How would you PRESENT this? A great exercise!

[Revenant]

I don't use a lot of patter with a trick such as the ACR. I ask the spectator whether they are an ambitious person while they select a card. Most people say "ummmmm........yeah.....I guess" and so I declare there card is much the same as they are.

From this point on my routine kind of takes on it's own natural patter.
1)Did you catch that? or was it too fast? Let me do it again for you.
2)Ok maybe there are too many cards. I will use half the deck.
etc etc etc

End with, "I guess your more ambitious then you though."

 

[Huruey]

My comment on the "communication skills" book was a light jab, not an ego booster...there is a difference.

If that was meant to be a light jab, then it was a very irresponsible one. Directly implying a stranger has poor communication skills via a forum in which tone can be little expressed? To be honest, though, even delivered with a light hearted laugh, it is pretty mocking to tell somebody you don't know that they lack communication skills.

I like everything you said up until the end - which may not be a cop out, but it sure as hell reads like one. I am not looking for you to prove yourself, I just figured because you stated that you are already up to par on the books I recommended and more, you would be able to help this thread...which at this point, I don't feel you have.

I see no reason to give in to a petty challenge when my first genuine input was simply taken as an indicator that I needed advice and to rethink my position. You may call it "feedback", but it was clumsy at best considering you managed to somehow skip several key words in my post and end up preaching to me.

If anything, you have detracted from the topic - and since I am running a contest to give away a creation of my own, and I started the topic...in effort to keep it alive, I do take position as the group leader and judge, hence the feedback and the effort to keep the dialog moving. I don’t feel this is my position in all threads, but if we were in meeting room and I brought up a topic that has merit, I would be responsible for the organization of it.

Sorry, I didn't realise there were such specific rules to contributing to this topic. It certainly wasn't my intention to detract from the topic, otherwise I would not have posted in the first place, but when my contribution was met with with a reply that was ignorant of my point and implicative of an uneducated opinion that deserved advice rather than any consideration, I hope you can understand why I would stand my ground and try to correct your mistakes.

I do deem you sharing something as relevant to this current conversation, because that is and was the intention of this thread - not the relevance of ACR presentation, but presentation of randomly selected effects as an exercise in presentation and approach to presentations.

The majority of this thread is littered with presentation ideas for the ACR. I was responding as much to them as to the initial post, maybe more so.

Please read the first post, and how we have been working on presentation, to understand how far off you are even if were discussing ACR. I hope you see this as a miscommunication, but I am insulted that your replies are as full of ignorance and self indulgence as you seem to think mine are.

Considering the fact that you continue to dodge or undermine the mistakes you made in reading my first post, I feel my past comments are justified. Any time you have almost admitted some responsibility to the miscommunication, you have undermined it.

If my initial post was so off topic, why did you bother answering it rather than pointing out that it was off topic?

Your purpose seemed to be sharing thoughts on if presentation is valid or not – which is not our topic – moreover, I am unsure of your intent, because so far – it has appeared to be a disruption to the goal of the thread, as you have added very little but a distraction…but I guess it beats having to bump the topic.

I'm sure it's not intentional, but you still seem to be twisting my my words, and if you can avoid it, please do so. I was at no point discussing whether presentation is valid or not. I made it clear in my first post, then explained further in my later posts, that I was promoting a simple approach to the presentation of the ACR compared to those in the many other posts in this thread. The fact that many presentations have been discussed clearly makes it a valid contribution to the discussion. Maybe you have a stricter idea of what is relevant and what is not, but simply being the thread starter does not make your opinion worth more than others.

By misreading my post and making too many assumptions, you undermined my input to the discussion. You continue to try to find reasons for justifying your response, so far as to even say it was miscommunication on my part, rather than of yourself or even a mutual miscommunication. Your response to my first post was the first to make personal attacks, containing direct implications of a lack of experience or knowledge. If you really want people to gain something from this thread, you'd do well not to think that you are the only one that can give advice.

If you feel you have something further to say on this, I invite you to send me a private message such that we don't contribute further to the distraction.


Joe

 

[KeoSilver]

Gosh darnit, mind taking this somewhere more private?????

