Twisting the Aces

Discuss your favorite close-up tricks and methods.
Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 18th, 2001, 4:34 am

LOL @ Asher Twist being angle proof !!!

It isn't.

I think it is a clever method and I am glad to see that it has proven very well for Mr. Asher, but I do not feel it is an improvement over the Vernon routine for the reasons that I have sited earlier. (I also do not think nor have I said that the Asher Twist is bad).

Honestly. How many WORKING magicians (I mean professionals, not the hobbyists that show off for friends nor the paper magicians that perform for magicians only at conventions) - ones that work for lay audiences for a living actually use this move or perform this routine?

(Of course, Paul Wilson uses it for his Kings and Aces trick and Lee Asher has been known to spring this routine on people on occasion.)

User avatar
Steve Bryant
Posts: 1947
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Ballantine
Location: Bloomington IN
Contact:

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Steve Bryant » December 18th, 2001, 5:45 am

Pete,

From the start, and going almost back to when Lee Asher came up with his Asher Twist, I've sensed there was something almost _political_ against the notion that a youngster could invent something better than that of the Professor. To me, the Asher Twist is way way way better than Vernon's Twisting the Aces. I always considered the Twisting the Aces to be a rather boring effect and never wanted to add it to my repertoire. The Asher Twist on the other hand thrilled me to the core when I first saw it. I've seen it done live by only two magicians -- Danny Dygert of Illusions and Magic Moments in Indy, and Wes Schield of Dallas & Co. in Champaign -- and both do it beautifully. And of course I've seen Lee do it on tape. Without any serious background knowledge of magic, I'd not have had a clue as to how they were doing it and would have suspected a double-faced card or some such. I cannot do the effect to my own satisfaction, but it's definitely on my list of things I'd like to accomplish. It's eye candy of the highest order and just wonderful to watch. If it's not angle-proof, so what? Watch you angles. Most of what Jerry Andrus does and Slydini did wasn't angle-proof. Big deal. As to Vernon, no one appreciated invention and artistry in magic more than he. The recent quest for the center deal is an example. I think he would have loved Lee Asher's excellent take on one of his classics.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 27047
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Richard Kaufman » December 18th, 2001, 7:56 am

Steve, I must disagree with you. I don't think Vernon would have like The Asher Twist one little bit. I had the experience of going to Los Angeles for the first time in 1982 after being around only New York card guys since childhood. Vernon watched some of what I did with great horror, but he kept a straight face and didn't say anything. I had to really press him hard to get him to tear the stuff apart. And when he did was I ever grateful. Spending time with Vernon and Jennings really changed the way I handle cards.
I really don't think Vernon would have enthused about The Asher Twist. It is a move that magically "pops," but utterly lacks mystery. MYSTERY is what Vernon worked so hard to put into his magic.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

User avatar
Ryan Matney
Posts: 978
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Abingdon, Va
Contact:

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Ryan Matney » December 18th, 2001, 8:18 am

Richard,

I would be interested to hear what exactly you did, and what Vernon said about it, if you would care to elaborate? Perhaps in another thread.
Best,
Ryan
Get the Dirty Work - Available now at http://www.ryanmatneymagic.com

Terry
Posts: 1303
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Kentucky

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Terry » December 18th, 2001, 8:37 am

From the start, and going almost back to when Lee Asher came up with his Asher Twist, I've sensed there was something almost _political_ against the notion that a youngster could invent something better than that of the Professor. To me, the Asher Twist is way way way better than Vernon's Twisting the Aces.


From reading all the previous posts, people are trying to compare apples & oranges. The Professor's way of doing the Ace's was done his way for him. Wouldn't the Professor have wanted each person to take the tools and use them to fit their "style" ergo being "natural"?

Lee's "Asher Twist" is his contribution to the effect and is Lee's way of doing it. Again it comes down to if one can develop the skill and perform it - great, if not - then okay.

Everyone has presented their opinion of the move - some like it, some don't, and some have never tried it. Cool, let's move on.

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 18th, 2001, 8:49 am

It's scary! Richard sees dead people! And he talks to them and can tell what they like or dislike!

Seb.

