions occur; otherwise the front right corner of the card will likely flash. Extend your right fourth finger, allowing the corner of the jogged selection to enter between the third and fourth fingers at the middle joint of the fourth finger. Close the fingers and squeeze firmly. You should be able to move the card forward with just this grip. It may, however, take a little work to develop the strength to do this, particularly if you have a "window" in that part of your hand.

NOTE: The extent of your body turns, here to the right, later to the left, is dictated by the viewing positions of your spectators. O n either side, the right second finger should point past the eye farthest to that side. This will assure that nothing flashes.

As you move the selection forward, loosening the right hand's grip everywhere except on the corners of the selection, the left front corner will break through the front edge of the deck. As it does so, the right second fingertip applies pressure against the left side of the corner. As you press with the second fingertip, the card will slide into the fork of the third and fourth fingers (Figure 264). You'll reach a point where you'll know you have control of the selection at the two Low Lateral Palm Grip points, the base of the third and fourth fingers and the second fingertip. As soon as that occurs, start to turn your body to the left. This may sound like an arcane point, but the turn should be accomplished via a weight shift rather than twisting your body. The reason is that the right hand travels no farther than a hand's length past the body's center line, while the left hand moves out to the lefi of the body. If you simply twisted at the waist, this would look and feel awkward. The body positioning mentioned earlier was aimed at facilitating this turn. Relax as you do it.

NOTE: The preceding actions must be performed quickly but not hur- riedly. This means that all overt actions must be executed at a normal, relaxed tempo, while all secret actions are performed with due deliberate haste. Perhaps more significant, no more attention should be given to what you're doing than is logically due. This is easier said than done. You must learn the extraction technique in yourjngers so your mind need not regard it. Such relative insouciance comes only with considerable repetition.

The card is now out of the deck. We're almost done. The card is currently held at as many as three points: the second fingertip, the third and fourth finger clip, and, perhaps, the right thumb. You want to be able to release the thumb at this point, if you haven't already. Squeeze inward lightly with the second fingertip and move the thumb a bit to the left. This will clamp the card between the web of flesh at the base of the third and fourth fingers and the second fingertip. When this grip is secure, the thumb can release its hold. This is the riskiest moment in the procedure. If your grip is not secure, the card can fall. Experience is key. With experience you'll become confident of when you have a secure grip.

The right thumb, having released the card, moves up above it. The right hand closes somewhat, into a relaxed curl. You must now remain mindful of your audience's vantage point. Aim the innermost (proximal) knuckle of the second finger at the average eye level of your audience and keep the concealed card parallel to the floor. These aids will prevent you from flashing.

The next sequence is designed to take the heat off the right hand, though it shouldn't be under much scrutiny. Extend your left hand forward a foot or so and straighten all your fingers. The deck should sit, as though on a table, still in a semi-squared condition. Look at the deck. If you've done everything properly, no one should have the slightest clue that the selection is not in it.

L O W LATERAL CONVERSIONS NOVEMBER 7,1995

For a wide variety of reasons, including applicability, angles, choreography and general deceptiveness, the ability to convert from one palm position to others argues for its desirability as part of one's arsenal. Motivated by this awareness, I've investigated a number of "Palm Conversions" for Low Lateral Palm. These conversions run in both directions, to and from Low Lateral Palm. I considered including !5dl details for every imaginable conversion but have decided that an overview of the subject will prove equally useful and far less cumbersome in helping to showcase the utility of the position. This is true because of the common features shared by all Low Lateral Palm conversions.

CONVERSIONS-There are three positions that are closely related to Low Lat- eral Palm and, therefore, are most easily converted to or from: Gambler's Flat

Palm (which includes what Gene Maze has named Unit Control Grip), Tenkai Palm (for purposes of this discussion, in spite of the small technical differences, this term will include Slydini Palm, and Marlo Palm) and Bold Steal position.

These positions can reasonably be considered gateways for Low Lateral Palm. All conversions will achieve one of them, or something very close, in the conversion process. It follows that any conversion that gets you to any of these positions will effectively get you to Low Lateral Palm, and any conversion from Low Lateral Palm to these positions will get you to any of the other positions. Since there are bi-directional conversions between the three gateway positions, all I need to describe is how to get to Low Lateral Palm and how to get from Low Lateral Palm to any one of the gateway positions; but I'm going to give you more. I'll describe how to get from Low Lateral Palm to each of the three positions and how to get from each of these positions to Low Lateral Palm.

LOW LATERAL PALM TO GAMBLER'S FLAT PALM-CU~~ the third and fourth fingers and push on the underside of the card(s). This will lift the left edge (Figure 265). Grip that edge at the inside edge of the outer phalange of the thumb (Figure 266) and rotate your hand to palm down.

LOW LATERAL PALM TO %NKM/SLYDINI/MARLO PALM-CU~~ the third and fourth fingers to support the card(s), then bend the first finger inward to contact the front left edge of the card(s) (Figure 267). Push with the first finger until the card(s) have slid back as far as you require (this varies with hand size). Extend your thumb to grab the left edge at the corner (Figure 268), forward portion of the edge or middle of the edge, as required for Tenkai, Slydini or

Marlo Palm respectively. It should be apparent that if you push further with your first finger and curl your third finger inward further, you can use this approach to move the card(s) to Rear Palm as well (Figure 269).

LOW LATERAL. PALM TO BOLD STEAL-This is a two-step conversion that is not likely to 270 be needed often, but I include it for the sake of completeness and because it is on occasion useful. The first step is to get your thumb on

second finger will cause the inner end to rotate the inner left corner. Pulling forward with your

clockwise enough so you can place the pad of 271 your thumb on that corner (Figure 270). The second step is to hold the card(s) with only your thumb and second finger so you can pull your third and fourth fingers away from the corner they hold. It is then a simple matter to move the fourth finger into position to hold the outer right corner as required (Figure 271). The card(s) should be held parallel to the floor throughout the process.

GAMBLER'S FLAT PALM TO LOW LATERAL PALM-This is an easy conversion. Part of Gambler's Flat Palm is a third and fourth finger clip that is essentially the same as that used in Low Lateral Palm. As a result, if you release all other holds on the card(s) and simply rotate the hand thumb up, the card(s) remain in Clip Steal position (Figure 272). Curl the third and fourth fingers to support the card(s), then extend the second finger to contact the outer left corner and you're in Low Lateral Palm. That's all it takes.

DNKAI TO LOW LATERAL PALM-This con- 273 version is easier still. Again, curl the third and fourth fingers to support the card(s) (Figure 273). Next extend the second finger to contact the outer left corner. Pull in with the second finger as you clip the card(s) between the third and fourth fingers.

BOLD STEAL 7'0 LOW LATERAL PAl,~-This conversion is the reverse of the process for getting into Bold Steal position from Low Lateral Palm. Hold the card(s) with only your thumb and second finger, so you can grip the card(s) between the third and fourth fingers. It is then a simple matter to curl the third and fourth fingers to support the card(s), then extend your second finger to contact the outer left corner.

TO AND FROM GAMBLER'S FLAT PALM-That completes the conversions to and from the gateway positions. It should be apparent, but Clip Steal position is part of Gambler's Flat Palm and, therefore, shares the same conversion paths. Full Palm, the most common palm position, is convertible to Gambler's Flat Palm by moving the fourth finger alongside the edge of the card(s), then curling the second and third fingers, driving the cards toward the wrist. The thumb can then take its position alongside the card(s). The reverse, moving the cards from Gambler's Flat Palm to Full Palm, requires that you move the first finger along the edge of the card(s) and rotate the left inner corner to contact the flesh at the base of the thumb. The thumb can then bend inward to hold the cards in position while the first finger straightens to wrap around the front corner of the card(s). The fourth finger can then contact the opposite front corner and you have the card in Full Palm.

Many of these conversions cannot be performed with the audience looking at the hand. This is not a flaw in Low Lateral Palm but in Palm Conversion techniques generally. The hand will, therefore, need to be screened, taken out of direct sight or misdirection will have to be applied. Nevertheless, as should now be clear, Low Lateral Palm is an extremely flexible position, certainly more flexible than standard Lateral Palm. This is yet another point that favors Low Lateral Palm.

ADD-BACKS

Obviously, with the card out of the deck you are free to do with it as your need dictates. Often, you'll want it back on top of the deck. Occasionally, you'll want it on the bottom or elsewhere. The following approaches will give you those options. The previously explained Palm Conversion techniques will allow you to load the card anywhere one might chose.

STANDARD ADD-BACK

Unlike most Side Steals, the Low Lateral Palm Control leaves the deck in relatively unsquared condition. This provides a legitimate reason for the hands to meet again at the deck, to square the cards. (I thank Steve Draun for making me sensitive to this issue. See Secrets DraunJFom Underground, 1993, page 11.) To add the stolen card back to the top of the deck (or most anywhere else) you'll

need to be able to open your hand almost fully with the card(s) in Low Lateral Palm. You may feel a bit shaky doing this at first but it can be done with complete control.

Move the left hand to the right and inward, toward your body. Stop when the left hand is about a hand's length in front of the right hand and a hand's width to the left (Figure 274). Open and extend your right hand in a gesture as you

move it to the deck (Figure 275). Almost ignore the presence of the palmed card(s). With your right hand, grasp the deck and begin to square it. Your knowledge that you want to add the card will drive you to open the third and fourth fingers, releasing the card(s). The legitimate squaring will take care of the rest. If you're adding the cards to a tabled deck, one-handed, curling your first finger will facilitate the transfer.

My friend Carl Albright first suggested the idea of releasing all but the third and fourth finger clip on the card(s) and allowing it (them) to fall onto the deck. As he demonstrated it, he covered it with a pointing gesture. I have refined his idea slightly, to better incorporate the gesture, but this is, essentially, his technique. As mentioned earlier, you'll find that when you have a card in Low Lateral Palm you can still open your hand almost Mly. The last bit is constrained by the need to keep hold on the corner with the second fingertip. What you might also learn, by accident, is that releasing the second finger grip does not automatically cause the card(s) to fall. You will still be able to grip it (them) perpendicular to the hand, between the third and fourth fingers, in Clip Steal position (see Figure 272 on page 366). This grip is the key to this "No Contact" Add-Back.

With this technique, the majority of the action occurs with the left hand. Turn your body slightly to the left, farther than you did when you stole the card. An

imaginary line extending longitudinally straight through your forearm should point past the leftmost eye viewing you. The right hand remains in a relaxed curl, roughly on a level with the bottom of your solar plexus. Make a statement somewhat akin to "A card has been taken and returned to this deck." As you say this, close your left fingers loosely around the deck and gesture, moving it up, then down. Simultaneously move your left thumb across the top of the deck. As your left arm relaxes after the gesture, allow your left hand to drift back closer to your body until it is slightly lower than the right hand. Your eyes should not look at your hands, so you must learn to judge the position through body awareness. You should be looking at the audience. Continue speaking: "You chose the card; you returned it." Simultaneous with the first You, your right hand moves to the fully opened position described in the previous paragraph, with the fingers held relaxed but fairly straight. As soon as the hand is open, move it toward the deck. The right hand's card will contact the top of the deck and ultimately your left thumb, which is extended across the top.

With practice you'll be able to slip the card under your thumb and, without hesitation, move your right hand in an open-handed pointing gesture toward the spectator who selected it. At that instant you should be saying the word You for the second time. This can be done silently, without the card making noise as it is released. All this may sound difficult, but such acquitments are common to our art. They can be mastered. Once this one is, the card will be added without the slightest suspicion. Let me also point out that while I've given you the line I use, many others could be developed to cover the required choreography.

BOTTOM ADD-BACKS Carl's technique for the No Contact Add-Back led to the following pair of techniques for adding cards from Low Lateral Palm to the bottom of the deck.

While turning to the left, move your left hand to the right and in toward your body. Stop when the left hand is about six inches in front and four inches left of the right hand. Open and extend your right hand, releasing all holds except the clip. Move the hands together, the left fingers straightening, to allow the clipped card to pass above them but below the deck (Figure 276). Irnme- diately grasp the deck in Overhand Grip. The added card(s) will be on the bottom of the deck but jogged to the right for about half their width. I You will now engage in one of two actions, depending on whether you

need to learn the identity of the card (assuming you only added one). If you already know the card or don't care, move the deck to your left fingertips and finish squaring it. You'll find it easy to bring the jogged card into register with the balance of the deck. When you need to glimpse the card you've just added, release your left hand's hold and tighten your right hand's grip enough to retain the card at the bottom. Turn both hands, the left hand turning palm down, or nearly so, the right hand turning palm leftward. (This action is similar to that of Steve Draun's Midnight Shift. [See Richard; Almanac, 1984 Winter Extra, page 157, under the title "The Graveyard Shift"; and Secrets Draunfiom Underground, 1993, page 37.1) At one point along the way, two positions will coincide: You'll be able to transfer the deck from your right hand to your left, and you'll be able to see the face of the jogged card. When these conditions are both present, take the deck with your left hand, pulling the jogged card square (Figure 277), and rotate that hand palm up. Handled casually, it will appear to be an innocent, if unusual, and slightly fancy part of the squaring of the deck-via an end-for- end turn. This is a perfectly acceptable / conclusion for an audience to reach.

LOW LATERAL STEALS

The techniques and applications we've been looking at thus far have used the Low Lateral Palm position in a form of Deal Switch and a form of Side Steal. It can be much more. Unlike most concealment positions, which severely restrict the use of the hand, Low Lateral Palm leaves all the fingers and, most importantly, the thumb, free to be used in other ways. As flexible as it is, one must initially move the card(s) into Low Lateral Palm before anything else can be done. The techniques for doing so, particularly off the top of the deck, are a bit odd but, as you'll see, quite workable.

TOP STEAL-It would be easy to jog the block of cards to the right and wedge them into Low Lateral Palm position. The problem with this direct approach, in most instances, is that it would either be visible from the left, or the opening of the third and fourth fingers would flash from the right. Neither is acceptable. For- tunately, these two periods of vulnerability occur at different moments during the process of the Steal. This allows us to develop a cover using a screen and a turn.

You must acquire a left fourth-finger break below the cards to be stolen; let's say the top four. The deck is in Dealing Grip with the left thumb resting on

the front left corner of the top card, and the right hand takes the deck into Overhand Grip. If you straighten your left fourth finger, the three cards below the top card should move out as a block, to the right. Once they have moved right far enough- about a quarter of the width of a card-you turn to your right. You can, however, have made the turn before you started moving the cards to the right. In any case, with your right side beyond the audience's line of sight, open your right fourth finger, as you did when performing the Low Lateral Control, so the corner of the jogged cards can enter between the third and fourth fingers at the middle joint of the fourth finger (Figure 278). Close the fingers and squeeze firmly.

Now turn back to the left to cover the weak angle for the next action, and use your left thumb to push the top card to the right. It will slide along the top of the cards that are already clipped by the right third and fourth fingers and become clipped without the need for the fingers to reODen. Move the left hand inward

279

slightly while the right hand stays in place. This will cause the front edge of the block to extend over the front of the deck. As the right hand moves forward and to the right, releasing the deck, the right second finger can curl and grasp the front left corner of the packet (Figure 279). The block of cards will be in a secure Low Lateral Palm. I

NOTE: The extent of the body turns, both right and left, is dictated by the viewing positions of your audience members. On either side, the right second finger should point past the eye farthest to that side. This will assure that nothing will flash on either side.

BOTTOM S ~ ~ ~ ~ - S t e d i n g cards into Low Lateral Palm from the bottom is far easier than from the top because the left-side view is screened by the deck itself. With your left side toward the audience and the deck held in left-hand Deal- ing Grip, obtain a fourth-finger break above the cards you wish to palm. Curl the left first finger under the deck, getting it out of the way. As you now turn rightward to protect that side, bring your right hand to the deck and take it into

Overhand Grip. Pivot the cards below 280 the break as though the inner left corner were pinned to the deck. The front right corner and about a quarter of the block of cards will protrude from under the deck on the right side. Grip this protruding corner between the right third and fourth fingers as you have in the Lateral Control and Top Steal (Figure 280). You will notice that the fiont left corner of the block slightly protrudes past the front edge of the deck. Turn toward the left until the right second fingertip points past the leftmost eye viewing you. Release your right hand's grip on the deck, at the same time curling the right second finger to secure the block of cards in Low Lateral Palm. You're done.

MIDDLE S ~ ~ ~ ~ - S t e a l i n g cards into Low Lateral Palm from the middle of the deck, even cards from different places, is also fairly easy. There are many ways to get into the position where one or more cards in one or more positions in the deck are jogged at the near end or the right side. It is not my intention to discuss jog controls here. We will assume that you have reached this in-jogged or right-jogged position. Further, once you are in either of these positions, it is a simple matter to grip the inner left and outer right corners between your right thumb and the tip of your right fourth finger. This is the same grip used for Marlo's Bold Steal. Move the cards to the right for about a third of their width.

Your right side must be turned at least slightly away from the audience. Open you right fourth finger, allowing the right front corners of the cards to enter between the third and fourth fingers at the middle joint of the fourth finger. If you are stealing widely separated cards (as in a Multiple Shift), you may have to open these fingers wider than you normally do. Close the fingers and squeeze firmly. You should be able to move the cards with just the pressure of this grip. Swivel the outer ends of the clipped cards to the right slightly as you turn your body to the left by shifting your weight, as we've discussed. Relax as you make the turn and allow your right hand to move forward as your right thumb pushes on the inner right corner, causing the front left corner to break through the front edge of the deck. Squeeze inward with the second fingertip and move the right thumb slightly to the left. This will clamp the cards between the web of flesh at the base of the third and fourth fingers and the second fingertip. When this grip is secure, the right thumb can move away from the cards.

Move your left hand forward and to the left, away from the right hand, which retains the stolen cards in Low Lateral Palm. The pressure shifts and regrips are a bit trickier in this steal than in any of the previous ones because the cards are

being extracted from the deck. Friction creates resistance to the extraction. With practice you will learn to deal successfully with all but the stickiest of decks. It is a good idea to practice this, and most other techniques, with decks: in all possible conditions.

LOW LATERAL SWTCHES NOVEMBER 18, 1995

What follows are two approaches to switches at the top of the deck, both utilizing the Low Lateral Palm. Each also describes a manner of handling cards while secretly holding other cards concealed. The first takes a fairly standard approach, the second is rather novel and could be done without the Low Lateral Palm but is much easier with it. Each offers a unique combination of benefits for certain situations.

LOW LATERAL ADDITION-As this Addition begins, we will assume that you've already stolen the number of cards you wish to switch in into Low Lateral Palm. We will also assume that the cards you wish to switch out are face down on top of the deck. We will show these cards-let's say there are four of them-to the audience and switch them under the cover of actions that appear very fair.

Spread over the top four cards of the deck and take them between the edge of your curled right first finger and the pad of the thumb, maintaining their spread condition (Figure 281). The important thing to keep in mind as you do this is that the cards in Low Lateral Palm must be kept parallel with the floor.

Tilt the right side of the deck down and push the left side of the spread closed against the right edge of the top card of the deck (Figure 282). Again, the Low Lateral Palmed cards must be kept parallel with the floor. Push with the right first finger, flipping the cards face up onto

the deck (Figure 283). Repeat the ' I - 283 - process to turn the top four face- up cards face down again. When you've finished, the top cards of the deck will be a bit unsquared. Square them briefly, releasing the Low Lateral Palmed cards onto the deck. Immediately spread over the top four cards and take them, as you have before, with the edge of the right first finger below and the thumb above, maintaining the spread condition. The cards you were holding out are switched in and, as the saying goes, "no one's the wiser."

LOW LATERAL SUBSTITUTION-The unique feature of this technique is that it switches face-up cards for face-down cards, yet the deck starts and ends with no reversed cards. It is also an unusual switch construct with far-reaching implications beyond the scope of this discussion. We will assume you want to switch three of the four Aces for the top three indifferent cards of the deck. To keep it simple, you are already holding a break below these three cards. The four Aces are in a face-up fan or spread in your right hand. Add the Aces to the top of the deck, pushing them closed but not square. Release your right hand's grasp on the closed spread and shift to Overhand Grip. Square the top seven cards and put your left thumb on the face of the top card (a face-up Ace). Immediately straighten your left fourth finger. The lower six cards, above the break, should move to the right as a block. This is somewhat like the start of a Burgess Top-Card Cover Pass (formerly attributed to Stanyon; see The Looking Ghs, Summer 1996, page 128) combined with Marlo's Future Reverse (from his 1945 booklet of the same name). Steal the six-card block into Low Lateral Palm. The action is very much like the Top Steal technique already described (page 370)) except that you don't push the top card over to join the clipped block. While you're completing the steal of the six-card block, as your hands are moving apart, you may want to secure a break below the top card of the deck. It isn't essential, just helpful.

What will happen next is effectively a Half Pass of the cards you've just stolen, albeit an unusual one, under the cover of the top card. Your right hand returns to Overhand Grip, which necessitates your left second finger releasing its pressure on the packet, leaving the cards clipped between the third and fourth fingers. At the same time, the left first finger moves over the outer end of the deck, near the right front corner. The right third and fourth fingers, which lie in front of it, screen its position and the action. The tip of the first finger enters

under the front end of the top card of the deck and supports the front edge of this card as the left hand slightly lowers the right side of the deck. Your right thumb and second finger also hold the top card lightly by its ends, helping to keep it stationary, while your left thumb stops the card from slipping to the left.

Here comes the unusual action: The left second, third and fourth fingers open and the left edge of the cards in Low Lateral Palm pass slightly below the right edge of the face-down deck. The right side of the deck is now lowered further, though you don't want to drop it any more than necessary. It should drop just far enough so that when the left fingers curl inward, as they will in a moment (turning the stolen block of cards over, side for side), the upper edge of the block will pass under the top card, which is kept horizontal. You are performing a Half Pass of just the small packet of cards, using the lower edge of the deck as the initial pivot point. Then, while the deck remains in place, the packet continues to rotate, pivoting on the right edge of the deck and finally on the right edge of the top of the deck, albeit under the screening top card. Figure 284 shows in three stages the packet on its reversal path.