 

[Morgan B]

Joe, didn't really read what you said - but I am sure it was full of apolagies and the kind of connected experience you give to your audience. So, can we continue to discuss what the topic is meant to be? Feel free to start up your own thread discussing how little you talk during your ACR.

Thanks.

 

[Huruey]

Joe, didn't really read what you said - but I am sure it was full of apolagies and the kind of connected experience you give to your audience. So, can we continue to discuss what the topic is meant to be? Feel free to start up your own thread discussing how little you talk during your ACR.

Thanks.

You again highlight your ignorance. You haven't really read any of what I have said. I was prepared to leave further discussions on this to PM, but I cannot have you continuing to undermine a valid contribution I made to the topic.

Most importantly, you are still misrepresenting my position. If you are going to assert my position, the very least you can do is be clear on what that is. I did not say that I do very little talking during my ACR, I corrected you on that in my first reply to you. I'll let you go back and read what I said for yourself, though I expect you probably feel above doing such a thing, considering you felt above even bothering to read my previous post.

Joe

 

[Morgan B]

Ok (word count)

 

[Sherlock]

Well to get back on topic, I decided to do something similar with Blueprint as stated before with the color change. I did a suggestion technique with some marked cards to set up the presentation of blueprint.

Without exposing I simply told them that because the test went so well I would like to try something a bit more challenging for the both of us. I told him to pick a card and went ahead and got the setup going, telling him to just remember his card. With some suggestion based patter told him no matter what he thought he saw it would not be his card (something to that effect.) Your card will actually look just like the 8 of spades, no matter how hard you look, try to imagine it something else it will be the near exact carbon copy of the 8 of spades.

Went through and he "saw" his card and went through the motions til I got to the 8 of spades. Asked him to check to make sure there wasn't anything wrong with the ink or anything sticky etc. I told him to keep paying attention and when I told him so that he would see his card transform from the 8 of spades to his 5 of Diamonds. Classic color change and then gave him back his card along with the other five, palmed off the top card (8 of spades) and simply placed it in my pocket after I gave him the entire deck.

There's a reason I told it would be the 8 of spades, there is only one card missing from the deck and that card is the 8 of spades. The power of suggestion is truly spectacular and thank you for trying this experiment with me.

Any tips/hints, I know it's not the full script or anything but any little subtleties that could possibly help.

 

[Toby]

COLOR CHANGING DECK:

I would actually mix ACR and CCD (color changing deck). I would take out a blue box and a blue cards out of it. I would offer a selection.

"Please, take one out. That will be YOUR card." (yes, I little exaggerate the word "YOUR"). "Please sign it. You may even kiss it, because card told me that you are really cute." Corny, but get's a laugh.
"Awww, look at it, it fell in love. Let's try something. I will put your card, in between all others. But if you try and call it... A little nicer than that... See, it comes right to you." I have to thank RD, for his idea on a similar patter. Of course, it sounds a lot nicer and cuter in person.
I will do that a one or two more times, differently of course, and than say:
"It comes to you again." At this time the card will be in her hand.
"But look, you have been calling and kissing that card all the time, and it made all the other cards jealous." And turn the deck into RED one.

I have another idea, with a presentation when my cards are all shy (being red), but after encouragement from the spectator, they cool down, or they became cool with performing, or something like that (and they turn into BLUE cards). All except one, the card that you are holding, that one is really shy when it is near you.

I hope you understood my point

 

[Morgan B]

Well to get back on topic, I decided to do something similar with Blueprint as stated before with the color change. I did a suggestion technique with some marked cards to set up the presentation of blueprint.

Without exposing I simply told them that because the test went so well I would like to try something a bit more challenging for the both of us. I told him to pick a card and went ahead and got the setup going, telling him to just remember his card. With some suggestion based patter told him no matter what he thought he saw it would not be his card (something to that effect.) Your card will actually look just like the 8 of spades, no matter how hard you look, try to imagine it something else it will be the near exact carbon copy of the 8 of spades.

Went through and he "saw" his card and went through the motions til I got to the 8 of spades. Asked him to check to make sure there wasn't anything wrong with the ink or anything sticky etc. I told him to keep paying attention and when I told him so that he would see his card transform from the 8 of spades to his 5 of Diamonds. Classic color change and then gave him back his card along with the other five, palmed off the top card (8 of spades) and simply placed it in my pocket after I gave him the entire deck.

