Variations on the 2 Card Transposition

August 5, 2008 · Filed Under Uncategorized · Comment 

Regarding the recently published 2 Card Transposition trick, I’ve got some extra stuff you might want to check out. First, comes this email from Peng Huang, who goes by the name MountainDew on various magic forums.

As per usual, some sleight names have been changed to their respected section number in Royal Road to Card Magic.

Hi Andrew,

Here is a minor variation on the handling of the two card transpo. The
below handling seems to be cumbersome and unnecessarily ‘woolly’, but
the payoff is a greater clarity of effect.

We’ll use the 4S as the first card. After ‘it’ has been placed in the
pocket, rather than doing a RRTCM XI to show the next card (in which there
is no guarantee that the card is a nice contrast to the 4S), do a
Braue reversal of the top card (4S) - you end up with face up deck and
the 4S face down at the bottom. (Alternatively, you may turn the deck
over and do a half-pass of the bottom card, the 4S) Now, as you
casually spread through the face up deck, you ask the audience to
choose a card that contrasts the 4S - a red card that is high in value
e.g. JH. This handling does three things - 1. there is now a guarantee
that there are two contrasting cards in play, which IMO is so
important for this card plot, and 2. subconsciously emphasises that
the card in the pocket is the 4S and 3. gets the spectator more
involved in the trick

After a red, high card has been chosen (we’ll use the JH), turn the
card face down and place it on the bottom. The presentational
justification is highlighting the point that any red, high card can be
chosen, gesturing to the face up card spread. Close the spread, turn
the deck over - now the JH is in the RRTCM XI position ready for the switch,
and the trick continues as you’ve already described in your blog.

And that’s it…I hope this handling is useful and thank you for your time. :-)

Cheers,

Peng

PS - Just as an afterthought, I realised that a more simplistic way of
guaranteeing two contrasting cards without having to do a
reversal/half-pass, spreading through the deck etc…is right before
the trick, casually fan through the deck towards yourself face-up,
find two contrasting cards that are next to each other, and cut the
deck at that point and go into your handling from there. Of course,
the handling above eliminates the need to do this ‘2 sec prep’, which
I’ve assumed you think is ‘weak’. But I may be wrong here…

It’s an interesting idea, if you don’t mind doing the extra sleight, and it should help accomplish the three things Peng mentioned earlier.

Also, Andster had an idea for dealing with the cleanup of this trick that he published a long time ago…

Moving on to B D Erland’s Two Card Transpo. One thing I noticed right away, and I’m sure it’s just common sense, is that you’re left with a random card in your pocket. Which is slightly annoying. If you perform a trick before the transposition and control that selection to the top, you’re left with a selected card in your pocket. Which is just fantastic. Here’s what I did at work one day: …

Click here to read the rest of his idea

If anybody’s got any more ideas that they want to share, don’t hesitate to send them in. Incidentally, I’ve noticed that this trick has been published over on some site that advertises “Free Magic Tricks” and doesn’t bother with the coding system that I’ve got here. I only just noticed this, so I have no idea if their idea predates mine, or if they saw mine and just decided to explain/expose it over there. That said, since the handling really is so straightforward it should have been published a long time ago, I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they didn’t take it from me.

Keep coming back here, though, as I’ll be adding further ideas to the tricks here as they come in. Thanks both to Peng for sending his in, and to Andster for publishing that (sorry if I didn’t say thanks earlier as he’d published his variation a long time ago).

Tags:

Web host issues (July 28)

July 29, 2008 · Filed Under sitenews · Comment 

Ok, so somebody spilled beer on the servers or something, and now it looks like the database is gone. Thankfully, I’ve got backups, but it may be a while before the search function works again and I can add new stuff.

Very sorry about that. Will let you know when things improve (some functionality has already started working again).

Tags:

Free Magic Trick: “The Ghost Card, Revisited”

July 26, 2008 · Filed Under tricks · Comment 

I had to think a long while before adding this trick, for a couple of reasons. First, to be honest, I’ve almost always done the impromptu version of this trick, but I feel that it’s a far-better trick if you do it the non-impromptu way. That said, I’ve only ever performed that non-impromptu version once. It played great, but as I’m moving towards FASDIU effects and away from this overall genre of magic (pretty close to mentalism), I’ve not been able to give that non-impromptu version the effort it deserves. So, keep that in mind. The second version of the trick is the one I’ve got more experience doing and, at the very least, I can attest to its effectiveness in practicing the specific method to be talked about today. The other reason that I was hesitant to add this trick is that, if I were to continue to do this trick today, I’d probably use a slightly different method, which I’ll talk about at the end of the blog entry. Still, the context of the trick is suitable to practice this method.

I hope that doesn’t turn anybody off. Hopefully the fact that I went ahead and added it will tell you what a huge fan I am of the effect, so if you’re willing, let’s get going.

THE GHOST CARD, REVISITED: A trick to practice (from S.W Erdnase’s Expert At The Card Table) the Last Shift in the Opening Legerdemain Section, as it relates to the Royal Road to Card Magic VII (hereafter LSVII).

Introduction: If you don’t know the plot of Theodore Annemann’s “The Ghost Card” included in Expert Card Technique, it’s this… A deck is borrowed from a spectator. A single card is chosen from the deck, and then isolated in an envelope, which is sealed and left in the spectator’s care. The magician then says what’s about to happen is very strange. Another card is selected by the spectator, and this one they can look at. It’s replaced into the deck, which is then shuffled. The magician then asks the spectator to name their card. They do, and then the magician deals each of the cards in the deck face-up, asking the spectator to say “stop” if they see their card. The spectator never does. The magician then prompts the spectator to open the envelope. They do, and it’s the card that the spectator apparently saw a moment before.

I love tricks like this. The effect is in the same strange realm of tricks like Brother John Hamman’s “Your Signed Card” or Alex Elmsley’s “Between Your Palms”, in that the more they think about it, the more paradoxical it is. In this trick, you’re essentially claiming that you can force the spectator to hallucinate, in a manner where they feel perfectly sober and not under the influence of anything. Also, for anybody watching, there’s very little in the way of apparent sleight-of-hand to explain the method.

Unfortunately, if you do it Annemann’s way, you’ve got to cheat, and without going into the specifics of the trick, the way it’s described above is exactly as clean as it is… and if you can’t think of a method that’s truly FASDIU to match it, it’s because there isn’t one yet that doesn’t introduce moves or take away conviction, the sort of thing that would compromise the effect and make it less clean.

