The DL Get Ready

[YRAMagicMan]

Is it really that important to have an invisible get ready? Do you need the pinky count to do double lifts well? Some say that the pinky count is the best way to go. I certainly used to think something along those lines, until I did an experiment recently.

I have a job at the local YMCA teaching people how to do magic. They pay for a few lessons and I teach them some basic (and classic) card tricks and other things that they can go out and perform. It was during one of these classes that I was teaching my students the Double Lift. I was showing them the push-over get ready and the pinky count alternately, with no attempt at covering anything, so they could see the difference between the two get readies. To my surprise, when I asked them if they saw the difference between the two get readies, they asked "What difference?"

I did the sequence again, pinky count then push over, they still didn't see a difference. I was shocked. I actually had to point out that I was doing something different each time. I'm not trying to say that the pinky count isn't useful, it certainly is, but for just a plain double lift, it appears that either the pinky count or the push over get ready will do just fine, even without cover.

Now, it may appear that I'm saying you don't need to cover your DL get ready. That's not what I'm saying. Cover your get ready, but don't worry to much about the particular technique, as long as you avoid the thumb count at the back of the deck thing. If you can't do a pinky count, don't worry too much about it for now, the push-over get ready apparently works just as well, if you have a good push over get ready.

(I have a feeling that I'm going to be posting videos later of my pinky count and push over get ready.)

Oh... Long time no see! I think it's been almost 6 months since I started a thread here.

 

[WyattSB]

Well sure, but its totally dependant on your spectators. Im sure pushing them over can work on anyone, but the pinky count will almost always work more of the time.

 

[James Wise Magic]

I personally dont use a "get ready". When I started magic I didn't know people used "get readies" so I just memorized the feel of two cards, three cards, etc. Makes it quicker, and easier in my opinion since it skips a step. But for people that use them as said above me, pinky count is pretty much the way to go in the general sense.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

I started with the strike double. The first trick I ever learned included the instructions, "Lift two cards as one". So, not knowing any better, I just tried to pick up two cards as if they were one. I did that over and over and over until I consistently got two cards. Turns out, that's called the Strike Double (I learned that part later).

These days I use my own variation of the push-off double as that fits how I handle cards better than the strike.

The technique used should always be the one that fits the performance the best. Examine how you do single turn overs. Make your doubles look like your singles, and make your singles look like your doubles. Then there will never be a reason to question what you're doing.

 

[ChrisWiens]

Is it really that important to have an invisible get ready?

It is important to have an undetected get ready, presuming you`re using a GR. The spectator shouldn`t be able to link the action of a get ready (visible or not) to the actual lift/turnover.
A spectator can feel if something has been done that doesn`t feel right. So it isn`t at all important if it was invisible when he feels something tricky was going on.
Aaron Fisher doesn`t like the pinky break because it builds tension in the hand during the excecution (if it`s badly done...and it is a hard move in my opinion that needs practice) that could be more of a tell than a justificated pushover or other methods (e.g. the technique in ECT). So you have to cover it and practice until you can get rid of the tension in your hand, or most of it.
I personally like the PC, and if it is excecuted at the right moment, with the proper technique (the Ortiz ?! technique is superior IMO to the "standard" PC. It is also teached by Jason England (1on1 download or Foundation)) and the proper "misdirection", it should be undetectable.

Any unnecessary fiddling and handling with the deck has to be eliminated and is a tell. A justification for the pushover of two card for getting a break is necessary in my opinion, for example as Tamariz uses in his Double Ambitious-effect. There the two cards are openly pushed over to demontrate something and there isn`t a logical link in the outer reality between this and the turnover.

Personally I don`t use a get ready for a DL/DT most of the time. Not because a get-ready DL/DT isn`t as convincing as a non-GR-DL/DT, but the technique I use is actually easier for me and I don`t have to think about it.
I can do it blind and without hesitation that looks excactly as me turning over a single card.
However sometimes an effect requires a different DL/DT (e.g. some one-handed DTs) which requires a break.
I don`t think it is important to turn over or lift two cards always the same way. It`s much more important IMO what ChristopherT said "The technique used should always be the one that fits the performance the best", that the DT/DL are economic and logical embedded in the context of the effect and make sense.
Normally I would turn over a single card differently, depending on the circumstances. Why not with doubles ?