Unpopular magic opinions.

[010rusty]

I've wanted to talk about this for a while. I want to discuss some topics that are generally against the common crowd. Everything in black is an explaination
-the chop cup is more exciting than any and all cups and balls routine
I've only seen 1 cups and balls routine that i could actually see my self performing. However Chop cup Routines never ever disappoint.
-Bizzaro is the best comedy magician today, not Mac King (of course Mac King is still in the top 2)
-expert at the card table is heavily overrated
-stealth pen is the greatest penetration effect
-Criss Angle is underrated
He may not be a typical magician (or really good or slight of hand), but he surely isn't "the disgrace to the community", or "any thing he does shouldn't even be considered magic" He is mostly camera tricks, but hey that is taking advantage of your setting. Like using a table to lap something. I think criss is average. Nothing special, or terrible.
-Jay Sankey does make solid products that are worth the risk
he does produce a lot of stinkers but the good ones are worth "sifting through the trash"
-the top change is not as good as the double lift
-Sans minds is better than Tenyo
JK
-Dee Christopher is the best alternative magician


That is it. I know these will most likely get me shot. I know many people will debate me on these, but I really want everyone to list there unpoplular opinions below.

 

[Al e Cat Dabra]

I feel that am kind of stating the obvious, but it depends on the performer who is doing the chop cup or cups and balls. While I personally prefer to perform the chop cup over the cups and balls (I do both routines), I don't think I would categorically state that the chop cup is more exciting than any cups and balls routine. The biggest factor in making any routine exciting is the particular performer, the plot and the script, and how creatively the moves and script are put together. Also important is how and to what extent the performer involves the spectators in the routine. So, you could have performer A who does a very un-exciting (even downright boring) chop cup routine, while performer B does a very exciting and entertaining cups and balls. In my cups and balls, I have 4 final loads from 3 cups (3 big balls and a lemon), whereas in my chop cup, I have 3 final loads from 1 cup (usually 3 lemons), which packs an even bigger magical punch. Also the cups and balls can be confusing or overwhelming for a spectator - there is just so much going on - whereas the chop cup is simpler, more straightforward and easier to follow. I think the chop cup generally lends itself to more audience participation than the cups and balls and is certainly more practical for strolling walk-around performances. For these reasons, the chop cup is my personal preference.

 

[trapeze]

One of the first presentations of the cups and balls I ever saw was by the late Frank Garcia. It was also one of the most entertaining I have ever seen.

 

[Maaz Hasan]

I'm happy to accept other people's opinions. I think it's absolutely stupid for anyone to assume that just because something is commonly accepted, it is 100% right. I mean, if you take the NBA for example, Michael Jordan is widely accepted as the GOAT by a lot of basketball fans, but a ton of other players have a case for GOAT, and the NBA following community can always accept other people's opinions. Why can't it be like this for magic too?

However, I would like to point some things out.

-the chop cup is more exciting than any and all cups and balls routine
I've only seen 1 cups and balls routine that i could actually see my self performing. However Chop cup Routines never ever disappoint.

I think it is more so who you see perform it. I've seen a ton of Cups and Balls routines that were amazingly well performed, and I've seen some that have sucked. Same thing for the Chop Cup. If people work on their presentation, both can be really good. I don't think one is inherently better than the other.

-expert at the card table is heavily overrated

I wouldn't say it is overrated as much as it is misused. People always call it "the bible of card magic" and all that, but it is by no means the best book out there. And it is definitely not for absolute beginners. However, if read for it's theory aspect, it is a great book.

-stealth pen is the greatest penetration effect

I like coin through table better. Again, it's highly subjective.

-Criss Angle is underrated
He may not be a typical magician (or really good or slight of hand), but he surely isn't "the disgrace to the community", or "any thing he does shouldn't even be considered magic" He is mostly camera tricks, but hey that is taking advantage of your setting. Like using a table to lap something. I think criss is average. Nothing special, or terrible.

He is definitely a good magician. I mean, he has a hugely popular stage show after all. People will hate just to hate.

-Jay Sankey does make solid products that are worth the risk
he does produce a lot of stinkers but the good ones are worth "sifting through the trash"

Yes. Jay has made a ton of good products. He does get a ton of hate, and his products aren't always great, but he has produced some great ones.