Depending on the length of your fingers, you may find it helpful, or even necessary, to angle the right side of the deck downward heavily. Within limits, this is not a problem; but it necessitates tilting the front end of the deck downward to screen the action at the front. Set up a video camera at eye level, at the distance you would typically stand from your audiences, and point the camera at your hands. The resulting image will tell you all you need to know about the angle considerations.

It will take a bit of practice to learn to do all this quickly, smoothly and noise- lessly, but it can be learned. Perhaps the hardest part is keeping the top card

from bending, which would give the game away. Using the lefi first finger as support aids in avoiding such undesirable bowing. You complete the switch by squaring the entire deck and raising your hands as you spread off the top four cards. There will be one Ace and three indifferent cards. This concept, using a Half Pass at the top of the deck to accomplish a partial packet switch, is, I believe, original with me, though Aaron Fisher uses a similar idea (see The I'aper Engine, 2002, page 66). 1 think it worthy of further investigation; alas, another day.

THE CHRIST-mNEMmN ALIGNMENT

DISPMCEMENT SEQUENCE (A WJ TECHNICAL VARIATION)

JANUARY 14, 1990

IN TED ANNEMANN'S Alignment Move (see "Synthetic Sympathy" in The Jinx, No. 2, November 1934, page 7) the top card of a three-card packet is pulled partially back so the second card can be pushed forward while simultaneously realigning the top card with the bottom one. The out-jogged card is then either drawn from the packet for display or relocation; or the aligned cards are turned end over end as a single card onto the out-jogged second card to display the face of the bottom card as though it were the top one. It was, I believe, Henry Christ's idea (although I've failed to date or find the reference to support this) to invert the Annemann procedure by pushing the top card forward so the second card can be drawn inward while the top card is pulled flush again with the packet. When this handling is applied to open displacements, as in routines such as Sam Schwartis "Back Flip" (Epilogue, No. 19, November 1973, page 175) and Derek Dingle's "We'll Twist-IfYou Insist" (The Complete Works of Derek Dingle, 1982, page 55), it has always been a bit problematic, requiring more justification than it is given. More often than not it's given no justification at all. The sequence defies logic when used in the usual way, so none is typically offered. What has made the sequence useable, in spite of its total lack of justification, is that it appears innocent or, at least, doesn't seem to accomplish anything nefarious. It is, as typically used, an unjustified open

rearrangement of the cards. If this sort of procedure were to be used in most other types of effects, it would be roundly criticized. In the context of the types of packet effects in which it is generally applied, so much happens that can't possibly be explained by this odd procedure that it "gets by." That's not good enough for me. What I'm about to describe is an effort to provide an alternative procedure and an alternative rationale. It isn't a perfect solution but it gives a rather different look to the procedure and provides some, however tenuous, justification. Give it a try. I think you'll agree that this technique is a step in the right direction.

The situation is as follows: Let's say we have a seven-card packet, in which the second card from the top is face up and out-jogged. This is the card we wish to align and displace, and we'll displace it, in this example to a position third from the bottom of the packet while appearing to cut it to the bottom.

Pull down with your left fourth finger 285 on the two lowermost cards in the usual way. Your right hand moves over the packet and the right second finger lightly kicks the out-jogged card to the left and into a canted position, creating space for the second finger to contact the packet at the extreme right front edge while the right thumb contacts the right near corner (Figure 285).

Carry the two cards below the fourth-finger break forward and into alignment with the out-jogged card. While the right hand holds the upper four cards-the top one and the three below the out-jogged card-the left hand pulls the out- jogged card onto the two cards in the left hand (Figure 286), drawing the card out of the right hand's packet. You'll need a patter line at this point. To some degree this is specific to the effect one is performing. I suggest something like "Remember, the King of Hearts [here you name the card being strippedfiom the packet] remains in the packet," or "We cut the King of Hearts into the packet." Conclude by putting the right-hand cards on top of the left-hand cards. That completes the Alignment-Dis- placement. You may note that this procedure is similar to the well-known Strip-Out Addi- tion of Dai Vernon's. This has not escaped me.

In some cases, rather than have the audience conclude that you've cut the card to the bottom or some known point in the middle of the packet, or when you need to position the card and rearrange the order of the cards above it, as you might in some effects, you'll want to convey that you are losing the card within the packet. In that case, you'll need to follow the first displacement with a second. This presents no problem; simply obtain a break under the upper two cards as you deposit them on top of the left- hand group. Without adjusting your Overhand Grip, openly draw the second card by its ends from under the top card (Figure 287), then deposit it on top. This procedure is somewhat like an Overhand Shuffle with the packet remaining parallel with the table rather than being turned on edge. It also resembles a Running Cut. You are probably well advised to cover this sequence with a line like "We can even mix them up a little." This will not serve as justification in every instance, but it will work in many. I'll leave it to you to come up with the appropriate rationale for the situation.

FOUR-AS-FOUR (HIDING TWO, FAF-TWO)

COUNTS NOVEMBER 7, 1995

FOUR-AS-FOUR COUNTS that hide two cards while showing two, in the handling style of the Elmsley Count, have been offered before. With few exceptions, such counts have found limited proponents. My good friend Noel Coughlin suggests that the lack of popularity is related to the lack of applications. It is certainly true that there is a dearth of material that takes specific advantage of such counts. I am reluctant, however, to accept that the fraternity is that shortsighted. I contend the primary problem with previous counts of this sort has been their technical difficulty. Secondarily, psychological factors, which I'll later address, come into play.

I have chosen to class all Four-as-Four counts that hide two cards as Faf-Two (Rhymes with laugh-two) Counts. Within this class are three categories of approach: Swap, Mask and Combined techniques. The Harnman Two-for- Four Count, described in The Pallbearers Review, Seventh Folio (Summer 1972, page 539) is a pure swap approach. It would be referred to as a Faf-Two S Count. The technique used in Daryl Martinez' marketed routine, "Chameleon Cards," is also a pure swap approach. The technique alluded to in my Carry Count description (Pasteboard Perpensions, page 4) is a pure masking technique. This would be referred to as a Faf-Two M Count. The treatment offered herein-the best to date, in my opinion-is a combined approach. It begins with a swap and concludes with a masking technique. It is a Faf-Two C Count. All these terms may be unclear at this point. They will gain clarity as the discussion continues.

Swap-type counts all involve swapping one card for three and three cards for one. This is done twice to simulate counting four cards. When one takes one card on the first count and swaps that one for the three-card packet on the second count, you then swap three for one on the count of three and conclude by placing the three cards, as one, onto the single left-hand card on the count of four. This makes the distribution of cards on counts three and four markedly disparate from what they should be. This disparity happens at a particularly problematic point because it is harder to maintain alignment at this stage of the count. (This is part of the psychological factor I mentioned.)

Conversely, taking three on the first count, swapping for one on the second, back to three on the third and, finally, one on the count of four, is better. It presents two problems however: First, the initial condition of the packet to be counted must be that the cards you wish to hide are sandwiched between the cards you actually count (unless you use the OPEC approach, which is illogical). Moreover, this is not the position one would typically be in, following a Half Pass for example. This necessitates additional packet handling. Further, this position does not recycle in the count.

The second problem is that on the count of one, three cards must be taken into the taking hand. This is brazen and somewhat intimidating for some performers. (The psychological factor again.) In sum, the swap approach is quite problematic, though certainly not unworkable.

Mask-style counts are easier to perform and don't require a beginning sandwiched condition. They do, however, suffer somewhat from the intimidation factor referred to in the three-one-three-one swap approach. I confess I don't find the problem as daunting in a mask-style count. It is, nevertheless, a factor. Still, for some purposes, a pure mask type count is quite viable.

The count about to be described is the happiest balance of the factors we've discussed in the swap- and mask-style counts. There is, however, one new skill that must be acquired to make the count smooth: the "Splay Grip." As it is a useful ability for any number of other purposes as well, it will be well worth the effort required to learn it.

THE FAF-TWO C COUNT OPENING POSITION: For practice purposes use two red-backed and two blue- backed cards or two face-up and two face-down cards. The packet should begin in Red-Red-Blue-Blue order. The cards that are to be counted start in right-hand Flexible-Count Grip, the right side of the packet pinched between the thumb above and the first two fingers below, while the right fourth fingertip rests against the right inner corner of the packet. This provides an alignment-stop for the cards taken back into the right hand. The cards will be

counted into left-hand Dealing Grip (see page 54, which addresses this issue at greater length).

On the count of one, use the left thumb to drag the top card of the packet into left-hand Dealing Grip.

On the count of two, take the three cards from the right hand onto the one in the left, aligning them as well as you can. As the hands separate, use the right fingertips to drag the bottom card from under the left-hand cards. This action is much like performing a Jordan Count.

The new skill required in the count occurs next. As soon as the hands separate, after the count of two, the left hand must perform a two-card Pull-Down on its three-card packet. This becomes fairly easy due to the finesse I'm about to describe, but the finesse is a knack that is difficult to explain. Once you get it, it's easy. Until you do, it will seem nearly impossible. Keep working on it and your hand will learn the feel.

SPLAY GRIP

With the packet in left-hand Mechanic's Grip (first finger on the front edge), exert inward and downward pressure with your left first finger on the right front edge (not the corner) of the packet. At the same time, squeeze rightward with the base of the left thumb. Simultaneously and most critically with the pad of the left thumb, press downward and diagonally forward to the left on the top of the front left of the packet. In effect, you're sliding the top card against the rear- ward pressure of the first finger at the front, and the right inward pressure of the base of the thumb at the side, and the left diagonally forward pressure of the pad of the thumb. This causes the card to buckle upward at the inner right corner. The packet will take on a light reverse S-configuration when viewed from the corner. If you've done everything correctly and exerted enough pressure, the three cards will separate from each other. (The pressure dynamic here is that used by Harvey Rosenthal in his Pop-Up Move in Karl Fulves' Packet Switches [Part Three], 1977, page 184.) The top card will bow upward slightly. The bottom card will bow downward and the middle card will remain essentially straight, bowing slightly downward. You should clearly see the edges of each of the three cards, with about a quarter of an inch between them (Figure 288). Once you can get the packet to splay in this 288 way pulling down the bottom two cards is easy. I should point out that this splay effect occurs in packets comprised of more than three cards. This gives the Splay Grip broad applications in establishing breaks with small, multi-card packets. \ / '1

O n the count of three, place the right hand's card onto the left's cards and steal back the single card above the break from the left-hand cards. This action is also like a Jordan Count, but is done above two cards. When the hands separate there will be three cards in the left hand and one in the right.

The count of four is easy. Relax all breaks and fairly take the last of the right hand's cards onto the left hand's.

NOTE: The only point where the numeric distribution of cards is other than what you purport it to be is on the count of two. The distribution is correct on counts one, three and four. It is off by only one in each packet on the count of two. This is the time when a discrepant distribution is least detectable and is one of the strengths of this approach.

APPLICATION NOTES: One example of a situation in which this count would be useful is a Four-Card Brainwave effect. If you're performing such an effect with a magical presentation, you might want to show all four cards face down before the spectator names a suit. (See my "Four-Card Heisen- berg" in O m , V o 2, No. 1, October 1998, page 10.) Since the packet consists of two face-up and two face-down cards, the Faf-Two C Count could be ideal.

The Faf-Two C Count can also serve as a form of face-up Gemini Move or Virgo Move. This is essentially the purpose to which Daryl applies the Faf- Two S Count in his "Chameleon Cards."

A FafTwo C Count is also a substitute for a Hamman or Veeser Count in a four-card packet. It replaces an Elmsley or Jordan Count where no displacement is acceptable. No doubt other applications are possible. I leave them to the reader's ingenuity.

WEST-TOWNSEND-JAMES (WT'J) COUNT

MARCH 7, 1990

THE W J COUNT is an incremental evolutionary step in the development of a convincing Elmsley-style Gemini Move. It may not be the final step but it is, in my opinion, the best offered to the fraternity to date, and it's easy. The basic idea for the move derives from a Larry West technique called the Mirage Count, which is essentially a handling variation of the Olram Subtlety; but the WTJ Count hides two cards while showing two cards twice during an Elmsley-style Count. In that respect, the Mirage Count and the WTJ Count are functionally, though not procedurally, like the Gemini Move, the Rhythm Count and its progeny.

NOTE: You will have noticed that I refer to Bro. John Hamman's sleight as the "Gemini Move" rather than the comn~only accepted "Gemini Count." I feel this change of terms is necessary, as the Hamman sequence is a display based on a means of creating a Center Double Lift in a small packet. It is an illogical sequence, and is typically performed without rationale. Because of this, it is not usually and should not be presented as a count, as doing so merely highlights the illogic. It would be equally illogical to refer to the Diminishing Lift Switch sequence-a slightly more logical but functionally similar concept-as a count. Thus, to properly reflect the nature of the technique and the best-advised application of it, I submit that the Gemini Move is the preferable nomenclature.

Some time before its appearance in the pages ofApocalypse (Vol. 12, No. 1, Janu- ary 1989, page 1590), Jonathan Townsend showed me a Count he had devised.

ENCHANTMENTS + 385

His Count hides two card surfaces, but only one card, while apparently showing the faces and backs of the four counted cards. His procedure combines an Elms- ley Count-actually, what is sometimes known as a "Broken Elmslef-with a strategically placed open turnover. The WTJ Count accomplishes the same end as the Mirage Count and Gemini Move, using a procedure similar in appearance to the Townsend Count. The combination is mine. It has the advantage of appearing more logical than the Mirage Count, while what it accomplishes is a more productive and difficult-to-achieve result than the Townsend Count: hiding two cards.

You will apparently show the faces and backs of four cards. Begin with a face- up four-card packet. The two cards at the face of the packet are the only two faces that will be seen. We will assume they are two red Queens. We will further assume the other two cards are black Eights.

Beginning with the four cards face up in left-hand Dealing Grip (see the Notes at the end for another option), the red Queens should be uppermost. The right hand approaches the left-hand cards, palm down. The left thumb moves the top card (a red Queen) to the left just enough to allow the right fingers to grasp the three cards below this Queen in Flexible Count Grip (Figure 289).

When the right hand has grasped the three cards, it moves back to the right, turning palm up in the process and leaving behind one face-up red Queen in the left hand (Figure 290).

290

As the hands are separating and the right hand is turning palm up, the left hand flips the card it holds face down into Dealing Grip. (It is not absolutely essential that the card be taken into Dealing Grip but it does make the sequence that follows more reliable.) The cards are now in the same position they would be after taking the first card in a face-down Elmsley Count: one face-down card in the left hand and three cards, also face down, in the right hand (Figure 291). That's exactly where you need to be.

Briefly rotate the right hand palm down, giving your viewers a flash of the red Queen on the face of the packet. Immediately turn the right hand palm up again as you move the hands together and perform the switch action used in an Elmsley Count. In other words, your right thumb pushes over a two-card block from the right-hand packet and your right fingertips steal back the card from the left hand, taking it under the remaining right-hand card. You will complete this sequence with two cards in each hand. The audience should believe they have seen the two cards in the left hand but not the two in the right. This is not true but is accepted for the same reasons operative in the Olram Subtlety and Flushtration Counts.

In some applications, such as a vanish in an assembly, the two left-hand cards might now be carried to the table, but you can simply continue to hold these cards in Dealing Grip. Thus, the count can be used when no table is available, unlike most variants of the Gemini Move (including my Virgo Move in Paste- board Perpensions, page 20).

The right hand still holds two face-down cards 292 in right-hand Flexible Count Grip. Extend your right second finger past your thumb but above the cards (Figure 292). Clip the two cards between your right first and second fingers while YOU raise your thumb and move your third and fourth fingers aside to allow the two cards to rotate inward, end over end, face up

between the first two fingers (Figure 293). The first finger ends up above the cards. Use your thumb to press the two cards against the right second finger (Figure 294) as you move the first finger below the cards and beside the second finger. This puts the cards back into right-hand Flexible Count Grip, but they are now face up.

Count the two face-up cards fairly into the 294 left hand, reversing their order if desired. If you're doing the entire count in the hands, simply lever them face down, bookwise, onto the cards already in Dealing Grip. Alternately, flip them face down and carry them to join those on the table.

NOTES: If you time the rotation of the first Queen as you turn it face down in your left hand so that the turn is completed as the right-hand packet moves over the back of the Queen, that back can remain completely hidden. The timing here is similar to that used when doing any Wrist-Turn Concealment. If your right hand holds the front end of its packet tipped lip at a slight angle, comparable to that used when necktieing a deck, the timing is even less critical. After the exchange has been made, during this second take, you'll need to maintain the alignment of each hand's pair of cards to within a white-border width. If, after you spread and display the faces of the two Queens in your right hand, you let the Queens slide square again as you flip them face down together onto the left-hand pair, you will have concealed two backs-one belonging to a red Queen, the other to a black Eight-as well as two faces. In other words, the backs of both under- cards remain unseen throughout the Count. It is rather amazing that in the process of apparently showing the faces and backs of four cards, two faces and two backs are not seen.

Those who have read my previous writings on counts (see Pasteboard Per- pensions, page 1) will be aware that I believe it can be quite confusing to an audience if a count that starts in the left hand also ends in the left hand. The construction of this Count somewhat mitigates this issue, but use of this count in a routine involving other Elmsley-style counts would argue for consistency in pattern. With that in mind, I suggest that you can begin this Count with the packet face down in right-hand Flexible Count Grip.

To do so, rotate the right hand palm down as it approaches the left hand for the first time. The left thumb then moves the red Queen on the face to

the left, drawing it into left-hand Dealing Grip. The right hand moves back to the right, taking the remaining three cards and turning palm up in the process. You then continue as has been previously described.

I have not included specific effects that employ this Count but I can fore- see application in treatments of "Flight-of-the-Blues" handlings. (I use this term, rather than Searles' "Ultimate Aces," because I find it more com- municative, not for its historical accuracy.) Such applications would not be possible with the traditional Gemini Move or my own Virgo Move. It might also be applied to routines such as Jim Swain's "Capitulating Queens" (Don't Blink: The Magic ofJames Swain, 1992, page 49), Walton's "Cascade" (a marketed manuscript, nd.), etc. The purpose of this description is to provide a tool to be applied as your creativity permits. After all, I don't want to "bogart" the good stuff. (If you don't understand the last comment, ask someone who was around in the Sixties.)

MY NOTES on this technique are not conclusive, but they suggest that I first became aware of this unique Bob Farmer equivalent to the Half Pass in April of 1997. Bob began circulating the sleight via private manuscript in mid-August 1995. At the time, I expected that Bob would publish the technique within a reasonable period. I'd then be able to apply it, with proper credit, in those effects to which it lends itself. Under that assumption, I began adding remarks within my notes that referenced Bob's technique. Here we are in 2003 and Bob has still not published the sleight, though he has clearly established it with a number of individuals. Bob has graciously given his permission to include the technique in these pages. This is, to the best of my knowledge, the first time Bob's Turnantula has been released to a wide audience. I am grateful to Bob for his generosity in allowing me to share this with you. You will find it easy to learn and execute, though you may have to resist an entrenched habit to make it fully deceptive. More important, you are likely to find yourself using the technique often and wishing it could be applied to more small-packet Half Pass situations.

For purposes of description, we will assume you have a packet of seven cards, the lower five of which are face up. In the apparent act of turning the packet from face down to face up, we will adjust this situation so that all the cards face the same way. The technique does not work as an all-purpose Half Pass but as a clean-up technique for secretly reversed cards, or when a presentational reason can be found for openly turning the deck or packet over. In other words, Tur- nantula might be called a Turnover Half Pass. It is natural in appearance and very deceptive. I'm not aware of much directly related history for this approach to the Half Pass. The Half Passes by Jim Patton and Bruce Cervon, described

in Ultra Cervon (1990; see Chapter Nine, page 147) have a distant family resemblance. Also, Gordon Bean has pointed out that Paul Curry, in his effect "Face to Face" (Something Borrowed, Something New, 1941, n.p.) described a sleight related in concept, though not in action. It is the mechanics of Bob's technique and their integration with the turnover action that are innovative, not the action itself.

Begin with a fourth-finger break held above the five reversed cards and position your left thumb along the left side of the packet. Bring your hands together and, with your right hand, grasp the packet from above, your thumb near the near right corner, your second finger close to the far left corner and your first - finger curled on top. Immediately slide the packet forward in your left hand until the near left corner of the packet contacts the deepest point in the fork of your thumb (Figure 295). This is the same position you would assume in preparation for an Erdnase Bottom Palm (Expert a t the Card Table, First Method, page 86). With your left third and fourth fingers, pull on the cards below the break at the near end and twist your left hand clockwise at the wrist, causing the lower cards to swivel below the upper ones (Figure 296). Important: Do not change the plane of the cards as they move. This is counter-intuitive at first, since you are thinking of a Half Pass, but the plane of these lower cards does not change until much later in the action. (Bob tells me a lay person can learn this sleight perfectly within five minutes, but magicians take longer because they feel they need to apply the familiar actions of a Half-Pass or Pass. Don't do this.)

When you have rotated the lower cards as far as you can without your left thumb breaking contact with the left side of the packet, immediately press down with your right fingers on the front edge of the upper packet. This causes those cards to start to rotate end over end, around (Figure 297)

and then under the pivoted lower packet (Figure 298). From a spectator's perspective, this should appear as though you are turning over the entire packet. When the upper packet is at roughly a forty-five-degree angle to the lower packet-which still has not changed its plane-your right thumb releases its hold on the near edge and moves down toward the face of the lower packet (Figure 299). Only at this point does that packet change its plane, under cover of the upper packet, rotating onto its edge, as you pull inward with your right fingers, driving the upper cards far enough to the left to assure that the - lower cards are obscured from your spectators' view as the packet continues to rotate forward in front of the lower packet (Figure 300).

You are about to perform the most delicate part of the technique, realigning the two packets. I find that the side of my left third finger and the flesh at the base of my right thumb ( \ provide sufficient alignment guides to allow the process to be completed. Depending on the size of your hands, you may find another finger better positioned to assist in pressing the packet against the fleshy base of your right thumb. When the packet is realigned, your right thumb presses I on its face (Figure 301). Your right

I hand finishes turning the packet face up by turning palm up (Figure 302).