There's a reason I told it would be the 8 of spades, there is only one card missing from the deck and that card is the 8 of spades. The power of suggestion is truly spectacular and thank you for trying this experiment with me.

Any tips/hints, I know it's not the full script or anything but any little subtleties that could possibly help.

Hi Sherlock,

So your initial presmise is that of a mentalist? Then you do magic to change the card, but want them to believe that is a magic moment or the power of suggestion? This isn't really a colour changing deck, just a colour change...but, I find the premise and presentation very serious - as a mentalist would approach - but their are vanishes and changes that seem more magic moment related. Not saying you can't mix them, but again, the magic has to seem moveless...and from the sounds of it - it has some sleights that will appear as sleights. Anyhow, it is hard to tell from the description and lack of script - but thanks.

 

[Morgan B]

COLOR CHANGING DECK:

I would actually mix ACR and CCD (color changing deck). I would take out a blue box and a blue cards out of it. I would offer a selection.

"Please, take one out. That will be YOUR card." (yes, I little exaggerate the word "YOUR"). "Please sign it. You may even kiss it, because card told me that you are really cute." Corny, but get's a laugh.
"Awww, look at it, it fell in love. Let's try something. I will put your card, in between all others. But if you try and call it... A little nicer than that... See, it comes right to you." I have to thank RD, for his idea on a similar patter. Of course, it sounds a lot nicer and cuter in person.
I will do that a one or two more times, differently of course, and than say:
"It comes to you again." At this time the card will be in her hand.
"But look, you have been calling and kissing that card all the time, and it made all the other cards jealous." And turn the deck into RED one.

I have another idea, with a presentation when my cards are all shy (being red), but after encouragement from the spectator, they cool down, or they became cool with performing, or something like that (and they turn into BLUE cards). All except one, the card that you are holding, that one is really shy when it is near you.

I hope you understood my point

Hi Toby,

I understood you - actually, your first part sounds very very close to some of what RDChopper uses, so I guess it is good you tip the guy you rip, but looking past that, I want to discuss this style of presentation.

I always think of my friend that did Jay Sankey's "Joking Around" where two jokers find a selected card and then it goes into what many call the "biddle trick" - anyhow, he would call the joker's detectives, the crime they wanted to solve is who stole a card from the deck, and they would find prints...so on and so forth.

People laughed - he thought he had a winner. He showed it to me, and I said, I never like the personification of cards. I find it childish, and a reminder that people are just seeing "tricks". It has a "this is good for my kids" flavour I don't like. He argued that people laughed, and were fooled by it. So I challenged him to rework the presentation, and see if he notices a difference. When he did, he came to me and said, "I realize now that people were laughing at me, or the concept, not with me" - he has never gone back to saying the Jokers are Sherlock Holmes and Watson. Why? He realized that this was a big stretch in imagination for your random audiences to grasp. They are cards...we are adults...I can pretend my potato is a steak, but I am a bit old for that kind of imaginary and play...and to get me to that spot, I would have to know and trust you a lot more than you just approaching me and telling me my potato is steak.

So your premise is the card actually has feelings and emotions? This is what your presentation indicates. RDChopper and I spoke of this, I think you can use cards as an analogy - let's have this card represent something and tell a story about that using the cards to illustrate it - but to say that the cards blush...well, that is asking the audience to believe something so farfetched, that it undermines your magic completely.

The odd part is - as far off as I feel it is...it is almost bang on. If you changed it, just slightly, to make it something I can identify as an adult - you have a winner. But don't take my advice...it took 2 years to convince my friend...and he knows and trusts me...who knows how long it will take the rest of magic to realize that our presentations are sometimes so childish in nature, it is no wonder people say, "I want my 3 year old to be here" when you just finished your effect (and think, but they won't get this) - perhaps not the magic, but they will enjoy the nursery rhyme equivalent of your presentation.

Hope you didn't think I was being harsh - as it is not you - and your thinking is on the right track. However, I hope you and all that present in this approach think of the negatives to using this common style of presentation.

Keep at it - you are almost there!

