theory11 — Magic Tricks & the World's Finest Playing Cards

This makes me want to quit.

TXmagician said:
the clipshift is my most used and undetecable sleight. if you dont like it, its because your not too good at it.
Click to expand...

So just because it's undetectable means it's good?

Usefulness is a relative scale. Compared to a lot of other card sleights out there, it lacks the versatility and utility of many other classic techniques. It's good as a color change, sure, but what else does it really add? There's nothing that the clipshift can do that can't be replaced with other, easier, and more versatile moves, save the color change.

I have the clipshift down, and I use it in 1 effect. It's not very useful at all.
 
Most of Chad Nelson's stuff is for the people who would rather have their stuff look like a ton of fancy flash and skill. While I personally don't see anything wrong with. A lot of poker deals out there can be played up as incredible skill. My main problem with things like that is it takes the whole idea of "Work smarter, not harder." and throws it out the window. Now I know Darwin Ortiz often talked about the harder work often leading to the best outcome. (Though he was talking about direct sleights vs gimmicks). This whole era of people doing sybils and clipshifts is just a phase. Because I can assure you that anybody who decides to try to make money doing magic as an enterainer. Is going to soon realize that most of those super quadriple backflip monkey shuffle out the window cuts, just don't entertain anybody. It's impressive sure. But not very entertaining to most laypeople. Specially if you try to do a move like that and then say "I've lost your card in the deck." Most people on this earth will think "Yeah right.."
 
TXmagician said:
the clipshift is my most used and undetecable sleight. if you dont like it, its because your not too good at it.
Click to expand...

A baseless accusation which only confirms your stupidity.

I don't like mathematics, but I still topped my grade in it in high school.

Going by your logic, you mustn't like English very much.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Randy said:
Most of Chad Nelson's stuff is for the people who would rather have their stuff look like a ton of fancy flash and skill. While I personally don't see anything wrong with. A lot of poker deals out there can be played up as incredible skill. My main problem with things like that is it takes the whole idea of "Work smarter, not harder." and throws it out the window. Now I know Darwin Ortiz often talked about the harder work often leading to the best outcome. (Though he was talking about direct sleights vs gimmicks). This whole era of people doing sybils and clipshifts is just a phase. Because I can assure you that anybody who decides to try to make money doing magic as an enterainer. Is going to soon realize that most of those super quadriple backflip monkey shuffle out the window cuts, just don't entertain anybody. It's impressive sure. But not very entertaining to most laypeople. Specially if you try to do a move like that and then say "I've lost your card in the deck." Most people on this earth will think "Yeah right.."
Click to expand...

I just wanted to separate this response from the idiocy above; apologies in advance for the double post. The poster I quoted will never bother to listen to an argument or explanation, but I will mention it here in brief anyway.

I mentioned that I think the Clipshift is 90% useless. Why 90%?

I think it's a pretty decent colour change. It's one handed, and quite visual. For what it is, I think it's great.

For everything else though... I hear people saying that it's a versatile sleight, it does everything. I will admit, it does function as a good colour change. For everything else... Versatile? Ok, sure. But I'm sure you've all heard of the phrase, "Jack of all trades, master of none". This is my issue with the sleight. The fact that it can be used for several purposes does mean it is actually good for all those purposes! For a colour change, holding it in one hand and shaking the deck at a slightly odd angle is not a bad thing. For a control, it absolutely is.

It works as a control? Sure, if you have never owned a decent magic book in your life. Whatever happened to truly great controls - the side steal? The diagonal palm shift? Comparing any of these to the clipshift is like comparing a millionaire to a hobo.

It works as a palm? Heck, if you want to palm it with one hand - Hugard.

It works as a pass? Whatever happened to the classic pass? The hermann pass? Any sort of decent pass that's been tried and tested through time?

The Clipshift is a decent colour change.

But there is nothing else it does, that another sleight doesn't do better.

So if you're satisfied with being average, or even mediocre, use it for everything. If you actually have talent, use the best sleight for whatever it is you want to do.
 
While I'm firmly on the side of those who prize table work in general, and Erdnase in particular, above pretty much any sleight-of-hand achievement, I think there is a point to be made in favour of flashy, visual magic, even if it's impractical or inefficient in performance. What we do in magic, and, I believe, in all creative pursuits, is express a joy that the art gives us. Therefore, I don't think it's entirely appropriate to sneer at those who wish to play with all the latest modern techniques, and I use the word "play" intentionally. I think we should feel free to revel in the many possibilities of playing cards, even if only for our own amusement, because it is the joy we give ourselves which will ultimately be conveyed in our performances. Of course, to attain the peak of the art, one should seek joy not only from the latest moves, but also from the history, obscure knowledge, and classical works laid down already.
 
Chad is great, he has already proved that with his Dan and Dave releases. I don't know what he is thinking with the new dvd.
 
