Gimmick Decks VS. Regular Deck

[Jack Spades]

I must admit....when the whole David Blaine thing exploded back around 2000, I was on board. Why should one put in all the hours of learning sleights when I can "buy" my magic. I found myself purchasing the invisible deck, the rising card deck, photography deck, brain wave deck, etc......I must of paid a fortune for all these trick decks. It seemed like at the time I didn't want to put the necessary time in to learn my card magic...I just wanted to buy it.
They basically set around collecting dust.

Years later, I now shy away from gimmick decks and cards (except for B-Wave, that is an awesome packet trick). I want to put the time in to learn the moves and sleights. I use a standard deck to create my miracles. I guess in the end, you must find a balance between gimmicks and non gimmick tricks.

Question to you guys: Where do you stand on using gimmick decks vs regular decks?

 

[William Karlsson]

I don't think there is anything wrong with gimmick decks. Then again, I don't use them. I enjoy practicing sleight of hand.

 

[yyyyyyy]

There are pros and cons to both gimmick decks and regular decks. You can accomplish things with gimmick decks that you may never be able to do with normal sleight of hand and it can be infinitely easier than using impromptu techniques. However, they can't be examined and one of the first conclusions that a good number of people jump to is "Trick Deck". On the other side of things, normal decks have a sense of "nothing to hide", they can be borrowed and sleight of hand can be both fun and satisfying. However, the responsibility to perform lies on the performer rather than the deck itself. It can be difficult to perform sleights in front of large audiences and other specific scenarios. Some moves aren't as clean as gimmicked tricks. It's really a personal preference, I don't see a need to dislike either. Stick with whatever works best.

 

[KonTW]

I don't use any gimmicked decks.

I prefer using a regular deck of cards, just because I have fun with
practising moves and I don't want to carry around a "special" deck, I can
only use for one single trick.

 

[TylerRouss]

I think it's irrelevant. Trying to hide a sleight and trying to hide a gimmick work around the same ideas, so I really don't see it as being different.

 

[KonTW]

I think it's irrelevant. Trying to hide a sleight and trying to hide a gimmick work around the same ideas, so I really don't see it as being different.

I do understand what you mean, but I don't think that this really works around the same idea, because ones you've made the sleight, you are done, and you are clean.
But if you have, for example, a gimmick card, you have to get rid of it (In most cases), and you aren't clean at all.

 

[JokerZingo]

Hi, I myself almost never use gimmicked decks.

I personally think gimmicked decks are abit boring. What I can do tho is put a dublicate in a deck but that's almost how far my "gimmick" side goes.

With that said I think gimmicked decks is good for younger magicians to get into magic. I got into magic at age 16 so I went directly into doing the sleights so I don't really like gimmicked decks. I got a few but never use them.
Even tho I don't use gimmicked decks I think it's okay to use them, the reason why I doesn't use it is because I don't get any satiscation out of almost doing "nothing" to fool the spectator.

I like the rush to do a classic pass infront a specators eyes without them seeing it. So that's the reason I don't use gimmicked decks.

But as I mentioned I think it's a good way for a younger magician to get into magic =)

- Markus/JokerZingo

 

[TeeDee]

It depends who you are, how you perform, and what type of material you perform. If I force a card on someone and then instantly reveal its identity, that's a slightly puzzling trick. Using a gaffed deck to achieve that force is, in my opinion, counter-productive because the spectator will instantly want to examine the deck. If, however, I spend five minutes with the spectator apparently reading their body language, throwing in some cold reading to reveal details of their innermost thoughts, and then work my way slowly to the identity of the card as our minds slowly synchronise, I may have just created a life changing moment where the boundary between the possible and impossible seem to have shifted. When that's the effect, who cares whether I used a gimmicked deck or not. It no longer matters.

I think that the aim with magic, as with any art, is to create an experience for our participants where the method no longer matters. Of course, aficionados and critics might want to study the techniques and consider the various moves and gaffs involved in achieving an effect, in the same way that an expert might analyse the canvas and paint that Picasso used. When we hear great music, or see great theatre, art, film, etc. it very rarely matters what technique or tool was used to create them. All that matters is the experience, and that's what we judge them on.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

I must admit....when the whole David Blaine thing exploded back around 2000, I was on board. Why should one put in all the hours of learning sleights when I can "buy" my magic.

I find this ironic since David Blaine spent over a decade learning sleight of hand before he got his TV special. He used to be a pure-sleight-of-hand guy.

Like TylerRouss, I don't think there's really that much difference between hiding a sleight and hiding a gimmick. Both require decent presentational skills and the ability to perform and control the crowd. Switching a deck isn't that different than hiding a classic pass and there's no more honor in doing it the 'hard' way. In the end the only thing that matters is the experience of the spectator. The way we achieve that effect is irrelevant as long as it is achieved.