Now, that said, I’ve got two alternate versions of the trick to offer here, one of which cheats in a different manner than Annemann’s original version, and another of which that allows you to function with a borrowed deck. The tradeoff in the former version is that it’s not impromptu, although you do get much better conviction in the effect. The tradeoff in the latter version is that you don’t get to build the same degree of conviction in the effect, although you do get to work impromptu. Life is compromise.

Here is ultimately your claim to power. You are going to be able to make a spectator see something that isn’t there. It won’t feel like they’re being coerced, it will feel perfectly natural, actually, but in the end they’re going to have a difficult question to answer — how could they have seen a card that was never in the deck?

Regarding the LSVII, there are so many versions of Erdnase’s book that offering a page number for the sleight is out of the question, and the table of contents in my version isn’t nicely enumerated the way Royal Road To Card Magic is, so I can only say this… Go to EATCT, turn to the Legerdemain section, look at the opening section on Shifts, and look at the last shift described before they go onto the next section. It’s a move that’s been called one of the more difficult card moves out there, although John Carney described it as something that tends to work by itself once you get the mechanics of it right, and that the key is to just pay close attention to detail. I will say that I believe Carney has good work on the move (as well as how it applies to the more general classification of the RRTCM VII), and that if you try this move out, I think you’d get a lot from studying Carney’s teachings of it (which should be easy to find if you know which move I’m talking about — again, sorry for all the coding, but it’s a publicly viewable blog…).

Now, if I put a card into the center of the deck, execute the LSVII, and then reach in my pocket to show that it’s jumped there, that’s a pretty direct and rather obvious application of the move. We’re going to do something that’s a lot more subtle.

VERSION 1, NON-IMPROMPTU

Effect: The magician brings a spectator to sit in a chair on his right. He hands a deck of cards to the spectator and asks them to examine it to make sure it’s a regular deck of cards, and to shuffle it as much as they please. While they do this, he patters thusly: “I’m going to try an experiment in coerced hallucination. I don’t want to give the game away just yet, but I will say this. The experiment involves three things. First, a regular shuffled deck of cards that’s free from guile. Second, this envelope.” The magician produces a simple envelope. “It’s a perfectly normal envelope and you’ll be able to examine it to your heart’s content once the effect is over. Finally, I have something else… Here, please pass me the cards.” The spectator passes the magician the cards, and he places the cards and the envelope off to the side. “Finally, I have this pendulum.” He reaches into his left pocket to pull out a pendulum. “I’m going to be using this pendulum to both start and stop the hallucination.” He puts it back into his left pocket.

“First, before we begin the effect, will you testify to the fact that this is a perfectly normal deck of cards that you’ve shuffled to your heart’s content? It’s a regular deck of cards, yes?” The spectator says Yes. “Great.” He has a card selected. “Now, I’m not going to show you this card. I’m not even going to look at it myself. The rest of the audience, however, is going to be able to see it. Can everybody please remember this card, and, for the sake of the experiment, please keep the value secret?” The card is flashed towards the audience for a few seconds (we’ll say it’s the Nine of Diamonds), before he takes the envelope from the table, and openly inserts the card into the envelope face-down, and then seals it, and hands it to the spectator. “Please place your hand on this but don’t do anything with it. Just keep it out of my reach.”

The magician then pulls out his pendulum. “At this point, I’d like you to please stare at the pendulum, because we’re about to begin this experiment. I’m going to count down from five to one, and at the end of that time, you’re going to be in a state whereby I’ll be able to coerce you to hallucinate.” He twirls it around five times. “Five… Four… Three… Two… One… Now.” He waves his hand. “How do you feel?” The spectator should respond that they feel fine. “You don’t actually feel any different than before, correct?” The spectator should agree.

“Excellent.” Another card is selected from the deck, and is handed to the spectator face down. “This card is for you, and for you alone. Please don’t say what it is or show it to the audience. When you are ready, pass it back to me.” He spreads the cards out, and the card is inserted into the spread. The spread is closed, and the card left outjogged a little. He flashes it at the spectator one last time. “Now, you see this card clearly, correct?” The spectator says Yes. “This card, from this deck of cards, that you shuffled and you examined, correct?” The spectator says Yes. “When you touched the card just now, did it feel real?” The spectator says Yes. “It felt just like a perfectly normal card, correct?” The spectator says Yes. “I’m giving you one last look at the card before it goes back into the deck, alright?” He flashes it one last time. “You are certain that you’re really seeing the card in front of you, yes?” The spectator says yes. He lowers the deck and inserts the card into the deck and squares up. “Will you be able to remember that card afterwards? Don’t say what it is, just tell me if you can remember it. Impress what you saw in your mind so that you won’t forget.” The spectator agrees to do so.

The magician continues, “At this point, I’m going to be bringing you out of the trance. Are you ready for that? I’m going to ask you to open that envelope you’ve got right there, and you’re going to show everybody the contents of the envelope, but first, I’ll use the pendulum to bring you out of your trance.” He reaches to his left pocket, pulls out the pendulum, and holds it in front of their face, twirls it around five times, and counts upwards. “One… Two… Three… Four… Five.” He snaps his fingers. “That’s it. How do you feel? Can you still remember the card that you saw just a moment ago during the hallucination?” The spectator says yes.

“Excellent. For the first time, please tell everybody the card that you saw.”

The spectator says they saw the Nine of Diamonds.

The magician nods. “Are you absolutely sure that you saw the Nine of Diamonds? That you touched it with your hands? That there’s no mistaking that you had the Nine of Diamonds, and not some other card?”

The spectator should agree.

The magician then spreads the deck over the table and says “Please tell me if you can see your card.” The spectator looks through the deck, and is unable to find the Nine of Diamonds. “If it’s there, please show it to everybody. If it’s not there, please say to everybody that it’s not there.” The spectator should say “It’s not there.”

“Thanks, now will you please open up the envelope and look at the card that was isolated from the deck for the entirety of the experiment?”

The spectator does, pulling out the Nine of Diamonds. The magician thanks the spectator for their part in the experiment, and leads applause for them.

Explanation: The preparation is this. You need a regular deck of cards, minus the Nine of Diamonds. You need an envelope which has two Nines of Diamonds covered beneath it. The pendulum is in the left pocket. Have the cards examined and shuffled to ensure that there’s nothing tricky going on. As they do this, produce the envelope from wherever, with the two Nines of Diamonds concealed behind them. They will need to be orientated so that their backs are against the envelope’s side.

Bring attention to the third item, which will be the pendulum. When you ask for the cards back, place the cards face-down off to the side, and place the envelope directly on top, loading the two Nines of Diamonds atop the deck. Now get the pendulum from your left pocket, allude to its role, and then put it back.