User avatar
Steve Bryant
Posts: 1947
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Ballantine
Location: Bloomington IN
Contact:

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Steve Bryant » December 18th, 2001, 9:15 am

Richard,

It's all in how you perceive it. For me the Asher Twist is completely about mystery (another visual effect that is similar to me is Jennings' Look -An Illusion, which I love to do) and Twisting the Aces has never been anything but a puzzle to me. Unfortunately, I've only seen BOTH effects done in purely magician-centric contexts, in other words not for real people. I'd love to see Paul Wilson's combination handling and how he presents it to laymen. (Or I could quit being lazy and try to learn the damn thing myself and be my own judge of how laymen like it.) But getting back to when I have seen it, it has never looked like juggling to me. It has looked like real magic. But what an odd thing this thread is, that folks are so passionate to argue that a magical effect is either wonderful or horrible. It should be a pretty simple choice, one way or the other. Why is this so difficult (regardless of which side of the issue you support)?

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 18th, 2001, 10:18 am

Last night I've spoke with Vernon.. or maybe I was just asleep ... Whatever...
He told me to be NATURAL and that you can't be more natural than casually spreading the cards.

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 18th, 2001, 10:37 am

Magic is an art form. That is why there really is no "Better or Worse" method for accomplishing a desired effect. I make my living as a musician, which is also an art form. I gave up many years ago, trying to decide who was "the best", and found it to be much more inspiring to see how different approaches work for different performers. I don't like everything I see, but that doesnt mean that millions of others wouldn't. Anyway, the Asher twist, works for Lee. I'm glad he loves it. It would be a bummer if he didn't. Keep in mind, that he designed it for himself, and is kind enough to share it with us. To me that makes him a good guy. Get off his case. If the move doesn't work for you, create yor own, or find one that you like. That's my simple philosophy..

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 18th, 2001, 11:00 am

I dont think anyone is actually "on his case" with the exception to this being my reply to Lee's arrogant comments.

Apart from that everyone is happy to discuss the merits of the move and it is not a direct attack on Lee Asher as that would be grossly unfair.

Pete McCabe
Posts: 2332
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Simi Valley, CA

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Pete McCabe » December 18th, 2001, 1:43 pm

Just to clear up what may have been a miscommunication on my part regarding my claim that the Elmsley count as used in Vernon's TTA is not natural.

The Elmsley count itself is a perfectly natural move. It is one of the relatively small percentage of magic moves which are perfectly illusory and can (if well performed) be repeated ad infinitum without causing suspicion.

However the use of the Elmsley count in twisting the Aces is itself unnatural, no matter how naturally you perform it.

Consider the effect: The magician shows the four aces and all are face down. After a magic pass, twisting gesture, etc., the magician shows the four aces again and one is now face up.

The question is how are you going to show the four aces. In Vernon's handling (and many others) you count the aces from hand to hand.

This is completely unnatural. There is no question how many aces you hold, and you are not showing the audience how many aces you hold.

The natural way to demonstrate that four aces are face down or that one is face up is to spread the cards. Counting the cards to achieve this goal may be only a little bit unnatural, or it may not consciously register with the audience, or you may get away with it, whatever, fine.

But it's not natural.


It's the Elmsley count. It is only natural if you use it when you are counting the cards. Otherwise it's unnatural.

I know of maybe 200 card tricks that use the Elmsley count, including a few I've made up myself. I only know of two where the move is used while you are counting the cards. (Dan Garrett's "Four Card Reiteration" and Dave Williamson's "The Famous Three-Card Trick.")


Pete McCabe

Frank Yuen
Posts: 594
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Winfield, IL

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Frank Yuen » December 18th, 2001, 3:04 pm

Juan Tamariz once stated, at a lecture that I attended, that only fools and magicians have to count cards from hand to hand when holding a small packet. Normal people, he said, spread the cards and can instantly see the number.

However having said that, I don't believe that in Twisting the Aces you are counting the cards but rather displaying them one at a time.

Still, you can put me firmly in the camp that thinks The Asher Twist is more magical and natural looking.

Frank Yuen

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 18th, 2001, 5:01 pm

Mr Ross,
Having used the Asher technique both in the form he does in his Twisting routine and as a completely secret move which creates no apparent result from the viewer's perspective, I am quite surprised to read your reference to the Asher technique as "Card Juggling." I am further surprised that you predicate this assertion on the premise that it is subject to angle limitations. Apart from the essential error in your predicate-- the Asher technique can be performed surrounded provided the hands are held sufficiently below the spectator's sight line to the area below the packet-- few techniques are without some angle considerations. Certainly, limiting the arsenal of viable techniques to those without angle considerations to avoid your label of "Card Juggling" would severely hamper the vast majority of the performers and constrain us from performing the preponderance of the effects in the card literature. It is easily possible you cannot perform the technique with adequate facility to make it a viable tool. I have seen the move butchered by far too many individuals to ignore that explanation. I can assure you, both Mr Asher and myself, plus, in all likelihood, a number of the others who have posted in support of the Asher technique, are employing the technique to strong result. If you are not, it is your loss and that of your audiences, who could be appreciating the fruits of Mr Asher's completely deceptive technique.

