Strike vs get ready DL

Discussion in 'Magic Forum' started by fridoliina, Jun 25, 2010.

  1. Almost every magician seems to love the Strike or hit style double lifts and most magicians seems to think that it is the way to go in terms of double lifts. After hearing other magicians rave about it for years i decided to learn some strike doubles so i picked up a few sources.

    After viewing some of them i just dont get it. Whats so great about it?

    Almost every double lift that i have seen that already has a break (get ready) looks so much cleaner, more relaxed and more natural.

    I understand that a pro might be that you dont need a get ready, but seriously how hard is it to just pinky count two cards?
  2. I have one question. What does a strike double lift looks like? I strongly agreed with you that a pinky count is a great way to look more natural.
  3. A strike or "hit" double lift is where you dont have a break and as you go in you get your two cards and turn them over as one.
  4. Strike doubles should look exactly the same as get ready doubles because both should look exactly like a single card being turned over. If the strike double isn't as clean, relaxed, and natural as the normal turnover, it's not being done correctly.

    But it's mainly personal preference over which one to use.
  5. Here is a video of me performing a strike double several times.

    TheatreHead's post is dead on. The important thing is what the spectator thinks has happened.
  6. Thats what im talking about, when the hand contacts the deck it has this smal "pause" when the picking up of the cards are done and there is some tension in that kind of move.

    If there is a break you just flip the card over.
  7. I think you see what you're looking for when it is not really there. Any "pause" is me taking my time because I'm relaxed and I feel I have nothing to hide.

  8. Dont take it the wrong way, thats how all strike DLs looks. Naturally it will have a pause since you have to pick up the cards vs when you have a break and you can just flip it over.
  9. David, nice video.

    The only thing I don't like about that double is that you have to keep going to the inside right corner to get it. Although I don't know what it looks like when you consistently turn over a single card, it should look exactly like that when you do a double. A pinky count is a great way to achieve this, and is what I do and recommend.

    The last turn over you did, for the single, was not consistent with the rest of the turnovers, and of course I'm over-analyzing the situation. The double lift should only be used sparingly, as people tend to notice what your hands do when you turn over a card. If you don't believe me, Darwin Ortiz talks about this is Designing Miracles and Strong Magic.

    Whichever way you decide to turn over your double, triple, quintuple, just make sure you do it the same way every time.
  10. Agreed, the last one looked much more loose and relaxed.

    Please dont take this the wrong way because your strike Dls were good, but thats just the nature of them.

    To me, DLs with a break just looks much more loose relaxed and natural. If someone disagrees i would like to hear your thoughts and points on it.
  11. I agree on both counts. Thanks for the advice.
  12. I prefer to do the strike and push-off double lift.A get ready double lift just looks a little bit 'fishy' without some misdirection.
  13. The difference is in preference. I do a get ready dl when performing, but have practiced both, I just prefer getting a break. The problem is magicians think like magicians, even when they think they're thinking like laymen. Laymen don't know about dl's, breaks, strikes or not...they don't care. They can't conceptualize you doing anything more than what you're showing them : the turning over of one card.

    If you do something poorly, with too much tension, without the proper misdirection or distance, your break was extremely large...what have you, then you might get called on it. Most of this is going to stem from nerves, not which move you chose to use (not to say this isn't important).

    Find a double that works for you, use it, love it, master it-and to hell with anyone who tries to tell you about being more 'deceptive' (especially magicians, who don't think like laymen...)

    On a quick note: The way magicians think is also why they are easily fooled, they are looking for extremely clever methods (even when you're not using one). If it fools magicians, but doesn't fool laymen...then it's no good to me. If it leaves laymen baffled beyond explanation (of any kind) then it's a move (or effect) I want in my arsenal.
  14. Rik, I agree with your post, but if you turn all of your singles over one way and do the double that you've practiced so hard on a different way a laymen will notice. Even if it's not right away, they will think back and say "Hmm he turned that card over differently, I wonder why". They get used to how you turn the card over, and then you create a disturbance by turning a card over a different way.

    This again is written about in both of Ortiz's books. I'm not trying to tell him to be more deceptive. I'm trying to tell him to be consistent.
  15. hi david i didnt know u had an account here i never saw u on the fourms
  16. While I didn't state it in my post, I do advocate practicing your singles in such a way to mimic your doubles. I actually didn't disagree with your post, I was answering his question; Why do so many magicians put the strike second on a pedestal?

    If it's a move they've used to great success, they'll praise it highly and say it's better than all other doubles (for a half dozen or so reasons) when, in reality, no one way is better than all others when it comes to double turnovers. As long as (like you pointed out) are consistent between your doubles and your singles then it doesn't matter which double turnover you adopt. Whatever feels and looks the most natural for your performance style should be the one you use. After you've found it, turn both singles and doubles over in that same manner until it's second nature to do so.

    The same can be said of shuffles, while the riffle shuffle is better served for mixing and showing mixed cards, not having a table makes the overhand easier to do. Since most laymen can't riffle shuffle without a table (if they can riffle shuffle at all) then you mixing them overhand style just looks natural.

    I hope that clears things up some, as consistency throughout an effect (and set, routine, act) will create a better illusion and in the end cause the spectators to believe what you're doing is impossible.

    In actuality, being more consistent will create a better deception which will lead to more barriers between effect and method...but I understand what you're saying ;).

Share This Page

{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results