Numbers Re-Run (ebook) by Rus Andrews $32.99
29 pages
Available at: http://mindshocks.com/products/numbers-re-run
Here we have Rus Andrews follow-up to his ebook Numbers. Mr. Andrews writing is a bit rough. The text contains numerous typographical and grammatical errors.
In most cases, the author does an adequate job of teaching the material.
He cites his inspirational sources, but leaves out details of the progenitors of his primary method.
All of these effects require a prearranged deck. The underlying principle is well known. Some of the effects do not employ a normal, 52 card deck.
Each effect involves Mr. Andrews force, in which the participant uses, um, an organic method to create a two digit number. He states that his method was inspired by Jamie Allan and Max Maven.
Well, what part of the method was inspired by which one of Mr. Allans effects, which was published where? Ditto for whatever inspiration he derived from Mr. Mavens work. This is important information. The author loses points for failing to provide it.
As far as, er, organic forces go, this method is natural in appearance. The participant carries out a common action that she has performed many times in the past. If the procedure is framed as a casual, off the cuff expedient, the participant shouldnt feel that it is contrived.
However, if the participant is particularly analytical or obsessive, or if you unconsciously place too much emphasis on the method or ooze guilt, she may examine the procedure a bit too closely. If she does, she will realize that her choice is limited.
Just so you know.
Numbers: The performer writes a prediction on a piece of paper, folds it and tables it. He places a cased deck of cards in front of a participant. She creates a number between one and fifty-two. She removes the deck from the case, counts down to her chosen number and arrives at the Nine of Diamonds.
The participant unfolds the prediction and discovers that the performer predicted the Nine of Diamonds.
This is a strong, well constructed effect and the performer never touches the deck. I like it.
Concealed: The performer places a cased deck of cards in front of a participant. He places a wallet with the corner of a prediction card protruding from it on the table. A participant creates a number between one and fifty-two. She removes the deck from the case, counts down to her chosen number and places that card face-down next to the wallet.
The performer removes the prediction card from his wallet and tables it face-up next to the participants card. She turns her card face-up and discovers that it matches the performers prediction.
Mr. Andrews states that his use of the wallet was inspired by Mark Elsdons Hierloom Redux. The author does a poor job of teaching the set-up and handling of the wallet. What kind of wallet are we supposed to use? Exactly how is the wallet set up? What goes where?
Apparently, the wallet cannot be shown to be empty after the prediction is removed. If this is possible, the author doesnt describe how to execute the display.
To help us unravel these mysteries, he urges us to see figure below. Ha! There is no figure below! The author should have included several photographs.
Based upon the text, I dont understand exactly how to execute this method. If I cant understand it, I cant like it.
Gamble: The performer tables an envelope which he states contains four cards from a poker hand he was once dealt. He places a cased deck of cards in front of a participant. She creates a number between one and fifty-two. She counts down to her chosen number and places that card face-down next to the envelope.
The participant removes the cards from the envelope and sees that they are the Ace, King, Queen and Jack of Spades. She turns her selection face-up and discovers the Ten of Spades that completes the royal flush.
There are numerous superior methods of performing this very common effect that dont require a prearranged deck. I dont like it.
Heat (Ray Noble): The performer pulls the deck half way out of the card case and tables the case. A participant creates a number between one and fifty-two. She removes the deck from the case, counts down to her chosen number and places that card face-down on the palm of her hand.
The performer tells the participant that in a moment, she may feel a strange energy caused by the vibrations between him and her card. He places his hand an inch over the card and the participant reports that she feels the card heating up. The performer names her card. She turns it over and sees that he is correct.
When I perform this type of effect I simply use a marked deck, so this method doesnt interest me. The idea of the febrile special effect that leads to the revelation of the card is interesting, but rather transparent. I dont like it.
Mnumbers (Stuart Nolan): The performer writes a prediction on a piece of paper, folds it and tables it. A participant creates a number between one and fifty-two. She takes the deck, counts down to her chosen number and notes that card.