-the top change is not as good as the double lift

All depends on what you're more comfortable with. Personally, I find the top change better because I am more comfortable with the misdirection needed to pull it off. I kind of find DLs awkward at times.

-Sans minds is better than Tenyo
JK

lol

My personal unpopular opinions:
- The Karate Coin and the Bitten and Restored Quarter aren't good effects.
- The modern market kinda sucks. I mean, great products and effects are always produced, but it seems like no one focuses on teaching the fundamentals anymore
- Card tricks that aren't the type we would perform regularly with are actually good effects, and we should perform them to friends as more casual tricks instead of going through a hardcore performance every single time

 

[CaseyRudd]

I will share a few things when it comes to magic that make me cringe sometimes, and as always all opinions are my own:

1. Any time I see someone recommend The Expert At The Card Table to someone just starting out in card magic. It's just not a good resource to start learning card magic, and most of the material in there is not suitable for a beginner at all. Add to the fact that it's confusing to read because of how it was written and that the moves are not practical for a beginner to learn when trying to get a grasp on the basics. It's a good book to have for the history of the art form and to appreciate it for its time, but it's only a book you should try and learn from once you're experienced with a deck of cards.

2. There is way too much bad magic being released because the filter for the majority of sites and stores is almost non-existent. In my opinion, I think we do a great job of only offering magic on theory11 that you can use and put into your repertoire almost immediately. We've certainly raised the bar for ourselves over the years in terms of the quality of magic we officially release. We're also really proud of the Marketplace and how seriously we take the platform. In terms of an effect being released, it can be original and the production value can be the best ever, but if it's simply a bad trick, it doesn't make it. We won't allow it if we don't think you'll learn anything new.

3. I've always thought it was really odd for someone to be a sleight of hand "purist" and they refuse the thought of even wanting to use a gimmick for an effect. Gimmicks and gaffs sort of get a bad reputation because a lot of people think that they do everything for you and that it takes no skill to perform the magic. This couldn't be further from the truth. I remember hearing Helder Guimaraes talk about this and he is exactly right. Gimmicks and gaffs can open up a whole different dimension to an effect. Not only in method, because when we perform magic we aren't performing for ourselves and trying to impress ourselves with our sleight of hand skill. We're trying to give the spectator an experience, and if a gimmick or gaff gets you there the cleanest and simplest then why NOT use that?

 

[Maaz Hasan]

I will share a few things when it comes to magic that make me cringe sometimes, and as always all opinions are my own:

1. Any time I see someone recommend The Expert At The Card Table to someone just starting out in card magic. It's just not a good resource to start learning card magic, and most of the material in there is not suitable for a beginner at all. Add to the fact that it's confusing to read because of how it was written and that the moves are not practical for a beginner to learn when trying to get a grasp on the basics. It's a good book to have for the history of the art form and to appreciate it for its time, but it's only a book you should try and learn from once you're experienced with a deck of cards.

2. There is way too much bad magic being released because the filter for the majority of sites and stores is almost non-existent. In my opinion, I think we do a great job of only offering magic on theory11 that you can use and put into your repertoire almost immediately. We've certainly raised the bar for ourselves over the years in terms of the quality of magic we officially release. We're also really proud of the Marketplace and how seriously we take the platform. In terms of an effect being released, it can be original and the production value can be the best ever, but if it's simply a bad trick, it doesn't make it. We won't allow it if we don't think you'll learn anything new.

3. I've always thought it was really odd for someone to be a sleight of hand "purist" and they refuse the thought of even wanting to use a gimmick for an effect. Gimmicks and gaffs sort of get a bad reputation because a lot of people think that they do everything for you and that it takes no skill to perform the magic. This couldn't be further from the truth. I remember hearing Helder Guimaraes talk about this and he is exactly right. Gimmicks and gaffs can open up a whole different dimension to an effect. Not only in method, because when we perform magic we aren't performing for ourselves and trying to impress ourselves with our sleight of hand skill. We're trying to give the spectator an experience, and if a gimmick or gaff gets you there the cleanest and simplest then why NOT use that?

I agree with all of these. The only time I can see an exception in the 3rd one is when someone is doing hardcore gambling/cheating demonstration, and even then I think it's fine to use a gimmick. After all, gimmicks and tools are/were used by cheats too.