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 18th, 2001, 6:02 pm

For those enjoying the to-and-fro-ing but a little unsure of what the fuss is about, you can see Lee perform on-line at:

QuickTime Asher Twist

My only beef with the move is that I've had many children tell me I'm doing the Asher Twist (not in so many words, of course) when I have performed Vernon's "Twisting" for them.

Jon Racherbaumer
Posts: 843
Joined: January 22nd, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: New Orleans

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Jon Racherbaumer » December 18th, 2001, 6:53 pm

DAI-VERSIONS, ANYONE?

So far this "twisted thread" has generated as many responses as there are cards in the deck...

Of course I'm always intrigued by what "magic twangers" are "plunked," what nerves are struck, and how much dander is raised...and the nature of the topic or issue that generates this much lively discussion. In fact, I think that if the Professor was alive-and-chuckling today, he would be raptly amused and aptly bemused by all this sound and fury regarding a trick where cards either MAGICALLY or MANIPULATIVELY turn over by counting or spreading them.

Lewis Ganson wrote that "Twisting the Aces" was "a favorite with Vernon," which unfortunately doesn't give us any clues as to WHY this was so. Nevertheless, "Twisting the Aces" was at least a pretext to introduce Alex Elmsley's Ghost Count to a larger audience. If anything, it showed how the technique might be APPLIED.

Somehow students and disputants have lost sight of a fact now as "lost" as Hofzinser's Ace Problem: How many remember Vernon's suggested patter for performing the Twisting trick? If Ganson is right, Vernon openly talked about MANIPULATING the Aces; that "the Ace of Spades, being a conspicuous card, is difficult to manipulate..." Later he says that the "other Aces are child's play to HANDLE (my emphasis)..." Although the open lateral "twisting action" is obviously a ruse to one and all, Vernon's approach was to ostensibly demonstrate how quickly and invisibly he could one at a time turn over the Aces. Astute lay people seeing this trick for the first time (then and now) don't assume that anything magical occurs. They may be, however, PUZZLED as to how the clever card-HANDLER is able to MANIPULATE the Aces by merely counting them at his fingertips. This is also what PUZZLED and first attracted magicians, then unfamiliar with the Ghost Count, to Vernon's trick in the first place. By the way, Ganson's last sentence in MORE INNER SECRETS OF CARD MAGIC is: "This is certainly a trick which is destined to become a classic."

Hmmmmmm...

When I first saw the Asher Twist, like others who saw it at FFFF, I was drawn to its visual immediacy; it awakened the Inner Manipulator asleep in my soul. I wanted to shout as Copperfield used to do: "Coooooool!" (to rhyme with "yule" and drawn out for at least four seconds...)

Howjadoodat? Man, O, man...Gimme, gimme, gimme the Work. No futzing around: A packet is merely spread and an Ace is face up. What turns. To many, Asher's Twist is magical-looking. To others, it is wondrously manipulative-looking. It's enough to...well...um...make a "body" cocky...as in "cocksure" or "cock-of-the-walk" or "little cocker"...

And then...

...and then...

...along came Jones...

only his name wasn't Jones; it was and is Reed McClintock...

Reed also caused Aces to turn face up by SPREADING--only his "spreading" is NOT Asher-like; it's different and also looks "coooooooool"...

I truly wish that Vernon was alive to see these two New-Wave Versions of his Old Twist.

Meanwhile it's fun to speculate about what the Professor would have thought or said. I think that Vernon would have found both methods "interesting" and "off-beat"--two evergreen, non-committing words. Would he have agreed that they're "magical" or "classical"? I doubt it. As I hastily write these words, I'm imagining him grumbling, partially to himself and everyone else with ear-shot:

"No, no, no! They're ALL wrong!"

Then he would pause and add:

"But my version wasn't right EITHER...It was only a diversion, not a classic...There's a difference you know!"

Onward...

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 18th, 2001, 9:20 pm

Gavin Ross mentions "juggling with cards" when the Asher Tiwist is used in this context.

Where does that come from Gavin? I admit Lee can juggle like a MOFO. But in regards to the Twist......its a simple action of just spreading the cards! How is that juggling?

It's fun and interesting to debate these different methods and approaches. Is it natural? Is it juggling? Whatever man.