The participant opens the prediction and either discovers that the performers prediction was correct, or sees that it was a near miss. At the conclusion of the effect, the deck is almost in the Mnemonica stack. The performer uses it for his next, sure-fire effect.
This method doesnt ensure that the effect will conclude successfully and I dislike the whole concept of a favorable near miss. Superior methods exist that ensure a successful outcome while maintaining a full deck stack. I dont like it.
Nil: The performer places a cased deck of cards in front of a participant. She creates a number between one and fifty-two. She removes the deck from the case, counts down to her chosen number and places that card face-down off to the side.
The performer divines that her card is the Ace of Spades. The participant turns her card face-up and discovers the Ace of Spades. The performer fans the deck to reveal that the rest of the cards are blank.
In some cases, prior to revealing the blank deck climax, the performer must openly remove the Jokers and dispose of them. Why were the Jokers the only other printed cards? Superior versions exist in which the participant can freely select any card and the blank display is more convincing. I dont like it.
Double Psych (David Devlin): The performer places two decks on the table. A participant cuts deck #1 and the performer marks the location of the cut by placing the bottom portion of the deck on top.
The participant creates a number between one and fifty-two. She takes deck #2, counts down to her chosen number and notes her card, say the Seven of Clubs. The participant lifts off the bottom portion of deck #2 and discovers that she cut to the Seven of Clubs.
Superior versions exist in which the performer isnt required for force everything. I dont like it.
Objection (Paul Miller): The performer introduces a blank deck with a different object drawn on the face of each card. A participant creates a number between one and fifty-two. She counts down to her chosen number and places that card face-down off to the side.
The performer states that he previously made a prediction. The participant turns her card face-up and sees that she chose a card bearing a drawing of a candle. The performer points out that the only other object on the table is a candle.
While I like the subtle, environmental revelation of the prediction, more straightforward methods exist to produce this effect. I dont like it.
Lottery (Kevin James): The performer displays a deck with the numbers one to forty-nine written on the faces of the cards. He tables a lottery ticket face-up and points out that four of the five numbers circled. One number is needed to create a winner.
A participant creates a number between one and fifty-two. She counts the cards in a face-up pile until she reaches her number and then deals that card face-down on top of the lottery ticket. The participant turns her card face-up and discovers that its number matches the winning lottery number.
In these tough times, the lottery presentation is particularly appealing. However, there are several lottery effects on the market that pack a bigger punch in a much more straightforward manner. I dont like it.
Partners in Crime (Chris Piercy): After the deck is cut by a participant, the performer hands it to participant #1 and asks her to deal the top four cards face-down to participant #2, to represent four cards of a poker hand.
Participant #2 creates a number between one and fifty-two and signals that number to participant #1. Participant #1 counts down to the chosen number and places that card face-down beside the four card hand. Participant #2 turns her hand face-up and finds two pair, Aces and Kings. Participant #1 turns over the fifth card, revealing another Ace that fills a full house.
Casting the participants as a pair of colluding card cheats is the perfect presentation for this methodology. The procedure is seamlessly woven into the narrative fabric. I really like it.
Destiny (Stuart Phillips): A participant briefly examines a deck of tarot cards. She creates a number between one and fifty-two. She counts the cards face-down until she reaches her number. She peeks at her card and then holds it face-down against her chest.
The performer divines the selected card and does a brief reading.
While Mr. Phillips ensures that the participant will choose a nice happy card, I despise Tarot cards and related atavistic mumbo-jumbo. I dont like it.
Keep in mind that I dont merely review the content of a product in isolation. I evaluate all aspects of the product, including its price tag, relative to the wealth of material available.
While Mr. Andrews methodology is clever, all of these effects can be accomplished by equally effective or superior means. I believe that your thirty-three bucks could be put to better use.
Not Recommended