 

[CaseyRudd]

I agree with all of these. The only time I can see an exception in the 3rd one is when someone is doing hardcore gambling/cheating demonstration, and even then I think it's fine to use a gimmick. After all, gimmicks and tools are/were used by cheats too.

Yeah I wasn't referring to gambling/cheating demonstrations as the purpose of those is usually to showcase sleight of hand at a high caliber. Not sure if an unpopular opinion but I classify gambling/cheating demonstrations as "not magic, but magical". The audience knows ahead of time you are using only sleight of hand to accomplish the demonstration and that you're a card technician. But the experience is still magical as it looks like there is no way the performer is in control of the cards at all times.

 

[Josh Burch]

I feel that am kind of stating the obvious, but it depends on the performer who is doing the chop cup or cups and balls. While I personally prefer to perform the chop cup over the cups and balls (I do both routines), I don't think I would categorically state that the chop cup is more exciting than any cups and balls routine. The biggest factor in making any routine exciting is the particular performer, the plot and the script, and how creatively the moves and script are put together. Also important is how and to what extent the performer involves the spectators in the routine. So, you could have performer A who does a very un-exciting (even downright boring) chop cup routine, while performer B does a very exciting and entertaining cups and balls. In my cups and balls, I have 4 final loads from 3 cups (3 big balls and a lemon), whereas in my chop cup, I have 3 final loads from 1 cup (usually 3 lemons), which packs an even bigger magical punch. Also the cups and balls can be confusing or overwhelming for a spectator - there is just so much going on - whereas the chop cup is simpler, more straightforward and easier to follow. I think the chop cup generally lends itself to more audience participation than the cups and balls and is certainly more practical for strolling walk-around performances. For these reasons, the chop cup is my personal preference.

I disagree with nearly all of these. Then again, if everyone agreed they would be popular opinions.

I will share a few things when it comes to magic that make me cringe sometimes, and as always all opinions are my own:

1. Any time I see someone recommend The Expert At The Card Table to someone just starting out in card magic. It's just not a good resource to start learning card magic, and most of the material in there is not suitable for a beginner at all. Add to the fact that it's confusing to read because of how it was written and that the moves are not practical for a beginner to learn when trying to get a grasp on the basics. It's a good book to have for the history of the art form and to appreciate it for its time, but it's only a book you should try and learn from once you're experienced with a deck of cards.

2. There is way too much bad magic being released because the filter for the majority of sites and stores is almost non-existent. In my opinion, I think we do a great job of only offering magic on theory11 that you can use and put into your repertoire almost immediately. We've certainly raised the bar for ourselves over the years in terms of the quality of magic we officially release. We're also really proud of the Marketplace and how seriously we take the platform. In terms of an effect being released, it can be original and the production value can be the best ever, but if it's simply a bad trick, it doesn't make it. We won't allow it if we don't think you'll learn anything new.

3. I've always thought it was really odd for someone to be a sleight of hand "purist" and they refuse the thought of even wanting to use a gimmick for an effect. Gimmicks and gaffs sort of get a bad reputation because a lot of people think that they do everything for you and that it takes no skill to perform the magic. This couldn't be further from the truth. I remember hearing Helder Guimaraes talk about this and he is exactly right. Gimmicks and gaffs can open up a whole different dimension to an effect. Not only in method, because when we perform magic we aren't performing for ourselves and trying to impress ourselves with our sleight of hand skill. We're trying to give the spectator an experience, and if a gimmick or gaff gets you there the cleanest and simplest then why NOT use that?

I agree with all of these.

Here are mine:

1. Max Maven and Jeff McBride are legends in their own right, and have done more for magic than I could ever dream to do, but their characters are corny and weird.

2. The library is the best place to start learning magic.

3. A child like state of wonder is a myth (sorry Paul Harris). Wonder is a very adult thing to experience. Kids rarely if ever experience it.

4. Magic is most difficult to perform for teenagers from the age of 11-16.

5. I like Rick Lax and his interactive magic videos.

6. I don't think that all the magic companies in the world are or should be enemies.

7. It's a beautiful thing for magic secrets to die with their creator.

 

[Al e Cat Dabra]

I agree that gimmicks and gaffs may unjustifiably get a bad reputation because a lot of people think that they do everything for you and that it takes no skill to perform the magic. Generally speaking, it takes skill and finesse to use a gimmick effectively. Take the time-honored TT, for example, one of the oldest gimmicks in the book. But to do a smooth, clean and deceptive bill switch with it - well, that is a skill that requires work and practice.

