Triumph

Discussion in 'Magic Forum' started by 19283grqhwbenjvwqhdb, Oct 13, 2012.

  1. Alright, so my favorite plot in magic is the triumph effect. I really like performing these, and I would like to find a triumph that is preferably impromptu, no funny movements, and, most of all, fun. So I guess my question is, what is your guys' favorite triumph.
     
  2. I like the original trick, but I've heard on the Wizard Product Review that this version of triumph is incredible. If you're up for a comedic performance that still really blows people away Sloppy Shuffle Triumph is great.
     
  3. Still the original published in Stars of Magic.

    Jay Sankey`s "Back in Time" with the Goodwin/Jennings-Display when there is no table available.
     
  4. My personal favourites are John Bannon's Last Man Standing (Impromptu and only a little bit knacky) from his book Dear Mr. Fantasy and The Bannon Triumph/ Play It Straight is virtually self working.
     
  5. I have the TA box set by Paul Harris and there is a Easter egg called Unshuffled Rebecca with a story line of the guarantee jokerfixing cards and what not and its very visual. I don't know if it has been on a another dvd but it sure is good and its great but the TA box set is expensive.
     
  6. Definitely Open Triumph, it just looks so clean and perfect.
     
  7. The strength of the triumph doesn't depend on the moves. Not one bit. I have bought, learnt, and performed literally over a dozen triumphs. From using simple psychological sleights, to doing push through false shuffles. Trick decks and impromptu. I can tell you that it does not make one bit of difference how its done. Whether you can display the cards, or fan them, or whatever other convincers you try to throw in. The only important thing in triumph, as with most magic, is presentation. A sloppy shuffle and a PTFS are equally deceiving to a spectator. But the difference in performance from say, stock patter, to say, Francis Menotti's Exdislycally Shunuffled, is massive. What you should be asking, is what is your favorite performance or patter for triumph. That is what will truly make a difference.
     
    sk1ndeep likes this.
  8. I've been performing Ben Train's Triumph v.136 any chance I can since I got it. It's easy to learn, and super deceptive, even with magicians. Ben is a tremendous teacher as well.
     
  9. Troy Hooser's triumph is fantastic
     
  10. I learned a similar version to the one shown on Blue Crown, (Ben Train's v.136) but that Dani DaOrtiz one is quite tempting. And fast, like he just picks up the deck and I'm waiting for some move, then he spreads the cards...wow.
     
  11.  
  12. #13 ChrisWiens, Nov 3, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 3, 2012
    I disagree.
    Example:
    In the original Triumph in "Stars of Magic" the spectator spreads the cards for the final display and the magic happens in their hands. I got that tip from Woody Aragon (he has a very good section about the Triumph effect on his Woodyland set, which I highly recommend). He said that noone does it the way it is described in the original (because spectators normally can`t spread card as elegant as we can). But for his audience, it is stronger. I´ve tried it and for me, he was right. It`s such small things that don`t seem important at first glance.
    And over-proofing that the cards are really mixed isn`t very good either, as it can arouse suspicion.
     
  13. I completely agree with you on both points Chris. I don't think I was quite clear enough by saying "how its done." I was referring solely to the mechanics of the effect. As in, it makes zero difference to a spectator if you perform a zarrow or a push through false shuffle. This is the kind of distinction that I see most of the time between marketed triumphs. There are certainly many that bring up wonderful points on how you present the triumph, the nuances of performing as well as the patter. It seemed to me that the original poster of this thread was worried more about the actual mechanic, so I wanted to impress that the important part of triumph is not the mechanics.

    Something very interesting I have noticed while performing triumphs, is that it also makes little to no difference to a spectator whether or not you can spread out the mixed up cards. The only true way to show the shuffle. Cheek to Cheek or Deck9 hit no harder than a zarrow shuffle or a sloppy shuffle. Their belief in what they are seeing happens as soon as the cards are "shuffled," no further proof is necessary. In their memory they see the same effect, no matter how much harder you worked to be able to show them cards back to back.
     
  14. Oh, ok. Sorry, I have misunderstood.

    Maybe this is the reason I didn`t find a version of Triumph yet that is "better" than the original.
    "Back in Time" isn`t even a "real" Triumph, but I like the presentation and plot.
     
  15. you end not clean at all !

    What? Looks clean from the video, so from a spectators standpoint not sure what the problem is...
    (I assume you bought it and know what you're talking about, I haven't so maybe I'm missing something.)
     
  16. He "cleans" it up indirectly. It`s even better to do it with a friend. I´ve seen Dani and his "brother" Christian Engbloom assisted him ;)
     
  17. I prefer to start and end clean, it's look good on video ok, but I prefer troy Hooser's handling
     
  18. Kainoa Harbottle's is the best I've found so far.... but Im not sure if you can get it elsewhere besides his lecture
     

Share This Page

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