Favorite ACR ending?

[Cliff|Bumgardner]

I have a somewhat interesting history with the Ambitious Card Routine. Originally, it was one of my favorite effects bar none, loved it. Then, after some psychology set in (i'd be happy to explain said psychology elsewhere) I actually boycotted the routine for several months before returning and making it what I wanted.

My personal favorite is the "Card Duplication" (Flustration) as used by David Williamson, fantastic finale.

 

[Morgan B]

Love David Williamson - hate the Flustration count - least convincing move in magic.

Love to hear the Ambitious psychology SharpestLives.

 

[Cliff|Bumgardner]

Love David Williamson - hate the Flustration count - least convincing move in magic.

Love to hear the Ambitious psychology SharpestLives.

I respectfully, totally, disagree. I have never been let down by the Flustration and I use it frequently.


There was a thread on E many many moons ago that talked about how the Ambitious Card could spoil your magic. Something along the lines of showing them how you can make any card come to the top of the deck makes *some* other effects lessened because they know you can control the cards in some fashion. Usually, people know that magicians control cards anyhow, but I like to be in the gray of people not knowing what to expect, or what I can do. And I really agree that by constantly making a card rise to the top of the pack you are somewhat saying "Hey look, I can control your card!". So I now present my routine as something completely different.

I use heat as a theme. The signed card goes back in and I talk of how heat rises. I then attempt to "heat up" their card in the deck, bam, its on top. This is the ONLY Ambitious Rise in my entire routine (unless, one time out of a hundred, I perform Fallen). The rest of the routine moves slowly away from the heat theme/idea causing the card to jump straight out of the deck completely, to my mouth, duplicate and cause the 4 duplicates to vanish. This routine has served me very well for about 6 months now and never fails to have the spectators in the palm of my hand by the end.


While thinking about it, Solid Deception is one of the best Ambitious finales I have ever seen.

 

[Big_Hoos]

I was doing a bit more thinking on someone's call for the "Shuffling Rebecca" of the ACR, and it occurred to me: what about Joshua Jay's "The Remote Control?" It's an ACR where all the magic happens with a prop in the spectator's hand, it makes sense (not 'your card is magic' or 'my magical finger snap' but 'This remote control has been programmed to control your card') and its got a kicker ending with a card-to-impossible location (inside the remote control's battery compartment) that makes more sense than most.

How's that tickle yr fancy?

 

[Morgan B]

I also respectfully and totally disagree - the flustration count does not fool as much as people think. In proper context it is a convincer from a previous phase...like in Jumping Gemini by Ortiz - but if the move is expected to act as the actual proof to the claim all the cards are the same, I find it fails. Don't believe me, ask your audience/friends or someone you trust that is not a magician. See what they say. Anyhow, I am not aiming to change your mind, and honestly - this could be a thread of it's own. I would like to say in closing, it is funny that you don't want to showcase a move like a DL from an ambitious card routine, as it shows control - but what do you think the flustration count shows? Do you really think people believe the cards are the same? I would argue that you are confused with the strength of the metrhods used for the magical claim and effect you are choosing. When done properly, an ambitious card, like Daryl routine for example, can be very magical...although, I can see where you can argue it showcases a move. Sort of like G-Force by Gregory Wilson, and how it just highlights forces to start the effect.

As for the ambitious card presentation, I really like that both of the last posts are trying to find motivation. However, (and I would love to discuss this) how far do you ask your audience to suspend their disbelief in your plots. Depending on your venue, it may be hard to have people "buy in" to this claim. We wonder why people see what we do and say...MY KIDS WOULD LIKE THIS - when we just did a knuckle busting high end magic effect we know their kids would not understand. I think that presentations that have the same feel as the classic....

I have 4 jacks and their robbers...one goes to each floor...blah blah..they escaped presentation for that effect that has been passed down in books like Magic for Dummies and other Chapters magic books.

I would recommend reading "Transformations" by Larry Hass to get a better understanding on how to make your words/scripts/presentations more powerful and have meaning.

Before you reply - please think about what I am saying. Presentations that make claims that people know are absurd, insult the intelligence of the crowd and can make magic look immature.

There is a difference between saying:

The card comes back on top because I can TRAVEL back to time when it was there and saying imagine if we could travel back in time to the point where your card was on top. Anyhow, for those that get it....

Thanks for reading.

 

[Cliff|Bumgardner]

I would like to say in closing, it is funny that you don't want to showcase a move like a DL from an ambitious card routine, as it shows control - but what do you think the flustration count shows? Do you really think people believe the cards are the same?

That is a very good point, and one I, in a sense, agree with. However, I do not play it off as duplicating one card "magically". I am simply showing 3 cards I had "prepared earlier" and then a 4'th which is the card they signed. The real magic is that the 3 duplicates vanish leaving just the single, signed, card.

 

[Justin.Morris]

Man, there's a ton of great ideas here! I use the pop up move, but recently tried Sankeys Paperclipped move. Awesome.