The real question for me is "what does the audience like better?" In my experience people love it when I perform Lee's handling and that's all that matters to me.

That is not to say that other versions aren't liked by an audience. It's just that I have performed several versions throughout the years and "the one where you just spread the cards" is the most talked about.

Best,

Nathan W. Kranzo

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 18th, 2001, 9:57 pm

Those who havent seen Lee do the twist or someone who has learned to do it right have no grounds to comment. Ive seen Lee do it hundreds of times and watched the spectators reaction they go crazy. They love it and ask to see it again and again. I belive the Professor whoul have too! it looks magical!

Harvey Rosenthal
Posts: 104
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Montgomery Village, MD—USA

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Harvey Rosenthal » December 18th, 2001, 11:27 pm

I was at the FFFF Convention the year that Lee Asher first performed his version of the Vernon twisting the aces effect using the Asher Twist for those in attendance. It is no exageration to say that there were gasps of astonishment heard from many of the magicians in the audience.

Harvey Rosenthal :cool:

Harvey Rosenthal
Posts: 104
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Montgomery Village, MD—USA

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Harvey Rosenthal » December 18th, 2001, 11:36 pm

I remember Lee being innundated with compliments by many of the highly skilled and knowlegable cardmen in attendance at the FFFF Convention at the conclusion of his performance.

Harvey Rosenthal :cool:
:cool:

Bill Duncan
Posts: 1639
Joined: March 13th, 2008, 11:33 pm

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Bill Duncan » December 18th, 2001, 11:40 pm


The question is how are you going to show the four aces. In Vernon's handling (and many others) you count the aces from hand to hand.

This is completely unnatural. There is no question how many aces you hold, and you are not showing the audience how many aces you hold.


Actually, the Vernon version used the original Ghost count technique which was to hold the cards at the extreme fingertips, not to count them into dealing position in the palm. The "one at a time" display is VERY natural. Spreading the cards from that position is unnatural... you get an unintended block pushoff. :D

The twisting action was created to excuse the odd way of holding the cards. If you twist the cards at the extreme fingertips, emphasizing how fair you are being, then showing them one at a time (not counting them for God's sake) is not at all unnatural.
:D

pduffie
Posts: 383
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby pduffie » December 19th, 2001, 2:59 am

During this fast-growing mammoth thread some important pros and cons regarding the Vernon & Asher 'Twists' have not been addressed. One point being, Vernon's "Twisting the Aces" and "The Lee Asher's "Asher Twist" are not quite the same effect.

In Vernon's original the Aces turn over one by one, but the previous Ace reverts to face down each time. So there is ever only one face up Ace at any given moment. And this is the main difference between Vernon's effect and The Asher Twist. However, the Vernon method then offers further impact points. When the first Ace changes into the second Ace we have, from my experience, a truly magical moment. But the most powerful moment is the final Ace, which reverses in the hands of a spectator. When this spectator is a female I often get screams from this (this is also one routine where I use the originator's patter and presentation, I assume it to be tongue-in-cheek, as it's hard to beat).

In Lee Asher's version the Aces turn over one by one until all four are reversed. There then follows a rapid all-at-once repeat, twice. These final all-at-once reversals are visually strong (as they should be for a finish).

Opinions regarding the techniques used in both tricks have been fully expressed throughout this thread and I don't intend to linger too long on this aspect. Some say that the Elmsley Count is not a natural way to display four cards. Some say it's the count itself, others that it's the action of counting - spreading four cards is more logical? While some people criticise the Elmsley Ghost Count, I haven't heard anyone comment on "HOW" one would normally spread four cards. It is natural to count cards from hand-to-hand, as it is natural to spread cards from hand-to-hand. I have never seen anyone spread a packet of cards in the way of the Asher Twist! The Elmsley Count, while requiring a special grip (no matter how you do it) is still a hand-to-hand count. The Asher Twist is not a hand-to-hand spread. Forget what the spread is concealing and think of the natural equivalent - there isn't one.

Jon Racherbaumer makes a valid observation regarding the non-use of Twisting the Aces by pro close-uppers in their working repertoires. Having used Vernon's TTA for over 20 years, usually as my opening trick for informal and intimate gatherings, I can see why. The full impact of the final Ace reversing in the spectator's hand can only be fully felt by that one spectator. It's their reaction that carries the impact to any other observers, and therefore, those close by also share in the experience. But for a larger group the effect would lose all its impact (and it does).