Have a card selected via any variation of the RRTCM XVI method that hits 100% of the time and looks fair. It has to be done in such a way that the card can be taken out and shown to everybody, but neither you nor the spectator can see it. The VIII.1 might do the trick for you, and you should notice that you’re immediately set up perfectly for that specific method, without any need to shuffle. Show it to the audience but don’t look at it yourself, and don’t let the spectator see it. Place it in the envelope, seal it, get it out of your reach.

Set the cards aside. Go for the pendulum, begin the hallucination mumbo-jumbo (but don’t treat it as mumbo-jumbo, unless you’ve got a comedy thing going on), and then place the pendulum away in the left pocket. Have the next card selected, again using any variation of the RRTCM XVI, and allows the card to be taken by the spectator but not shown to anybody (again, the VIII.1 method would work, and you’re set up for it). Have the card returned to the deck as described, square up so that the card is outjogged, flash it one last time, and then, when you bring their attention to the envelope again, execute the LSVII. You have to ensure that the action is smooth, and that the spectator’s attention is divided between you and the envelope, with no more thought of the cards. You can, if you like, place the entire deck on top of the card that is in VII position in the left hand, and casually gesture, using the deck as cover.

Now, you’ve got to go to the left pocket to get the pendulum one last time. Take the deck with the right hand, go with your left hand to get the pendulum, leaving behind the VII card. Deeper and looser pockets will make this easier. Pull out the pendulum and begin the process of bringing them out of the trance (more mumbo-jumbo etc.). Now, have them name the card they saw for the first time. Get them to swear that this really was the card they saw. This should get a reaction from the audience. Next, spread the cards on the table and see if they can find it. It will be gone. Now have them open the envelope to see that the Nine of Diamonds was in the envelope all along. Lead the applause for your confused spectator.

Notes: This is a less obvious effect than what you’ll see in a normal magic show, which highlights the importance of constantly stressing the fairness of the operations. You have to convince everybody that the spectator is seeing something that couldn’t possibly be there, but because the audience can’t see things through the spectator’s eyes, you have to establish the claim via the surrounding evidence, all of which is non-visual. It’s not like (for example) a levitation, where they get to see something float. So, make sure they’re aware of all the surrounding evidence that strengthens the effect. It’s a deck of cards that’s been examined and shuffled. You do no real manipulation of the deck between the moment that the deck is shuffled and the moment the first card is selected. The card in the envelope really is sealed away the entire time. The spectator will really feel like they’re touching and looking at the selected card. The card that the spectator swears they saw earlier really is gone from the deck. After the effect, the deck can be examined to their heart’s content. (You do start with a discrepancy, of course, but show me a spectator who can point out that there’s a spot card missing from a deck of 52, and I’ll show you a magician who does a lousy job picking spectators)

Audience management is key here. If your claim is that you can make the spectator hallucinate, they can’t very well show the card they’re holding to the audience, or else other people will see that they’re actually holding a Nine of Diamonds. So, make sure you have a compliant spectator. You also need to make sure that the audience keeps the card they see a secret from the assisting spectator as well. (You could conceivably change the effect to a mass hallucination, but I think that’s a more difficult claim to make.) You also might want to consider saving this effect for a time when you’ve established yourself as someone with apparently weird mental powers.

I don’t know how you do your LSVII. Personally, I like to break it up into two actions. The first apparently inserts the card and squares the side of the deck. The left hand comes away, and the back of my right hand shields the card’s position. There’s a pause. Next, the left hand squares it once more, the fingers rotate the card into VII position, and then the right hand gives the deck to the left hand to hold. Essentially, I’m squaring a squared deck, which is considered by some to be a big no-no (Steve Draun for one dislikes it when magicians do this). Personally, I see his point, and it’s worth mentioning that I’ve since replaced the LSVII with a different move altogether (more on this later) that eliminates the squaring-a-squared-deck action. That said, given the reactions I’ve got from effects using this move, I don’t believe that it aroused suspicion, and I also don’t think that the effect points towards sleight-of-hand as a solution — consider the conditions you’re setting up at the onset, namely an examined spectator-shuffled deck of cards, and no apparent manipulation of the deck by the magician between that shuffling and the point that cards are taken. Now, THAT said, if you’re more responsible than I am and can do the LSVII without any tells and without the “shotgun-loading” action that can sometimes come from doing the LSVII too obviously, then have at it. One other thing about blocking — the spectator has also been situated in a location that gives me personally the best angle to execute the LSVII, at a time when their attention should be occupied elsewhere. Take a moment and examine where your own weak spots for the LSVII are (if there are any) and if so, adjust the blocking for yourself accordingly.

You might want to consider alternate times for the spectator to announce the card that they see. Personally, I’d prefer the card be out of play before it’s announced, but it’s hard to know how the magician is going to want to build up the drama and tension, and as such when the best time to have the card named is to take advantage of that tension. Also, in Annemann’s version, the cards are dealt face-up to show that the card they saw isn’t there, but I’m not a big fan of dealing through 51 cards just to show one has gone. Personally, I’d rather spread the cards out and leave them there for them to check out afterwards if they like. But different strokes for different folks.

VERSION 2, IMPROMPTU

Now, the above method is clean and pretty convincing. This method is a little bit less so, but you can work with a borrowed deck. I’ve performed this version a lot more frequently than the first, and while I’ve sometimes had some difficulty selling the effect — again, it’s non-obvious compared to, say, colour-changes — I did find it very effective in being able to practice the LSVII.

Effect: The spectator examines and shuffles a deck, which can be borrowed. The magician takes the deck and shuffles it as well, before saying that he’s going to try something a wee bit different than normal. He riffles the corner of the deck and has them say stop. They do, and a card is openly removed from that spot but kept face-down, away from the spectator. The magician looks at it, and then writes down the card he sees on a piece of paper. He crumples it up and places the paper ball in front of the spectator, and then says he’s going to isolate this card from the rest of the trick, putting it in his back pocket.

He goes through the process of hypnotizing the spectator in order to set up their hallucination. When finished, he riffles the corner of the deck and has them say stop. They do, and a card is removed, and this time the spectator is allowed to look at it, and examine it as much as they wish. The magician takes the card, inserts it into the deck, and then flashes it at them one last time, before squaring up. He snaps his fingers to bring them out of the hallucinatory trance.

He then explains to the spectator that, no matter what they think they saw, it was a hallucination. He points towards the paper ball and says that prior to the trick, he decided to try to make them see that card. The spectator opens the paper ball and indeed sees the same card was written down ahead of time.

