theory11 — Magic Tricks & the World's Finest Playing Cards
Quick Question About The Biddle Trick
- Thread starter Deadman
- Start date
Slow and steady
I definitely find that a slow and steady count works best, and when you try to speed up the counting, basically haste makes waste.
I definitely find that a slow and steady count works best, and when you try to speed up the counting, basically haste makes waste.
I definitely find that a slow and steady count works best, and when you try to speed up the counting, basically haste makes waste.
I agree, I go more with a slow and steady count as well.
V.
If you go too quick they feel like you are trying to hide something. The move in the Biddle trick is something so minute that you can do it really slow and open as there is essentially nothing to see. Aaron Fisher said it in the Paper Engine about going slow to respect the audience so they can really experience the effect.
I show them each card very slowly, there's really no need to go fast, the move is completely invisible even when done slowly. There is no reason for there to be any suspicion at this point. However, going fast will suggest that you're trying to cover up and as soon as they suspect that you might be doing something the reaction is going to be significantly weakened even if they don't actually see anything.
I can't agree with this at all, in my opinion you're completely wrong. Spectators do not think you're doing a move if you go slowly, they think you have nothing to hide. Spectators generally expect sleights to be extremely fast moves, 'the hand is quicker than the eye' type stuff. They really aren't prepared for, and have no concept of, sleights that happen in a casual action. The steal in the biddle trick is completely invisible anyway, if they see you slowly count off the cards how could they possibly suspect a sleight? Whereas if you go quickly they're far more likely to think you're hiding something.
This applies to most other moves as well. Such as the Elmsely count, rushing it because you're worried they will see the same card twice is probably going to give it away, they're more likely to ask to see the cards again and suspect something isn't right. Slowly and smoothly and it appears that you're being very open and have nothing to hide, the audience will pick up on this and assume nothing is happening.
I can't agree with this at all, in my opinion you're completely wrong. Spectators do not think you're doing a move if you go slowly, they think you have nothing to hide. Spectators generally expect sleights to be extremely fast moves, 'the hand is quicker than the eye' type stuff. They really aren't prepared for, and have no concept of, sleights that happen in a casual action. The steal in the biddle trick is completely invisible anyway, if they see you slowly count off the cards how could they possibly suspect a sleight? Whereas if you go quickly they're far more likely to think you're hiding something.
This applies to most other moves as well. Such as the Elmsely count, rushing it because you're worried they will see the same card twice is probably going to give it away, they're more likely to ask to see the cards again and suspect something isn't right. Slowly and smoothly and it appears that you're being very open and have nothing to hide, the audience will pick up on this and assume nothing is happening.
just go at a normal speed kind of like making your doubles look like one card if you dont look at it they wont
I count the cards. I go "card number 1... (pause) card number 2... (pause) card number 3..."
I try to make it as fair looking as possible. Also, if I get nervous and start to fumble the card, it's easier to recover if I'm going slow. If I was going really fast and then paused to square up the deck, it would look super suspicious.
I try to make it as fair looking as possible. Also, if I get nervous and start to fumble the card, it's easier to recover if I'm going slow. If I was going really fast and then paused to square up the deck, it would look super suspicious.
Don't you feel you are leading them to count along with you? wouldn't that make them pay more attention?
I think instead of saying card # 1, # 2 etc. You could call it out as first, second, third that way they are not counting the cards with their eyes their just listening.
Just a thought.
Here is something I'd like to through out.
Twice I've had a spectator say, "why is the card upside down?" I could practically see the gears in their head cranking as they searched for clues.
I said "well, I used to not put the card in upside down and it would take too long for the person to find their card. Some people would take forever, so I stick the card in upside down now so the spectator finds it faster."
Both times the person really ate up that answer and didn't question it at all.
Twice I've had a spectator say, "why is the card upside down?" I could practically see the gears in their head cranking as they searched for clues.
I said "well, I used to not put the card in upside down and it would take too long for the person to find their card. Some people would take forever, so I stick the card in upside down now so the spectator finds it faster."
Both times the person really ate up that answer and didn't question it at all.
I go slow, but not to slow. I also name the cards as I am going through like "king of spades, 4 of spades, 3 of hearts etc" that way it seems very fair and they are confirmed both visually and audibly that their card was in the five.
Am I the only one who has been wanting to say "That's what she said" to half of these responses?