No, Dave, you are mistaken. I do not claim the Flick to be my invention anywhere in the literature that accompanies the Coffee Chop, or in any other written or verbal communication. In the instruction booklet that accompanies the Coffee Chop I state a “new move” is used to dislodge the ball; I think it is clear within the context of the instructions that I am referring to a move that will be new to the user. Of course you may wish to misconstrue that, but nowhere in the booklet do I claim the move to be MY invention.Originally posted by David Groves:
In reading the instructions, I seem to recall that "the flick" was written up as new and an invention of Mr. Wayne's. However, in viewing Paul Wilson's "The Restaurant Act" video, which was produced in 2001 but developed well before then, I found a nearly identical move that was described in the following way:Originally posted by Thomas Wayne:
[b] ...also, the innovative (and patent-pending) magnet system involved is, to my knowledge, the only NEW idea to be applied to the chop cup in several decades....
"This isn't mine, it's an old chop cup technique."
Is "the flick" new? [/b]
The genesis of the move dates back much farther than you are aware - at least several decades - and can be found in Mark Wilson's 1979 "Chop Cup Book", within Earl Nelson's routine. In Earl's routine he uses a shaking motion to dislodge the ball, and justifies the accompanying rattling noise of the ball as signifying the exact time when the ball “arrives” under the cup. While this is very different from the Flick, it is the first I became aware of the idea of dislodging a ball by some means other than banging it down on a flat surface.
The basic problem with Chop cups in general is the relationship between the magnetic attraction of the ball to the inside of the cup, and the force required to dislodge the ball. With all standard cups this problem is addressed by approaching that fine line between a weak-enough attraction to dislodge easily, and TOO weak (which results in an unreliable cup).
I set about to resolve this dilemma by examining the various chop cup mechanics – steel cup shim with magnetic ball, steel ball shims with magnetic cup and magnetic balls with magnetic cup. All suffered from the too-weak/too-strong problem, and had other negative issues as well. For example, most chop cups come with two balls, one that is attracted to the cup and one that is not. This means the user must somehow keep track of which ball is which. Also, the “special” ball cannot be set on top of the inverted cup during performance without the likelihood of the magnetic attraction being obvious to the audience; this precludes many of the standard cups-and-ball move such as the Tip-Over Load.
After much experimentation I discovered a completely new approach to the problem. With my system the ball and the cup are both magnetic, but in a very special way. In fact, BOTH balls are magnetic. However, the balls are only attracted to the inside of the cup. They are not attracted to each other and they are not attracted to the outside of the cup. This resolves all the major complaints I have about traditional Chop cups and allows for more natural and normally motivated handling.
Incidentally, the Flick does not require an “unnatural shove”, or does it require contacting the surface with the “leading edge first”. In fact, it is not necessary to contact the table at all, a feature I always demonstrate when showing the system at conventions. I often use the Coffee Chop on the palm of my hand - and the spectator's hand - without using a table. In no case is it ever necessary to contact a flat surface in order to dislodge the ball.
It is this specific design, orientation and application of the magnets system in my Coffee Chop that is new, and is my original and proprietary invention.
Regards,
Thomas Wayne