- Join Date
- Apr 2013
I wish I lived with my library and I would look it up. However, currently I dont have acccess to my library and cant give a specific source, but I do seem to remember its either a Walton or Vernon handling. Its also very similar, only presentation that differers slightly, to Mike Boden's Deck Memorization in Card Cavalcade 2. It's also very similar to (in method and presentation) Hector Chadwick's Reds & Blacks, but that one has more of a creative twist and finesse than yours. Out Of My Mind is just taking the gilbreath principle and doing the most obvious thing with it. Do you really think that no one else have done what you've done here?
Which lists some other sources for it, some which are very similar to yours such as getting into it from new deck order etc.
http://www.maa.org/columns/colm/cardcolm200608.html See Separated at Girth.
So what exactly have you added to the very basic idea? What's new here? Maybe I'm wrong... and maybe you've come up with something entirely original, and it's just that me and my friends have done the same trick all these years, even though it hasn't been published, and you are truly the first to publish it. It's possible, unlikely, but possible.
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
As far as I can tell, neither of these routines have the step where the spectator intuitively cuts EXACTLY half the deck, NOR do they have the exact revelation of the last card. (the strongest part of the effect)
So far all you have provided are effects which USE the Gilbreath principle, that's like saying you can't publish an effect using a double lift because the ambitious card already exists.
ALSO! And this is huge, most versions of this principle that I have read INCLUDING the one you sourced, requires the performer to LOOK AT THE DECK AFTER THE SHUFFLE! Which I believe is less strong. Mine is dealt immediately after the shuffle, and the performer never looks at the cards.
So enough people thought there was value here, and also, i cant stress this enough, the trailer is VERY fair! I'm sorry but if I saw a trailer which showcased an effect I already do, I would just not buy it. The crediting is there, so I don't get the heat here. If one is familiar with it, all they would have to do is not buy it.
Just my two cents.
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
So you spread the one half on the table... That's the same as looking at them.
You clearly haven't read the Chadwick book then? As they do the cutting and he reveals the last card's identity, too.
Don't get me wrong here, it's a very good product. I just don't think it being original enough to warrant a release. I dont have to buy it, just because I know it, sure. But we can't all just think like that and release old stuff. Nevermind, I shan't dwell too much on this. My opinion isn't gonna change anybody else's, so I should probably just be quite and not worry as this has nothing to do with me.
Anyways, best of luck with your product!
D_Young is spot on.
I personally learned this trick over three years ago from Asi Wind ('Chapter 1' notes). The issue is not that it is using the Gilbreath principle (which seems to be a lawyer like rebuttal) it's the red black part, IT'S NOT NEW, regardless if someone comes up with it themselves. Going with that logic, could I or would T11 release the 'mind mirror' (the same version found in Expert Card Technique) if I came up with it independently? Absolutely not (at least I should hope not). The defense of this is sad, adding the naming of the card and the cutting does not make it new, that's like saying putting new tires and a stereo in an old car makes it a new car and worthy of being amongst the new cars. If the method for naming the red and black was different then I wouldn't, I couldn't argue, but it is the same. T11 and/or spidey are basically trying to profit off of people who are not well read and those that are new to magic, that's not an honest business model at all.
I can't believe that your research didn't find that the core of this effect is not original.
Captain Picard double face palm!
With proper crediting, there is nothing wrong with this, just as there is nothing wrong with Jason England teaching the fundamentals of the Herrmann Pass with due respect to Alexander Herrmann and Hofzinser. In that case, and in this case, our videos were not intended for experienced professionals; but there is great value, and nothing wrong with, teaching the next generation of magicians and mentalists those principles that form the foundation of the art if, and only if, proper crediting is presented, and the instruction is offered by an experienced practitioner with the knowledge, expertise, and experience required to serve as a competent instructor.
With that said, this video is surely not intended for those already experienced with the Gilbreath Principle, or those that have already learned some of the many applications of the principle in print. This is an instructional resource for those new to the field of mentalism to learn the concept properly with a simple, powerful presentation.// jonathan.bayme
ceo / theory11