Turnantula is not merely a Half Pass; it contains elements of both a Half Pass and a Pass. Rather than reversing

the bottom portion of the packet, the top portion is rotated around it in the action of apparently turning the packet over. When done correctly, the illusion is perfect from every angle but your own. Bob observes that the actions create a very potent optical illusion. The technique will seem a bit busy when you first begin to practice it, but with work it becomes a synchronized series of actions that appear to be no more than turning over the packet. If the packet remains a bit messy as a result of the turnover, it is not a problem so long as the cards are aligned within the width of a white border. You may feel guilty about it, but it would occur, to some degree, if you rotated the packet legitimately.

THE EGRESS VANISH JUNE 4 ,1990

IS TECHNIQUE was developed for my "Kannibal Kings" routine (see Stop Fooling Us!, page 11). It is based on an item titled "Cul-de-Sac," which appears in Ken Krenzel: Close- Up Impact! (1 990, page 154). The broad method is Ken's, the technique and application are mine. As a historical note, my treatment is more familially related to the Depth Illusion, popularly known as Tilt, than is Ken's. Nevertheless, my treatment would not exist without Ken's idea as inspi- ration. It is worth mention that in neither of Ken's methods is the card that vanishes actually between the cards from which it vanishes at the time of the vanish; it only appears to be. This guides the direction in which the performer concludes the sequence. (Ken causes the card to reappear, while in my sequence the vanish is seemingly permanent.) The condition employed in Ken's technique precludes showing the bottom of the enveloping cards immediately before the vanish while mine solidly supports it. In this respect, my technique expands the performer's options. It permits the bottom of the lower card to be shown until the last moment-the card that vanishes is actually sandwiched. If you're currently performing a Cannibal Card routine-mine or another, wherein the "missionary" is inserted crosswise between the Cannibals-try adding this sequence. If you're developing your own routine consider this vanish.

EFFECT: A card inserted crosswise between four others (only rwo are essential) is seen to vanish when it is pushed through the packet and fails to emerge from the other side. The packet is then shown to still contain only four cards. The inserted card has vanished completely.

SET-UP: After performing the now standard Marlo Chewing Move (the comic action of bowing the cards of the packet in opposite directions and flexing

them open and shut to simulate chewing), allow the packet to close into the cross-formation shown in Figure 303. The right hand should be holding the packet as shown, effectively in Over- hand Grip, with the missionary card protruding from both long sides. Obvi- ously, if you are performing another effect (such as Elmsley's "Point of Departure" or an assembly-type routine) you may want to offer another reason for this configuration.

The left hand grasps the packet between the second finger below and thumb above at the near left corner. The right second finger and thumb then grasp the far left corner in the same grip (Figure 304).

Bend your right fourth finger in and under the protruding, crosswise card, contacting the underside (Figure 304 again). This position prepares you to lift the near end of the upper cards. All will appear normal from the front, and it is, but you'll actually set up a V-formation, a Tilt-like configuration.

Rotate the packet clockwise ninety degrees, bringing its long edges toward the audience. As you perform this rotation, your right fourth finger pushes the crosswise card up as it enters under it, much as it would if you were forming a fourth-finger wedge break (Figure 305). The crosswise card should not separate from the upper two cards. Your left fourth finger moves into the break so that the left hand assumes the mirror image on the left side of the packet to the right hand's grip on the right.

The first fingers of both hands extend to contact the sides of the protruding card and push it out until its near end is completely under the upper cards and 4'

within the packet (Figure 306). -)

Bend your wrists upward to flash the bottom of the packet, simultaneously moving your fourth fingers back, allowing the crosswise card to slide off them. The fourth fingers will now contact the back of the crosswise card but are below the upper lengthwise cards (Figure 307, an exposed view). Don't hold this position for long.

307

Bend the wrists downward. When the hands have moved down until the bottom cards of the packet are parallel with the floor, move both first fingers to the far edge of the protruding card and push it flush with the front edge of the packet. It will appear to vanish (be digested) because it does not appear to emerge on the opposite side of the packet. This is due purely to perspective. From your view, the card clearly protrudes from the back of the packet (Figure 308, in which the angle of the lower cards has been exaggerated for clarity); but because of the secret angling of the cards in the packet, the crosswise card is invisible to your audience (Figure 309). Pause a moment to make a comment that highlights the vanish. In the Kannibal routine I say, "They're digesting their meal."

308

NOTE: The angles on this technique are somewhat misleading. They are very similar to Tilt in the vertical plane but are more critical on the horizontal plane. Both hands screen the sides to compensate. A mirror will provide

reasonably accurate feedback on the horizontal angles but not on the vertical angles. A video camera provides accurate guidance on both angles, but the errors in depth perception make the illusion appear less convincing than it is to the naked eye.

1 have debated whether it is better to make the push fast or slow. In some applications, a slow dramatic push might make sense. In a routine such as the Kannibals, it would be, I believe, dramatically out of character. In my experience, a quick push followed by a brief pause produces a startled reaction. The spectators' minds reel and question what they are seeing. Continuing as I'll describe serves to confirm that what the audience has seen was a visual vanish. It is like seeing a special effect in a movie. Still, an audience has no frame of reference for what a vanish looks like, so it remains to be demonstrated that it has occurred.

Continuing-with the left first finger, apply upward pressure on the extreme front edge of the packet, to hold it closed. Release the right hand's grip on the packet and use this hand to gesture to the right. If there are spectators on your right side, keep your right arm between the cards and the audience. You may also turn the left hand clockwise slightly at the wrist. This helps to prevent the spectators from seeing the V-opening or the protruding card. The left hand still screens the left side of the packet.

With your right hand, regrasp the packet, assuming the same position as the left hand. Move the left hand away, turning the right hand counterclockwise at the wrist and exerting upward pressure on the front edge with the right first finger. This action parallels what you did on the other side. / 31 1

As your left hand returns to the packet, place your left thumb on the front edge but extend your left third finger under the protruding card and contact the right edge of the near corner of the crosswise card (Figure 3 10). Move your right hand forward and to the left. This causes the packet to rotate counterclockwise as the left third finger pulls the crosswise card by its edge, causing it to rotate clockwise. The packet will end up in an elongated condition with the vanished card heavily in-jogged but hidden by the left hand (Figure 31 1).

Your right hand squares the packet, clips it between its first two fingers and turns it face up, end over end, to assume position for an Ascanio Spread. When I'm performing the Kannibals, I say, "If the chef has done his job properly, if the meat is tender and juicy, you'll always hear-" Pause and pop or snap the packet-"a burp."

Finish by performing the Ascanio Spread to show that the card has vanished. (As I've discussed the technique for the Ascanio Spread at length in my Stop Fooling Us!lecture notes, page 18, I will not do so here.)

NOTES: I'ractice the sequence for smoothness. The angles are not nearly as critical as they might seem, but there should be no fidgeting in the hall- dling. Your grip changes must be sure and efficient.

This vanish demonstrates an odd phenomenon. While the event is clearly visual, a vanish ultimately occurs on an intellectual level more than on a visual one. This is true in spite of the fact that the vanish is recognized visually. I mention this because some people will not realize, react to or accept that the vanish has occurred until you perform the Ascanio Spread. You cannot count on a response until the moment the Spread is complete. It is as though the mind can't process the visual data, so it waits for intellectual confirmation. This can really mess with some people's heads. Don't be surprised if you hear a lot of comments about it from your lay audiences. It's great in the retelling as well.

A REFINEMENT FOB THE BLUFF SHIFT

ON SATURDAY, May 4, 199 1, I had a brief conversation with Eric Decamps. During that conversation, he described and demonstrated two versions of the Bluff Shift he had seen Roger Klause perform at a then recent Fechter's Finger Flicking Frolic. I found the "new" concepts Roger had incorporated into his handling of this venerable technique very interesting. It was during my experiments with what I understood to be Roger's ideas (see Roger Khuse: In Concert, 199 1, page 131) that I developed my own thinking. My modifications are, I believe, genuine improvements on the line of thinking fostered by Roger Klause. As my publisher, Stephen Minch, points out, Roger seemed unaware that lifting off no cards in the Bluff Shift was the original handling offered by Frederick Montague in 1928 (Westminster Wizardry, page 75). In a phone conversation in September 1998, Roger confirmed this was the case. He believed, with good reason, that the Bluff Shift, lifting one or several cards as cover, came from Tommy Tucker in 1936, as indeed it did (What Next!, page 24). Roger thought, however, that lifting no cards was original with him. Frankly, while I had long been aware of the idea of performing the Bluff Shift lifting no cards-having first learned it that way-I had not known its published origin. It is now noted for posterity.

Roger also believes, I think correctly, that his technique for creating a "per- sistence of vision" in the lift-off process is original with him. Whatever the exact details of Roger's contribution, he has clearly advanced the development of elements that significantly enhance the visual illusion created by the Bluff Shift, and he inspired my hrther analysis. Thanks Roger; had you not

accented the bevel and dribble actions, I would probably not have revisited this technique, and the fraternity would not have the improved tool I think this description records.

THE BLUFF SHIFT AS A CONTROL The Bluff Shift is usually used as a Pass substitute that controls a selection to the top or second from top of a deck. It is less frequently thought of as a variation of the Riffle Force, though it can be used in that way as well, forcing a card at any desired position. I will initially describe my technical refinements for the move as it is most often employed, as a Control. I'll then discuss its use in other applications. Since it will be described as a Control, we will assume that a card has been selected. The description begins as you prepare to have it returned.

Hold the deck in your left hand in what is called Erdnase Grip: the first two fingers on the front edge, with your left second fingertip very near the front right corner of the deck. Finally, put a pronounced front and right bevel into the deck, until the front edge of the top card aligns with the tip of your left thumb when it is extended along the left side of the deck (Figure 3 12). This position will vary slightly from hand to hand.

Turn your body slightly to the right, after which you twist at the waist, back to the left, just past center. This will give you a minor angle advantage in a moment. Curl your left first finger under the deck and slowly riffle your left thumb down the left, beveled side as you would when doing a Riffle Force. Ask the spectator who previously selected a card to call "Stop." Make a point of stopping exactly where commanded. Use your left thumb to push the lower packet down, opening the deck.

Bring your right hand over the deck and place your second fingertip at the front left corner of the upper packet. The remainder of the fingers should screen the front edge of the entire deck. The left and right fingers adjust the cards above the point where you were stopped, beveling them to the left, before applying inward pressure to bevel them back toward you (Figure 3 1 3).

Several actions now occur simultaneously:

(a) The right hand slightly exaggerates applying the pressure required to lift and carry off the upper packet. Don't overdo it-which is a common "tell"-you should just add a little emphasis. The right hand actually lifts either one card or none and moves back toward you, coming to rest near your chest. The hand should be parallel to the floor. Many who use the Bluff Shift angle the hand downward heavily when holding one card. I assume this is to show as much of the back of the card as possible. However, it is unnecessary; and, to magicians, though not to lay people, it alerts them to the likelihood the Bluff Shift is being employed. It is your left hand that should tilt slightly downward, not your right (Figure 3 14).

(b)At the same time your right hand rises, your left thumb relaxes, quietly closing its gap in the outer left corner of the deck.

(c) This is tricky to describe but easy to do, extend your left fingers above the top of the deck. The easiest way to clarify what you must do is to explain what it accomplishes. If you hold a deck in your hand with all the fingertips roughly level with the top, which is normal, lifting off a portion would leave a part of each fingertip above the top of the lower packet. Usually, we adjust our grip, without thinking about it, to bring the fingertips level again with the top. In this case, you extend your fingertips above the top, simulating their positions if a portion had been lifted off, as though you hadn't readjusted. Try the honest actions and you'll understand what you need to do.

(d) Finally, relax, allowing your body to turn naturally to the right as you extend the left hand for the return of the selection.

NOTE: Frederick Montague described the simulation of diminished thickness through the extension of the left fingers above the top surfice of the deck in his description of the original Bluff Shift. Here we have embellished this illusion by adding a combination of bevels and a slightly rightward orientation of the body. The actions of the hands, reinforced by the visual cues, make the illusion quite convincing. It is possible and sometimes desirable to alter the size of the portion of the deck that you bevel inward. When you are stopped near the middle of the deck there is little point in doing so. The size of the back- and left-beveled portion dictates the size of the portion the viewers will believe remains. Thus, if you want to make it appear that a small packet has been lifted off, you would bevel back a large portion of the left hand's cards. Conversely, if you want it to appear a large portion has been lifted off (leaving a smaller one in the left hand), you would bevel back only a small portion of the deck. As you practice the technique, you will find that once the thumb lets its gap in the deck close at the front left corner, the right fingers can easily adjust the number of cards they include in the beveled group.

Once the selection has been placed onto the left hand's cards you must convincingly simulate adding back the packet of cards the right hand supposedly holds. In fact, either one or no cards will be added back. The best illusion of this occurring is accomplished by combining visual and audible simulation with visual reinforcement. To accomplish this, the right hand moves to the deck as though it contained a packet of cards. The right first finger should be lightly curled above the card, or supposed card, the right hand holds. At the same time, the left hand moves sharply up toward the right hand. As the hands meet, the right first finger should solidly strike the top card of the deck. This produces a noise very similar to the sound of one packet being slapped on top of another. Here too, there is a tendency toward excess. Try actually doing it and you'll find it makes just a little noise. (In a noisy environment this touch is irrelevant.)

As soon as the hands meet, the right hand slightly lifts all the cards that you previously beveled back, unbevels them and slides them forward as a block. They end up in a slightly out-jogged position (Figure 3 15). Grip the deck between the right first finger at the left front corner and the right thumb at the left near corner. This causes the deck to form a diagonal

step as shown in Figure 316. Immediately raise the deck to the left fingertips and grip it at its sides, near the middle, between your left second finger and thumb. This pressure changes the step to what Marlo has termed an X-step, and locks it. The step should be fairly pronounced, visible to anyone looking at the deck (Figure 3 17).

Pause just long enough to deliver some comment; then scrupulously square the deck. The selected card is on top or second from the top, depending on which version of the Bluff Shift you've executed.

NOTE: All this jogging and squaring can be dispensed with, but they wordlessly convey that there was something in the middle of the deck that could have been used to locate where the card was returned. At the same time, you don't want to suggest that you could, would or might need to do so. You are not thumbing your nose as though to say, "See what I can do." You are changing the moment when the spectators lose track of the card, thereby changing their perception of where they last saw it. If they notice the jog and step, they almost can't help but do so. Should they fail to see or appreciate these techniques, it costs you nothing. I might mention that many performers have taken to using a touch of Tommy Tucker's: They lift off a portion of the deck and dribble it back onto the remainder, leaving the audience with a last image of roughly half the deck being dribbled onto the selection. This is a useful ploy but far less subtle than the step, and probably excessive if the Bluff Shift is to be employed repeatedly. The technique described here offers an alternative that can be used in addition to or in conjunction with the dribble feint.

THE BLUFF SHIFT AS A RIFFLE FORCE

As previously mentioned, the Bluff Shift can be substituted for the Riffle Force. Let's assume you wish to force one or more cards which you have positioned first, second, third, fourth, etc. from the top. Perform the first segment of the Bluff Shift, riffling down the corner until stopped and apparently removing all

ENCHANTMENTS + 403

the cards above that point. If you now allow the spectator to take the top card of the left-hand group, that card will be one of the Force cards froin the top stock. Which card they get obviously depends on how many cards you lift off. More- over, when multiple selections are being made, you can make it persuasively appear that the cards come from different points in the deck. One attractive feature of using the Bluff Shift in this way is that it is not necessary that you cut the intended Force card(s) to the middle at the start, or from the middle at the end, or maintain a break after the Force.

A very deceptive sequence for the selection and discovery of multiple cards can be constructed in this way. I will describe the sequence for three cards but it should be clear that, with minor alteration, five or ten cards could be used. We will assume that the cards to be forced are at positions three, two and one (the top card). We will further assume that a fourth-finger break has been established above the lowermost of the Force cards. Perform the opening mechanics of the Bluff Shift, holding the fourth-finger break as your left thumb riffles down the corner. When you lift off the right hand's cards, take all the cards above the fourth-finger break. This will leave the lowermost Force card on top of the left- hand cards, which appear to be a packet. By adjusting the size of the beveled group of cards, as discussed in the Note on page 40 1, you can make the cards in the left hand appear to be the proper thickness for the point where the spectator stopped you.

After the first Force card is removed, simulate replacing the right hand's cards as described above, but dispense with the jogging procedure. Instead, as the packets meet, allow the left fingers to lightly contact the lowermost card of the right-hand packet and move it slightly to the right. Then, as you square the deck, pull down on the right-jogged card, forming a fourth-finger break above it. (This break-adjustment procedure is Ed Marlo's.) You can then repeat the process until you've forced all the cards you've set.

NOTE: This Force sequence can be very disarming because it is not necessary to maintain a break in the middle of the deck. This allows a wide variety of casual gestures, to be interspersed between the selections and, if you're of a mind, flourishes. Such a construction makes serial Forcing nearly impossible to conceive of for any layman and many magicians. I consider this a real power-tool. Like any tool, it is only as good as the craftsman wielding it.

PART THREE MENTAL EFFECTS & GAFFED METHODS

GOING MENTAL

MENTAL MAGIC SOME OF the effects in this book suggest that the performer has the ability either to predict or control future events, or to read or control a spectator's thoughts. Such effects are commonly classed as "mentalism." There are some members of our fraternity who would contend that magicians should not perform such effects, that they should be left to those who work as mentalists. I am not sure how widely held this position is, and I don't want to set up a straw man; but I feel this issue should be addressed. I believe the mind and the future are fair game as subject matter for magic. I also accept that all manner of objects are fair game for mentalists. For example, moving a pencil could be presented as a magical animation effect (under the Fitzkee definition; see The Trick Brain, 1944, page 27). I don't believe this precludes mentalists from presenting such an effect as telekinesis. In sum, everything is fair game for each, in the theoretical sense. It is questionable whether mentalists are well advised to use playing cards as props. Consider, if you will, the associations that cards have for the public: card games, gambling and card tricks. Are those the associations the mental performer wants? I would not think so. This is not to say that playing cards should be precluded from use by mentalists. It is, however, proper to challenge the wisdom of their so doing. It seems to me that we could make a pact: Mentalists won't use playing cards and magicians won't use ESP (Zener) decks. With that as my stated position, I predict that you will enjoy the following feats of mental magic.

THE VIBRATORY PREDICTION

AUGUST 10, 1969

ONE OF the techniques I have used in attempting to create my magic is to ask, "What would it look like if I could really do it?" This approach isn't unique to me. I am persuaded, however, that my penchant for honesty-always sought if not always realized-has made the question inordinately helpful to me. The procedure followed in this effect appears very close to what one might do if one could really predict or control a spectator's thoughts. While the effect is classic, little else about this approach is conventional. Here's what the spectators see:

EFFECT: The performer allows the deck to be shuffled to the spectator's satisfaction. On return of the deck, the performer removes a card, laying it face down on the table without showing its face. The deck is then spread face up across the table. The spectator is asked to think of any card she or he sees, then name it aloud. The card is located and removed from the spread. The spectator turns over the magician's prediction. It is the mate of his mentally selected card. People were once barbecued for doing stuff like this.

When I first started developing my approach to this venerable effect, I was actively investigating the Faro Shuffle, Stay-Stack and other stacked-deck ideas. There is little doubt that this immersion influenced my first approach. For about three months I performed a routine involving a fully mirror-stacked deck. (That method was related to published material from Marlo, Rusduck, Elmsley and, later, Ron Ferris.) This first effort played very well with my audiences, which is what convinced me that I had constructed a workable

sequence. It was clever, if I do say so myself; but while I was very pleased with my audiences' reactions, I began to bemoan the need for the complex set-up. That drove me to develop my first impromptu method (also not included here), which I used for nearly five years with rewarding results. The method that follows meets all the goals of the first impromptu method and improves upon it. I've used it ever since.

PREFERRED M E T H O D DECEMBER 20,1974

BETA

In late 1974, I was in Chicago doing a trade show when I had the opportunity to get together with a devoted local amateur with whom I'd met previously, while he was visiting New York. His name is Mike Kozlowski (best known for his manuscript, The $100 Bill Switch). During our session he showed me an idea he said A1 Schneider was experimenting with and asked my opinion. I suggested that the idea seemed a good one but that only experimentation would prove how good. That idea, which I dubbed "The Intention Force" in my notes, has been in my arsenal ever since. The effect in which I most often use it is included here for the first time. I almost didn't include it in deference to the idea and its creator. Though it had been well over twenty years since I learned of it, it still had not been published. Fortunately, I've was able to arrange a conversation with A1 Schneider, whom I've never met, during which he gave me his blessing in releasing the idea. I've avoided using the effect around magicians; but, at the right time, for a group of intelligent lay people, using the approach I'll describe, it is a heart stopper. Even if the Force doesn't work, this effect comes about as close to mind manipulation as mental magic ever appears to get.

You must be seated for this effect. You will need a full deck without a Joker. A Joker would allow a potentially inconvenient choice, were the spectator to think of it, and is, therefore, best not included. The deck need not be in any order and, therefore, can be genuinely shuffled by you or a spectator. While the shuffling is being done, patter about different people giving off unique vibrations with their voice that are as good an identification as fingerprints. Upon return of the deck, spread through it looking for a group of seven to nine cards of one color with one card of the opposite color in the center of the group. If you fail to find such a group, which is probable, create one.

There is almost always a group of at least three cards of the same color together in the deck. Almost as often, there will be a four-card run of the same color. (If not, the approach I'm about to detail will allow you to create such a group. Essentially, you just up-jog the cards that don't belong in the group.) The naturally occurring or created three- or four-card group and the contrasting card to the right of it form the core of the stack. Cut the contrasting card to

the face, leaving whatever cards you've up-jogged in place. Now spread the top cards of the deck. Within the top few cards there will be a mix of cards of both colors. Up-jog those cards of the same color as the card on the face of the deck. You will rarely have to up-jog more than three or four cards before achieving your goal. Next spread through the deck until you locate the mate of the card on the face and up-jog it also. Strip out the group of up-jogged cards and table the deck.