The magician then reiterates that this wasn’t a prediction but in fact a hallucination. He hands the deck to the spectator and asks them to look through the cards to find theirs, as he goes to the back pocket and retrieves the card that was there all along. He sets it off to the side. They say that they cannot find their card. He turns over the card from his back pocket, and it is, in fact, the same card they could have sworn they saw still in the deck a moment ago.

Explanation: Have the deck shuffled. When you get it back, shuffle it again, and do a RRTCM V of some kind in order to spot a card. Shuffle that card into position for a RRTCM XVII (in this case, we’ll again use the variation found in VIII.1 — incidentally, I do apologize for the fact that all these methods under the same general category are scattered throughout the book’s chapters).

Have a card selected using the same approximate action for the VIII.1, but don’t actually do the precise action (keep the important card in position for later on). This is to get a random card and to condition them to the VIII.1 action later on.

Look at the card and promptly forget it, and on a piece of paper write down the card that you Ved a moment earlier and are about to VIII.1 at this point. Place the indifferent card in your back pocket.

Now, do your mumbo-jumbo to impress upon them that they are entering their hallucinatory trance. Go through a proper VIII.1, and have the card taken by the spectator and looked at. Let them look at it and examine it to their heart’s content. Take the card back, flash it at them, and then insert it into the deck, telling them at this moment that you’re going to bring them out of their hallucinatory trance. Snap your fingers, and point towards the rolled-up paper ball where you the name of the card, and have them open it.

Now, you’ve got several instances to execute the LSVII in the above, depending upon your preferences and the way that you’re able to manage your spectator. One advantage to breaking it up the way I mentioned I do earlier is that I can square up the deck, gesture to show the left hand empty, snap the fingers, and then bring it back to square it again and get the card into VII, before the focus goes towards the paper ball. One thing I’ve noticed is that frequently after it’s apparently inserted, and I gesture to show the left hand empty and then relax, their eyes come off the deck. This sets up the second half of the LSVII perfectly for me. Now, I’m comfortable with this choreography, but then again, as before, it’s violating Steve Draun’s thou-shalt-not-square-a-squared-deck rule. So, look at your options. If your LSVII is divine, you can execute it straight away, talking about how you’re going to bring them out of their trance. You’ve also got their attention going towards the paper ball in front of them, so that’s another possibility of misdirection towards a point of positive focus as well.

In any case, I’ll summarize my own handling, and you alter it as you like. The card is left outjogged, flashed at them one more time, and then apparently squared into the deck. Left hand is shown empty as the left fingers snap. They come back to the deck as I patter about the effect and the paper ball. The left fingers square the edge of the deck once more, finishing the LSVII, the deck of cards is placed in the left hand above the VIIed card for cover, and I gesture with the right hand. Patter some more and let a little time pass. The right hand takes the deck and hands it to them for examination as the left hand relaxes, before going to the back pocket to retrieve the card. (Incidentally, Steve Draun also mentions an excellent point about how one can misdirect off the retreating hand in his Standing Room Only DVDs. It’s not restricted to just the LSVII, and I highly recommend it. If you VII and don’t do this, you’re missing out on an excellent technique.)

The follow-up is as explained in the presentation above. They go through the deck, can’t find the card they saw just a moment ago, and meanwhile, the card that was in your back pocket, removed before the trick even started, was the card they must have hallucinated.

Again, this is a non-obvious effect, and I think it’d be wise to not downplay the hallucination aspect of it by treating it like mumbo-jumbo, since that’s what’s really going to make the effect mysterious in the first place.

Incidentally, if you have a way of getting that initially-selected (indifferent) card to somewhere else other than the back pocket that everybody thinks you’re placing it in, then later, when you LSVII and then go to the back pocket to reproduce it, you could drop it off, and then say “Actually, wait, I want somebody else to look inside.” Turn around and show that there has only been one card there from the beginning, and have it fairly removed to show it’s the card they hallucinated. Now, how you get that indifferent card to “vanish” from the back pocket is anybody’s guess. The best I can think of right now is to shove it down the back of your pants under cover of placing it in the back pocket, something which would be pretty rude if you’re working with a borrowed deck.

By the way… yes, you are left with an extra card left out of the deck. Don’t panic. Leave it there until such a time that you can safely bring it back to the deck. There’s no rush.

Final Notes of the Key Sleight: As said before, it’s a knacky move, but once you’ve repeated it a few hundred times without issue, you can start to see Carney’s point about it working by itself. I’ve used this move in a trick called “Itchy” that I described over at the olde blogge, and I found that it was an excellent move when it got past the spectators… which once didn’t happen for me because I flashed to someone sitting on the far right side. Because my personal performing style in that situation is to be able to move out amongst the audience, I’ve since opted for a method that has far greater cover and is far more accommodating to my style and mannerisms. That said, if you get the move down smoothly, and you’re able to manage your angles properly (which this routine construction tries to enforce on you anyway) then there shouldn’t be problems.

To summarize “Itchy”, it’s like this. A magician, obviously bothered by an itch on the right side of his belly, asks a spectator to select a card. They select any card they please, and can change their mind if they like (it’s important that they believe it’s a free selection). The magician, troubled by the itchy spot and constantly scratching at it, takes the card back and inserts it straight into the center of the deck, but he’s still bothered by the itching. The deck is then handed out for shuffling, and while it’s being shuffled, the magician, finally exasperated by the itchiness, reaches under his shirt, and pulls out a playing card. That card turns out to be spectator’s selection.

Consider the main advantage of the move over other versions of the VII. The card is really inserted in the center of the deck, and the deck is then handed over to the spectator to shuffle. There is a fixed idea of where the card is at that moment. The card is then reproduced from a new location. If you’re doing a transposition or object-to-impossible-location, it is absolutely improved if the audience is given a firm idea of where the object is prior to the jump. It is less effective if that belief isn’t there. This is why one usually doesn’t shuffle in the latter stages of an Ambitious Card Routine, for instance.

Now, there are moves other than the LSVII that allow you to give conviction of the card being in a fixed spot. The move that I’ve used to replace it is this (and sorry, I’m coding this one as well)… The creator is a European who is well-known for playing an imaginary violin after his effects, and part of the title of the move is a mathematical concept for a line that shoots out perfectly at 90 degrees from another line. It is a beautiful, beautiful move… I’ve fooled quite a few magicians with it, and I honestly don’t even do it as well as I should. In the creator’s hands, it’s masterful and extremely baffling. It also shares the feature of the Erdnase-based move in that the card is seen specifically inserted into the deck. There are some additional choreography considerations if you use this latter move rather than Erdnase’s, but I’ll leave that as an exercise to the reader.