ANd to those who say that card to impossible location is not logical... what do you think is so impressive about the ACR? ="How did it get to that 'impossible location' AGAIN? I was watching that time!" Then boom, to a totally crazy place. Very cool, especially if you work that into your patter.

j

 

[Big_Hoos]

And to those who say that card to impossible location is not logical... what do you think is so impressive about the ACR? ="How did it get to that 'impossible location' AGAIN?

My complaint with most C2ILs (if you'll forgive the abbreviation) is that they aren't justified even within the context of the routine. Why should the card shoot to my pocket other than "because I said so?," and shouldn't the logic behind our magic be a bit more compelling than that?

I'll bring up Jay's "Remote Control" again: the remote "stops working" (i.e. card is no longer rising) so the magician opens the battery compartment to check the batteries and instead finds the selected card folded inside. This makes a strange kind of sense, doesn't it? The logic is a bit flimsy, obviously, but there's a motivation within the context of the routine.

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, this is just a pet peeve of mine. Let's get back to the fun stuff!

 

[Randomwrath]

My usual patter is "So, the card can rise to the top but occasionally it keeps going, it gets a bit excited" (Card to Mouth) "and once it's turned up in my mouth, it starts turning up pretty much anywhere." (Card to Impossible Location)

 

[Morgan B]

Wow Randomwrath...you must do the trick REALLY quick if that is your patter, lol. Anyhow, that is still just verbal rationale, as you are now personifying the card, giving it feelings as the card gets "excited".

In short, adding illogical words as filler to illogical sequences does not make it logical - two wrong making a right kinda deal.

PS - SharpestLives - thanks for responding. Nevertheless, it is not the presentational framing that concerns me, although I wonder how your framing truly changes the logical minds of the actual method, but it is the actual method that I feel don't fool, as it is very apparent that you are continually showing the bottom card...and if it's signed, I think that is the proof of method to the on-looker. Regardless, we can agree to disagree...but then who would post in the threads?

Back to ambitious card - C2IL is not always garbage, as I have seen some effects where the wallet is brought into play early, but I still feel it can lack.

So, what is the ideal ending...and why?

I think Kurtz had it - he did 5 phases...each with an increasingly more stringent and challenging criteria...and the final phase reads like this..."Cut the cards yourself, cover the cards yourself, square the cards yourself, snap your fingers, turn over the top card yourself"!

They do it all themselves and the card is on top. If sponge balls is one of the strongest effects...because it happens in their hands, why doesn't this hold true for ambitious card?

Really great threads, glad I could write in it.

 

[Randomwrath]

...it was slightly abbreviated lol...

Anyway my magic isn't logical. I'm not a logical typa guy. I think my magic reflects that. XD

 

[nspikito]

If CardToImpossibleLocation is such a poor ending, how do you explain the success of Tommy Wonder's ACR, where it ends up in his ring box? His ending works so well because of the way he changes the narrative, claiming that if you like the trick so much, he'll explain it to you. Sure, his explanation is as nonsensical as any story a magician weaves. But it flows smoothly from the rest of the more traditional ACR routine. Also he sets you up for the surprise ending right from the beginning, by pointing out the ring box even before the card is signed.
I think the narrative is absolutely essential to great magic. Otherwise it's just deceptive athletics.
Spike

 

[SKSleighofHand]

A great way to end this ACR routine is Card to Mouth, great reactions when I performed this trick.

 

[FOO:L]

always thought the omni deck concept was good.(the whole, deck-to-clear-block) never bought it though..

 

[Big_Hoos]

I've actually designed one of my walkaround sets so that I use ACR to lead into Paperclipped. I'll admit this completely throws my previous criteria for "logic" out the window, but spectators take to it wonderfully!

 

[Medifro]

I've actually designed one of my walkaround sets so that I use ACR to lead into Paperclipped. I'll admit this completely throws my previous criteria for "logic" out the window, but spectators take to it wonderfully!

I think magicians restricting themselves to ACR ideas only, and neglecting all other ideas for being out of logic, when using an ACR, is a bad thing.

I have 3 ACRs, one of them ends with a complete deck change, other ends with a torn and restored. They all blend together nicely, as the presentation justifies all.

On an intresting note, the number of phases shouldn't be restricted too. Daryl's routine is 13 phases, but people argue that all these 13 phases are done in a specific venue. Well, Darwin Ortiz's ACR is 8 phases, all go very nicely and performed close up.

Mine are 4, 6 and 10

Cheers,

 

[spades]

I end with a card to mouth, or the card face up in the center of the deck jumping to the top.

-S♠

 

[thecavschosenone]

I'm seriously surprised that nobody mentioned this. If someone did, then I'm sorry I must have missed it. My favorite ambitious card ender is Ray Kosby's Raise Rise. Its simply beautiful!

 

[BrianationX]

I don't end It I keep it going and going

 

[Teddy94]

I like when you double lift the top card to show the chosen card, put down the indifferent card on top of it, and dribble on that until there is one card on top: the chosen card.