The stack is in but not yet positioned, and you're holding a small group of cards in your hands. The idea conveyed to the spectators should be that you've nar- rowed the possibilities down to these few. Tabling the deck at this point shifts the focus off it and, therefore, away from the utility of a stack. The notion is that if you haven't yet decided which card to predict you haven't set up anything. This subtle logic is probably missed by most spectators, but it's an easy way to arrange this type of stack and the subtlety allows me to feel I've been conscien- tious in the construction.

Look at a spectator who is sitting exactly center, or slightly to your right of center, or slightly left of your center, in that order of preference. (These positions relate to the optimal use of the Intention Force, which I'll describe shortly.) Ask the spectator to state his or her name, city of residence and occupation so that you may hear the person's voice vibrations. (You can ask for other information if you want to have fun with it, but do so tastefully.) From the group you hold, remove the mate to the contrasting card in your set-up and place it face down slightly to the right and about ten to twelve inches from the table edge, with one end of the card turned toward you.

NOTE: If you're working at a small table, when you remove your prediction and set it down, place it in front of you. You'll use a different technique at a small table, so the long edges of the card should run parallel with the near edge of the table. The near edge of the card should be at least two to three inches from the table edge but, depending on angle considerations (discussed later), not more than six inches.

Insert the remaining cards of the small group you hold into the middle of the tabled deck, then cut the deck below center, which positions your stack above center. This should appear very casual; it is not a secret move and you're not trying to prove anything. Your patter during this process should be similar to the following: "There are some things I do as a magician that are scary. I almost feel as if I'm tampering with primeval forces. This may frighten you too. You'll know if it frightened you because you'll want to deny what you've seen. You'll try to tell yourself it's a fluke, an accident, a coincidence-but a part of your mind, the part that knows, will know."

T~t rn the deck face up and pause. Indicating the card you've placed on the table, say, "By the way, that's a prediction." You can also explain that the card you removed seemed to give off vibrations compatible with those you detected from your assisting spectator and that you would like to try an experiment. Spread the face-up deck widely across the table so the contrasting card ends up slightly left of your center line. The spread shouldn't be particularly neat. The important thing is that most of the card indices show and it should be clear that they do.

THE I N T E N T I O N FORCE

Look at the assisting spectator, making eye contact, and gesture with your right hand as you say, as off-handedly as possible, "Just think of any card you see and look away." Coordinated with the word think, allow your right hand to drop so that it points toward the middle of the group of cards that contains the contrasting card. Allow your eyes to glance briefly at the Force card. Immediately lift your hand and look back at the spectator, re-establishing eye contact as he immediately looks up again, per your instructions. Don't wait! As soon as the spectator looks at the spread-by which time you should have completed the line-look at the spectator and state dogmatically, "You've got one! What is it?"

If the card taken is the mate of your prediction, your job is done but the effect continues to its predestined conclusion.

NOTE: The idea of incorporating a bold and direct (yet, in its way, subtle) gesture toward the card you intend the spectator to choose is the essence of the Schneider concept. The coordination of that gesture and the instruction to think of a card, together constitute the Intention Force as it was shown to me twenty-five years ago. Some of the details, including the arrangement of the single contrasting card in the middle of six to eight cards of the opposite color, and the instruction to immediately "look away," are discoveries I've made during my years of using it. Using all the little tips I've included in the description, I find the force works about eight out of ten times for lay audiences. I don't have a large enough sampling of performances for magicians to be definitive, but I'd estimate only three out of ten. It works better on women than on men, but all bets are off when the lighting is bad. I once did a hospitality suite for a company that had the misguided idea of making their room seem like a bar. The lighting was so subdued you could scarcely see beyond the light thrown off by the candles on the tables. I missed five for five that night, the worst run I can recall, before I pulled it from that evening's repertoire. In sum, try it under fair conditions before deciding if it works for you. It has made performing this effect much easier for me.

6% If your Force card is not chosen, as the face-up card is being removed by the spectator, look for its mate in the spread. Usually, locating the mate is easy but

every so often you'll have trouble spotting it. You'll need to be able to ''vamp" while you look, as inconspicuously as possible, for the card. I'm naturally pretty good at dealing with such situations extemporaneously, but it's a good idea to script what you will say during such potential lulls. I'd suggest saying something about how the spectator could have named various other cards, even naming a few, but not the mate of their card. As soon as you spot the mate, end your monologue with something like, "...but you're happy with your choice." Write out five or six lines in your own style. That should be enough to cover you in the event of trouble.

When you find the mate, use your left hand to begin scooping up the spread from left to right. The left thumb should be above the spread, and the fingers -

below it. The scoop action should be performed in one smooth movement but without rushing. As the spread is being gathered, place your left thumb on the face of the card just to the left of the mate to the selection. A bit of practice will teach you how to time the action so it looks completely innocent yet allows you to "mark" the position of the card with your thumb. At the completion of the scoop, there should be two blocks, the top one jogged to the right of the lower one, the left thumb on the left side of the face of the lower packet (Figure 3 18). In a continuing action, allow the left hand to turn palm down. What was the upper block should fall face down onto the table. This should appear unplanned. The left thumb and fingers still hold a block. Turn the left hand palm up and take the block into dealing position, face down. With your right hand immediately reach for the face-down portion on the table, pick it up and deposit it onto the cards in the left hand. Since the cards will be unsquared, square them up. As you do so, palm the top card. (I use Vernon's Topping the Deck from Select Secrets, 1 94 1 , page 7.)

NOTE: Occasionally your thumb will land on the mate itself rather than the card to its left. To avoid a lot of fidgeting in an attempt to correct the position, before or after the scoop, use a Side Steal to get the card into your right palm (see the V7J Side Steal, page 181).

During this pick-up and squaring process you continue to patter: "Remember I told you this was scary? Every time I do it and it works, I get a chill. I believe I've controlled your mind." Here you can substitute, "I've predicted your actions," or "I've correctly read your vibrations." Add, "It doesn't feel like I did anything, does it?" Regardless of what the spectator says, continue, "I warned you that you wouldn't want to believe it. You did exactly what I thought you'd do."

Obviously, if the card is already correct, just push the prediction card to the spectator and have it turned over. If the prediction is wrong, extend your right hand, containing the palmed card, toward the tabled card, your fingers pointed toward the middle of it. Just as the hand is about to contact the card, straighten the fingers and bring your palm down over it so the far edge of the card is hlly under the palm, but just barely so (Figure 3 19). With absolutely no break in timing, slide your hand forward as you extend your arm in a pushing action, releasing the palmed card. The palmed card will glide across the table to the spectator. Immediately open your fingers a bit. As you perform these actions, say, "Turn it over and look at it." As soon as the spectator reaches for the card you've pushed forward, sit back and relax. You can then slide your hands back along the table until the card under your hand falls into your lap. At no point should you attempt to palm the card. It can be done but it's an unnecessary risk when you're seated.

NOTE: 'The above described technique is heavily based upon Marlo's Push Switch (Revolutionary Cdrd Technique, Chapter 13: Card Switches, 196 1, page 30), which I've used for many years. No one has ever had the slightest suspicion of a switch. Part of the reason for the success of the move is its boldness. The key is attitude. Not only must it be done casually but you must act as though the card doesn't matter because you already know it's right. There's no getting around it, this move is under extreme "heat." The audience knows the prediction card should match the named card. Few switch techniques would bear the level of scrutiny this one must. For more than twenty-five years, through many hundreds of performances, this one has passed through the fire. The first few times you do it, your heart may seem to seize in your chest. Confidence comes from experience.

This Push Switch is as fine a technique as I could want when working at a large table. That is not, however, always the situation. When I'm working at a small table, I use Marlo's Kick-Off Switch (Kkbbala, Vol. 1, No. 9, May 1972, page 67), which I'm about to describe with my own minor changes.

THE KICK-OFF SWITCH The first sit-down session I ever had with Ed Marlo, in 1967, included a fair amount of discussion of tabled card switches, one of my favorite subjects. Among those he did for me was a technique he had developed in the mid- 1950's. It can be done for one card or a complete hand, as in a Poker-deal effect. I'll describe it here with one card, as I use it in this effect. Those familiar with the original description may note some refinements I've developed through extensive use. Nevertheless, this is Marlo's technique.

I prefer to place the card two to three inches from the table edge, but you can move it farther from the edge, depending on where your audience is seated relative to you. At two to three inches, you can be almost surrounded and still use it ifyou keep your left hand resting on the table, obscuring the left side view. If there is no one seated to your sides, you can safely move the card out about six inches or so from the table edge. I rarely have that situation, so I usually set the card at about three inches.

Your right hand has a card concealed in Full Palm. You can have the hand resting with the fingertips on the edge of the table or you can start with the right hand fully on the table, to the right of the card you intend to switch. Your right hand moves toward the tabled card, keeping the heel of the hand and the right edge of the fourth finger in light contact with the tabletop. Your fingers should be straight, as when reaching, which necessitates bending your first finger at the middle joint, to retain the palmed card. When your right hand reaches the tabled card, your right thumb should fall on the middle of the card back (if you were switching multiple cards you would have to contact the near edge). Two actions, both a bit unusual, now occur simultaneously. Your thumb flicks the card off the table, into your lap-and all four fingers bend inward over the palmed card to grasp it near the right end (Figure 320). It should appear that the action of the thumb was the start of its movement to the near side of the visible card and that the thumb then lifted that edge as your fingers slid inward onto the back of the card. At the same time, the card is hinged up from the table as though you were looking at a hole card (Figure 321).

There is a tendency to move the right thumb further under the hand than is necessary in preparation for the kick. You're only kicking the card a few inches; it doesn't take a great deal of force. Kicking the card too hard will only cause it to sail farther off the table before falling. That extra few inches are more likely to cause a flash than the space between your hand and the table edge. Practice kicking no harder than you must.

The illusion is best when the palmed card seems to appear at the fingertips. I find that you can sort of spring-load the palmed card by squeezing inward slightly with the first finger just before it straightens to allow the card to pop out, as the fingers move in. Don't make the mistake of lifting the hand too

quickly. You should pause briefly, as though looking at the card, before the card breaks contact with the tabletop. This assures that the journey of the original card over the table edge will be screened by the arched hand and the switched- in card. If you're performing the technique at a greater distance from the table edge, or the angles are particularly difficult, you may find it helpful to move your right hand to the left as you apparently lifi the card. You can now either sail the card onto the table face up, or you can place it back down on the table, face down, and slide it to the spectator, smiling and saying, "Take a look." You will find that the switch goes unsuspected.

NO1'E: At some point during the five years I was using the first impromptu method, 1 stdrted, intermittently, using the two different switch techniques in different circumstances. I think what prompted the change was finding myself working at larger tables at some times and smaller ones at others. At larger tables, the Kick-Off Switch, as good as it is, felt overly tight in terms of use of table real estate. This is, in my opinion, an issue worth further exploration, but I don't want to get side-tracked with it at this time. In any case, I began using the Push Switch. I hasten to make it clear that I remain as fond as ever of the Kick-Off Switch though I now reserve it for performances on smaller working surfaces. I can confidently attest that both techniques have withstood the test in the trial by fire.

Regardless of which switch you've used, don't be in a hurry to recover the lapped card. When you do, it's best to add it to the bottom of the deck as you slide the deck off the table. Don't be surprised if the audience doesn't applaud at the conclusion of this effect. The spectators' minds are reeling. You may need to encourage them with a remark like, "The applause should be deafening-unless you're too scared."

OBSERVATIONS: It would be very easy to allow fear to drive one to a "safer" technique, such as the Curry Turnover Change, as others have in the past. One can argue, rationalize and justify such approaches, but they can never seem as impossible. Remember, card cheats, with a great deal more at risk than a magic effect, have employed techniques like these for years. Most have made a living with them. There is nothing wrong with being frightened by these techniques. Still, if you believe, as I do, that we owe our audiences our best efforts, we should marshal our courage and go for it. Facing one's fear can only make one stronger.

BLUSHING LEAPER JUNE 30,1971

BETA

MANY YEARS ago, Jack McMillen developed an effect ("The Leaper Card," n.d.) that is clearly related to, but somewhat different from, a card problem later addressed by Edward G. Brown (see "Wandering Ca rd in Willanek Methodsfor Miracles, No. Three (1 952) or Trevor Hall's The CardMagic ofEdward G. Brown, 1973, page 39). The McMillan approach became popular for a while but fell into relative disuse. As I see it, apart from procedural differences, the distinction between the two plots turns on a fine distinction: whether the card or the number is thought of first. In the McMillen plot a number might not be thought of, but might merely be noted. My "Blushing Leaper" revives the McMillen approach but employs the practice of having the number thought of first, as in the Brown problem. I find this easier for spectators to follow. I've also applied more modern techniques and added an intriguing, albeit non sequitur, kicker ending.

EFFECT: A spectator cuts a shuffled deck and the cut-off portion is placed aside. From the balance of the deck the spectator is invited to think of a card from among the first ten, remember it and the position at which it falls. The cards are cleanly given to the spectator. The performer then alternates taking cards from the spectator and from the previously isolated half until the spectator's number is reached. The card has vanished from the spectator's packet and appears at the same position in the performer's packet. Further, to explain why the spectator chose the card, the performer reveals that the thought-of card has a different back color and design from the balance of the deck.

REQUIREMENTS: You will need one odd-backed stranger card, which you place face-up second from the top of the deck.

1 Give the deck a False Shuffle and False Cut. You need only retain the top two cards, but care must be exercised because the card second from the top is reversed.

2 Have the spectator cut the deck and give him the option of mixing the lower portion. Meanwhile, you take the cut-off upper portion and place it aside. Remember that there is a reversed card second from the top.

NOTE: It is, of course, possible to allow the spectator to shuffle the whole deck but you'll need to hold out the rop two cards. Low Lateral Palm is a very good choice of techniques for this situation (see page 357).

If you prefer, you can have the odd card in your lap. Palm off a c7rd as you hand out the deck to be shutfled. While the spectator mixes it, set the odd- backed cdrd face to face with the card palmed from the deck. Palm both ~ a r d s in your right hand, with the card that matches the deck closer to the palm. When the deck has been cut into two piles by the spectator, add the two palmed cards to the top of the pile that is being placed aside.

3 You will now ask the spectator to think of a number between one and ten, and to remember the card that appears at that number. You should time your delivery of these instructions so that you have already shown the first card before the spectator knows what is expected of him. The cards are shown as follows: Hold the spectator's packet in left-hand dealing position. Push the top card to the right and take it face down in the right hand with the thumb above and the fingers below. m e n you take the first card, the card should face the floor, then be brought up very briefly to face the spectator. The second card should be placed under the first and then brought up to face the spectator. As you're showing the spectator the second card, you should deliver the line, "Remember the card that appears at the number you are thinking."

4 Continue by showing the spectator the third card, adding, "If you're thinking of three.. ." You do not lower the right hand between your display of the second and third cards or any thereafter. Continue with the fourth through tenth cards, pushing each card from the left-hand packet onto the face of the right- hand packet. As you add the tenth card to the face of the right-hand packet, your left thumb contacts the back card of the right-hand packet and secretly drags it back onto the left-hand packet as the left hand moves away (Figure 322).

While the right hand holds its cards in a Fingertip Grip, the action of this steal- back is very much like a Slip Cut. It is not difficult.

Fairly drop the supposed ten- (actually nine-) card packet back onto the left- hand packet. Square the half deck and lay it fairly on the table in front of the spectator. Say, "These are your cards and you should be thinking of one of them. D o you remember both your card and the number at which it lies?" When you are satisfied the spectator remembers, you can continue. If you're not satisfied, hand the packet back to the spectator. Have it reshuffled and repeat the selection process as described.

Pick up the other packet, which was originally the top half of the deck. Square the packet, picking up a right-thumb break under the top two cards. This is facilitated by the reversed card. Place the packet onto the table in front of you and, with your right hand, immediately pick up the top two cards as one. Place the card(s) into left-hand Dealing Grip.

"This is my first card. Did you think of your first card?" The spectator will say, "No." Continue, "Give me your first card." Take the card from the spectator into your right hand, fingers at the front, the thumb at the rear (Overhand Grip). Put the card onto the card in your left hand but keep a left fourth-finger break between it and the two cards below it.

With your right hand, take the top card of your tabled packet into Overhand Grip. "This is my second card. Did you think of your second card?" We will assume the spectator says, "No." Set the right hand's card onto the left hand's packet and ask the spectator to give you his second card. Take it into Overhand Grip, just as you did the first, and place it onto the packet in your left hand. Release the previous fourth-finger break and establish a new one under the card you're adding.

When the spectator eventually tells you that he did think of the card at the position you've reached in your portion of the deck, you immediately do a Top Change, exchanging of the card in your right hand for the top card of the left- hand packet. In an action flowing from that of the Top Change, put your right hand out toward the spectator's tabled packet as you say somewhat command- ingly, "Don't touch your card!"

Recount the circumstances of the effect. Remind the spectator that his card and number were merely thought of and that you have not touched his packet. Tell him that if the effect has succeeded, the card that was at his number in his packet should be gone and that his thought-of card should be the one you hold. Turn over the catd in your hand and reveal it to be the spectator's.

Place the card face up on top of the left-hand packet, in-jogged for about half its length. As you say, "Something would be amiss if the card that is at the

[spectator; number] position in your packet were also the card you thought of, but take a look anyway." The card will be an indifferent one.

While the spectator is looking at his top card, your right hand moves to the packet you hold. Your right thumb reaches under the packet and draws the bottom card square with the in-jogged face-up card. The right hand then moves away from the packet.

"You won't want to believe this but this whole thing was possible because I knew which card you would think of before we started. It's not that I could read your mind. I didn't even know we would meet. I simply knew that you'd be drawn to think of a card that looked a little different." Return your right hand to the packet and grab the two in-jogged cards at their near ends. Pinch them together with your right first finger above and thumb below and turn the pair end over end, dropping them onto the packet while maintaining a break under them. (This is an outgrowth of a technique that appeared in Joe Berg's Here; New Magic, 1937, page 6).

Execute the Two-Step Double Lift (page 158) as you say, "Now you understand why you thought of the [nume of card] ." Turn the card face up as you name it, then execute the K.M. Move, cleaning up as you toss the card face up onto the table in front of the spectator. If the spectator picks up the card it will seem to have changed back to the color of the rest of the deck. If he doesn't pick up the card by the time you have reassembled the deck, pick it up without calling attention to its back.

NOTES: The most serious weakness of this effect is that, if the spectator thinks of a high number, the transfer process, "Did you think of your [number] card? Let me have your [number] card," can get a bit tedious. One solution, ofsorts, is to limit the selection to a smaller range (e.g., one to six); but that seems to weaken the effect somewhat. For larger audiences, I have used a presentational solution. Have each member of the audience think of a number between one and ten. After "Did you think of [number]?" is asked of the spectator who remembered the card, poll the audience: "How many of you thought of [number]?" You can then give a short numerologi- cal interpretation of the significance of choosing that number. This keeps the audience interest level up by slowing the effect down. It also highlights the fact that other numbers could have been chosen.

This was the first effect I ever performed for Ed Marlo (with an earlier, slightly different handling). He asked, as you might, whether the odd-back kicker plays with lay audiences. It is a fair question with an odd answer. One problem with the Leaper effect is an issue of dramatic structure. There are two things that need to be revealed: the "vanish" of the spectator's

thought-of card 2nd the arrival of that card in the performer's packet. If the "vanish" is revealed first, the arrival is anticipated and, therefore, weakened. If the arrival is revealed first, the vanish is anticlimactic. It is obviously a bad idea to end on an ~nticlimax. The kicker helps ameliorate this problem by poviding a climax afier the anticlimax. Thus, it is theatrially justified.

7'he second point is that audiences don't know what to think of this ending. Ir is, in fact, a non sequitur. 'This dernands that it be "logically" jusrified. 'I'he line, "I knew that you'd be drawn to think of a card that looked a little different," provides that rationale, however flimsy it may read. Like much of my magic generally, and mental magic more particularly, this effect is more appreciated by intelligent audiences. Given such an audience and an environment conducive to adequate focus, this ending plays well. It is common to hear people questioning whether they might have missed the card being odd-backed. I have had people ask me if it was, to which 1 respond, "Probably not, but that's the magic of it." If you're uncomfortable with this ending, particularly for somewhat smaller groups, you may wish to try the next effect instead.

BROWNIAN MOVEMENT

THE SEQUEL SEPTEMBER 9, 1969

FINAL

THIS IS a version of an E. G. Brown treatment of the Thought-of Card Across plot (see the aforementioned "Wandering Ca rd in Wilklnei Methodifor Mir- acles, No. Three, 1952, or Trevor Hall's The Card Magic of Edward G. Brown, 1973, page 39)) and is therefore related to "The Blushing Leaper." (I think Jordan's "Unknown Leaper" [see his Four Fztll Hands, 192 1, page 271 plays a part in this history, but it would take some work to figure out exactly where.) Unlike "The Blushing Leaper," it has no kicker ending. Fortunately, because of its construction, it doesn't need one. Frankly, I never expected this effect to play as strongly as it does for lay audiences. I, therefore, originally relegated its use to once in a while, when I was sitting around with non-magician friends. After a few performances I knew I had a blockbuster. This is as strong an effect as anything you can do, and I present it that way. It doesn't read nearly as well as it plays, and magicians aren't nearly as impressed as lay people. It is not exag- geration to say that the most common reaction of lay audiences is a collective, audible gasp. The method is technically easy but it does require a fair amount of presentational ability. Learn it with the patter I've included and you'll have a powerhouse. You will need to rehearse this piece thoroughly before presenting it but, except for the Veeser Concept, the actions won't require much practice. By the way, I am aware that the name "Brownian Movement" was given to a treatment of this problem that appeared in Ibidem, though I didn't know it when I named the effect. I don't care; I like the name and I'm using it.