In any case, that’s two different applications for the LSVII (three if you include Itchy) that I think allow for you to create the appropriate moment to pull off the move without being detected. I would understand if you’re not quite sold on the first (non-impromptu) version of the trick. It’s really a complicated effect that would probably appeal more to mentalists than it would regular magicians, and mentalists who use Erdnase’s techniques are pretty few and far between. Still, if you’re looking for a way to be able to practice the LSVII under impromptu conditions, then absolutely consider the second version — it’s straightforward, you can do it with no preparation, and the routine construction gives you a good time to pull off the move. Personally, before I used the LSVII live I was nervous about it, but after that trick, not so much.

Conclusion: At this point, if you’ve read through all five of the tricks in this series, congratulations, and I hope the coding wasn’t too much of a hassle (if you don’t already own Royal Road to Card Magic or Expert At The Card Table, I recommend you pick them up as they’re really inexpensive given the quality of what you get). I’m hoping that the design of each of the tricks offers a safe context within which to practice some sleights that might otherwise be pretty intimidating. If you try any of the tricks and have your own touches to suggest, I’d love to hear from you.

All the best…

Tags:

Free Magic Trick: “The Magic Wand”

July 25, 2008 · Filed Under tricks · Comment 

Cue scary music. This time we’re looking at the Royal Road to Card Magic XVII.

Continuing the theme of examining intimidating sleights, this has to be perhaps one of the boldest and most frightening for people out there. But as anyone who’s pulled it off will tell you, it’s a LOT of fun when it works. I’m going to offer two different ideas for applying it. The first is straightforward and good for a casual situation, and the second is a bit more elaborate.

First, a bit of “theory” (I suspect this is one of those times that I’m misusing that word, but whatever). One of the great benefits of doing a multiple-phase routine is that we can create good timing for ourselves. Here’s the idea: If you say that you’re going to do a magic trick, it is uncertain to somebody who is watching you for the first time exactly how many moments of magic you’re going to give them. For all they know, they’re just getting one. You can capitalize on this.

Consider the Ambitious Card Routine. To borrow an idea from Tyler Erickson (a really smart magician in Minnesota) we’re going to give them an initial effect that doesn’t necessarily offer the strongest proof, but still contains magic. Open the trick. Have a card selected, and use the IX (or even one of the I’s) to get the card to the top of the deck. Do not tell them what you are going to do yet until you have already finished getting the card into position. State that one of the magician’s greatest secrets is to be able to get a card under his control at any moment’s notice. Say, “Currently, it’s not under my control. It’s not on top.” Do a 3x XI to show it’s not there, and then replace it. “Also, it’s not on the bottom, which would be another convenient place to find the card.” Show the indifferent card at the face of the deck. Now say, “At this point, if I want to get the card under my control, all I have to do is snap my fingers.” Tense up, for the big moment of magic is coming. Snap your fingers, and lift the top card off the deck to show that it has jumped to the top. Hold it there for a second longer than necessary, and then relax, and look up at them. You are relaxing because the trick is, for all intents and purposes, finished. Take advantage of the fact that if they’re burning the hell out of your hands, you DON’T have to continue the trick if you don’t want to. However, if we follow the old John Ramsay maxim of looking at the object of interest to get them to look at the object of interest, and then relaxing and looking at them so that they look at you, you might find that your spectator is going to mirror your relaxation and also agree to make eye contact. Follow Max Malini’s advice and “Vait a veek” if you have to, not doing anything until they look up from the deck into your eyes, to see what might be coming next. Remember, as far as anyone knows, the trick is over. You’re a magician, you gave them a unit of magic, your part of the performance contract is, for all intents and purposes, finished.

When the eyes come up, execute the XVII. This will be made easier if your relaxed position is one where the deck in one hand and the card in the other are sort of hovering innocently next to each other (This is an idea from Andrew Galloway’s DVDs about Ramsay). If you’ve practiced your XVII to the point that you can execute it smoothly and without too much noise or movement, that time, when the spectators eyes meet your gaze and the deck and card are out of frame, is the perfect time to do it. So go ahead and do it. Next, even after you’ve completed it, continue to NOT give away the fact that you’re about to repeat the effect.

Finally, when they’re looking in your eyes, ask them. “Was that too fast? Should we do it again? Let’s do it again.” Next, insert their card[?] face-down into the center of the deck, and ask them to push it in with their thumb. Do a regular XI to show that it’s not on top. Snap your fingers again, and then show that it’s on top.

(Why a 3x XI the first time, and a regular XI the second? Well, if the top card that the selected card rose above in the first phase was the eight of hearts, then after the effect, the eight of hearts should still be on top. Do it with a regular XI and you’ll notice that there’s a discrepancy for no good reason as to why the top card “changes” between phases. Or else skip it if it doesn’t matter to you.)

Essentially, that’s the first two phases of an ACR that you can try out on the spur of the moment. I’m not saying that this is necessarily the best way to construct your ACR, but I’ve found it to be an effective way of practicing the XVII (I would usually head into an Everywhere and Nowhere type of presentation rather than a full ACR with this, and I’d skip the second convincer). Incidentally, if you did want to continue the ACR from this point, understand that now suspicions are likely going to run higher about how you’re doing the trick, and you ought to choose methods that can confront and annihilate those suspicions.

So there’s an application that’s pretty straightforward and casual. But how about a trick with a little more meat to it?

The Magic Wand: A trick to practice the Royal Road to Card Magic XVII.

Introduction: This is one I’m really excited about. Tyler Erickson (he figures heavily in today’s blog entry) agreed to let me pass his ideas along regarding how to use the XVII for this trick. The plot is an old one — card is selected and returned, magician picks a card under amazingly difficult conditions, shows it’s the wrong card, audience looks up at magician like he’s a twit, magician then asks what the card is, they name it, and he shows that the card in his hand has magically changed into their card. Royal Road to Card Magic in fact has a handling of this trick where the timing of the XVII is pretty close to perfect — you execute it after you’ve shown the incorrect card, but BEFORE it’s acknowledged out loud that it’s the incorrect card. Again, this is a shift in the critical interval. If you’re holding the wrong card, and they say it’s the wrong card, and you look surprised and say “Really?”, then (assuming your acting skills are up to par) this signals the moment where the magician is in a conundrum that he must fix. Of course, since you’ve already done the XVII before this point, you have the advantage of not having to do a “bad” move before revealing that the card is now fixed (which means, consequently, that you have an opportunity to establish a more legitimate magic claim, since there’s no bad move to dilute that claim).

