Malkolm Triumph by Telmo Trenado.

[TelmoTrenadoTv]

Hi guys!

As you know The Wire team rejected my last 2 effects that I submited. So, before a new failure, I want to know something.

-Was this effect created before by another person? I know that Dani DaOrtiz has a very simple triumph like this, it is called Quick Triumph. He show it at the Fat Brothers DVD.
-I ask that because I will not waste time doing something for nothing. I say that because I spent a lot of time, seriously long time, creating ( When I say creating I mean the tutorial: preparing the script, recording the video and after editing, etc.) my last 2 effects for The Wire, and after they rejected my effects within a few hours.

I expect you to understand my position, because for me all this, is a hard work.

[video=youtube;c9hN90mCPtA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9hN90mCPtA&feature=youtu.be[/video]

The spectator takes any face up card and places it on the table. The deck of cards is separated into two piles. The cards are shuffled face to face so that half the cards are face up, the other half face down. After, the spectator places the selected card anywhere in the deck. Remember, the cards are shuffled, but when the deck is spread out on the table, all the cards are face up, except for one face down card, the selected card!

Created by me, this is a typical Triumph Trick, popularized by magic legends like Dai Vernon and Paul Curry.

 

[WyattSB]

I'm going to go ahead and say its not going to get approved, purely because it is just not original, like the other effects you've had rejected. It brings nothing new.

 

[yyyyyyy]

This looks identical to Dani DaOrtiz' Quick Triumph. Similar is an understatement; it looks exactly the same. You seem to be genuinely confused as to why your work has been rejected.

The fault isn't with Theory 11, it's with you. You should have accepted the criticism given to you after the first two rejections.

I'm not going to sugarcoat things for you; you're doing things wrong. You say that you don't want to make something for nothing. So then why expect us to GIVE you something for nothing?

As for how much effort you put into creating the video, quite frankly, no one cares. No one is going to give you money for filming something they've seen time and time again. Production quality is nice. It can make it easier to market your effects. It can make it easier to teach your material. It can make it easier to LEARN the material. But production quality doesn't mean anything if you aren't producing anything new.

 

[Steerpike]

The Shawshank Redemption was a great movie, but if someone sold me a ticket to a movie that had the exact same cast, script and cinematography frame for frame with the only change being that the main character's name was Schecky O'Flaherty instead of Andy Dufresne, I'd ask for my goddamn money back.

 

[TelmoTrenadoTv]

This looks identical to Dani DaOrtiz' Quick Triumph. Similar is an understatement; it looks exactly the same. You seem to be genuinely confused as to why your work has been rejected.

The fault isn't with Theory 11, it's with you. You should have accepted the criticism given to you after the first two rejections.

I'm not going to sugarcoat things for you; you're doing things wrong. You say that you don't want to make something for nothing. So then why expect us to GIVE you something for nothing?

As for how much effort you put into creating the video, quite frankly, no one cares. No one is going to give you money for filming something they've seen time and time again. Production quality is nice. It can make it easier to market your effects. It can make it easier to teach your material. It can make it easier to LEARN the material. But production quality doesn't mean anything if you aren't producing anything new.

-First of all, the setup, the preparation of the deck of the Quick Triumph by Dani DaOrtiz is completely different from this. Moreover, Dani doesn't use a selected card to do this variation, but in his variation he can do too. And the most important thing, the method to do the false shuffle it's different too, so, the routine too. Furthermore, I think that I've found a new form to introduce the card in the deck: the spectactor decides if he wants to introduce the card face down or face up in the deck.

What do you think now? Is it an understatement still?

-When I say "I will not waste time doing something for nothing", I mean the tutorial, because as you can see I did the performance but not the tutorial because that costs a lot to me: preparing the script, recording the explanation video in english and after editing...

Too much work for me if then they tell me: "this effect was created before"

I do not think it's that hard to understand.

 

[TelmoTrenadoTv]

The Shawshank Redemption was a great movie, but if someone sold me a ticket to a movie that had the exact same cast, script and cinematography frame for frame with the only change being that the main character's name was Schecky O'Flaherty instead of Andy Dufresne, I'd ask for my goddamn money back.

I say the same to you, read the above.

 

[Steerpike]

-First of all, the setup, the preparation of the deck of the Quick Triumph by Dani DaOrtiz is completely different from this.

Even assuming you're right, doesn't matter.

Moreover, Dani doesn't use a selected card to do this variation, but in his variation he can do too.