I think this whole visual thing just comes from tv. Young magicians just want to recreate special effects so they come to "visual" magic. I like some visual magic but not all of it is good. If you can see it I think it can be more real. But, a lot of the older magic is better because they don't know when the move is about to happen.
 
^ I think you, and many other people, need to realize that magic isn't just about "not getting caught". "Visual" magic has many more problems then just telegraphing to the spectator when a move is going to happen. I can fool my spectators all day long with random sleights that they won't ever catch, but if the routine Doesn't make sense then the magic is worthless. To the spectator, the magic doesn't only happen by what they see. All 5 senses are involved, and how the magician manipulates these senses determines what impressions their magic will leave. The spectator witnessing a card change during a clipshift is a "cool" factor. But a well thought out routine, that makes sense, and has feeling, can be as "un-visual" as one wants, and it will still leave the spectator questioning what has transpired.

Magic isn't only in the eyes.
 
Okay I have been into magic for 2 years then dropped out because of school and all that (yes I am in high school). But I recently got back into it and have been doing it for about 4 months and am trying to get good well let’s say I am trying to get a job at a local restaurant. Anyways I admit I bought allot of the New stuff BUT the only reason I did was because that was the only stuff I knew like I only knew about ellusionist and that’s it. Well I am trying to get a library of some good books. And I know it's kind of far I am waiting for Christmas to get some books BUT I already own Magic menu part 1, Mark Wilsons complete course in magic, Card college part 1 and Bo Bo's Modern coin magic. Well basically what I am asking is that I would like to know what books to get. I am already saving up for and asking for the rest of card college and magic menu and Royal Road to card magic, but I heard there are a lot of other good books out there like Tarbell so what should I buy/study. And where do I get it. I just want know what the Old stuff is I guess what I am asking because I know what the new stuff is...I own almost half of the stuff and like some of the people said before me a lot of it is trash. Not trying to bash it just telling it as it is.
 
A07:

Have you mastered Mark Wilson's book? Can you do the sponge ball routines, the cups and balls routines, the rope routines, the coin routines? If not, work through that book and learn not just what the methods are, but learn how to perform those methods.

Have you mastered Bobo's book yet? Again, not just reading but learning the methods and effects?

Have you worked through Card College Volume 1 yet? What did you think of it?

My point is to make sure you spend the time with the books you have before you get new ones. After you have worked through the three books you have you should have a better sense of where you want to go with you magic. Are you looking to progress in cards, coins or other types of magic?

Where you want to go dictates the route you need to take. I can recommend books that I like, but they may not necessarily work for you.

To answer the question you asked, if you liked Card College Volume 1, get Volume 2. The first two books were originally published as a complete course in card magic. The rest of the set is amazing. If you like Volume 1, I expect you will eventually get the rest of them.

Tarbell is a general treatise on magic. It is an interesting read and will give you a tremendous amount of information. However, if you like cards, I would recommend getting the rest of Card College before getting Tarbell.

Other classic books include Royal Road to Card Magic, Expert Card Technique, Encyclopedia of Card Tricks, Scarne on Card Tricks, Hugard's Magic Manual, The Card Magic of LePaul, and EACT. Other than Encyclopedia of Card Tricks and Scarne on Card Tricks, I wouldn't get them until you have finished the Card College series (stick with Giobbi and the order he teaches the material). One of my favorite books is Stars of Magic which was the equivalent E or T11 back in the 1940's and 1950s. It has a lot of classic effects.

If you want to do restaurant magic check out books and DVDs on that topic. Your learning will be more focused that way.

As for the new stuff being trash, I'm not sure I agree. Yeah, a lot of the stuff is designed for performing for other magicians as a demonstration of skill, but there is a lot of new stuff out there that is pretty good. For example, Aaron Fisher's Search and Destroy and Helter Skelter are great effects (in The Paper Engine or from Aaron's DVDs) that would work in a restaurant setting. A lot of Paul Harris' material (from AoA or TA) would also work in a restaurant. Kenner's Totally Out of Control is another great book.

My advice is work through what you have now. Get out there and perform it. That will give you a sense of where you want to go and you can get better recommendations.
 
RealityOne said:
As for the new stuff being trash, I'm not sure I agree. Yeah, a lot of the stuff is designed for performing for other magicians as a demonstration of skill, but there is a lot of new stuff out there that is pretty good. For example, Aaron Fisher's Search and Destroy and Helter Skelter are great effects (in The Paper Engine or from Aaron's DVDs) that would work in a restaurant setting. A lot of Paul Harris' material (from AoA or TA) would also work in a restaurant. Kenner's Totally Out of Control is another great book.
Click to expand...

Its not the new "stuff" that is bad, its the new mindset, the feeling that everyone has to create a new move or control to be like Dan and Dave, and evewrything has to be "visual" magic, like Ponta the Smith and his coin routines. If you look at Aarons stuff, it is definitely an older style of magic. The effect outweighs the sleights. Search and Destroy, you do almost NO fingerwork, and you get an amazing effect, through method and presentation. With Chad Nelson, you do tons of difficult, obscure and angle sensitive fingerwork to get a mediocre effect like a single color change.
 
