Card tricks and Sherlock Holmes.

It's quite possible to perform this effect purely by sleight of hand without resorting to any kind of gaffed deck.
 
I have seen a variation of this trick "performed" in a crowded room under most unusual conditions.

What was unusual about it was that the trick was muffed. It was the first time that I had ever seen a trick so spectacularly blown. The performer tried to carry on as though it were part of the act, but when I talked to him after the show, he was very red-faced about the whole business, and he confided to me how the trick was supposed to have been done.

When Mr. Randi reported his version of the trick, I recognized this as probably being the very same trick. (The business about returning the cards to the box suggests that it is the same trick.) Moreover, the same factors that led to the other performer blowing the trick could have led to Mr. Randi blowing the trick as well.
 
Peter Morris said:
Assuming this is the trick used, Randi's description is slightly misleading on a couple of points. It says that Randi used a 'new' deck. It wasn't new, it had been prepared in advance.
Click to expand...
Well, unless Randi is a liar, this cannot have been the trick used.

BillyJoe
 
Gee, a magician lying. Telling the audience untrue things to mislead them. Whatever next? Sleight of hand? :i:
 
BillyJoe said:
Well, unless Randi is a liar, this cannot have been the trick used.

BillyJoe
Click to expand...
No, the effect, under the exact conditions Randi stated can be done quite readily without a gaffed deck.
 
wert said:
No, the effect, under the exact conditions Randi stated can be done quite readily without a gaffed deck.
Click to expand...
I can add that a variation of the trick can be done under conditions slightly different from those stated by Mr. Randi without a trick deck. (The "slightly different" conditions are actually significantly different from the performer's standpoint, but most spectators would regard the differences in conditions as trivial and would take no notice of them.)

What I'm trying to say here is that there is more than one way to skin the magical cat, that there is more than one way to achieve what appears to be the same effect.
 
wert said:
No, the effect, under the exact conditions Randi stated can be done quite readily without a gaffed deck.
Click to expand...
You guys are driving me insane. I really, really want to know how this was done, and if you don't tell me I'll scweam and scweam until I'm sick.....
:cry:

Rolfe.
 
Heh,
I started one heck of a ball rollin!
Now you see it, now you don't; but don't cry - you just have to keep spending $10 amounts on various trick decks until you have either gone broke, or have the trick all sussed!
Ahhhhhh!
(smilie)
 
Think it through, Rolfe.

You know that Randi didn't know the card in advance. That tells you more or less exactly when one part of the trick had to be pulled.

Read Randi's story again. Is there any window for mischief? Any time Randi could have done something sneaky without being observed?

I think you'll be able to put it together if you think about it.
 
You can buy the Invisible Deck trick here for $6.95 if you just must know one way to do it: Card Trick

I also found a sight that explains how the Invisible Deck trick is done, but I'm not going to post the URL. It's not hard to find...

BillyJoe: steps 1 and 4 are relevant... as is the fact that Randi shuffled his deck under the table (out of view).
 
wert and brown:

are the ungaffed methods you're referring to described in any of the better known magic books (Royal Road, Art of Astonishment, etc?). Or perhaps another?

In either case, could you point me to them?

Thanks.
 
^^^ There is one (so-so) version in AOA which really wouldn't work in the conditions Randi used.

The more convincing (and technically more difficult versions) are found elsewhere. (in much less "mainstream" magical literature)

Happy hunting! :biggrin:
 
I'm guessing that the face up card immediately before the face down 7 of diamonds was a 6, probably the 6 of clubs...
 
Garrette said:
are the ungaffed methods you're referring to described in any of the better known magic books (Royal Road, Art of Astonishment, etc?). Or perhaps another?
Click to expand...
I don't remember seeing it in Royal Road. I haven't read Art of Astonishment.
 
What kind of skeptics are you? Imagine this, similar to the scenario earlier, Ug comes along, and does the exact card trick Randi outlined in his commentary, and says "I can do that coz I'm psychic" I cry out in anguish and all my friends go "He must be psychic" and I say to Ug "Prove you are really psychic do it under controlled conditions so everyone can see." But Ug won't prove it, he says "Just believe I'm psychic".

Then oh fellow skeptics, Randi comes to town, does the exact same trick, and says "I am NOT psychic, it was a trick" All my friends go "He's right, Ug was a fake" and I say to Randi "Prove it was a trick, show us all how the trick was done, so that we might be wiser and avoid being fooled again" but Randi won't prove it, he says "Just believe I'm not psychic"

Well where the hell does that leave me? I must choose to take someones word for it. That aint good enough I'm afraid. And why is it that I have to go out and spend money to find out how the trick was done? Why won't people just tell me?
 
T'ai Chi,

T'ai Chi said:
But people did tell you... someone mentioned the Invisible Deck.
Click to expand...
Have you googled for "Invisible Deck"?

They don't explain the trick for you.
They're all trying to get your money.
They want you to buy this book or that video.

If you have had more luck please provide a link.

BillyJoe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom