New card trick: is it worthwhile?

Discussion in 'Magic Forum' started by cmadeira, Jan 26, 2019.

  1. I came up with an idea and would like to get your opinion.

    The routine would be something like this (I'm making it as short as possible).

    Magician: I need three spectators who have access to their email on their cellphones. Great! Please insert your email adress here. Very well. Now, I'm going to send a message to all of you. Please check that you have got that message, but do not open it yet.
    OK, now I need another spectator. Good. Please take this deck, put it behind your back and cut it as much as you want. Tell me when you are satisfied.
    Great. Now take the top three cards and give me the rest of the cards. Good.
    Now, please hide those three cards somewhere no one can see them.
    So, let's recap. I've sent a message to these three volunteers, and then this gentleman chose three random cards. No one, not even him, knows what cards are those. Much less could anyone know which cards he would select at the time when I sent the messages. And yet...
    Please, madam, would you open your message and see what's in it?
    Spectator A: It's a card, the five of clubs.
    Magician: Good. And you sir?
    Spectator B: I have the jack of spades.
    Magician: Last message.
    Spectator C: eight of hearts.
    Magician: Very well. Remember I sent the messages before the cards were selected. Let's see what those cards are. Please, sir, can you tell us what cards you have hidden somewhere?

    And of course they are the same cards.

    You know how most of this is done (SS, etc.)., but can you figure how I sent the messages before the cards were selected?
     
    Mr_ARPY likes this.
  2. I dont understand, are you looking for a way to create this, or you wanna know if it’s a good trick or not?
     
  3. I created it, just would like to hear some thoughts.
     
  4. Too complicated. What is the magic that happens?
     
    johnny wizz likes this.
  5. The magic is I predicted which cards would be selected. Proof? Is in your email, sent even before I said what was going to happen. No force at all.
     
  6. From a magician perspective, the only interesting issue is the selection process. You gave that away with using the word ‘cut” and selecting the top cards. I suspect that your effect won’t work with a borrowed deck, with a shuffle or with a selection of non-consecutive cards.

    At its most basic, this is a three card selection effect. I could take a second deck and pick three cards and then have the selected cards match. Same effect - “I predicted the cards that match.”

    That raises the question of whether your presentation adds anything. I think that getting people’s emails at the beginning results in a distraction and a waste of time. If I’m in the audience, I would tune out. It is dead time with no audience interest.

    The selection proceedure seems contrived. Why cut the deck? Why behind the back? Why only one person picking three cards?

    For a selection proceedure, you need to justify any proceedure where the person isn’t picking from a face up spread. In this case, there is no justification so the audience perceives the proceedure to be the method. That is, they will say “there was something about him putting the cards behind his back” and think themselves clever for figuring it out.

    The reveal draws away from you as the magician. Your involvement was sending an email. That isn’t magical. The reveal is your spectator reading an email. Where is the focus of the audience?

    Finally, there is opportunity cost. Opportunity cost is the loss in value for forgoing the opportunity of performing another effect. There are a lot better prediction effects. My first thought was Kranzo’s East Canasta where a spectator and magician each picks three cards from decks they have each shuffled and put them somewhere in their pockets. The cards and the locations match. The focus of the reveal is on the magician and the spectator and the audience can see everything (as opposed to the spectators attention being directed to the volunteer’s phone).
     
  7. Thanks for so many interesting thoughts.

    Yes, I told that in my initial post. It's an SS deck. The normal routine would be take back deck, peek , reveal, pretty basic.

    Yes, but you need some kind of force. Or the selected cards could be spread on a table in front of you and you have a second deck and you go fetch the exact same cards, you know where I'm going. To the movies...

    Yes, of course, but it could be done while doing other things in the meantime. For instance, do something with spectator A, ask for his email, start some other thing with spectator B while spectator A does this, ask for email, etc.

    Email is a strong thing, because you cannot tamper with it (once sent, it's lost, there's nothing you can do), but at the same time tricky (messages could be sent to the spam folder, maybe the user has blocked images and it won't work).

    So, there's an additional level of possible problems here, including dead time: Oh, you didn't get the email/you can't see the picture?

    The SS routine forces it to be cuts and a single person. Behind the back so that no one can see how many cuts, where, etc.

    Well, it could be done in front of everyone's eyes, like false shuffle, cut, complete, take the top three cards. Do you think this improves it?
    The only important thing is that a spectator gets three SS cards and you have a peek at the next (or previous, in this case).

    Very good point. That's why I wanted to have people commenting.

    The point is:

    I can send a number of messages, take the same number of cards from an SS deck (after I have sent the messages and I am commited to whatever is in them) and the cards match. Free choices, no force whatsoever.

    I guess I could go where you want me to be saying something: "OK, let's see what cards were chosen by spectator D. Now, I can magically appear this card on your phone (spectator A). Please check. Now you (spectator C). Open your message. Now you (spectator B)." Do you think this a better approach?

    I don' know Kranzo's East Canasta, but that brings me to Mark Elsdon's 21st Century Canasta, where, again, the magician touches nothing, does nothing: a spectator cuts to an ace, opens the magician's phone and the card is there.

    And finally: the general idea could be used to many other tricks. It's about revealing something on a previously sent mail message, which you cannot change once it is received. I guess this is a strong method, just need to find the best way to use it and present it.

    Many thanks for your helpful thoughts.
     
  8. Oh, you meant Easy Canasta, totally lost it. I see what you mean, but this is legit, no setup apart from the SS stack.
     
  9. Just a thought... you could gather everyones email before the show and have an assistant pick 3 people who have smart phones and can receive email. This might help the distraction process of the effect since you won't have to send an email from the stage.. Hell, you could have even sent the email a week before hand and told them to bring it to the show. Darin Brown does these sorts of things a lot and they never seem boring or drawn out in my opinion. Personally, I think you are on to something. Keep working at it....I look forward to seeing how the trick develops.
     
  10. Agreed. But so is giving three spectators posterboards with pictures of the cards (for stage) or giving three spectators cards from a second deck. The question is which works better for your performance?

    Anytime you deviate from a truly free selection, you lose something. The more complicated the selection procedure, the more suspicious it is. I like you doing a shuffle when you talk, explaining that you could just take the top three cards, but then asking the spectator to cut the deck to any three cards.

    I'm assuming SS refers to the name of a person who's stack you are using - if not, I don't know what you are talking about.

    It appears that there is something going on with your method that requires the card following the selections to be known at the time of the e-mail is sent but which isn't known until later when the cards are selected. Is that correct? If so, that subtlety would be lost on the audience because they don't know the method.

    No, because I see using the phones as a distraction.

    Essentially, this is the basis for every prediction effect. Is e-mail stronger than other methods? I don't think so, but it's your call.

    My error. I was typing on my phone. It doesn't matter if magic is "legit" because the audience doesn't know the method. What matters is the appearance of being "legit" which I think Easy Canasta does very well.
     
  11. Almost everything has been done in some way or another. Email simply brings a trick of this sort into the modern era...and in my humble opinion, that is interesting. You could also do it with Text messaging....might be even quicker and feel more modern, or snap chat etc...
     
    Mr_ARPY likes this.

Share This Page

Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results