FLIPPED Series

[CallingEagle]

I have come up with three effects to show you guys. First of I would like to let you know of the sleights or principles not used... The Braue Reversal is not used for as similar as it may look, The Chicago opener principle is not used either because I know what that trick is and have done it before, and the final trick FLIPPED is not like other sealed deck tricks. The only way to do the trick is to go out and buy a new deck which will get expensive and there is no gimmick or reset cuz it can't be reset when the trick is done it's done which gives a perfect reason for not doing it again. My sealed deck effect the card is not signed because I've found that the Flipped card makes it more solid than signed cards.

Plus I've noticed on other sealed decks that the card signed tend to be the same card each time. Anyways I'll let you guys be the judge I've done these out on the street before and got great reactions especially if you use them in a little routine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTAcGDZx25s

 

[Silver]

Your handling looks awkward at times. In the reversal - the concept is neat, but all the cutting is unmotivated in my opinion.

The false cuts in the last one are unconvincing. Either speed them up, switch to something harder to follow, or get a false shuffle in there. A false overhand would be effective. Regardless though, if you have to buy a new deck *every* time you want to do the trick, it's not very economical.

 

[Robert//Livingston]

I think the first two effects just have too much handling... There are methods that are easier to understand, and more logical. Also the lack of patter through these make the effect seem even more disconnected.

I agree with Silver on the last effect, the cuts need to be faster, or better, or just a different 'f word'.

Lastly, the final effect seems like the spectator would react this way.. "So there's a card I picked reversed in a new deck... so what?" It just doesn't seem that hard hitting, especially since you have to use a new deck every time.

I'd love to see a performance of the last effect for spectators, and see their reactions. I could be totally wrong, but it seems my reaction would be as I explained.

 

[LuseifHo]

Theres not much I can say...
I didn't like the first two tricks. Your methods may be new... which I doubt, but honestly there is too much fidgeting. Even if it isnt the original way to perform it who cares? Your version has too much cutting, squaring, shaking, and unjustified movements. If you can compact it into a few small moves which are all justified with motivation, then there we might have something.
As for the last one... I have no idea how you did it exactly, but not bad. I don't what you mean by a non signed card is more solid... take a look at the Pandora System, hits hard, looks amazing. is stronger than just a flipped card. As said before, work on that false shuffle or atleast use a less obvious force (its not even exposure... seriously).

Also practice the first sleight of the 2nd flipped thing... its a tad awkward. Why would you cut from one side, transfer it to the other hand just to show what card is on top?

 

[RikAllen]

I have to agree, the first two were over complicated in handling. In part by the mess of movement and length of time in between 'selection' and it being reversed. If there weren't 100 different variations out already I'd say it might be worth looking at, but with 100 variations (many more direct and simple than yours) to have a single card reversed.

I will say your reversed card is neat, would be better with a signed card (having it reversed is optional) and with methods that can achieve a signed card (even if it is the same one over and over...you should change your audience often enough that it won't matter) then yours seems obsolete. If your method uses a legit new deck (Like I could hand you one and you use it for this effect) then I don't see any advantages to flipped versus signed in a sealed deck.

I would say Earl Nelson was correct in the 1970's when he wrote that too many magicians create new sleights and routines for the sake of creating new sleights and routines. Originality is one thing, re-creating methods for plots that don't make the effect more direct, simple, and hard hitting to an audience is trying to hard. Don't let me discourage you from creating and trying to be original, but overall making slight variations on already tested material will prove more beneficial than trying to create routines from scratch.

The last part isn't only directed at you either, many members here could probably stand to buy Variations Revisited just to read the last chapter (though the amount of work inside would be wasted if you just read the last chapter...great book...though I have the original and not the revisited edition).

 

[CallingEagle]

Alright I hope to clarify some of what you guys are saying, but to give you an idea of what you're looking at...the first two are showing you face up and face down cards(all) then the cutting and squaring and then giving the spectator the deck to have them pretend to flip the card themselves. The end of the tricks whether you want to do with all three or just the first two.

The third trick...I have seen the Pandora thing and I'm not impressed by that because if you look at the preview there's three groups of people and each time the sign the King Of Diamonds. Apparently the Pandora system is pretty gimmicked and it looks as if any one spectator who sees it more than once could get a clue as to whats going on. As for my thoughts on a flipped card being more solid than signed...well the example is the Pandora system It's too fishy for me. To do a flipped card is not too over the edge as to do a signed card.

It's like to tell a person they're doing a good job rather than an excellent job...when you tell a person excellent they tend to get sloppy because they don't think they have to try anymore and that's what a signed card to me is, is the excellent to the spectator and anything less won't impress them...A flipped is the good job which will give them the surprise on how the flipped card was flipped it needs more space to do a flip rather than placing a signed card in it's respectable place in a gimmicked deck.

Lastly my version of this has gotten a lot of great reactions and none of them have ever been "Oh so my card is flipped in the middle". And unlike Pandora the spectator opens the new deck from the cellophane to the the seal without the magician interrupting or opening the cellophane which also looked fishy because the cellophane didnt look like it covered the whole deck which might be why the magician opened it to begin with I'm not sure. All in all to each there own and I will keep mine .

 

[Jv]

I agree with everything said above, but I give you 100% props for creativity... although, the flipping procedure for the card (if it's the exact way I think it's done) is something that I used to use a looong time ago... but I like the possibilites you're coming up with it.