A 07 5P4D35 said:
Okay I have been into magic for 2 years then dropped out because of school and all that (yes I am in high school). But I recently got back into it and have been doing it for about 4 months and am trying to get good well let’s say I am trying to get a job at a local restaurant. Anyways I admit I bought allot of the New stuff BUT the only reason I did was because that was the only stuff I knew like I only knew about ellusionist and that’s it. Well I am trying to get a library of some good books. And I know it's kind of far I am waiting for Christmas to get some books BUT I already own Magic menu part 1, Mark Wilsons complete course in magic, Card college part 1 and Bo Bo's Modern coin magic. Well basically what I am asking is that I would like to know what books to get. I am already saving up for and asking for the rest of card college and magic menu and Royal Road to card magic, but I heard there are a lot of other good books out there like Tarbell so what should I buy/study. And where do I get it. I just want know what the Old stuff is I guess what I am asking because I know what the new stuff is...I own almost half of the stuff and like some of the people said before me a lot of it is trash. Not trying to bash it just telling it as it is.
Click to expand...

I'd focus on school.
 
UnknownMagician93 said:
Its not the new "stuff" that is bad, its the new mindset, the feeling that everyone has to create a new move or control to be like Dan and Dave, and evewrything has to be "visual" magic, like Ponta the Smith and his coin routines. If you look at Aarons stuff, it is definitely an older style of magic. The effect outweighs the sleights. Search and Destroy, you do almost NO fingerwork, and you get an amazing effect, through method and presentation. With Chad Nelson, you do tons of difficult, obscure and angle sensitive fingerwork to get a mediocre effect like a single color change.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm probably as "old style" as it gets. My skill as a magician is based on what my audience sees, not on the level of difficulty of the sleights that I perform. Too often "visual" magic is a excuse to not engage the spectator's other senses. Patter is a lost art, with most people doing a say-do-see presentation (say what you are going to do, do it and tell the audience to see what happened). I could go on my soapbox for pages.

I was merely responding to A07's "old" stuff vs. "new" stuff dichotomy. How old something is doesn't matter. What matters is the quality of the material and how it works in front of a live audience (as opposed to a webcam).
 
RealityOne said:
Agreed. I'm probably as "old style" as it gets. My skill as a magician is based on what my audience sees, not on the level of difficulty of the sleights that I perform. Too often "visual" magic is a excuse to not engage the spectator's other senses. Patter is a lost art, with most people doing a say-do-see presentation (say what you are going to do, do it and tell the audience to see what happened). I could go on my soapbox for pages.

I was merely responding to A07's "old" stuff vs. "new" stuff dichotomy. How old something is doesn't matter. What matters is the quality of the material and how it works in front of a live audience (as opposed to a webcam).
Click to expand...

We are on the same page.
 
Let me restate what I ment on the word "new stuff is trash." I mis said when I said it was pretty much all trash, what I meant was that people were just making stuff to make a quick buck and it doesn't matter the quality. Not all the new stuff is garbage, there is alot of good stuff out their, such as WH stigmata, Indecent, DG fraud, well I hope you get the point. So I appologize on the worded way I hope you get what I am saying now.

As for RealityOne I have mastered everything I can do. I don't have sponge balls or cups and balls. Also sounds weird but I don't have rope for all the rope tricks. Everything else I have perfected. Another thing I don't want to just be one catagory. I think magic is the ability to perform with anything such as a fork, quarter, cards, sponge balls, bills hopefully you get my point.

So once again I apologize for not clearly stating what I meant.
 
UnknownMagician93 said:
^ I think you, and many other people, need to realize that magic isn't just about "not getting caught". "Visual" magic has many more problems then just telegraphing to the spectator when a move is going to happen. I can fool my spectators all day long with random sleights that they won't ever catch, but if the routine Doesn't make sense then the magic is worthless. To the spectator, the magic doesn't only happen by what they see. All 5 senses are involved, and how the magician manipulates these senses determines what impressions their magic will leave. The spectator witnessing a card change during a clipshift is a "cool" factor. But a well thought out routine, that makes sense, and has feeling, can be as "un-visual" as one wants, and it will still leave the spectator questioning what has transpired.

Magic isn't only in the eyes.
Click to expand...

Well said - I've been lacking a good point of reference about visual magic.

To repost a short anecdote from another thread - I performed recently an effect in which the spectator demonstrates photographic memory by remembering the positions of cards in a shuffled deck. She gave me a hug afterwards, saying "Thank you for making me feel talented".

You are absolutely right - magic is more than visuals. Visuals have advantages, certainly, and should be incorporated into what you do, but there are other, bigger things to worry about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.