Now, aside from misdirection, the XVII is also about choreography, camouflaging the move within natural-looking actions. This routine attempts to build upon the trick XVII.2 in Royal Road to Card Magic, by providing what is, in my opinion, superior cover and misdirection made possible by Tyler Erickson’s choreography of the move.

Effect: A spectator is brought up to assist the magician. A card is selected by another audience member, shown to everybody present except for the magician and his assistant, and the card is then shuffled into the deck. (For the trick, we’ll say it’s the Four of Spades) The magician then hands a magic wand to the assistant, and makes the grand claim that the assistant will use the magic wand in order to get the selected card. The assistant is asked to hold the magic wand straight out and drop it onto the cards as he spreads them from one hand to the other. The magician begins the spread and looks away, so as not to influence the assistant’s actions. The assistant drops the wand and touches a single card, which the magician carefully extracts, looks at it, smiles broadly, and states, “Here is your card, the King of Diamonds.” He then proudly shows the card, bowing a couple of times to the audience, before looking up confused by the lack of a standing ovation. He turns the assistant and says “Jeez, they’re a tough bunch tonight, aren’t they? I would have thought they’d enjoy that trick a lot more than they did.”

At this point somebody makes noises to the effect that the card is the incorrect one. The magician looks at the card in his hand, asking, “It’s not the King of Diamonds?” They say no. The magician pauses, and then his eyes brighten up, saying “Well, she didn’t actually USE the magic wand, she just touched one of the cards. Here,” he says, turning to the assistant, “please wave the wand over the card and say the magic words.” He holds out the card, but his eyes go back to the deck, as he riffles the corner, looking at the indexes. The spectator says that they don’t know the magic words. The magician says “It’s ok, just make some up.” He continues to look at the cards in his left hand, before finally saying “Oh, by the way, what WAS your card?” The audience responds that it was the Four of Spades. The magician nods, and then goes back to the cards in his hand, before getting a confused look on his face. “The Four of Spades?” They reply in the affirmative. He twists his mouth thoughtfully, before saying, “Wait a second…” and then he asks the assistant to show the card in their hand. It’s changed into the Four of Spades. The magician holds the card proudly, and leads applause for the assistant.

Explanation: As before, it’s just a control followed by an XVII, but this explanation is going to be VERY specifically choreographed and blocked out, to give you the best possible circumstances to perform the XVII. This explanation assumes that you hold the deck naturally in your left hand, so if you don’t, you’ll need to reverse everything to compensate.

Invite an assistant to help you out, and have them stand on your right. Give them the magic wand.

Have a card selected, shown to everybody, and then replaced in the deck. Control the card to the top via any IX or I. Because the onus is on the spectator to find the card in a random location, there’s no need for anything secretive such as the XII. After the card’s in position, you might want to perform an XI to show that the card is not on top and then show it’s not on the bottom, to sell the fact that it is lost somewhere in the middle.

At this point, spread the cards out and have them touch a random card using the magic wand. So long as they don’t touch the top card, it will be incorrect. However, act convinced that they succeeded, outjog that card slowly and with tense body language, square up the deck so that it’s in your left hand, and with your right, making sure everybody knows that you’re not switching it, pull it out look at it, remember which card it is, and loudly pronounce its name, and happily show it to the rest of the audience.

Here is the choreography. You want to imagine that there are three main portions of the audience around you. The first is ahead of you and to the left. Basically, if you’re standing, facing the audience directly in its center, it would be everybody from the center towards your left. That’s Section A. Next, you have everybody from the center and to the right. That’s Section B. Finally, you have the spectator who is assisting you, directly to your right. That’s Section C.

You are going to flash the card towards Section A, while bowing your head towards Section B, saying “Thank you, thank you very much.” Next, turn your body towards Section A, and bow towards them, as you flash the card at Section B. Continue your thank yous, announce the card’s name again. Finally, take the card and flash it at Section C (your assistant), and hold it directly at their face for a couple of seconds longer than necessary. Bow once more to the audience in general, but at this time look up at them and notice that they’re not clapping. Gesture with your deck holding hand, saying aloud “Thank you, the King of… Diamonds…” with uncertainty. Look confused, and have this confusion on your part be the contributing factor to why your assistant is getting a faceful of the incorrect card for a slightly longer-than-necessary time. Relax, gesture towards the audience with your deck-holding hand but directing your comment towards your assistant, saying “Jeez, they’re a tough bunch tonight, aren’t they? I would have thought they’d enjoy that trick a lot more than they did.”

You’re going to swivel your body towards your spectator in an unhurried fashion. As you launch into that comment, your card-holding hand needs to drop down, and your left hand holding the deck is going to meet it. The motion should not be fast, and it should look like you’re coming to a rest position. You need to get your assistant’s eyes off the deck, which should occur at some point while you’re addressing them. This is aided by the fact that you’ve been giving them the incorrect card to look at for slightly longer than necessary, so that when the hand holding the card drops, the card which is no longer interesting to them (as they’ve looked at it for long enough) is replaced by a magician’s face with a concerned expression addressing them, which should be a lot more attention-grabbbing.

After the XVII is executed, gesture back towards the audience while referring to them with your patter. “Is there something wrong? We got your card, didn’t we?” They say no, you look down at the card in your hand, which is now their selection, but you miscall it again as the card they just saw. Say “Your card wasn’t the King of Diamonds?” as the Four of Spades is staring you straight in the face. They say no.

At this point, you’re done, and it’s all presentation. Proceed until the end of the trick as described above, keeping the Four of Spades noticeably far from the deck, before hitting the climax to show the change. End by bowing in the same manner that you bowed previously when showing the incorrect card. Lead the applause for your spectator, take back the magic wand, and transition into the next trick.

Notes: This blocking and choreography comes from Tyler Erickson, with influence from Gary Kurtz’s Leading With Your Head. Look at what the choreography accomplishes. You are in a position where you only need to really misdirect one person, the person who is assisting you — everybody else is getting the back of your hand. You’ll also have a good amount of time to evaluate your assistant just before the key moment to get a feel about how you can coordinate your actions to take advantage of their way of interacting with you. This brings us to the timing of the move. You are executing the move before you acknowledge the card is incorrect, so the timing is good. When you miscall the card, looking at it after the move, you are restarting the Critical Interval from that point. In some performances of this trick that I’ve seen, I’ve noticed that the magician acknowledges that they have the incorrect card before they do the necessary move to correct it. Personally, I believe this is dangerous, since you’re forced to do a move after a point where they’re going to be on higher alert for it. This routine takes advantage of (in my opinion) the far superior timing established in the Royal Road to Card Magic’s handling of the effect, which is to show the card, XVII it, and THEN allow people to tell the magician that it’s the wrong card. Don’t underestimate this. Ricky Jay, in his HBO performance of the 52 Assistants, gets a strong reaction by executing the XVII before the spectator names what the correct card is. It gets the laughs that Hugard and Braue talk about in that chapter.

