By average person, I meant lay person, since the average person has very little, if any, knowledge of sleight of hand. And I wasn't comparing Fantastic Fig and David Blaine. I was using Blaine as an example of someone who isn't a magician's magician. He's only effective with lay people. I was trying to make the point that from a lay person's point of view, Fig's sleight of hand skills are no better or worse than Blaine's. Everyone keeps analyzing his performance from the viewpoint of a magician. But he's not performing to magicians, is he? I was also pointing out that I'd rather watch Fig perform than watch Blaine perform. Blaine has never fooled me, and his personality isn't entertaining. Fig won't fool me either, but at least I'll be a little entertained by his bizarre actions. I find this rather funny. You criticized Fig because he used a memorized stack. The Si Stebbins stack is commonly used, so I don't see the problem with any sort of stacked deck. You also said he won't make it past another round. Well, he's not trying to, so I don't see your point. Again, stop taking his act so seriously. It's also funny that you said it isn't a big deal to fool a lay person. I quote you on this, " Also, yes, he fooled the judges... bravo. Do you find it hard to fool a lay audience?" And yet you praise David Blaine, a magician who can only fool a lay audience. Well aren't we contradicting ourselves. Point is, Blaine and Fig are very similar from a lay person's perspective, in terms of skill level. Blaine probably performs harder hitting effects, but that has nothing to do with difficulty. From my point of view as a magician, none of the effects that either of them perform are going to truly amaze me. So what matters are the other aspects of a performance, like presentation. I like Fig's presentation better, so I'd rather watch him.