The Asher Twist is visual from start to finish. It could be performed silent and the effect would not be diminished. However, in an ultra-close-up situation the final impact of the Vernon routine must be stronger because magic happens out of your hands, and in the hands of a spectator.

I said at the start - pros and cons.

Best Wishes

Peter

Charlie Chang
Posts: 163
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Charlie Chang » December 19th, 2001, 3:15 am

A few of the comments in the last day or so have highlighted some of reasons why I believe that the Asher Twist is a superb effect to perform prior to Twisting The Aces.

In both effects a card reverses itself magically by UNSEEN means.

The natural conclusion in BOTH tricks is the simplest of deductions (even Dr. Watson's dog could have guessed this one) - that the magician is somehow turning those cards over in a way that I cannot see.

Consider that again - the above statement applies to BOTH effects. A card turns over, therefore the performer did it somehow.

What many people dislike about the Asher Twist (myself included at one point) is the fact that this suspicion is entirely correct.

What I would like to assert here is that, whether the suspicion is correct (as it is for Asher) or not (as with Vernon) it has little bearing on the success of the effect if the method is invisible. In BOTH cases, the suspicion has the same effect on the audience's perception of the trick: "ahh, he's just turning them over in some clever way I can't see. How clever."

Once again, let me re-iterate a simple fact about Asher's Twist. It is INVISIBLE. From all angles? No. Show me how many moves ARE invisible from all angles. Every move has a good angle, some wider than others. Performed CORRECTLY the Asher Twist can not be seen, full stop.

Now, let's analyse Asher followed by Vernon.

A lot of people fail to appreciate one of Lee's cleverest ideas in the Asher Twist. I am not referring to the reverse spread (he thought of that on the toilet, apparently) which has been correctly assessed by Richard K. I am referring to the final phase where one card is flipped over and the rest all follow. This is a powerful ending and often has the effect of leaving people a little off balance. If he simply Twisted four Aces face up and handed back the cards - the effect would be incomplete and the audience would naturally copme to some conclusion regarding the method because what they had just seen would be no more than a puzzle.

I have discussed in my lectures a problem I found with Vernon's Spellbound. In the right circumstances, I have no problem with it. However, when I work up-close I like my performance to be interactive - I want people to take part in my show, not just watch. When I perform Spellbound here I find that people become obsessed with the coin they cannot see. They start challenging me, apparently seeing an opportunity to beat the magician. It is true that I encourage this a little (thanks to my passion for Ramsay) but it still concerned me. My solution was to work out a Spellbound that flowed. In my routine, "(Spell)Bound to Please", Each change flows into the next and the hands are seen clearly empty at all times (apparently). The coin is produced, changes several times and is then returned to my pocket WITHOUT pause. The effect is over before the audience can begin to wonder about method.

In effects where the same thing happens again and again (coins across for example) the audience are forced into wondering how this is happening. "How does he move these coins over?" so we change the method each time in order to keep fooling them. In the case of Spellbound, however, the audience stops short of "how" and ends at "what". The solution to them becomes "he has another coin" and the next question is "where is he hiding it".

I believe any good Spellbound routine will work so long as it is constructed properly for the environment you plan to perform in. I would use Vernon's routine in the close up room of the Magic Castle but not in the Saracen's Head in Glasgow.

This logic helped me to construct my Twisting routine.

I begin by having the four Aces examined. Now I perform the Asher Twist quite quickly - not rushed but I don't stop for directions. I end with all four turning face up at once.

I now hand back the Aces for examination. At this point I have seen people try and flip an Ace face up somehow (extremely rare but equally likely with the Vernon routine).

I now take back the cards and set their order for the Vernon routine. Now I set up for Vernon's classic as described in Inner Secrets saying "You probably think I flip a card face up like this when you're not looking" - perform triple turnover of Ace Of Spades - "or maybe turn one over under the spread like this" - turn left hand palm down, extract Ace of Spades, revolve face up and replace - "so I'll do it one more time as slowly as I can so you can see how fair this is - look, all I did was twist the cards like this when you looked away...and a card magically turned over...I'll do it again - watch - all I do is twisssssst - and there's another one..." and so on. Note that the Vernon routine is one card reversing at a time - and them turning face down again as another appears face up.

Using this approach, I fool them then immediately address the only solution they could think of, disproving it completely with the second phase. People now watch Vernon's effect with such concentration that they become completely absorbed by it. They believe they are watching the first phase being repeated slowly for their benefit and when the last card reverses in their hands they have nowhere to go. Very magical.