Finally (and this is the real icing on the cake here) also note that if for some reason you betray the mechanics of the XVII, and somebody calls you on it, you still have a safety net. Replace the card in your hand back on top of the deck, gesture with your free hand continuing to patter about wondering why they’re not clapping, do an XI to again show the incorrect card that they saw a moment ago (thereby indirectly addressing the suspicion of the spectator), before turning it down and handing the correct selection to the spectator to continue with the effect. Now, while using the XI as an out violates the no-contact principle that makes the XVII such a devious method, at least you’re still able to deal with a suspicion and have a good magic effect out of it.

One thing that you need to be careful about with this trick is keeping conviction that you’re still holding the King of Diamonds despite the fact that the face of the card is going to be out of view for a while until the moment you show the change. This, incidentally, is a concern that Tyler had with my approach to the revelation that you might want to keep in mind — if too much time passes, they could lose an emotional connection to the card and even get ahead of the magician. Darwin Ortiz mentioned that there’s sort of a sweet spot of time that one can get away with keeping things out of view, and if you exceed it, the effect risks becoming weakened. It’s a tough balance to strike between having time misdirection as your ally and your enemy, and if we go a few seconds too long, we’re venturing into that dangerous territory. This is why before the XVII, you want to repeat the incorrect card’s value several times, establishing its presence, and continue to sell its presence by miscalling it after the XVII, and then, after having the spectator begin to wave the wand over the card, not waiting too long to get to the point where the audience finally names their selection, and then after they name it, not waiting too long to where you reveal that it’s appeared in the spectator’s hands. Consider that in most versions of the trick, the time period between showing the incorrect card and showing the change is under a few seconds. We’re dragging it out a little bit longer here, but we don’t want to drag it out too long. If your concerns mirror Tyler’s, you might want to change my approach, and shorten up the post-failure aftermath by miscalling the card, saying that the spectator didn’t actually use the magic wand, instructing the spectator to wave the magic wand, asking what the card is, and then quickly showing that the card has changed. So long as you’re able to get the timing right on everything leading up to the XVII, then this latter part of the presentation can be experimented with.

As with the last trick “Jacks Got Your Back”, we’re using the magician-in-trouble plot. To repeat what was said last time, this is dangerous territory, especially for this trick, since you have to execute a pretty bold move. If for whatever reason the audience has caught wise to the fact that you play these little psychological games with them, they’re going to be less likely to believe you’ve really failed, and as a result, more likely to notice any anomaly that happens after the apparent “failure” that they’re not buying into.

If you find magic wands cheesy and degrading, that’s understandable. Just try to find a different way to motivate and explain how the magic is going to cause the wrong card to change into the right card. For instance, you could claim that the assistant will find the card using the magic of their fingertips, with the initial selection being done with the assistant’s holding their hand in a fist with the index finger straight out, and that they will come down and point at a specific card, and later, that they will then change it by wiggling their fingers over the incorrect card.

Woo-hoo… four down, one to go…

Tags:

Free Magic Trick: “Jacks Got Your Back”

July 23, 2008 · Filed Under tricks · Comment 

JACKS GOT YOUR BACK: A trick to practice the Royal Road to Card Magic XII.

Introduction: Ah yes, the good old XII. Either the most important card sleight in magic, or the most unnecessary, depending upon whom you ask. I’m not going to venture into that debate here — I’m just going to assume that you want to use it.

First, an aside. If you really want to do a trick that uses the XII under truly ideal conditions, get the Royal Road to Card Magic DVDs with R Paul Wilson and do the trick Roy Walton contributed called Pass At Red. The routine construction is ridiculously unfair — there is zero heat on the move. It’s almost like shooting fish in a barrel.

That said, later on, there might be those tricks when you want to be able to do the XII without being so far out of frame. That’s what this trick is meant to offer you.

Effect: The magician has a spectator stop at a random point, and the card at that point is removed. The magician then says he’s going to use the help of the Jacks, because “the Jacks Always Got Your Back” (meaning, they’re always there to help). He pulls out the two Black Jacks, and he says that he’s going to figure out what the spectator’s card is, by magically finding it. He says that because the Jacks got your back, they’re going to find the spectator’s card. He asks the spectator to determine which Jack is going to the leader. The spectator points at the Jack of Clubs to be the leader, and the magician places the Jack of Clubs on the bottom of the deck. He then places the Jack of Spades on top of the deck. He gives the deck a quick shake, and instantly the Jacks have disappeared from both the top and the bottom of the deck. They are actually deep in search of the spectator’s card. The magician then notices that the spectator is still holding their selected card. He pauses, before confidently stating “Well, like I said, the Jacks Always Got Your Back. Look, I won’t touch the deck. If I snap my fingers, they’ll give me the best clue I can possibly get, the mate of your selected card.” He snaps his fingers, and spreads the cards out, showing that one card is trapped between the two Jacks, and he pulls it out. “Wouldn’t it be incredible if the cards were mates?” He flips over the middle card, and it’s the Six of Hearts. “According to the Jacks, that means that you must be holding the Six of Diamonds. Please show everybody the card.” The spectator shows everybody that they are indeed holding the Six of Diamonds.

Explanation: The trick relies on a prearrangement. You need to take the pair of red sixes (or red nines, or black threes, whichever you want), and you’ll need one of them on top of the deck, and the other in a position to be XVIed. Now, you don’t actually have to use the XVI.1 if you don’t want. You might want to consider using the XVI.3 or the XVI.6 or perhaps another one of your own choosing. The only important thing is that after the XVI, the mate of the card you just XVIed is now in a position to be brought quickly to the top of the deck.

Let’s assume you’re going to do the XVI.6, and the mates are the two red eights. Place the eight of diamonds at the top of the deck, and then place the eight of hearts on top of it. Go through the motions of the XVI.6 as described in the book, and you’ll have XVIed the eight of hearts. Assuming you were holding the cards in your left hand originally, that means that at the top of the packet still in the left hand is the eight of diamonds. Place that packet on top of the other.