EFFECT: A remembered card at a thought-of position vanishes from its isolated packet to appear at the same position in the performer's packet.

Hand a spectator the cards and have them shuffled until he is satisfied they are mixed. While this shuffling is done, introduce the effect: "This next experiment is one I was reluctant to put into my program. It's risky, in that it doesn't always work. I have gotten it to the point where it works most of the time, so if it doesn't work, I'll repeat it until it does. You may wonder why I'd bother to go through all this trouble. It's like this: When I do it for you, you'll be impressed, but over the next week, when you think about it-and you will think about it- it will become increasingly impossible to believe. Perhaps a month from now, you'll be sitting around with some friends and you'll try to describe what you saw here today. You'll become increasingly incredulous that you could possibly be remembering it correctly. And perhaps a year from now we'll meet again, and you'll have had plenty of time to think about it. You'll try to describe to me what you remember me doing for you but with no faith in your own recall. You see, it becomes more impossible the more you think about it. That's a big build-up, so let's get on with it. Remove any twelve cards."

When the spectator has complied with your instructions, say, "It's not that I don't trust you, but it's important, so I'll count them." Do so, dropping the cards slowly and fairly into a pile.

Pick up the cards and spread them face up between your hands for all to see, and point out that there are some pairs, possible straights, etc.-whatever happens to be in the group. Offer the spectator the chance to change some cards for others. He is to be satisfied that the cards are a random, representative sampling. When he expresses satisfaction, proceed.

Give the packet an Overhand Shuffle; in that process in-jog the fourth card from the top. Here is how I manage this: I shuffle the cards briefly in sloppy blocks, then complete the shuffle by undercutting more than four cards, in-jogging a card and running three cards onto it. The remaining unshuffled cards are then thrown back to the bottom to complete the shuffle. While the cards are still somewhat messy, flip them face-up in your left hand. As you square them, convert the in-jog to a fourth-finger break above the four lowermost cards.

"Six of these cards are yours and six are mine. In a moment I'll show you your six cards; but before I do, I'd like you to think-just think-of a number between [stress the word] one and six.-You've thought of a number? Good. As I show you the cards, I'd like you to remember the card that appears at your number. Since you already have a number, you'll only have to concentrate on one thing, spotting your card, and I'll make it easy for you; I'll show them to you one at a time."

T H E VEESER C O N C E P T A N D ALIGNMENT INSURANCE

The technique you are about to perform is a version of the Veeser Concept display. It accomplishes the same goal as the Hamman Count but is far superior. Any time the Hamman Count is called for, the Veeser Concept can be substituted and I always do. It is to my way of thinking always a much better choice. I make no claim to the creation of this technique, only to some of the fine points that give it additional deceptiveness. The key to making the count deceptive is the way in which you square the packet prior to beginning and the smoothness with which the count is performed. When you square the cards in preparation for the Veeser Concept, bevel the packet so that the uppermost card is forward and to the left. This is accomplished by pressing against the left side of the packet with the left thumb to produce the left bevel, and rocking the packet forward on your right thumb and second fingertip to produce the front bevel. With the packet "squared in this way, its thickness is impossible to judge because the spectators can see only the edge of the uppermost card of the packet. I believe it was Marlo, in a different context, who referred to this as the "razor edge." It is a useful mental image to help remind one of the need for attention to this detail. The bevel also makes it easier to pull off the card cleanly. 1 can assure you, once you have learned this technique, particularly adding my extra touch, you will not want to go back to the Harnman Count. Fortunately, you won't have to.

With your right hand, grasp the packet of twelve cards in Overhand Grip. The right second finger should hold the packet at the extreme outer left corner. The right thumb contacts and holds the packet at a point left of center at the near end. The right first finger should stay out of the way, curled above the face of the packet. The left hand has a fairly wide fourth-finger break above four cards. While the break is wide, the fourth finger does not enter into it but only holds it open with the flesh. Remember to keep the razor edge.

The left thumb pushes down on the card at the face of the packet and moves to the left, taking along the face card and the four cards below the break. The left first finger should press against the front edge of the cards producing the bevel discussed earlier. The slight overhang of the top card prevents the block below it from being seen from the front and left sides. The large break is maintained between the single, upper card and the four-card packet below it, and the entire packet is tipped downward fairly sharply at the front. Aim the forward left corner toward the leftmost eye in your audience. This cants the packet slightly but helps to protect the vulnerable right side from exposure. To the audience it should appear that the left hand holds only one card. As you take this "card you say, "If you're thinking of one, this will be your card."

The left hand returns to the right-hand packet and draws the next card off the face and onto the left hand's card (actually a packet). "If you're thinking of two, this will be your card." Continue to draw off cards and specify their positions until you've taken the fifth card from the face of the right-hand packet. As you pull the sixth card into the left hand, leave all the cards above the break beneath the right-hand packet and draw the sixth card onto the four cards that remain in your left hand. If you've done everything correctly, you should have five cards in your left hand, only one of which has been seen by the spectator. Gesturing with the left-hand packet, say, "These are your six cards." Place this packet face down on the table. Make sure that the spectators see your hand come away empty from the tabled packet.

Take the right-hand cards and turn them face down. Use a Push-Off Count to display the seven cards as six, without reversing their order, making the packet somewhat sloppy and holding the last two cards squared as one. Use the Steranko Move on the last card (see my variant on page 35), if you can do it well. Close the spread with the double sixth card, adding it to the bottom. The accompanying patter is "And these are my one, two, three, four, five, six cards." Square your packet and lay it face down on the table.

With your hands obviously empty, make a magical gesture, moving from the spectator's packet toward yours. Look at the assisting spectator and say, "I think I got it, but I'm never sure." Ask the spectator, "Do you remember how many cards there were in your packet?" The spectator will respond, "Six." Count them to the table saying, "There are now one, two, three, four, five cards."

Fairly pick up your packet and ask, "And in this packet?" The spectator will respond, "Six." Count the packet into a fan: "There are now one, two, three, four, five, six, seven cards." Look straight at the spectator and say, "Don't tell me the name of your card just yet, only the number you're thinking of. What number did you think of?" The spectator should answer with a number between one and six. If he says, "Six," drop your cards on top of his with a sense of res- ignation and say, "It didn't work." Shuffle the cards, have the spectator think of another number and repeat the display and Veeser switch. This will rarely happen because of the stress on the word between in your instructions. This miss is not a real problem since you've warned the spectators that it doesn't always work. It's been my experience that on the rare occasion when this happens, it's stronger the second time. It's like a juggler missing.

We will assume that the spectator said, "Five." Count from the top down in your fan to the fifth card. Jog it forward and say, "At the same position in my packet as it was originally in yours, a merely thought-of card.-For the first time name your card." When the spectator does, dramatically turn over the card protruding

@ from the fan and drop it in front of him. The audience will be stunned. I am

@g honestly accustomed to hearing an audible gasp. Don't say a word; let the silence @ hang. Drop your cards on top of the spectator's and the whole packet on top of

the deck. Take a bow.

NOTES: The key to selling this effect is that everything must be done slowly and with painstaking fairness. Your every word must convey preci- sion. The combination causes the audience to believe they've seen a miracle. You may be happily surprised to have people come back a week or so later and tell you that you were right: They do keep thinking about the effect and its impossibility. It is, of course, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

If doing a standing performance, I will perform Ed Marlo's handling of this effect, using his extremely clever Switchless Switch. This can be found in Ireland? Card Annwl1956 page 1 5; and in Card Tricks fov Cardicians, 1978, page 15. When I do Eddie's version I skip the False Counts of the two packets he uses just before effecting the magical translocation. I feel the Counts add little to the conviction of the piece and may arouse as much suspicion as they quell, at a high cost to the pacing.

In performances before larger groups, up to about a hundred people, this is one of my favorite effects to perform. Lay people seem to respond almost viscerally to it. With proper presentational skills, in formal performance, this is a most highly recommended effect. I've also fooled rooms full of magicians with this handling. The Switchless Switch is one of Eddie's many under-appreciated and little-known techniques.

HAM AND ACE SANDWICH

NOVEMBER 30, 1971 BETA

IT IS difficult to classify this effect. It begins as a series of predictions that sort of miss, but it ends as a transformation, transmogrification, transportation, time anomaly, or something like that. The effect, in the matter of time displacement, bears a familial relationship to Marlo's "Future Reverse," framed in a dynami- cally adaptable presentation. The presentation is "hanlmy" and fun. It is the type of item that fits well into a program of heavier presentations. It's not that the effect is weak-far from it. Rather, it appears weak-or at least odd-in the early phases but resolves in a mind-twisting climax.

EFFECT: (As best I can describe it.) The performer places a prediction face down between two face-up Aces on top of the deck. A spectator then chooses a card, which proves to be "somehow related" to the performer's prediction. This may be repeated dd libitum. Finally, the performer makes a last prediction. As previously, a spectator chooses a card. The performer's prediction card proves to be the very card the spectator selected. I suspect this effect description may be confusing. Remember that it's presented with tongue planted firmly in cheek and it should become clearer as you read on.

SET-UP: You remove from the deck the Ace of Clubs and one red Ace, while secretly positioning the other red Ace fourth from the top of the deck, with an indifferent card and two mates (e.g., the King of Hearts and King of Diamonds) over it. This four-card set up is easily obtained if approached in this manner:

Spread through the cards with their faces toward you, saying to the audience, "I'm looking for two cards-two Aces-the Ace of Clubs and the Ace of Dia- monds." In roughly the time it takes to deliver these words, the stack is done. As you spread through the cards, look for any adjacent set of mates (in our example the King of Hearts and King of Diamonds). Cut them to the top as you deliver the first part of the line ("I'm looking for two cards"). Start through the deck again, looking for any Ace except the Spade. If the first Ace you come to is red, slide it out of the spread and into a positionfourth from the top. Let's say this is the Ace of Hearts. As you do this, deliver the second part of the line ("two Aces"). If you first find the Ace of Clubs, again say, "two Aces," then drop the Ace face down onto the table. Continue searching for the remaining Aces, delivering the third part of the line ("the Ace of Clubs and the Ace of Diamonds"), in pieces, as you find each one, altering your words in accordance with the red Ace you find first. Since the first red Ace you find goes fourth from the top of the deck, you will always name the other red Ace. In a sense, this set-up seems more complex than it is because it is so flexible. It is, as a result, quite expeditious. At its completion, the top two cards will be any set of mates. The card fourth from the top will be the Ace of Hearts or Diamonds. The Ace of Clubs and the other red Ace will be face down on the table. For purposes of explanation, the stack will be that given above.

1 Show the Ace of Clubs and Ace of Diamonds, and cleanly place them face up on the deck. "I'm going to make a prediction, a prediction of things to come, and I'm going to sandwich that prediction between these Aces."

2 Take the deck under the table and place any card you pull out of the deck (except the Ace of Spades) face down between the face-up Aces, remembering what card it is.

Bring the deck from beneath the table and spread the top three cards inward lengthwise to exhibit the sandwich you've formed: face-up Ace of Clubs-face-down indifferent card-face-up Ace of Diamonds (Figure 323). Close the displayed spread.

4 Spread the deck and have a card selected, looked at, shown around and remembered. "Now everybody knows the name of the card-except me." Take back the card face down, then look at it yourself. "Now everybody knows the name of the card. That's okay, I've already made my prediction." To emphasize that your prediction is already made, you may redisplay it if you choose.

Insert the selected card into the deck from the near end, as though you were doing Tilt. lf you perform this effect standing, simulate Hull's Front Tilt.

NOTE: I refer to this subterhge as R. W. Hull's Front 'Tilt for reacons given in the Notes at the end of this article. Since this early treatment of the Tilt idea is not well known, let me quickly explain it. It is conceptually the same as Vernon's 'rilt but with the top card lifted at the front of the deck and the deck angled sharply downward. Because of the sharp downward angle the move can only be used effectively when the performer is standing and with a bit of distance between him and the audience. This technique is described in Pallbearers Review Close-Up Folio #10, 1977, page 1025. When the conditions are correct I find this version more natural in appearance than the familiar Rear Tilt version. They are, at least in this instance, functionally interchangeable.

Spread over the top three cards of the deck and say, "Would it prove interesting if the card I predicted was a card of exactly [the opposite color] from the card you selected?" The words of the statement in brackets change in accordance to the properties of the selection and your prediction card. The form of the statement is always the same. You are stating a relationship, whether it be opposite color, matching color or matching suit or matching values. Whatever relationship you can find between the two cards, state it as though that were your intention. The question is rhetorical (and delivered tongue in cheek), but the audience will likely look at you strangely.

Reveal the prediction and immediately offer to repeat it, saying, "Maybe you think that was just luck. Okay, I'll do it again." Lose the prediction card into the deck, simulating whichever form ofTilt you've used previously, and without disturbing the stack at the top.

You perform this phase, sort of missing without admitting it, at least once. If the audience gets into the spirit of the effect, I may do it a second time. I never repeat this quasi-miss phase more than twice. If you find you have a stronger coincidence, such as matching values or an actual match of mates, go straight into the next phase.

When you're ready to move on to the penultimate phase, leave the Aces face up on the deck as you take it under the table and place one of the Kings (the third card from the top) face down between the Aces. Place the matching King (the fourth card from the top) two-thirds of the way down in the deck and hold a left fourth-finger break below it, in preparation for a Classic Force.

Bring the deck from beneath the table and spread the top three cards inward, showing the sandwich: face-up Ace of Clubs-face-down King-face-up Ace of Diamonds. It is important that the Ace of Clubs be on top.

9 Spread the deck and force the King at the break on the spectator. (If you're not confident of your Classic Force, see Roberto Giobbi's fine address of the subject in Card CollPge, Elume 1 ( 1 996, page 21 7; in this case, however, it's not wise to itl-jog the force card.)

10 Have the card looked at and remembered. Parrot your earlier patter, as described in Step 4, as you take the card back, look at ir yourself and emphasize that your prediction is already made.

1 1 I'lace the selected card back into the deck from the back as though you were doing Rear Tilt. (Again, if you perform the effect standing, you should simulate Front Tilt.)

12 Spread over the top three cards of the deck. "Would it prove interesting if the card I predicted was a card of exactly the same color and value as the card you selected?" Reveal your prediction. The prediction matches in color and value. Regardless of the audience's reaction say, "You're a tough group. You want everything. Okay, one last time." Push the prediction card, the King, into the center of the deck in the same Tilt-fashion you have previously established.

1.7 With the Aces still face up on top of the deck, put it under the table and turn the fourth card from the top (the Ace of Hearts in our example) face up, leaving it in its position. Next, form a break under the top two Aces. The stack should be: face- up Ace of Clubs-face-up Ace of Diamonds-face-down indifferent card-face-up Ace of Hearts.

I4 Bring the deck from beneath the table and grasp the top two cards as one between your right thumb and first finger at the near left corner. Pull them back for half their length and place your right second fingertip on the face- down card now showing. Draw it and the doubled Aces back far enough to expose the A of the face-up Ace (of Hearts) below them (Figure 324). The audience assumes they are seeing the Ace of Clubs, the face-down prediction and the Ace of Diamonds, as they have each time before.

15 Close the spread, carefully push over at least four cards as a block and spread through the deck to have a card selected. Have it looked at and remembered as before. Repeat, "Now everybody knows the name of the card-except me." Take the card back and look at it yourself. Continue, "Now everybody knows the name of the card. That's okay, I've already made my prediction." As ~ou ' re speaking, form a break under the Ace of Clubs in preparation for Rear Tilt or Front Tilt.

##; *@$ Execute said move under the Ace of Clubs. 2. E: i *re, 6 A* 2 Spread over the top three cards of the deck, take them with your right hand, and 2+p& y table the deck. With a tone of exasperation, say, "Would it prove interesting if .s&>,::

*WL the card I predicted was a card of exactly the same color and value as the card :##$ 6 - ?,& you selected?" As you turn over the card and show it, add, "How about the same .** ,z$g#i 2$@p>.", >d.-2d$.3,

suit? That's everything!" Do a broad double-take at the card and add, ''That: ~%ZG~.$

: s23.cg.; impossible!"Shrug as though puzzled and hold the position. It will take a beat or @&.A? , two but the applause will start.

NO'T'ES: You will still have a reversed Ace second from top of the deck. Since I usually perform this routine seated, 1'11 secretly lap the face-up Ace, using a One-Handed Second Deal, as I reach for the tabled cards. I later retrieve the card and add it back to the deck.

When I perform standing, I assemble all the cards face down above the reversed Ace. After squaring the cards, I lift off the packet, including the reversed Ace, and do a K.M. Move to right it. I then drop everything back on top and continue with my next effect.

It would, of course, be possible to perform only the final phase or last two phases of this routine. It just wouldn't be nearly as entertaining. I can be as guilty as the next guy of taking myself too seriously. This routine allows one to have fun with some of the haughtiness common in magic and customary to mental presentations. Alternately, you may choose to be an old stick-in- the-mud. The effect is funnier if you miss on your predictions, though doing so requires both confidence and conviction. As stated, I have sometimes missed twice before getting one correct, and then finished with what I think of as the "time warp ending. If you have the flair and judgment to carry it off, you could miss all three times before performing the time warp. It's a question of judging your audience's response to the humor of the situation and their patience with the effect. I leave it to each performer to determine his or her own abilities; you'll develop confidence over time, but acting without conviction is pretending, an unnecessarily embarrassing undertaking.

THOUGHTS O N TILT: Though today is not the day, sooner or later the entire history of Tilt and the Depth Illusion will be established. I would prefer not to address this issue until then but because of the techniques used in this routine I feel obligated to try. I acknowledge that Karl Fulves made a fair stab at this in Pallbearers Review Clase- Up Folio #I 0, but I don't think he got quite all of it. In all likelihood neither will I.

There are, as I see it, two distinct elements that define the sleight Marlo named "Tilt." These are the technique and the illusion that makes the

technique deceptive. The technique can be performed in at least three ways. One way is from the front, as I believe R. W. Hull suggests in Eye Openers (1932, page 5)-both Fulves and my good publisher disagree with my interpretation of Hull's writing. Another way is from the side (left), as Edward Victor describes in Further Magic of the Hand- (1946, page 25). The third way is from the rear, as reported by Faucett Ross in a two-page typed description, dated July 7, 1961, that circulated through the underground but waited until 1977 for formal publication in Pallbearers Review Cloje- Up Folio #I 0 (page 1 026).

The structure is roughly the same for all three techniques. The card is always inserted but left protruding. In all cases, the inserted card is put second from the top (or under a small number of cards). It is then pushed square. Any of these techniques could theoretically be used without benefit of the set-up that makes it appear that the card is going much deeper into the deck than it actually is. Hull's description in Eye Opmers uses the technique in that way. Both Victor and Vernon used the depth-enhancing set-up. Notice that I've carefully avoided calling the set-up "The Depth Illusion" (coined by Conrad Bush). There is not much dispute that the idea of tampering with the illusion of depth in broader terms predates this application. All three of the techniques use the same set-up to create the illusion of greater depth, to wit, elevating one end of the top card(s). There is increasing consensus that the first person to apply the illusion to this technique was Vernon. Vernon, however, appears only to have applied it to use of the technique from the rear. I'm not sure how this investigation will ultimately resolve when all sources have been exhausted. I do know that it has become increasingly difficult to know how to refer to any of the techniques so as to convey one's intended meaning and, at the same time, be true to the historical record. My solution, albeit imperfect, is to tip my hat to practice, history and communication without bowing to any. Thus, I call all the techniques "Tilt," modified by the direction from which it is performed. So we have Front Tilt, Side Tilt and Rear Tilt. Further, since we have a "Depth Illusion," courtesy ofVernon or Cazeneuve (Magic Without Apparatus, 1945, page 85) or whomever, and we almost always employ it, there seems no reason to continually mention it. I can think of no other illusion for which we do so. The reason is simple: It's obvious that we will use the best method we have; thus, while the phrase may have appeal, it's redundant.

My chosen naming convention will, no doubt, annoy just about everyone equally. It has one redeeming feature: It communicates all one needs to know in two words: direction, technique. I find that definitive, in one sense of the word, if not both.

DIVINE MIBASICILL OCTOBER 17,1973

ALPHA

THIS IS the type of effect that reads terribly but plays quite well. I suspect that "Out of This World," the wonderful Paul Curry effect, might have read as dull as this one does. If you've done "Out of This World," or any of its variations, you know how strong it is for lay audiences; so at least consider this effect.

What is offered here is based on the Stewart James (no relation) effect "Miraskill," which appeared in Thejinx, No. 24, September 1936, page 147 (it can also be found on page 102 of Stewart James in Print: The First Fzfty Ears, 1989). For those who have forgotten, "Miraskill" is usually presented as a prediction effect. Typically, the prediction is something like "You will have three more reds than blacks." Such a prediction always seemed too mathematical to me, and the usual presentation, unlike "Out of This World," is rather imper- sonal. The following approach addresses both these problems with the original, extremely clever, effect.

The treatment is based on a collection of old ideas and a few new ones that were put together at one of those long, late-night sessions we've all had at one time or other. Irv Wiener-one of the warmest, kindest, most genuinely lovable men I've met through magic, and a brilliant magical thinker-was my co-creator for this effect. Frankly, I've long ago lost track of who contributed what, but here it is.

EFFECT: The performer offers to bestow on the assisting spectator the power of divination. She is told she may accept or reject this power (though she really doesn't have a choice). Without knowing any more about the effect, it should

already be clear why this presentation is more emotionally engaging than the traditional one. From a shuffled deck, the spectator chooses about two-thirds of the cards. After making sure there is an even number in the chosen group, the spectator removes pairs of cards, segregating them into red, black and mixed- color pair-groups, until all the cards have been paired and sorted. Precisely as the performer predicted would happen if the spectator accepted the offered power of divination, there are exactly the same number of red pairs of cards as there are black pairs.

Have a spectator shuffle the deck and divide it into three packets of relatively equal size. Permit her a free choice of any two of the three packets and combine the two chosen packets into one.