 

[William Draven]

So, I propose we take an effect I know we ALL are familiar with – as I hear so many of you talk about your ACR routine. Let’s take the AMBITIOUS CARD – ONE PHASE – and really sell that idea...why does the card come to the top? If we can sell this one phase, than all the multi-phase effects become easier to present – so again – the focus in A SELECTED SIGNED CARD GOES INTO THE MIDDLE AND ARRIVES ON TOP OF THE DECK – WHY? How would you present this and sell it if a gig depended on it?

Let’s get creative!

Props: 1 deck of poker sized Tarot cards.
Pre-Show: Gather a group of people together by performing a bit of cold reading and having them select a card from the pack. Do spot one card reads while I work the crowd over and give some history on the Tarot cards, and their modern brother the normal deck of cards.

Segway into performance: Explain how cards aren't selected for no reason at all. That the energy from a quarrent (the spectator) is cast onto the cards and the cards themsleves reposition to allow the specific card for that specific person to be selected.

Have a card selected. Do a on the spot cold read for the person. I want you to remember this card. No doubt you're friends won't believe me when I say this card was destined to you. However notice in a deck of 72 cards, that is the only one you picked?

Have them replace the card into the deck, and move into a full ambitious routine to back up my claims that certain cards are destined to be selected by certain people.

Close with a color change, as opposed to card to location or a popup move.

 

[Morgan B]

Hi Draven,

Good to see you in the thread. A few points of clarity?

give some history on the Tarot cards, and their modern brother the normal deck of cards.

You say the "normal" deck is their modern brother - but isn't the truth that their is no decision on this, but isn't their evidence that indicates cards were created almost 100 years before tarot cards? Just curious if you know something I don't, so I don't educate the wrong way.

Have them replace the card into the deck, and move into a full ambitious routine to back up my claims that certain cards are destined to be selected by certain people.

How does the card coming to the top - as opposed to the bottom or being reselected using various forces - back up your claim that certain cards are meant for certain people?

Close with a color change, as opposed to card to location or a popup move.

I see this as an equal non-sequitor on the list of things that have nothing to do with ACR, however, in this case - it is like Red Hot Mamma - the one card they are destined to select is proven by having a different marking.

Hindsight, maybe could have put this into the colour changing deck presentation and had a winner...too late! haha

Thanks Draven.

 

[RDChopper]

Hey, this is me trying to contribute something:

The tricks is "trycicle" by chad nelson and by far one of my favourites, it leaves a lot of room for presentation in wich my case is:

The Performance: Right after the biddle trick I told them If they believed me If I said to them that I was actually hypnotising them, using the words and my hand gestures, that's the presentation of the trick, I offer them to show them how with some simple but subliminal words and actions of my hands I could make them see things that were not really there, so the trick went as usual and I tried to interact with everybody this time, you'll see how we joke a little before and in the performance so everythin went okay, I think that I didnt rushed things and I love this trick! .

I copyed it from the "Gut.Perfom" thread, Im a bit lazy today, but if anyone is interested in knowing the details of this presentation, let me know

Here is a video of me performing the trick to some people

http://www.vimeo.com/5035798

 

[William Draven]

Hi Draven,

Good to see you in the thread. A few points of clarity?

You say the "normal" deck is their modern brother - but isn't the truth that their is no decision on this, but isn't their evidence that indicates cards were created almost 100 years before tarot cards? Just curious if you know something I don't, so I don't educate the wrong way.

Well the symbology that exists between the two decks are amazingly simular. The tarot deck consists of 4 suits. Wands(clubs), Swords(spades), Cups(hearts), and Penticals or Coins(diamonds). The associated meaning behind the modern suits and the tarot suits hasn't changed much. Even today Magicians use a throw away joke line "You selected the Ace of Spades... the card of death. ...blah blah" Well, that death card is referencing Tarot. Though highly inaccurate. The Ace of Spades signifies the start of conflict, not death. Death itself just signifies change, nothingmore.

Spades: Conflict
Hearts: Emotional Interests or Concerns
Diamonds: Financial dealings
Clubs: Energy, Change, and Work

The tarot deck has court cards, as does the modern deck. King, Queen, and Knight.(Jack) The modern deck just drops the use of the Page.

The modern deck also has 1 major arcana card in it. The Joker (Fool).

The tarot deck numbers their suits from Ace to Ten, then court cards from Page to King. The modern deck follows suit, with the exception of the Pages inclusion.