Doesn't matter.

And the most important thing, the method to do the false shuffle it's different too, so, the routine too.

Doesn't matter.

Furthermore, I think that I've found a new form to introduce the card in the deck: the spectactor decides if he wants to introduce the card face down or face up in the deck.

No you haven't.

What do you think now? Is it an understatement still?

Yes.

-When I say "I will not waste time doing something for nothing", I mean the tutorial...

I do not think it's that hard to understand.

Now let's see if this is difficult for you to understand: your next response to me better be, "Yes, you're right. I need to spend more time performing and less time trying to submit stuff to the Wire." If it isn't, then this is the last time we'll be speaking. Why should I waste my time trying to help someone who is just going to tell me to go **** myself? Why should I take the time to try and help you when you think you already deserve my money and adulation because of your ability to record a third-rate knock-off effect on digital video?

This is your last chance. I'm trying to help you. I've spent the last 6 years working as a professional, so you better believe I know more about marketing and business than you do. You can either get over yourself long enough to realize that I know what I'm talking about and you're better off listening to me, or you can continue with this infantile whining, wasting your time, and wondering why no one respects you. The choice is yours. Remember, once you close this door, it's closed for good. I do not like having my time wasted by children with bad manners and ego problems.

 

[TelmoTrenadoTv]

Even assuming you're right, doesn't matter.



Doesn't matter.



Doesn't matter.



No you haven't.



Yes.



Now let's see if this is difficult for you to understand: your next response to me better be, "Yes, you're right. I need to spend more time performing and less time trying to submit stuff to the Wire." If it isn't, then this is the last time we'll be speaking. Why should I waste my time trying to help someone who is just going to tell me to go **** myself? Why should I take the time to try and help you when you think you already deserve my money and adulation because of your ability to record a third-rate knock-off effect on digital video?

This is your last chance. I'm trying to help you. I've spent the last 6 years working as a professional, so you better believe I know more about marketing and business than you do. You can either get over yourself long enough to realize that I know what I'm talking about and you're better off listening to me, or you can continue with this infantile whining, wasting your time, and wondering why no one respects you. The choice is yours. Remember, once you close this door, it's closed for good. I do not like having my time wasted by children with bad manners and ego problems.

First of all, if you are going to answer me all the time only with "it doesn't matter" and you don't give me any reason, argument, we are in the same loop.

Maybe, in part you are right, but the ways you've used from the beginning to answer me, it wasn't appropriate. At all times, you answer me hesiating and joking. That's how I see it.

Finally, I want to ask you one last thing: Why this effect can not be a new effect, a new creation? I give you some details about "my triumph". In my opinion, those details become this, a new different effect. What do you think?

Anyway, thanks for everything.

 

[Steerpike]

First of all, if you are going to answer me all the time only with "it doesn't matter" and you don't give me any reason, argument, we are in the same loop.

It doesn't matter because the market doesn't care. Anyone who's been in magic long enough can smell a knock-off a mile away. I don't even own some of the DVDs you cribbed this stuff from, and even I can tell it's not original. Do you really think the wider audience out there of magic buyers are going to be any different?

Maybe, in part you are right,

In part? Okay, in matters like this, I am always right.

but the ways you've used from the beginning to answer me, it wasn't appropriate. At all times, you answer me hesiating and joking. That's how I see it.

And if you can't take this kind of criticism from me, how do you expect to be able to handle an audience, nevermind a publisher?

Finally, I want to ask you one last thing: Why this effect can not be a new effect, a new creation? I give you some details about "my triumph". In my opinion, those details become this, a new different effect. What do you think?

Because it's still the same effect. You don't take someone else's recipe and claim that you invented it because you added a sprig of parsley for garnish.

Dozens, if not hundreds, of magicians and mentalists have published their variations on Anneman's Pseudo-Psychometry. Maybe 5 of them were any good. The rest were some variant on, "I use a different blindfold," or, "I use this style of forcing bag instead." Most of them were crap because they were just tweaks on the method that had little to no appreciable effect on the overall routine. Many of these methods wallow in obscurity because no one cares. Most people will just stick with the Anneman original.

You are looking at the same thing right now. Why should anyone buy a Triumph from you that looks exactly like Dani Da Ortiz's Triumph when they can get the original instead?

Go out there and perform. You don't have anything you can market right now, I guarantee you. And you won't until you get the experience as a performer under your belt.