Pick up the remaining third of the deck, which you explain you will count to determine if the other two piles contain an equal number of cards. You explain that you could count her cards directly, but you don't want to handle them. Also state that it will become apparent why an even number is important as the effect proceeds.

As rapidly as you can, silently count the packet face up between your hands, slightly down-jogging all the cards of the color opposite the color of the card on the face. There should only be about sixteen to eighteen cards, so it shouldn't take long; but instead of counting in the normal manner, count as follows: Whatever the color of the card on the face, count it as one. Let's assume this card is red. If the next card is also red, the count becomes two. If, however, the next card is black, the count becomes zero. Let's assume the second card is red, so we've counted two. And if the next three cards are black, the count becomes one, then zero, then minus one. This procedure continues until the packet is completely counted. In short, you add one for each red card (that is, each card matching the color of the card at the face of the packet) and subtract one for each black card (each card opposite in color to the card at the face). With a little practice, the whole process can be done as quickly as straight counting. Remem- ber, slightly down-jog all the cards of the color opposite that of the face card.

The count will yield one of three results: a positive number, zero or a negative number (n, 0, or -n). A positive number means more cards of the same color as the card on the face of the packet (n means red in our example), zero means the same number of reds as blacks; and a negative number means more cards of the opposite color from that on the face of the packet (-n). In our example, a negative number would indicate there are more blacks than reds. If the count is zero, proceed to Step 6. If the total is, for example, four, you must transfer four cards of the same color as the card at the face of your packet to the spectator's group. If the count was minus three you'd transfer three blacks. Perform a Strip-Out

A DREAM? JULY 1978

FINAL

THIS EFFECT is a presentational variation of Hummer's "Mind Reader's Dream" premise (originally a marketed effect, circa 1952, and included in Karl Fulves' compilation Bob Hummer? Collected Secrets, 1980, page 42). It is only the construction of the routine and some novel presentational touches to which I make any claim. The reader will note that there are a number of elements that can be applied to other effects. Notable among these is the use of a regular deck as an index and the cover for a Deck Switch with a natural set of actions-even though your back may be turned.

EFFECT: An artistically inclined spectator is asked to think of a card and then draw a picture of it. She is also asked to remove and hide a number of cards equal to the value of her card and to arrange other cards in the shape of the suit of her card, all while the performer's back is turned. The performer indicates that this will help her in clearly visualizing the card. The performer then reveals the name of the spectator's card. He congratulates the spectator on how good she is at visualizing but then admits that he doesn't like it when people are too good because.. . He spreads the deck to reveal that all the cards are blank except for one-the spectator's thought-of card.

REQUIREMENTS: Required are one regular deck of cards, one blank-faced deck, a small note pad and a pen.

SET-UP: Place the blank-faced deck in your left shirt pocket, back against your body. The pen should be clipped to the same pocket. The fourteenth

card from the top of the blank-faced deck is pencil dotted on its non-index corners or otherwise marked to make it easy to spot in a narrow spread. You must wear a jacket. In its left inside pocket place the note pad. This pocket should be otherwise empty. In addition, your pants should not be too tight, since this makes it difficult to get into and out of the pants pockets, which will become important.

After some opening patter about how vivid dreams can be, ask for the assistance of a visually oriented member of the audience. Such people, you explain, usually draw well. They are painter, architect, photographer types of people rather than lawyer, engineer or writer types. O n finding such a person, spread the deck in front of her and ask for confirmation that she is familiar with playing cards and knows what all the cards look like. Have her shuffle the deck as you remove your note pad, but not the pen, from your pocket and lay it on the table.

Take the deck back from the spectator and place it into left-hand dealing position as you explain that you hope she has well-developed visualization abilities because they will be helphl in the forthcoming experiment. Tell her that you will turn your back to her during much of it. Do precisely that as you continue your explanation.

NOTE: Like most performers, I've learned some lessons the hard way. One of those lessons relates to turning your back to spectators. It is extremely difficult to manage an audience when you're not looking at them. The eyes and facial expression are major tools used to maintain control. You won't always be able to arrange it, but it is best during most of this presentation, when your back is turned to the assisting spectator, to remain facing the majority of the audience. You'll need to be able to move around during the course of the effect but if you can't interpose yourself between your assisting spectator and the audience, and the audience is larger than about a down, you probably shouldn't perform this effect. It has no bearing on the method or the handling, but the risk of losing control of your audience increases with its size.

"I'm going to ask you to attempt to visualize the face of a playing card and draw it, or at least a semblance of it, on the pad. You'll need a pen-I have one." As you say this, reach up with your left hand and grasp your left lapel. With your right hand, reach up toward your left shirt pocket. As your right hand goes past your left hand, take the deck into the right hand and put it into your left inside jacket pocket. Continue by taking the pen and the blank-faced deck out of your shirt pocket. Take the deck into left-hand dealing position but retain the pen in the right hand. Continue: "I'm also going to ask you to perform some actions with the cards." Turn around. "The purpose of all this is to create a very clear vision of the card you'll think of, in the hope of conveying that image to me."

NOTE: It is possible to perfor111 the deck switch I just described in hll view of the audience. The technique is similar to a cold-deck move used by card cheats, known as the Cigar Switch. It will take a bit of work to make it smooth enough to go by undetected, but it has been used for many years at the card table, so it is clearly able to bear scrutiny. When some cheats use this technique, they facilitate getting hold of the deck by tucking their tie into their jacket pocket and slipping the "cooler" into the fold of the tie. Simply pulling on the tie will then raise the deck out of the pocket, maktng it easy to grab. Tom "7: A." Waters accomplished the same end with a length of wide ribbon in the shirt pocket. He described the details in his booklet I'sychl (1983, page IG), and later in his compilation Mind, Myth nnd Mugick (1 993, page 501).

Place the deck and the pen on the table. The deck should be to your right, which will be the spectator's left. "I'm going to turn my back and step away a bit. Think of a card and draw a picture of it on the pad. If you can't draw a picture, at least write the number or letter and a picture of the suit, a Heart, Club or whatever it is. When you've done that, put the pad away, where I can't see it, and tell me when you're finished."

When the spectator informs you she has done as requested, pick up the deck and extend your hand toward her with the deck resting on it, but keep your head turned away from her. "Cut off about half of the deck. Now quietly, I don't want to hear it, deal off a number of cards equal to the value of your card. A Jack is eleven, a Queen twelve and a King thirteen. When you've done that, hide the cards you've dealt off I'm going to turn back around for a moment, so neither the pad nor the packet of cards you just dealt should be visible."

NOTE: If the table is wide, making it awkward to have the spectator cut the deck while you hold it, you can allow her to take the deck to cut off a portion. She can then return the portion she did not take. The reason for all these machinations is to justify taking back the unused portion of her cut-off packet after she has counted off the cards equal to her number and hidden them. If you weren't already holding most of the deck it would seem odd to want this remaining portion. She could simply leave it on the table. By holding onto the cards, ir merely appears that you're a bit of a neatness freak.

Turn around and, as soon as you do, spot the packet from which the cards were dealt. Pick up those cards and ask for your pen back. As the spectator is getting your pen for you, spread over and sight-count the number of cards above the marked one. (It will be a number between zero and twelve.) Square the packet and place it back onto the table. In your mind, subtract that number from

thirteen and you now know the value of the mental selection. We will assume it is an Eight. When you have your pen back, take it into your right hand. Have your assistant place the lower porrion of the deck onto the upper portion and square the cards.

HISTORICAL NO'I'E: The principle being used here comes from Audley Walsh's "The Mystic Twelve" in Annemnnni Miracles uj'Gnrd M a p , edited by John J. Crimmins, Jr., 1948, page 3.

7 Turn your back again. "I'd like you to take the cards that remain and arrange them face down on the table into a pattern that resembles, as well as you can, the suit of your card. Use as few or as many cards as you feel you need. I'm going to step quite a distance away because I don't want any audible clues."

8 Step away from the spectator and this time turn your back to the entire audience. Put the pen into your left shirt pocket and retrieve the deck from your inside jacket pocket as you do so. Because you are a distance away, you can safely go through the deck and remove the four cards of the value you know the spectator's card to be and arrange them in CHaSeD order. It is probably unnecessary to remind you, but don't betray your actions by allowing your elbows to move away from your sides as you perform this cull. It's always a bit of a ticklish balance to keep your elbows in without appearing stiff. The key is to keep tension out of your shoulders. In any case, when you have finished your cull, put the balance of the deck back into your inside jacket pocket but palm the four cards in your left hand in Gambler's Flat Palm.

NOTE: If circumstances don't allow you to turn your back on the entire audience, use a Card Index. The Index can be fashioned from a deck of cards and a rubber band. Arrange each of the thirteen values in CHaSeD order and out-jog the even valued cards from the 325 odd for about half their length. Also turn the out-jogged even packets face down, while leaving the odd packets face up. Encircle the entire package around its width with the rubber band, wrapping it around the Index several times until it is snug (Figure 325). The rest should be apparent.

9 Tell the spectator to gather the cards she used to form the suit and hide them with the cards that represent the value, and to tell you when she's done, so you may turn around again. When she has done all this, turn around and casually walk back toward the table, putting your left hand, with its palmed cards, into your front left pants pocket.

Announce that you're getting a fairly clear image of the value of the card but that the suit is not quite clear. "Just say yes or no-It's a black card?" If the spectator says, "Yes," respond with "It's a Club." If the spectator then says, "No," say, "It's the Eight of Spades." If you say, "It's a black ca rd and the spectator says, "No," you respond, "It's a Heart." If you get another "no," say, "It's the Eight of Diamonds." This doesn't explain every possible pattern but you should get the idea. If you handle this fishing technique properly, the audience is left with the feeling that your questions were part of an effort to make the revelation dramatic rather than that you didn't know. It works extremely well as just a few attempts will confirm.

NOTE: 'I'his fishing technique, it should be noted, is Ed Marlo's. (See The Cardician, 1953, pages 133 and 137.) Marlo was a master of such techniques but is rarely given credit for his talent in this area. This may be a compliment in its own way. Thanks, Ed.

Ask for the return of the hidden cards. As they are being retrieved, palm the appropriate card out of your left pocket in either Full Palm or Gambler's Cop, depending on the angles under which you are performing. The card should be face against your palm in either case. Add the palmed card to the bottom of the cards on the table as you pick them up. Drop these onto the cards the spectator gives you and put the deck down.

Ask for the note pad back and start to compliment the spectator on the clarity of her drawing.

Stop and say, "Did I mention that I don't like to do this effect? I might have. You see, some people are too good at it. I have a feeling you may be one of them. Some people are so good that the deck is affected by their concentration." Turn over the cards and spread them widely across the table, revealing that they are all blank except one, that card being, in our example, the Eight of Diamonds. Conclude, "It makes you wonder whether what you're seeing now is a dream or if what you saw before was just a vision."

NOTES: This effect is rather elaborate. Some may even think it overdone. It is not the kind of effect you'll do every day. In formal performance, as a closing item, it can be devastating. That's a strong word, but the audience response justifies it. Use it to close just one show, with the right presentational address, and you'll be using it often.

Finally, while this effect clearly uses a mathematical technique as a major part of its method, it well shrouds it by using the drawing of the card as a red herring and a fishing technique to determine the suit.

SERIOUSLY GAFFED

WHY NOT? I AM not a purist. I have never seen a reason not to use gaffed cards if there is something worthwhile to be gained thereby. O n the other hand, I know that I will not always carry gaffed cards with me, so I am loathe to add gaffed-card effects to my repertoire, except for those that have become part of my regular close-up act. My good buddy Noel Coughlin and I have discussed the use of gaffs on many occasions and have gone to great lengths to find ever better ways to make them, and yet I remain somewhat unresolved on the issue of how widespread a use I will give them. I am inclined to agree with Noel's opinion that they are fine, but that there is much to be gained by trying to find ways to eliminate them, as that effort helps card technique advance.

With that as preamble, I'm including three items that depend on The first, "Wishuffle," is an effect I marketed a number of years ago, through Hank Lee in Boston and Tannen's in New York. The effect is amazing, amusing and very entertaining. It should not be overlooked. In the second piece, "The Birthday Aces," I return to the Progressive Ace premise, in which the effect is given an admirable directness thanks to a new form of feke. The third and final item, "Watch the Wild Ace," is a blockbuster that I've kept for my own use for almost thirty-five years. Only a handful of magicians have ever seen me perform it, but it is incredibly powerful. It is, in some ways, the most amazing effect of its type lay audiences can ever see. It is without question a reputation-making routine.

One final word-As we enter these realms, I suppose it necessary to repeat the obvious: All manufacturing rights reserved. Infringement is illegal and ethically reprehensible.

JANUARY 19,1973 FINAL

THIS IS one of those effects that always "demonstrates" extremely well, is richly enjoyed by lay audiences, but has never caught on in the magic world-so go know. I'm explaining it here in its entirety, with the instructions that came with the effect, but with this added little historical preamble.

I first wish to acknowledge that the presentation was influenced by a man who inspired much in me through his writings, Mr. Ed Marlo. His gags and bits of business pertaining to shuffles, which appeared in the Ieland 1944 Yedrbook (page lo), and later in his book, The Cardician (1953, page 25), while not all original with him, made this routine possible. I am, yet again, in his debt.

Beyond that, its ancestry can be traced as follows: "Cheek-to-Cheek" is a dealer item that has been on the market since 1948. It applies the same method (in reverse) as "Wishuffle," but the effect is not at all the same. It does, however, share common ground with the second phase of "Wishuffle." U. F. Grant is usually given credit for creating "Cheek-to-Cheek," and so I thank him for another clever idea, of which he had many. It is of interest to note that Dai Vernon reported that Arthur Finley had come up with the same idea decades before Grant but never published it. Grant, therefore, was unlikely to have been influenced by Finley.

The primary effect of "Wishuffle" is that a deck invisibly shuffles itself at the performer's request, under impossible conditions; there is also a secondary effect: the location of a selected card in the fashion of Triumph. When I marketed "Wishuffle" I believed I had discovered a new plot, that of causing cards

to mix face up and face down by merely willing them to do so. As it turns out, I was incorrect. Stephen Minch has brought to my attention a Herbert Johnson effect in which the deck is fanned to show the cards in normal orientation; the fan is then closed and the cards dealt to show them alternating face up and face down. That's not quite the same as a deck that unshuffles itself, but it's close. White-bordered cards and a tight fan were his method. Johnson's trick appeared in Walter B. Gibson's Twenty New Practical Card Tricks (1925, page 16) under the title "The Instantaneous Reversing Pack." Another closely related effect is the magical mixing of the colors of the deck. Leslie Guest is believed to be the first to tackle this plot in his "The PackThat Shuffles Itself" (The Linking Ring, Vol. 8, No. 8, October 1928, page 639). Guest used waxed pairs of cards to dis- guise their true mixed condition. Ed Marlo weighed in on the subject with his "Cased-in Shuffle" in Ibidem (No. 8, December 1956, page 20; and page 154 in the book edition), in which the rough-and-smooth principle and Oil-and- Water technology are put to use. J. K. Hartman's "Faromatic" (in Mr. Gadfly, Vol. 1, No. 3, September-October 2001, page 3 1) features yet another method. Tony Chaudhuri altered the plot somewhat with his "Automatic Deck Shuf- fler" (Bedazzledf, 1977, page 42), in which a pack in new-deck order is shuffled magically into a mixed condition. Finally, in 2002 Bob Farmer, working from an idea by Gerald Kirchner, combined several of the plot elements above to produce an "un-Wishuffle" effect wherein a deck in random order is mixed face up and face down, only to right itself magically, also rearranging itself into new-deck order. This effect, with a gimmicked deck, is marketed under the title "Bammo Card Walloper."

Those interested in this type of effect may wish to check another related plot, the "sympathetic" face-up, face-down mixing of cards in two packets. My contribution to this idea is "Siamese Shuffle," which I developed nearly a year before "Wishuffle." I contributed "Siamese Shuffle," over twenty years after its invention, to Apocalypse (Vol. 15, No. 9, September 1992, page 2120). This effect and three variations were later included in my book, The Magical Record and Thoughts of Weslgljames (page 62). The earliest sympathetic-shuffle effect I'm aware of is U. F. Grant's "Giant Acrobatic Cards," a marketed item that was purloined by Glenn Gravatt for his Encyclopedia of Self Working Card Tricks (1 936, page 125) and then appeared in Hugard's revision, Enyclopedia of Card Tricks (1937, page 127). Another notable example of this tiny genre is Nick Trost's "Believe It or Not!" from The Linking Ring (Vol. 34, No. 12, February 1955, page 63). An improved version can be found in The CardMagic ofNick f i s t (1 997, page 1 50).

I created the concept that is "Wishuffle" on December 10, 1972, and premiered it to the magic world on January 19, 1973, at an S.A.M. Open House conducted

by Sam Schwartz. The first "Wishuffle" decks and instructions were sold on March 28, 1973, by me at a lecture in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, to magicians in that area, and shipped on April 1, 1973. Since then I have developed and recorded, in an unpublished manuscript, a number of handlings-two of them non-gaffed and impromptu-that eliminate the self-righting phase found in the original treatment. The routine stands as a novel combination of effects framed in a humorous presentation that has played well for many audiences for many years. I've told the history as I know it. What I give you in "Wishuffle" is a tool with which to bring some entertainment, some escape and some joy to the lives of those who see you do it properly. On the page it may seem silly-it is-but do it for an audience with the proper delivery and you'll keep doing it.

REQUIREMENTS: You will need twenty-six different double-faced cards and twenty-six regular cards.

SET-UP: Faro shuffle the two packets together, or otherwise alternate the double-facers and regular cards, and cut a face-down card to the top. Put the deck into its case and you're ready to go.

As you remove the deck from the case, face up, you introduce your premise. "Cards, as they come from the factory, are always stiff, slippery and in numeric sequence. For that reason, they are usually shuffled. Recognizing that this was probably true of the cards that came from the early Egyptian factories, I began my quest for knowledge in the field of Shdology. What else would a magician study? My perusal of the subject has proven enlightening, not only magically but also sociologically. Tonight (unless it's morning; I haven't seen the sun in three days) I'd like to share with you this report, which I've had the pleasure of delivering before four Presidents-at the foot of Mt. Rushmore. They were stoned at the time."

"To begin: The first methods ever devised for mixing cards were not true shuffles but merely cuts, usually done repeatedly. Although I am sure that other cutting techniques predate the following, I begin here for purposes of clear dating. In the year of the Hebrew Exodus from Egypt, a man named Charlya, Moysha Char- lya, conceived this cut." Execute a Charlier Cut. "This has come to be known as the 'Jewish' or 'Passover' Cut. You'll notice one packetpas over the other."

With the deck still face up, continue, "Though it may seem strange, history documents no further advance in shuffle technology for many years. [A an aide:] Centuries is a lot of years, isn't it? Not until the Russian Czar, a devoted card player, during the Russian Revolution and while in pursuit of enemy forces, happened upon a technique that has come to be known as the 'Russian Shuf- fle."' Spring the cards from one hand to the other. "One card rushin' after the other. By the way the rumors that the Czar was Polish are totally unfounded."

The deck remains face up as you say, "That brings us to the first shuffle of the modern era and the first to be invented in the western hemisphere. In watching, you will notice the political statement it makes about its national origin. It is called the 'Argentine Shuffle.'" Do a Running Swivel Cut, a la Leipzig. "You see, of course, the political statement: one revolution after the other."

The deck will still be face up as you add, "One can feel pride in their American heritage when considering this next technique. I believe it reflects America's advanced technological thinking in the field of automation. The name given this efficient method of shuffling.. ." Begin an Overhand Shuffle from the face of the deck, running single cards. Stop the shuffle after running an even number of cards and throw the run cards back onto the face of the deck. ". . .is the 'Over- hand Shuffle,' which is a misnomer in that the 'Overhand Shuffle' was invented by some very underhanded people. Such is the American way."

"Let me pause here long enough to say that it should be understood that this does not attempt to be a hlly comprehensive look at Shufflology. Techniques like the 'Waterfd Shuffle' and the 'Table Riffle,' as well as mathematical shuffle techniques such as the 'Faro' and 'Reverse Faro,' the 'Monge' and the 'Klondike,' all fall outside the realm of this thesis."

For the first time, turn the deck hce down. "In fact, there is only one more approach that falls within my scope. I am proud to say that I am the creator of this shuffle. I must, however, hasten to say that I don't understand how it works. I suspect that it has something to do with the power of the mind. It is for that reason that I call this technique the 'Wishuffle.' I simply lift off about half the deck [ah so, Izjing o f a portion above a face-down card] and drop it back on top [do so], and by concerted effort and concentrated thought they are mixed." Turn the deck face up and spread it.

Turn the deck face down again and say, "Now, just in case there are any doubt- ers in the group, I have devised f'urther, incontrovertible, scientific proof. I will turn the top half face up and leave the bottom half face down." Cut at a point where a face-down card rests on top of the lower half and turn the top half over. Place the reversed top half back onto the bottom half, but maintain a large, open step between them. "I place them together, half face up, half face down, and wish." As this line

326

is spoken, with your right hand lift the upper half and flash the back of its lowermost card. This serves as minor misdirection; you don't need much. Your left hand rotates palm down, allowing its cards to rest on your curled fingers (Figure 326). As the hands come together, turn

your left hand palm up again, simultaneously uncurling the fingers while the packet lies on them (Figure 327). In other words, the packet is subtly reversed by rotating your hand around it. This reversal is further covered by executing it under the screen of the upper packet, in the last instant before the packets are rejoined. Casually bring the upper packet down onto the lower one and move the reassembled deck to your fingertips. Turn the deck face down and spread it on the table. Every other card is face up. "Proof that the shuffle works."

"Now, being a magician, I can't have a deck in this unusual condition without putting it to use. So, would you, sir, please, as I turn my back, take any one of the face-down cards, turn it face up, look at it, remember what it is, and place it back into the deck, still face up, right where you got it. Square up the spread cards and leave the pile on the table. Let me know when you're through."