The Tarot deck has 74 cards total. 22 Major Arcana cards and 52 Suit cards. (Minor Arcana)

A modern deck of playing cards has 52 cards. (Not including jokers) The modern deck has just dropped the use of the major arcana.

The parallels between the two are almost too curious to be coincidence.

How does the card coming to the top - as opposed to the bottom or being reselected using various forces - back up your claim that certain cards are meant for certain people?

I should have been more clear. In my handeling of the ambitious card the card comes out everywhere. Top, middle, bottom, and even changes places with another card in the spectators hand. I don't run a standard ambitious. However it does back up my claim in that if that one person is destined for that one card, it doesn't matter where it is placed, or where she selects from... the results are the same.

I see this as an equal non-sequitor on the list of things that have nothing to do with ACR, however, in this case - it is like Red Hot Mamma - the one card they are destined to select is proven by having a different marking.

Hindsight, maybe could have put this into the colour changing deck presentation and had a winner...too late! haha

Thanks Draven.

Perhaps. But at the base level. Card is selected, and is returned to the deck only to be found on top again, if the card is destined to be selected by a person then it would make sense for that person to be able to locate that card quickly and with ease, hence justifing the cards top position in the deck, or in my handeling any position supposed by the magi. The tarot cards give a mystic and old world feel to the effect by providing grounds to make this logic work.

 

[Sherlock]

Hi Sherlock,

So your initial presmise is that of a mentalist? Then you do magic to change the card, but want them to believe that is a magic moment or the power of suggestion? This isn't really a colour changing deck, just a colour change...but, I find the premise and presentation very serious - as a mentalist would approach - but their are vanishes and changes that seem more magic moment related. Not saying you can't mix them, but again, the magic has to seem moveless...and from the sounds of it - it has some sleights that will appear as sleights. Anyhow, it is hard to tell from the description and lack of script - but thanks.

I use a magic effect to change the card yes, but I do a suggestion based change. I want them to believe this is all pure suggestion, the audience was really great and they swear they could see that card.

I never meant this to be an alternative for presentation for the color changing deck, but instead how I could use the suggestion technique for the color changing deck but for a different effect. The only sleight that would seem to be a move would be the classic color change and the way I presented it was like a slow color change that happened slowly and right in front of their eyes. I don't know any color changes that I could really use for it but any that somebody knows of would be great.

The reason for lack of script was because this was pretty much on the spot improv stuff. Went to the mall saw some people eating a pretzel and tried it out and they were quite dumbfounded. They kept saying they could swore they saw that card.

It went over well but I am trying to really improve this to be like you said "moveless" because I want to make this as real as possible. Thanks for the advice and believe me I take all hints and tips and try my hardest to improve.

 

[Toby]

Hi Toby,

I understood you - actually, your first part sounds very very close to some of what RDChopper uses, so I guess it is good you tip the guy you rip, but looking past that, I want to discuss this style of presentation.

I always think of my friend that did Jay Sankey's "Joking Around" where two jokers find a selected card and then it goes into what many call the "biddle trick" - anyhow, he would call the joker's detectives, the crime they wanted to solve is who stole a card from the deck, and they would find prints...so on and so forth.

People laughed - he thought he had a winner. He showed it to me, and I said, I never like the personification of cards. I find it childish, and a reminder that people are just seeing "tricks". It has a "this is good for my kids" flavour I don't like. He argued that people laughed, and were fooled by it. So I challenged him to rework the presentation, and see if he notices a difference. When he did, he came to me and said, "I realize now that people were laughing at me, or the concept, not with me" - he has never gone back to saying the Jokers are Sherlock Holmes and Watson. Why? He realized that this was a big stretch in imagination for your random audiences to grasp. They are cards...we are adults...I can pretend my potato is a steak, but I am a bit old for that kind of imaginary and play...and to get me to that spot, I would have to know and trust you a lot more than you just approaching me and telling me my potato is steak.

So your premise is the card actually has feelings and emotions? This is what your presentation indicates. RDChopper and I spoke of this, I think you can use cards as an analogy - let's have this card represent something and tell a story about that using the cards to illustrate it - but to say that the cards blush...well, that is asking the audience to believe something so farfetched, that it undermines your magic completely.