Next, you remove the two Black Jacks. I’m going to talk a whole lot about this later on. For the moment, just quickly scan through the deck and find the two black Jacks, the Jack of Clubs and the Jack of Spades. Toss them face up on the table. Square up the deck and turn it face down. At this point, place the Jack of Spades face up at the top of the deck. Ask, “Which would you like to be the leader Jack? The Jack of Clubs?” Pick it up and gesture with it, and then place it on the top of the deck, thumbing over the Jack of Spades that’s already there. “Or the Jack of Spades?”

At this point, you want to do an XI, but you are not going to actually turn it over. You’re going to keep it flat. Regardless of what the spectator’s answer is going to be, you’re going to place the Jack of Clubs[?] face up at the bottom of the deck, maintaining your XI. After, you’ll place the Jack of Spades at the top of the deck.

So, if they say they want the Jack of Clubs to be the leader, say “Great, it’ll go into position first.” Place it at the bottom of the deck. If they say they want the Jack of Spades be the leader, say “Great, we’ll put the Jack of Clubs on the bottom, and the Jack of Spades in the leader’s position.”

This is a pretty rudimentary example of equivoque. It’s main purpose isn’t all that important from a logical standpoint (it’s not like one of the Jacks is going to figure more prominently than the other by the time the trick is done), but the sequence, however trivial it might seem, does motivate the placement of the Jack of Clubs on the top of the deck before it apparently goes to the bottom. That said, don’t treat it like a big deal. In the spectator’s eyes, the trick shouldn’t have even begun yet.

The situation should now be this. Face up black jack on the top of the deck. The mate of the selected card at the bottom of the deck, face-down. The other face up black jack on top of it, the rest of the deck in the middle.

Now announce that the Black Jacks are about to go in search of the spectator’s cards, and give the deck a small shake, using that as cover for the XII. The nice thing about this application is that you really don’t need to maintain a break, any XII somewhere in the middle will do the job fine. Now square up and set the deck down, and proudly announce that the Jacks are going to help you figure out the selected card by trapping it. At this point, bring attention to the fact that the spectator is still holding their selected card.

At this point, don’t go into a whole theatrical production about how much trouble you’re in. In all honesty, just stare at the card in their hand with a blank expression, blink once or twice, count to three in your head. The trick has been botched, let people project their own expectations of how you must be feeling onto your blank face.

Then smile as if nothing has gone wrong, and state, “Well, this is fine, I can still use the Jacks to determine what that card is in your hand. If I snap my fingers like this, they can actually trap the mate of that card, the only other card in the deck that has the same rank and colour as your selected card.”

Snap your fingers, and then immediately ribbon spread the cards to show a single card indeed is now trapped between the face up Jacks. Push all three cards out, and then push the face-down card a little further. “If I am correct, this card will match your card in rank and suit.” Flip it over to show the eight of diamonds. “If the Jacks are correct, then your card must be the only other red eight in the deck, the eight of hearts. Please show everybody your card?” The spectator shows everybody the Eight of Hearts.

Notes: This trick has two major influences, John Bannon and Jay Sankey. Plot-wise, this is basically John Bannon’s Play It Straight Triumph but done in a sandwich effect rather than a Triumph effect, so all credit for the basic presentation goes to him (or else to whomever he was inspired by). The great thing about this trick is that all the moves are done before the magician is apparently boxed into a position whereby they must change the effect and still emerge victorious. Now, PIS Triumph has the nice advantage of a more impressive outcome than the one originally promised. In JGYB, you’re simply making good on the original promise, that the Jacks will be able to help you find their card. You just change the way in which it’s done. That said, there are some nice features that are specific to this trick.

Now, I wrote earlier that I’d talk more about the initial “taking out of the black Jacks”. In the explanation above, you’re just going through the deck to find the Black Jacks (arguably, if you were to do it that way, once could skip the XVI altogether, V the selected card, go through the deck looking for the Black Jacks, and control the selection’s mate into position as you remove the Black Jacks… but let’s keep it easy for now). Here’s the thing. Since you’re working with a prearrangement of two cards anyways, you might as well also prearrange the Jacks into a position whereby they can be produced in an impressive fashion. For instance, the prearrangement could be Eight of Hearts, Two Black Jacks, Eight of Diamonds. You XVI.6 the Eight of Hearts. Then you perform two slip cuts to skillfully find the two Black Jacks, or else you could use the various spin-outs that require the spun-out card to be in that position. So now look what you’ve got. If you do a basic false shuffle beforehand, then with each appearance of the Black Jacks, so long as you call it beforehand, you’re essentially getting two extra magic moments out of the trick. This also adds a certain element of comedy in the fact that, despite all your impressive powers, you’ve still apparently botched the trick. This is where the Jay Sankey influence comes in. He wanted to create a card opener whereby you start by showing a great deal of impressive skill — this is used to establish your ability, create some instant prestige, etc. which is helpful for strolling performers. I can’t remember the specific effect Sankey did — it was the thinking behind it that stayed with me rather than the actual trick — but I do remember flourishes were involved to some degree. Then he wanted to create a moment where things go wrong. This adds conflict, which usually gives the performer a chance to reveal a bit of character, as well as suspense, which is a nice dynamic in the trick. Finally, you get to succeed despite the odds against you.

There’s one other nice feature about the trick. I originally designed this trick to be a part of a full-deck stack I was working on a while ago. If you consider the dynamics of the trick, if you start with a full deck false shuffle, XVI.3 the card (rather than XVI.6), then “magically” produce the two Black Jacks as described above, and then proceed into the XI, followed by the XII, followed by the trick’s climax, you’ve just done a pretty good trick that also doesn’t upset the order of the rest of the deck. Sneaky, eh? For some people that might not mean anything, but for others it might be useful, since it’ll allow you to maintain a bank of cards elsewhere in the deck for another effect. (You might even decide to replace the Jacks with Jokers so that 50 of the 52 cards remain in some sort of order — although that would take away the nifty little rhyme in the “Jacks Got Your Back” motif… ok, moving right along.) Also, if you’re smart about the way you gather up the two Jacks and the two red eights (or whatever your mates were), then you can just put them back on the deck and you’re reset. (A false shuffle might be warranted just to throw people off the scent.)

Now, this is a magician-in-trouble trick, and it’s worth pointing out that these sorts of tricks can get old pretty quickly. Tommy Wonder was a master of this sort of plot dynamic, and he wrote at length about it in his Books of Wonder in the section on “failureffects”. I very much encourage you to either buy those books or else find some other way to hunt that passage down and read it. Without going into too much detail, the concept of the magician being in trouble is something that can very easily come across as cliche’d if they’re unconvinced that you’re in trouble, or as incredibly manipulative if they ARE convinced that