When told by the spectator that he's done, pick up the deck, square it and reverse it openly. "Now the magical 'Wish-Unshuffle,' which does not, by the way, fall into any category." Spread the deck across the table. "Lo and behold, every card in the deck turns one way. Except one." Remove the single face-down card from the spread and hold it back to the audience. "What was the name of your card, sir?" When he names it, repeat the name. "Thank You." Dramatically turn over the selection and toss it onto the table. As the audience reacts and applauds, put the deck away while making idle comments.

NOTE: If you prefer to do a shorter routine or if you can't do a Charlier Cut, Running Swivel Cut, or spring cards from hand to hand, eliminate those items. Marlo includes some other gags that can be used. I list them so that you can figure out for yourself how to incorporate them:

The "Army" or "Rifle Shufflex-Execute a riffle shuffle.

The "Fancy Shuffle3'-Make a fan, being careful to show only the face of the deck.

You can expand or contract the routine as suits your style. The "Wishuf- fle" portion of the effect actually starts with Step 7. Give the presentation some thought. It's an interesting premise and lay audiences get onto the farce of it.

BIRTHDAY ACES SEPTEMBER 3, 198 1

ALPHA

"BIRTHDAY ACES" is so named for two reasons: First, the idea came to me on September third, which is my birthday; and second, the patter is based on the idea that on my tenth birthday my !great-grandfather taught me how to handle the first Ace; on my twentieth birthday my grandfather taught me the handling of the second Ace; on my thirtieth birthday my father taught Ine the procedure for the third Ace. And the fourth Ace is my own because he didn't live to see my fortieth birthday.

"Birthday Aces" is a treatment of the Progressive Ace premise, the history of which I have discussed in Pmteboard Perpensions (page 35) and in "Catalytic Progressive Aces" in this volume (page 38). All of the versions of the Progressive ~ c & s e m b l ~ I have seen use nation of these gaffs, or they is, I believe, unique in that it uses only three feke cards, which are neither double- faced nor double-ended and which are quite fair looking in appearance. Each of the these cards has a hinged flap attached to one side, which produces cards such as those shown in Figure 328. When the flap of the first feke lies

double-ended cards, double-faced cards, a combi- have relied on palming. The solution I offer here

open, an Ace of Diamonds is exposed, apparently fanned behind a spot card in Spades. The second feke, when open appears as a spread Ace of Clubs and Ace of Diamonds behind a spot card in Clubs. The third feke, when open, shows a spread Ace of Diamonds, Ace of Clubs and Ace of Hearts behind a spot card in Spades. When these flaps are folded closed against the faces of their attached whole cards, the backs of the cards can be displayed as normal. I've made the flaps in several ways over the years. The simplest way is to glue sections of the Aces together to create the second and third fekes. You can also go to the trouble of splitting the pieces first, to cut down on the thickness of the fekes; but I've found the difference isn't really significant enough to warrant the work. You can use transparent tape to hinge the flaps to the three whole cards.

Once the nature of the fekes is understood, the handling can largely be deduced and many variations developed. The following are some of the handlings that take advantage of the fekes. You will find that they produce an extremely deceptive display. Further, though it goes without saying, versions of the MacDonald Aces, Wild Card and any number of effects normally requiring double-faced or double-ended cards can be modified to utilize the principle embodied in the Birthday gaffs. I know of no other feke quite like these. It does, however, have some relatives. If all its relatives had been combined, something similar to the Birthday feke would have resulted. It might, therefore, be fair to call the Birth- day feke a composite or amalgam. To borrow wording from the laws governing patents, the embodiment would be "patent-able" because, "it is novel and does not follow logically from prior art." This is demonstrated by the period of time that has elapsed since the last "patent-able" material in the field. Relatives of the Birthday fekes are the "Fake Fan Ca rd (a DeLand innovation) with which most of you will be familiar from the Fako Deck, "The Kitson MiracleIPat Page Three-Card Monte" Card (marketed by Magic, Inc.) and Bob Koch's Acrobatic Card variation described on page 80 of Ed Marlo on the Acrobatic Cards (Magic, Inc, 1968). All of these ideas, arguably related to the Birthday fekes, are long standing prior art. The fact that the Birthday feke was not thought of is strong evidence that it "does not follow logically."

I have taken somewhat greater pains in this dissertation than I normally would to establish an idea because I think it useful to establish some guidelines for use in determining the validity of any claim to a move, sleight, concept, premise, trick, effect, etc. I hope it is helpful. It at least provides my thinking on the matter.

REQUIREMENTS: The fekes, F l , F2 and F3, are as pictured in Figure 328. The flaps hinge to lay on the face of the card. The backs look normal when the flap is closed. The hinge, which is made of cellophane, is imbedded between the layers of the card, which means the cards must be split and re-glued around the cellophane hinge.

Also required is a regular deck minus the three spot cards that appear on the fekes: the Four of Spades, Six of Clubs and Two of Spades in our samples.

SIT-UP: From the top down, Ace of Clubs-Ace of Hearts-Ace of Spades-Ace of Diamonds-face-down indifferent card-three face-up indifferent cards-F1- f;2-F3-balance of deck. The flaps should all be folded closed onto the faces of their cards, with the hinge on the right.

1 Form a break under the top eight cards of the deck-above the Fl card. This is facilitated by the thickness of the F1 card and the reversed cards. Spread or count off the top four cards without reversing their order. Turn them face up and square them at the left fingertips. Draw off each Ace, one by one, into a sideways spread showing, from the face, the Ace of Clubs, Ace of Hearts, Ace of Spades and Ace of Diamonds. Use your right hand to hold this spread above the deck. Grip the four cards above the break as though adding them under the spread but keep the left side of these cards flush with the left side of the deck and do not allow them to break contact with the deck below. Place the left thumb on the top card of this lower block (the face-down card) and hold it in place as you move the three under cards to the right about a third of a card width (Figure 329-the spread of Aces is bowed here to make the action clear; in performance the Aces lie flat on the deck). Align the left edge of the spread of Aces with the three-card block under the face-down cover card (Figure 330), and close the spread but don't square it. The seven face-up cards should be roughly aligned. Shift the right hand to pinch the seven- card block at the middle of the right side, thumb above, fingers below (Figure 33 1). Slide all seven cards to the right until they are clear of

i;

the face-down card while holding that card in place with the left thumb. Hinge the seven cards face down bookwise onto the deck (Figure 332). From the top down, the order is now, three indifferent cards-Ace of Diamonds-Ace of Spades- Ace of Hearts-Ace of Clubs-indifferent card-F 1 -F2-F3.

HISTORICAI, NOTE: This style of packet switch, using a face-down top- card cover, was first suggested by Hugard and Braue in their 1941 booklet, Mirat'le Method, No. I: Tbe Stripper Deck. In two included tricks, "The Braue Aces" (page 31) and "The Princess Card Trick: Stripper Version" (page 25), they used the tapers in the trimmed deck to facilitate the switch of the packets as the cards were turned hce down on the deck. In 1974 , in his En Hand Poker Stack, Ed Marlo explained his handling with unprepared cards (page 164). Upon reading Mario's thinking, Harvey Rosenthal was inspired to devise a number of refined handlings. Meanwhile, in England, Alex Elmsley was working independently on the concept. The Elmsley and Rosenthal handlings have remained unpublished to date, but Rosenthal has circulated enough information to inspire variants that have reached print. Nocable among these is Ken Krenwl's technique in Epilogue Special, No. 2 (circa 1975-6, page 246). Larry Jennings, Arturo de Ascanio and Darwin Ortiz have also contributed versions to this family of packet switches. My handling differs only in small details from that offered by Krenzel.

2 Move the left hand forward and deal the top four cards into a face-down row, from left to right across the working surface. They will be three indifferent cards and the Ace of Diamonds.

3 Form a break under F3. As before, the thickness makes this fairly easy. Peel the first three cards (unbeknownst to the audience they are Aces) one at a time into right-hand Dealing Grip. Pause, then continue, drawing the next four cards (all the cards above the break) as one into right-hand Dealing Grip using a block push-off, facilitated by the break. The apparent count will be four. Continue immediately, drawing off two more cards in this manner. Following the same pattern (three cards and pause) draw off two additional three-card groups. The apparent count will be twelve; there will actually be fifteen cards in your right hand. This process is justified as removing "twelve" cards to be used in the effect.

4 Set the deck in line with the leftmost tabled card, but a few inches behind it. The idea is to place the deck in a position that seems to be out of the way but which will later be in the way, to justify moving it. As you're tabling the deck, pull down on the right-hand packet with your right fourth finger, forming a break

above the lower six cards of the twelve-card packet. This is greatly facilitated by the extra thickness of the fekes but may feel odd since one does not usually pull down cards using the right hand.

Transfer the packet from right-hand Dealing Grip to left-hand Dealing Grip, maintaining the break during the transfer. This is most easily accomplished by converting the right fourth-finger break to a left-hand heel break. Once the packet is in the left hand, move the right hand to Overhand Grip and perform a Turnover Pass, still maintaining the break. Finish this sequence with the packet face up in the right hand, with a thumb break above the lower six cards.

You next execute the Veeser Concept by peeling the card from the face of the packet into the left hand, onto the six cards below the break, without revealing the existence of the block, as shown exposed from the rear in Figure 333. Catch a break between this single card and the lower six. It should appear that you've merely peeled the card from the face of the packet into the left hand. As the hands meet again and the left hand's packet moves beneath the right's, transfer the break above the six-card group to the right thumb. This adds the single card above the break to the underside of the upper packet. Immediately move the left hand back to the left, taking only the lowermost card of the packet, F1, to the left as you peel the next card from the face of the packet into the left hand. Drawing F 1 away from the packet is best accomplished with a light pressure of the fleshy mound at the base of the left first finger. (If you are familiar with the-H~LO Cut, the technique here is quite similar.) As soon as it is possible, the tip of the left fourth finger catches the right edge of F1 and continues to pull the feke to the left, moving it along beneath the card the left thumb is peeling off the face of the packet (Figure 334).

Return the left hand to draw off one more card from the face of the packet onto the two the left hand already holds. The left hand now holds three cards, just as it should, and they are two indifferent cards with F1 beneath them. Turn this three-card packet face down, side for side, and place it onto the leftmost card of the tabled row.

7 Repeat this count-display sequence, creating three-card packets for the supposed Aces at positions two and three, secretly switching in F2 and F3 as the top card in their respective packets.

8 You will be lefi with six cards (believed by the spectators to be three) in your right hand, with a thumb break held above the lower three. (If you've lost the break, which happens to me regularly, you will have to cheat a little to reestablish it. Under the guise of checking the count, necktie the ~acke t slightly and spread the lowermost two cards (Aces) to the left. Close the spread, jogging the third card from the bottom to the right as you return the packet to a horizontal position. A downward pull on the jogged card as you square will reform the lost break.) Peel the next card off the face of the packet and onto the three cards below the break without revealing the presence of those three cards (Aces). Maintain a break between the lower three cards and the upper one. Continue, drawing off the remaining two cards from the left hand into the right. Turn the six cards face down, as three, as though closing a book, while maintaining the break.

9 Immediately steal the lowermost three cards in a Gambler's Cop and place the upper three (Aces) onto the rightmost card of the tabled row.

10 Slide the deck off the table, adding the copped cards to the bottom of the deck. Place the deck aside, out of the working area. The layout should be:

1 st 2nd 3 r d - - - 4'h - Top F l F2 F3 Ace

X X X Ace X X X Ace X X X Ace Bottom

11 Pick up the leftmost packet, holding it at the right fingertips, and spread the cards from right to left. This will show four backs with the F 1 feke at the top of the packet.

12 Close the spread and square the cards. As you square, the flap should be on the right. Pull down on, or angle open, the three lower cards on the right. The flap should swing downward into the open position (Figure 335). Release the lower three cards and the flap will become trapped outside the packet (Figure 336), and is hidden from the audience's view by the right hand.

Flatten your right hand slightly and release the left hand's hold completely. Turn your left palm to the right, then rotate the right hand clockwise and inward, and transfer the packet from the right hand to the left (Figure 337) without flashing the open flap. Rotate the right hand to a position above the left. You will be holding the packet much as you would if you were about to squeeze open a Poker hand (Figure 338).

Fan the first two cards on the face to the right. The fan will appear to show three indifferent cards and the Ace of Diamonds. In actuality, the third indifferent card is a Double, its rear card hinged to the repositioned flap of F 1. Place your left thumb on the fan along the line formed by the left sides of the cards (Figure 339). The inner left corner of the fan should be concealed in the thumb crotch. Lower the fan to allow the spectators to see the faces of the cards.

Rotate the left wrist clockwise, maintaining the cards on a plane parallel with the floor. Rotate the right hand palm up and grasp the fan with the thumb above, fingers below, across the flap (Figure 340). Keep the left hand close, screening the audience's ( view of the back of the flap seam, as you rotate the right hand palm down and the packet fice down. The left thumb, lying over the inner end of the flap seam, takes over the hold of the fan long enough for the right hand to move to Overhand Grip.

Again pull down on or angle open the three lower cards, and the flap should swing downward (exposed in Figure 341). Curl the left fingers inward as you lift the lower three cards. The flap will be trapped inside the packet (Figure 342). Square the packet before making a magical gesture over it for effect.

17 Turn the packet face up, end for end, which keeps the flap on the right. Fan the cards in the same fashion you have before, revealing that the Ace has vanished, leaving four indifferent cards. Pause a moment for this to register before you close the fan and drop the packet face down into its original position on the table, but turned ninety degrees to bring the flap seam nearest you.

18 Pick up the second packet and spread it from right to left. This shows four backs with the F2 feke at the top of the packet.

19 Close the packet and pull down the three lower cards, allowing the flap to swing downward into the open position. Release the lower three cards, trapping the flap outside the packet and hidden by the right hand.

20 Again flatten your right hand as you release the left hand's hold. Turn your left palm to the right and your right hand clockwise and inward. Hand the packet from the right hand to the left without flashing the open flap and move the right hand up into Poker-hand position.

Spread the card at the face to the right, as though forming a fan. The fan will appear to show two indifferent cards, the Ace of Diamonds and the Ace of Clubs (Figure 343). The second indifferent card is a Triple, the rearmost of the three hinged to the flap of F2. Place your left thumb on the fan along the line formed by the left edge of the Triple but overlapping it to the left.

Again, the inner left corner of the fan should be concealed in the thumb crotch. Lower the fan to allow the spectators to see the faces of the cards. Keep the fan slightly in motion as you display it, to hide the thickness of the Triple.

Again rotate the left wrist clockwise and the right hand counterclockwise, and transfer the fan to the right hand, thumb above and fingers below. Keep your left hand close, screening the flap seam, as you rotate the right hand palm down. The left thumb should hide the flap seam as the right hand moves to Overhand Grip.

I'ull down the lower three cards, permitting the flap to swing downward. Curl the left fingers inward as you release the lower three cards, trapping the flap inside the packet. Square the cards and make a magical gesture over them.

Turn the packet face up, end for end, and fan the packet, revealing that both Aces have vanished, leaving four indifferent cards. Allow a moment for this to register. Close the fan and drop the packet face down back into its original position on the table, but rotated crosswise so the flap seam is nearest you.

Pick up the third packet. Spread it as you have the previous two, to show four backs, with the F3 feke at the top of the packet.

Square the packet and pull down the three lower cards to set the flap into the open position, hidden by the right hand.

Transfer the packet to the left hand, rotating it to Poker-hand position as you have before.

Simulate spreading the cards into a fan that shows an indifferent card, the Ace of Diamonds, Ace of Clubs and Ace of Hearts from the face. The face card is a Quadruple. Position your left thumb on the fan along the line formed by the left sides of the cards and conceal the corner of the fan in the left thumb crotch. Lower the fan to allow the spectators to see the faces of the cards but keep the fan in motion.

Once again, rotate the left hand palm right and the right hand counterclockwise, and transfer the fan to the right hand, with thumb above fingers below. Keep the left hand close, screening the flap seam, as you rotate the right hand palm down. The left thumb once more hides the flap seam as the right hand moves to Overhand Grip.

Pull down the three lower cards and the flap will swing downward. Curl the left fingers inward as you release the lower three cards. Trap the flap inside the packet, square the cards and make a magical gesture over them.

Turn the packet face up end for end, the flap still on the right. Fan the packet, revealing all three Aces have vanished. Four indifferent cards are present instead.

Allow a moment for this to register. Close the fan and replace the packet in its spot on the table, but rotated so that the flap seam is toward you.

Pick up each of the rotated packets and turn them face up one last time, flap on the right. Spread each packet into a fan and place the twelve-card fan on the table, face up. This reinforces the vanish of the Aces from all three packets.

With the hands obviously empty, pick up the final, rightmost, packet. Spread these cards as you have each of the previous three packets. Transfer and rotate the packet into Poker-hand position as you have before. Spread the cards into a fan, then lower it, showing the four Aces. Drop each Ace onto the table and take your bow.

WATCH THE WILD ACE JULY 4, 1965

FINAL

IN APRIL of 1962, Gus Southall contributed a description and explanation of a Peter Kane routine called "Watch the Ace!" to Hugard's Magic Monthly (Vol. 19, No. 8, page 89). This started a series of letters from magicians all over the world, sharing touches and variations on the idea. Among the people moved by the Kane routine was Frank Garcia, who altered it in a number of ways. As Frank told me the story, Lou Tannen witnessed a Garcia performance of his variation of the routine. Lou saw its commercial potential and decided to market it, albeit without Frank's assistance or permission. Lou named Frank's routine "Wild Card." He did give Garcia credit for the routine, but he never obtained Frank's permission to market it, though Frank never attempted to stop him. In the meantime, Blanca Lopez, then editor of Hugard's Magic Monthly, began publishing some of the correspondence being received from inspired readers. From this correspondence grew the first enhancements and variations. Some were handling variations of "Watch the Ace!" some of "Wild Card." All praised the original creations that motivated them.

In late 1964, when I sessioned with Frank Garcia, perhaps for the first time, I saw him perform "Wild C a r d while at Tannen's store, then located in the Wurlitzer building. I purchased the routine and began playing with it. The set I bought was made with the Ace of Clubs and King of Hearts. After toying with the cards for a number of months and rereading the description in Hugard's of the Kane effect, I decided that people were overlooking the fact that the effects were different, however closely related. "Watch the Wild Ace" was born from my efforts to take the best from both plots.

462 + ENCHANTMENTS

I have shown this routine to very few magicians over the years, but I have performed it for many lay people, who have happily enjoyed those performances. I find it interesting that, after more than thirty-five years of innumerable versions, handlings and variations of the two original routines, no one has come close to this concept. I truly believe "Watch the Wild Ace" brings the idea begun by Kane's "Watch the Ace!" full circle. Alternate methods and alternate handlings may come along, but just as "MacDonald's Aces" defines its premise, "Watch the Wild Ace" defines a culmination of the "Watch the Ace!" and "Wild Card" premises. Don't make the mistake of going backward, removing a wallet and taking out the cards, etc.; and be wary of the inclination to switch the cards so they can be examined. Examination may assuage your sense of guilt in an effect like this, but in my opinion no one in all the years has come up with a switch that is logical enough to accomplish its end without leaving some lingering suspicion (including Marlo, Ortiz and Decamps). If you can't switch without that lingering suspicion, it's better to leave the mystery. Beyond this, &owing props to be examined, particularly at the end of a routine, sets a bad precedent for a highly questionable practice. If ever I find a solution to the switch problem, I'll do my best to bring it to the fellowship and, perhaps, celebrity to its creator. I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

EFFECT: The performer removes the four Aces and one other card of each suit. He then proceeds to change each of the indifferent cards into an Ace of its suit, creating four pairs of Aces: two Spades, two Hearts, two Clubs and two Diamonds. Continuing, the performer changes the Aces of each of the suits, for example Spades, Hearts and Diamonds, into Aces of Clubs. The routine concludes with eight Aces of Clubs spread on the table.

REQUIREMENTS: Eight cards in all are required. Three are double-faced, longitudinally split-faced double enders: an Ace of Hearts-indifferent Heart, backed with an Ace of Clubs; an Ace of Spades-indifferent Spade, backed with an Ace of Clubs; and an Ace of Diamonds-indifferent Diamond, backed with an Ace of Clubs. These cards are shown in Figure 344. The indiffer-

344

ent cards shown here are those used in my set and, for convenience of explanation, will be referred to in the text that follows.

faced as follows: an Ace of Clubs backed with an indifferent Club; an Ace of Hearts backed with an Ace of Clubs; an Ace of Spades backed with

an Ace of Clubs; and an Ace of Diamonds backed with an Ace of Clubs. Figure 345 should make the construction of these cards clear. One regular Ace of Clubs and a regular deck of cards are also needed.

SET-UP: Arrange the deck from face to rear with the cards matching the faces of the gaffed packet interspersed throughout the pack in the following order (indifferent cards will intervene): Ace of Clubs-Ace of Hearts-Ace of Spades-Ace of Diamonds-Ten of Clubs- Nine of Diamonds-Jack of Spades-King of Hearts. The King of Hearts should be second from the top. For this explanation, let's say the top card is the Four of Diamonds.

The gaffed packet should be set up, again from face to rear: Ace of Clubs-Ace of HeartsIAce of Clubs (Ace of Hearts showing)-Ace of SpadesIAce of Clubs (Ace of Spades showing)-Ace of DiamondslAce of Clubs (Ace of Diamonds showing)-Ten of ClubsIAce of Clubs (Ten of Clubs showing)-Nine of Dia- monds-Ace of DiamondsIAce of Clubs (Nine of Diamonds to the left)-Jack of Spades-Ace of SpadesIAce of Clubs (Jack of Spades to the left)-King of Hearts- Ace of HeartsIAce of Clubs (King of Hearts to the left).

Place the gaffed packet face up in your left hand with the regular Ace of Clubs showing, and place the deck face up on top of it. Make sure that the Ace of Clubs on the face of the gaffed packet and the Ace of Clubs in the deck are oriented in the same direction.