The odd part is - as far off as I feel it is...it is almost bang on. If you changed it, just slightly, to make it something I can identify as an adult - you have a winner. But don't take my advice...it took 2 years to convince my friend...and he knows and trusts me...who knows how long it will take the rest of magic to realize that our presentations are sometimes so childish in nature, it is no wonder people say, "I want my 3 year old to be here" when you just finished your effect (and think, but they won't get this) - perhaps not the magic, but they will enjoy the nursery rhyme equivalent of your presentation.

Hope you didn't think I was being harsh - as it is not you - and your thinking is on the right track. However, I hope you and all that present in this approach think of the negatives to using this common style of presentation.

Keep at it - you are almost there!

Hey Morg, thanx for reply.
In no way I find it harsh. Contrary, I find it very interesting and you made me think (damn you ). Thank you for that.

Now, I'm not trying to suspend their beliefs, I was going for more friendly, kind of fun presentation, with a lot of opportunity to interact with the spectator, and generally have a good time. When I say that all other cards "got jealous", I don't expect from them to actually believe me, because that would be really insulting on my part. So, basically, I went for the "cute" presentation, more than to make them believe in supernatural.

I will use cards as an analogy from now on, thank you for that. I will try to rework this presentation before the deadline. Hope I succeed.

p.s. I know that you have a killer presentation for CCD, but at the end, it is deck changing color, whatever excuse you have for doing it (except for deck change), they wont really believe you. Hope you prove me wrong

 

[RikAllen]

I scrapped both of my color changing decks, and have been reworking my sponge ball routine.
I've always loved sponge balls, but justification (as you said) is difficult. I use them as a learning/explination tool, something to keep your mind occupied while I tell you about something boring(and usually not true...yay sleight of hand).

This is basically what I have, I've been toying with the idea and don't have anything written up yet, nor is it audience tested yet. Another week of tinkering and handling changes and I'll probably have a formal write up...or a completely new idea.

Let's get into some psychology, specifically what you see and what you think you see. Sometimes what you see isn't real, and what seems real isn't there. I'll explain with a visual aid.
(reach into the air and hold imaginary sponge ball)
What do you see? *nothing*
(Reach with other hand and produce first red sponge ball)
And now what do you see? *small jolt of surprise, and they say a little red ball*
Right, and it's different than my right hand... *they say yes, looking towards right hand...now holding a second red sponge ball*
-it's different people, say it's still different...there are two in the right hand!- I love a good inner dialog, I won't post all of it here though.

[moving on]
So if I take what you see in my right hand and put it in your hand
(put one sponge ball in their hand)
and keep this one in my hand
(close hand around single sponge ball)
it appears that I have one and you have one. *agreement*
and it's true
(open hands to reveal nothings changed)
but what if I were to take this one
(take sponge ball from left with right, still having third ball hidden)
And switch it with this one
(clearly take the one from their hand and put two into specs hand ditching own sponge ball from left to right hand)
Now we can see the difference between what you see, or what you thought you saw, and what is real.
(open empty hand, point with right hand and they reveal two oh my god!)
(after a moment of reflection)
I'll show you again, only a little different, maybe you can keep up if I only use two hands, instead of three. (motion my two hands and no longer include theirs)
(take the sponge balls back...'one' in each hand)
If I put this one in my pocket (pull 'empty' hand) and close my hand around this one (around two) Then what you think you saw was one being put away and one being held.
What really happened was one was put away, but not in my pocket. I put it away in my other hand. (reveal two in one hand)
But if I was to put one into my left hand (show putting one into hand, put none) and this one in my pocket (put both red ones in pocket) then how many are in my hand.

At this point you have two answers...some will say one, hopefully a lot will say two due to repetition.

If one, 'Are you sure?'...hope to get a two, ask other spectators and find someone willing to say two.

Yes, two. But I wonder if you've really seen what's going on so far. Would you mind saying what color they are?
*confused look, 'red?'*
No, you thought you saw red ones, I only deal with *insert color of choice* ones (open hand revealing different colored sponge balls).
(I have some yellow ones but plan on getting a different set)


It's something I've been toying with, the subtleties aren't their yet, this is the first 'formal' writeup, I'll re-read after work and edit it a bit.

Fun stuff so far, glad to see you back Morgician.