 

[Al e Cat Dabra]

Al e Cat Dabra Wrote:

"I feel that am kind of stating the obvious, but it depends on the performer who is doing the chop cup or cups and balls. While I personally prefer to perform the chop cup over the cups and balls (I do both routines), I don't think I would categorically state that the chop cup is more exciting than any cups and balls routine. The biggest factor in making any routine exciting is the particular performer, the plot and the script, and how creatively the moves and script are put together. Also important is how and to what extent the performer involves the spectators in the routine. So, you could have performer A who does a very un-exciting (even downright boring) chop cup routine, while performer B does a very exciting and entertaining cups and balls. In my cups and balls, I have 4 final loads from 3 cups (3 big balls and a lemon), whereas in my chop cup, I have 3 final loads from 1 cup (usually 3 lemons), which packs an even bigger magical punch. Also the cups and balls can be confusing or overwhelming for a spectator - there is just so much going on - whereas the chop cup is simpler, more straightforward and easier to follow. I think the chop cup generally lends itself to more audience participation than the cups and balls and is certainly more practical for strolling walk-around performances?

Josh Burch Wrote: "I disagree with nearly all of these."

So, Josh, I am curious, when you say that you "disagree with nearly all of these," what you mean by "these," and also what is the basis of your disagreement. I certainly do not expect everyone to agree with me, but generally like to know why they do. Are you disagreeing when I say (1) that I don't think I would categorically state that the chop cup is more exciting than any cups and balls routine or (2) that the biggest factor in making any routine exciting is the particular performer, the plot and the script, and how creatively the moves and script are put together; or (3) that it is important how and to what extent the performer involves the spectators in the routine; or (4) that you could have performer A who does a very un-exciting (even downright boring) chop cup routine, while performer B does a very exciting and entertaining cups and balls; or (5) that the cups and balls can be confusing (and again, as I I am saying depending on the performer); or (6) that the chop cup is simpler, more straightforward and lends itself to more audience participation than the cups and balls; or (7) that the chop cup is more practical for strolling walk around performances. If you are disagreeing with "nearly all of these," I would like to know the basis for your disagreement. I think it would allow for a more constructive discussion.

AECD

 

[ParkinT]

In the realm of Generalities...

4. Magic is most difficult to perform for teenagers from the age of 11-16.

I would adjust that as "Magic is very difficult to perform for teenagers but MOST difficult to perform for Engineers (or other tech-savvy individuals)"
They tend to view EVERYTHING in the world as a puzzle that needs to be understood and explained and have difficulty simply "being entertained"

 

[TylerScottIllusionist]

My unpopular opinion is that card tricks are overrated and generally very boring to watch. That's not to say that I don't like some card tricks, there are some really cool effects out there, but there is an ocean of generic effects.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Here's mine:

Impossible does not equate to magical. Much of the cause of the crap on the market is because someone was just trying to create something impossible to make some money/build a reputation.

 

[DominusDolorum]

My unpopular opinion, mostly around the younger crowd, is that if you are trying to make a card trick look like magic don't do flourishes/crazy (albeit amazing) packet cuts. It undercuts the magic aspect of the trick or dismisses it entirely.

 

[DominusDolorum]

My unpopular opinion is that card tricks are overrated and generally very boring to watch. That's not to say that I don't like some card tricks, there are some really cool effects out there, but there is an ocean of generic effects.

 

[TylerScottIllusionist]

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Oh. Another one:

You probably won't perform all of the tricks you have in your lifetime, you don't actually need to purchase any more.

 

[TylerScottIllusionist]

Oh. Another one:

You probably won't perform all of the tricks you have in your lifetime, you don't actually need to purchase any more.

That could honestly be more of a fact than an opinion.

 

[DominusDolorum]

Oh. Another one:

You probably won't perform all of the tricks you have in your lifetime, you don't actually need to purchase any more.

I agree. Unless its refills, I'm not spending any money on magic this year. If I say that enough maybe Ill follow through lol

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

I'm telling myself I can only purchase materials relating to theory.