If you remove the Twos and Threes from the deck, you can slip the set-up deck into a card box, ready to begin. Alternately, I have kept the packet in my left-side jacket pocket and the deck in my right-side jacket pocket. Both hands go to the pockets simultaneously. The left hand then goes to the lap, where it leaves the packet, while the right hand ribbon spreads the deck face up across the table. The deck can then be given a False Shuffle and False Cut. You can even do other effects with the deck, as long as you don't disturb the order of the required cards. When you're ready to perform, you should be holding the deck face up in your right hand, in Overhand Grip. The left hand goes to the lap and retrieves the packet, taking it into Gambler's Cop, with the normal Ace of Clubs uppermost. As you stand, add the packet face up beneath the face-up deck.

1 Explain that you will remove the four Aces and one card of each suit. Spread the cards between your hands and openly out-jog the eight required cards as you come to them, in order: Ace of Clubs-Ace of Hearts-Ace of Spades-Ace of Diamonds (note the CHaSeD suit order)-Ten of Clubs-Nine of Diamonds, Jack of Spades-King of Hearts. After out-jogging the King of Hearts, move your left thumb to the forward left corner of the indifferent card (the Four of Diamonds in our example) on the face of the packet remaining in the left hand. As you finish out-jogging the eight cards, raise your hands just enough to let their backs be seen but not far enough to risk flashing any of the gaffed-card packet. How much of the faces you can hide will depend on the size of your hands and how you hold the cards. Experiment in front of a video camera or a mirror; there's nothing difficult about it, but you need to be aware.

Lower your hands again as your left thumb pushes the Four of Diamonds to the right, just enough to allow you to obtain a fourth-finger break under it. Be careful not to flash any part of the index of the Ace of Clubs on the face of the gaffed packet. With your right hand, grasp the deck from above, with the thumb at the right near corner, and use the right second finger to angle the out-jogged cards to the left so that it can complete the grip on the front right corner of the deck. Secretly carry the gaffed packet below the break forward under the out-jogged cards. With your left thumb, press down on the face of the out-jogged Ace of Clubs and pull all the out-jogged cards onto the gaffed cards (Figure 346), - -

forming a fourth-finger break between the two groups. The deck will be in an unsquared condition at this point. Bring the left hand's two groups of cards back under the deck, adding the upper packet to the bottom of the deck, and immediately lift the deck to your fingertips to square it. Since the card on the face of the left hand's packet has the same card at its face as the packet that was just pulled from the deck, the audience will believe, without question, that they are the same cards. (This is why you oriented the two Aces of Clubs in the same direction when you set up the cards.) \ \

NOTE: The technique just described is based on the Vernon Strip-Out Addition (Phoenix, No. 248, February 8, 1952, page 990; or Dai Vernoni Further Inner Secrets of Card Magic, 1961, page 5) but goes an important step further by not only adding cards but switching packets as well. While this technique is virtually the same as Derek Dingle's NoLap Switch (The

Complete Works ofDerek Dingle, 1982, page 85). 1 do not believe Derek was aware of my technique when he created his. The sequence has important applications to other effects where similar conditions exist, though in this - form it requires a duplicate or near duplicate be employed.

Place the deck aside. You won't need it again during the routine. Make a moderately tight Drag Fan of the gaffed-card packet in your hands. With experience you'll learn the parameters of handling these cards without flashing portions of the cards that should not show. The cards will show in an order identical to the cards that were out-jogged in the deck. This further confirms that they are the same cards. Point out to the spectators that you have the four Aces and one card that matches the suit of each of the Aces.

Reach over and pull the Ten of Clubs into an out-jogged position in the fan. Take the Ace of Clubs off the face of the fan and place it behind the Ten of Clubs, pinching the end of the Ten and the Ace together (Figure 347). Draw the Ten of Clubs out of the fan and turn the two cards, roughly squared, so their backs are toward the audience. (The back of the honest Ace of Clubs, which screens the Ace-of-Clubs side of the double-facer, is seen.) Move the two cards to the left end of the fan and use them to close it, rotating the cards end

348

Place the two cards on the face of the packet, turning them over in the process so that the Ace of Clubs lies face down on top of the Ace of ClubsITen of Clubs. (The Ten of Clubs is now facing the Ace of Hearts.) Use only your left hand to square the packet, as your right hand pulls the face-down Ace of Clubs inward

(Figure 349). This reveals a second Ace of Clubs and the first magical change: the Ten of Clubs has transformed into an Ace of Clubs. Turn the face-down Ace of Clubs face up and push the Ace of Clubs/ ?Ten of Clubs off the face of the packet, talung it into the right hand, in a fanned position under the Ace of Clubs. Set the two cards to your right on the table.

5 Take the packet into the right hand, in Overhand Grip, and peel the top and bottom cards off to the left, as you would in a Klondike Shuffle (Figure 350). You will end up with the two cards in fanned posi-

350

tion in the left hand, held by the thumb above and the fingers below. This is the second magical change: the King of Hearts to an Ace of Hearts. Set down these two cards to the left of, but not touching, the two Aces of Clubs.

6 Repeat the previous sequence, peeling the two Aces of Spades off the face and rear of the packet, and place the fanned pair to the left of, but not touching, the first two pairs of matched Aces. This is the third change: the Jack of Spades to an Ace of Spades.

J Take the two remaining cards from the right hand into the left and fan them to show two Aces of Diamonds. This is the fourth change: the Nine of Diamonds to an Ace of Diamonds. Place these two Aces down on the table as well.

8 Your patter should reinforce the impossibility of what you have done. Offer to continue more slowly, more fairly and with fewer cards. Pick up the legitimate Ace of Clubs from the face of the Ace of Clubs pair, saying something about using it as a pointer. Casually let the back of this card be seen as you gesture with it.

The next sequence was originally done as a Through-the-Fist Flourish, which I never liked in this situation. In July 1970, I changed the handling to its present form. Take the Ace of Clubs face down into your left hand and use it to scoop up the two Aces of Spades. Place these three cards into your left hand, draw the face-down Ace of Clubs from under the two Spades and place it onto them. Holding the packet in dealing position, open the fingers, releasing their

grip. Bring the right hand to the left and take the packet into Pinch Grip at the middle of its right side, with the thumb above and the first and second fingers below. Lift the right side of the packet slightly and slide the cards across the left hand until the left edge of the packet lies along the joint between the inner and middle phalanges of the first finger and the base of the innermost phalange of the fourth finger. The contact is most pronounced at the base of the fourth finger. Push up and slightly forward with the right hand (Figure 35 I), allowing the two lower cards to escape from the grip of the right fingers while the right thumb retains the top card. The two cards should snap over invisibly, under cover of the top card (Figure 352). If you have done everything correctly, it should look as though the top card was merely lifted sharply off the packet, which it

I 352 has been. It should not be realized that the two lower cards have been reversed in the process. They will show as two Aces of Clubs. This technique is my Snap Reverse (page 58). These constitute the fifth and sixth changes: the two Aces of Spades into two Aces of Clubs.

9 "Once the first one changes, the other one's a goner." While still holding the face-down Ace of Clubs between the right thumb and third finger, turn the hand palm down and take the uppermost Ace of Clubs from the left hand, clipping - -

it between the right first and second fingers - (Figure 353). Place it face up onto the Ace of ClubsITen of Clubs on the table but leave it jogged to the right so both faces show. Turn the right hand again palm up as it returns to the left hand. Take the remaining Ace of Clubs by turning the right hand palm down and clipping the Ace of ClubsIAce of Spades between the right first and second fingers. Place it on the growing spread of changed Aces of Clubs. Your right hand should still hold the regular Ace of Clubs.

10 "I'll do it again, a little slower and a little fairer." Use the regular Ace of Clubs in your right hand as a face-up scoop to pick up the two Aces of Hearts. Turn the entire packet over or "face down.'' Execute a Pull-Down on the bottom card of the packet, to free it from the two cards above. While your right hand holds the ~ a c k e t in Overhand Grip, turn your left hand palm down, rotating the bottom card from under the packet and face up to display an Ace of Hearts (Figure 354). Be careful not to flash the face of the Ace-of-Clubs side of this card. Place the Ace of Hearts face up on the packet. Pull the face- down Ace of Clubs from under the face-up Ace of Hearts and drop it on top. Use a Buckle or Pull-Down to create a break under the top two cards and immediately pull them back as one, revealing the Ace of Clubs beneath (Figure 355). One Ace of Hearts has apparently changed to the Ace of Clubs (the seventh change).

Turn over the right hand's double card and place it "face u p under the left hand's card (supposedly two cards). Push the card on the face of the left hand's packet to the left, revealing the second Ace of Clubs (the eighth change). Repeat, "Once the first one changes, the other one's a goner." With your right hand, slide the legitimate Ace of Clubs from under the other two cards. Turn the right hand palm down and take the first face-up Ace of Clubs from the left hand, clipping it between the right first and second fingers. Place it onto the line of Aces of Clubs on the table. Repeat this action with the left hand's remaining Ace of Clubs.

? 1 "Let me try the last one in slow motion." Use the Ace of Clubs as a face-up scoop to pick up the two Aces of Diamonds. Hold the three cards spread in your right hand, in Overhand Grip. Square them up, forming a break above the lower two cards and move the left hand to the left, openly revolving the two cards, as one, face down from under the card above (Figure 356) and placing this double card onto the face-up Ace of Diamonds (Figure 357). Be careful not to flash

the face of the two cards as you flip them face down, as a split-faced card would show. The action is rather like opening a book while keeping its cover up. The audience should believe the card you are putting on top of the Ace of Diamonds is the Ace of Clubs.

Maintain a break between the top two cards and the third, the face-up Ace of Diamonds, and take the packet into left-hand dealing position. Grip the double card by its near end, with the right first finger above, thumb below. Pull back the card(s), showing half the face of the Ace of Diamonds. Push the two cards square but maintain your grip on the double card. Pull back, revealing the Ace of Diamonds again. "Still hasn't changed. It's tougher when you do it slowly." Push the double card forward again and with the right thumb underneath, push the - - lower card of the Double outward and squarely onto the Ace of Diamonds, releasing it from the right hand's grip. If you push fairly hard you will push it slightly past the front end of the Ace of Diamonds. Pull back the single top card, causing the Ace of Diamonds to appear to have changed into an Ace of Clubs (Figure 358). Resquare the packet as you remove the top card briefly without showing its face. This is essentially the standard Paintbrush Color Change (and the ninth trans- - formation of the routine). I I Drop the right hand's card, still face down, onto the face-up Ace of Clubs on the left hand's packet, in-jogged for half its length. Use the Christ-Annemann Alignment Move (page 80) to align the bottom card of the packet with the top card. Pinch the two cards as one at their near ends and turn them end over end and face up onto the packet. Now spread the three cards, revealing three Aces of Clubs, as you say, "But once the first one goes, the second one's a goner." This is the tenth change.

Transfer the rear card of the packet to its face. Next take the upper two Aces of Clubs into the right hand and turn the left hand palm down, which exposes the

4 back of the normal Ace of Clubs there. Take the right hand's two cards between -'5 4

j* the left first and second fingers and add them to the tabled group, at the end of * the tabled spread, completing a string of Seven Aces of Clubs.

dr".'

Use the remaining, legitimate Ace of Clubs to scoop up the tabled line ofAces, &"@ =~$3 adding it to the rear of the packet. Square the packet and turn it face down

in your left hand; then say, "That ruins another deck but it's worth it for an xvs- +% 2 % audience like you." As you deliver this applause cue, retrieve the deck from

where it's been resting on the table, put the packet onto it and put the deck - -?> e; .- into your pocket.

NOTE: After performing this routine, you're through. S don't think this can be anything but a closing item. It's too strong to be followed. Further, by doing it as a closing effect, you avoid the problem of having the cards examined. Sf ever a satisfactory method of switching is devised, it may make sense to switch the deck and just leave the cards behind. I don't accept the idea of a Wallet Switch. In considering a logically acceptable switch, the closest I've come to a solution is one that leans heavily on the closing line of the routine. It requires that you set up a deck with the four Aces and the four indifferent cards removed, and eight Aces of Clubs on top. If you put that deck into your pocket and later do a Full-Deck Switch, just leaving the cards behind, there is a logic to it: You can't use the deck because it's ruined. Therefore, you're leaving it behind. But the deck switch must be a good one: something like a Cigar Switch (page 439, Step 3). If the deck has eight Aces of Clubs and no box, there is a good chance the audience won't want to keep it, but under these circumstances you can't make a big deal about getting it back. If the deck is to be taken away from the audience, a friend of yours must do it. I'm sure this seems like much ado about nothing, but psychologically the reasoning must stand up or the audience's recollection of the effect may be muted. It's somewhat like selling magic tricks in the lobby after a magic show: It cheapens the whole show.

This effect is not difficult to perform; the moves are all quite easy. Please, please, practice them sufficiently to do them justice, and present the routine well. I truly hate to part with it because I fear its being abused. Please give it the effort it deserves.

SECTION THREE GENERAL TIPS

THE HANDS T ~ E HANDS of a magician, unlike the hands of any other performing artist, must have the correct moisture level to function optimally. Certainly the hands of a pianist or a violinist must be supple and strong, but only magicians must be concerned with the exact moisture level of the skin. While it is true of other props besides cards, it is arguably more true that handling cards is affected by the condition of your skin. Dry hands will almost totally stop you from being able to deal Bottoms and will make Seconds "if$" at best. Wet hands will play havoc when you palm cards. I have heard a story-it may be apocryphal- that Vernon was once asked, "What do you do for wet hands?" To which he responded, "I don't know, but I'll give you a thousand dollars if you tell me how to get them." The point is that even the greats have known the problem. I have from time to time seen mentioned in various magic journals the idea of using Sort-Kwik, a commercial preparation made for people who handle paper, such as bank tellers. I have seen others mention using roughing fluid, hair spray, rose water, glycerin, Vagasil or cocoa butter on the hands. All these "solutions" have one thing in common. They approach the problem as do most doctors: Treat the symptom, not the disease.

A number of years ago, I found a solution to the problem that works for me. I am sharing it here for the first time in print. The substance is called Na-PCA (Sodium Pyrrolidone Carboxylic Acid). It is the prime constituent of human skin moisture and it regulates the moisture level. We all start out with an ample supply at birth, but it becomes decreasingly available as we age and as our skin is exposed to the elements. This substance is now available in a spray. It is, I

believe, manufactured by Twin Laboratories, Inc. of Ronkonkoma, New York, and can be found or ordered through most health food stores. If you're having a problem with dry skin, use it at least once daily for two to four weeks (best right after your morning shower) and certainly before performances. Once your hands have rebalanced their n~oisture level, use it every few nights, according to your need, before going to sleep. If you're troubled by wet hands, use it daily but not before performances, and start using Neutrogena or glycerin soap for washing your hands. It will take a few weeks but your hands will improve markedly. While I'm on the subject, regardless of the condition of your hands, never use these products before a practice session. You want the conditions during practice to be as adverse as possible.

(I have been counseled to make the following statement fir the benejt of the liti- giously minded: I am not a licensed health-care practitioner and the sugested use of Na-PCA h a not been@lly tested by the FDA. While I have qeriencedfivorable results, resultsfar other individuals and their side efects can vary widely. The author, publishec its agents, distributor and seller of this book are to be held barmlessfiom any claims resultingfiom any problems in using this product.

(Wbat ajdnny zuorfd we live in9

THE CARDS I AM forever amazed at how little attention most magicians pay to the way in which they prepare their cards for use. Pianists are very particular about the tuning and regulation of their instrument; violinists carefully tune the violin and resin the bow; drummers tune and tighten the drum heads, nail their bass drums to the floor, adjust pedal tension and make sure that the kit doesn't ring. Magicians, regardless of conditions, whip out a deck and expect it to perform. They complain bitterly when the deck "acts funny." Cards may only be paper but they are sensitive to how they are treated. As many will know, most playing cards are composed of three layers. The two layers on which the front and back are printed are made of what is called coated stock. (Some are glazed and some are plastic coated.) The center layer is a papier-m2ch6like bonding layer that varies from manufacturer to manufacturer. All mass-produced cards are printed in large sheets or on rolls, then die cut on a huge press or with a rotating wheel. The result is that the edges of the cards include an exposed edge of the center bonding layer, which is a virtual sponge. Increasingly over the years, U.S. Playing Card Com- pany, the world's largest manufacturer of cards, has tried to use their dies for more decks before replacing them, as a means of cutting production costs. The result is that many decks are shipped with edges that are ragged from being cut by worn dies or blades. U.S. Playing Card decks have gotten worse and worse, but other companies also have unsealed edges on their cards. For most purposes this process is fine, and decks perform as intended. There is little point in complaining to U.S. Playing Card or others because magicians constitute far too small a part of the market for us to matter. We are left to find our own solutions.

I have experimented with any number of approaches over the years in an effort to find the best way to break in a deck. I want it to handle well for as many things as possible, and I want it to last as long as it reasonably can. Thus far, the best approach is as follows: Obtain a men's all-cotton handkerchief. (I'm not sure why, but blends of cotton and other materials don't work as well.) Wash it and allow it to dry fully, then soak it in Downy-brand fabric softener. (Some other softeners work, but it's hit and miss.) Lay out the handkerchief to dry at normal room temperature in an area that is dust-free but has good ventilation. It may take a while (as much as a day) for the cloth to dry. Don't try to hurry the process and don't put it in a dryer.

Store the prepared handkerchief in a cool, dry, dust-free environment-a plastic bag works well. When you're ready to break in some cards, it should be a fairly dry day and the room should not be too warm. Open a number of decks at one time and give each a gentle perfect Faro, with the deck held by each end and side (that's four Faros in all), then carefully square the cards. Take the handkerchief and rub the side of each deck vigorously in full strokes, on all sides, running from end to end (it's like a squaring action). Eventually the sides of the deck will feel smooth. This will take varying amounts of work, depending on the degree of roughness that existed before you started. You will need to change spots on the handkerchief from time to time as you rub. When you have done all the decks, put them back into their cases and store them for three days. (In a pinch, one day will do). I usually do a dozen decks at a time. The preparation on the handkerchief will be used up by then and it will need to be washed and retreated.

The process I've described works for a number of reasons. The handkerchief acts as a gentle abrasive to smooth the edges of the cards, the Downy (an aqueous dispersion of non-ionic sterates in a colloidal suspension) acts as a sealant and moisture repellant. It also tends to act like an extremely light coating of fan- ning powder, applied only to the edges but without the caking tendency of the powder. A deck once treated this way can last for months, provided it isn't used in a dirty or moist environment; and it will continue to function well, provided it is not used for more than about an hour at a time. If you do use a deck for more than an hour, it will take longer before you can use it again. A general rule is: one day of rest for every hour or portion thereof of use.

I am not suggesting that all your decks necessarily be treated like this. It is, after all, a bit of work. I am suggesting that the decks you use for performance be so treated. You'll be surprised at the difference it makes. A good deck will feel like putty in your hands; it will seem that every move you do is finer, neater and more reliable. It isn't a cure for a lack of practice, but it is a major help at the time when you need it most-during performance.

I should add that these treated decks should not be used for practice or general use, though you may wish to use one during rehearsal, and you should use one during full-dress rehearsal. For general use, day to day, and practice, try to use decks in every possible condition. It's the only way to develop a good sense of which techniques can be done reliably with decks in various states of wear. It is actually harder to compensate for a slippery deck than for a sticky one. Experi- ence with decks in different conditions is an excellent teacher.

I HAVE seen performers try to construct an act with one powerful effect after another. Some even advocate this construction. To the extent that they succeed, they may wonder why by the end of the act they have lost their audience. The general rules are fairly simple. They are the rules of good theater. I pass along my experience on the matter with the recognition that there is a wide variety of choices of effect, and opinions about the category into which various effects fall. I'll even play safe and say, this is not the only workable order for an act.

Just as a play, a book or a movie must have pacing, so must a magic act. You should open strong; grab your audience. You should not try to follow strong but rather look for something novel, off-beat, unique, engaging. Follow with another strong effect, which can be of the longer variety. Do a pretty, visual effect to follow the longer, more cerebral item. This allows the spectator's lefi brain to rest and the right brain to take over.

If you are going to do a longer act, now is the time for a shift in the type of material. You must use judgment as to how long you can go. If you sense any restlessness, you have been on too long. If the audience is having a good time and is not restless or fidgety, hit them with your big finish and get off. Do not under any circumstances do anything after your closing effect that seems to be a continuation of the act. There are ways to handle encore pieces, but they should clearly be separated from the act itself.

This is hardly a comprehensive treatment of the subject, but the widespread proliferation of misguided theatrical ideas and the advice that every effect must be a "closer" have doomed many performers and performances to failure. Reflect on the acts of the most successful performers in any of the performing

arts: music, comedy, dance or magic. They all have a range of material, stronger- weaker, faster-slower, lighter-heavier, etc. Well chosen and delivered, you take your audiences on a roller coaster ride, culminating in a moment, preferably a moment of exhilaration. Such moments get an audience off their hands and applauding (where appropriate). In formal situations, your energy in feeding your closing item can come back in exceptional response from your audience. They feel good and their applause tells you so; then you feel good. All is right with the world. It's a truly wonderful exchange. Plan for it and work toward it-you'll be glad you did.

TRIS BOOK is heavy-laden with information. I was a bit sneaky in hiding useful tidbits all the way through, in the hope of encouraging you to read the whole thing. I believe there is some rather novel thinking reflected in my work, and while, no doubt, some will disagree with things I have written, those ideas should, at least, cause you to think about the positions you hold. Finally, let me apologize if this work reflects a wide divergence in levels of sophistication from item to item. I have endeavored to offer something of value to as wide a variety of magicians as possible. At the same time, I wanted to introduce some advanced thinking on the issues of today and tomorrow in the world of card magic. This is no easy task. The spread between the expert and the novice is wide; and the years of practice and experience that separate the two are long. It is my hope that you will use the material your abilities permit and come back to the book as your abilities improve. In the meantime, you can offer your audiences these Enchantments and your own.

Wesley James

Wesley James Enchantments.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Wesley James Enchantments.pdf