 

[Jack Spades]

I was speaking upon the card tricks themselves. Invisible deck and the rising card deck were both featured on David Blaine's first t.v. special. I'm sure the sales of these two effects sky rocketed...more so than let's say a book about card technique and handling.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

I wouldn't be surprised if the ratio of sales didn't change that much. I don't know if you realize it, but the vast majority of people interested in magic only make it to the stage of getting self-working-esque stuff like the ID. They then perform it exactly as the paper tells them to until something goes wrong and then they give up on magic because they were never that interested in it in the first place.

 

[erdnase97]

I have actually never handled a trick deck in my life. A never liked trick decks, because people allways think that there's a trick deck. I don't even like to use fancy decks for my performances. I use wpt bees, because then there's no way the deck can be gaffed, or anything like that. And I always give the deck for examination.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

I have actually never handled a trick deck in my life. A never liked trick decks, because people allways think that there's a trick deck. I don't even like to use fancy decks for my performances. I use wpt bees, because then there's no way the deck can be gaffed, or anything like that. And I always give the deck for examination.

Odd. I never have people suspect that I use trick decks. Perhaps something in your performance is making them think that?

 

[erdnase97]

Well, not always, but the smart-arses always say things like: "they're all threes", and such. I just don't like the concept.

 

[ChrisWiens]

I actually do 2 routines with a double backer. Both are no self-workers and sleight of hand is required. The construction of both is good enough that the idea of a gimmicked card shouldn`t even come to mind, and both end clean.

So why do people think gaffed cards are for beginners only?

I know real knuckle-busters (I can`t do) which make subtle use of (a) gimmicked card(s).
Some of the best sleight of hand card men in the world use gaffed cards sometimes (when required).

To me gimmicked cards are just a tool, not exclusive objects for beginners.
I would go so far and say most gimmicked cards are only really useful with a good amount of sleight of hand skill.

 

[AO356]

I don't use any gimmicked decks.

I prefer using a regular deck of cards, just because I have fun with
practising moves and I don't want to carry around a "special" deck, I can
only use for one single trick.

Exactly why i don't bother with fully gimmicked decks.

Odd. I never have people suspect that I use trick decks. Perhaps something in your performance is making them think that?

I once performed for a policeman. Right after performing two card monte and biddle trick, he wanted to examine the deck.
He did things like riffles and checking the edges of the deck. So i asked why he did so many 'tests'. He said some people {stripper deck} and some people used {marked decks}. Some spectators are aware of the existence of such gimmicks.

words are {..} are not the actual words he used. He just described the gimmicks.

Also on a side note, it doesn't mean you have to master a difficult sleight if you don't use gimmicks.
I used VERY basic sleights and normal deck and a whole lot of misdirection.

These are just my experiences performing magic over the years. Hope it helped=)

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

I once performed for a policeman. Right after performing two card monte and biddle trick, he wanted to examine the deck.
He did things like riffles and checking the edges of the deck. So i asked why he did so many 'tests'. He said some people {stripper deck} and some people used {marked decks}. Some spectators are aware of the existence of such gimmicks.

words are {..} are not the actual words he used. He just described the gimmicks.

Also on a side note, it doesn't mean you have to master a difficult sleight if you don't use gimmicks.
I used VERY basic sleights and normal deck and a whole lot of misdirection.

These are just my experiences performing magic over the years. Hope it helped=)

This is the point where I repeat the bit you quoted from me. Maybe your performance makes them suspicious. I never have people suspect that I use a trick deck, ever.

 

[Steerpike]

A never liked trick decks, because people allways think that there's a trick deck.

I've never had that problem.

And I always give the deck for examination.

Why do you run when you're not being chased?

Anyway, why is it that sleight of hand purists never just lie?

Some spectators are aware of the existence of such gimmicks.

They're also aware of some rudimentary sleights. That's why I lie. Like, all the time.

 

[Jecoa]

I'd just like to echo Steerpikes point (not that he needs back-up) about lying.

Because it seems that a lot of people want to be honest about their trickery and they are thus missing the point.
Lie, it works.

 

[Parker Nolan]

I like some gimmicked decks, mainly just the invisible deck and perhaps some very discreetly marked cards (for more mentalism-type card tricks). I like cards/decks like these because you can make them yourself, out of whatever cards you use.
Also, the only tricks where I would show the deck as being real is either when they (the spectator) ask to look at them, after performing a force. I also use the the spectator's attention on the deck (while they are checking them) as misdirection, enabling me to either set up another effect quickly, or even hide any gimmicks/gaffs that I did indeed use for the effect.