Before I end this long breath of hot air, let me consider the opposite of what I just described - Vernon FOLLOWED by Asher.

As has been said above (and by others) the natural solution to any Twisting The Aces effect is that the cards are being flipped face up in some manner that the audience cannot see. If this conclusion is reached during Vernon's routine (as it often is) then continuing with Asher's handling will simply compound that belief because that is what's going on. That makes this the wrong time to perform the Asher Twist in the same way as it is bad form to perform the Travellers when someone asks if you can really hide cards in your hands (Open Travellers would be better, I think).

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 19th, 2001, 6:20 am

Wow! What a fabulous thread this has turned out to be. "Thank you" to Jon, Peter and Paul (especially -- you addressed my concerns exceptionally well) for digging deeper than the religion of it all.

cheers, Doug

User avatar
Matthew Field
Posts: 2846
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Slydini
Location: Hastings, England, UK

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Matthew Field » December 19th, 2001, 7:24 am

Let me add, perhaps as a coda, how nice it is to see my friend Wesley James, one of America's finest card (and coin) workers, here on the Genii Forum.

Welcome, Wesley!

Matt Field

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 19th, 2001, 12:20 pm

I seem to recall meeting Wesley James in NYC a year or so back and with that in mind, let me clarify a few points in his post and also one point in the post of Nathan Kranzo.

The term Card Juggling in relation to the Asher Twist was not coined by me but was raised in a conversation by a magician of high standing at the conclusion of Lee Ashers lecture in Glasgow.

The magician in question is, without doubt, one of the most skilful magicians around and is also most knowledgeable in the field of card magic. This remark was overheard by several well respected card magicians from the Glasgow area.

The term, as applied by myself, refers ONLY to the use of the Asher Twist in the context of the Twisting effect and I do praise the move in other effects as I have clearly stated in my postings. Therefore is quite inaccurate of yourself, and others, to state that I refer to the technique as Card Juggling where it is plainly obvious it is only [at present] the twisting effect that makes it look like Card Juggling. I found it strange that you raised this again when it has already been so well documented.

Mr James, you then move on to accuse me of making an essential error in my predicate on this and then immediately contradict yourself by agreeing that the move does in fact have angle limitations when you clearly state The Asher technique can be performed surrounded PROVIDED the hands are held sufficiently below the spectator's sight line to the area below the packet.[My capitals].

This is an issue I also addressed some time ago in posting and compared it to the Vernon routine using the Elmsley Ghost Count which is imperceptible.

Further more you infer that other moves have attracted MY label of Card Juggling. This is not the case as I have at no time made this suggestion and the only person who has actually came close to doing this so far is yourself with your rather wild statement.

As for your statement that it is easily possible that I may not be able to perform the technique with adequate facility to make it a viable tool, I have several people who will naturally tell you the complete opposite regarding my handling, but lets not enter into that type of discussion here.

In response to Harvey Rosenthal, another fine card man, who remembers Lee Asher being innundated by compliments by many of the highly skilled and knowledable card men at the FFFF convention, I too remember Lee Asher being paid compliments by many knowledgeable magicians when in Glasgow.

I myself paid him a few compliments when I saw him as I enjoyed some elements of his performance greatly.

However, it would be difficult on both occasions to say whether those comments passed by other magicians were based solely on his move or his performance as a whole.

I should hope it was the latter.

It is also worth remembering that amongst many magicians the art of sycophancy is well practised.

My friend Peter Duffie make many valid points in his informative post and, without repeating them here, he sums up the beauty of the Vernon effect over the Asher effect exceptionally well.

Let me again state. I DONT dislike the Asher Move, ONLY the effect under discussion in which it is used. I consider the Vernon effect to be vastly superior in its construction. It is also angle proof 100%, the Asher move is not 100% angle proof in this effect.

Finally, In conclusion it may well be that the Asher Twist stands the test of time but I doubt that it will be as well remembered as Elmsleys Ghost count, which was popularised by the Vernon routine, or as well remembered as the Vernon routine itself.

I fear that the Asher twist, although a valid contribution to card magic literature, will fall by the wayside unless sufficient effects are evolved which make valid use of the move and avoid the impression of Card Juggling.

To quote Richard Kaufman in reference to the Asher Twist it is a move that magically pops but utterly lacks mystery.

MYSTERY is what Vernon worked so hard to put into his magic.

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 19th, 2001, 3:43 pm

Hm. Leaving aside some of this thread's more vitriolic moments, I'd like to weigh in on a couple of issues.

First, to go back to Richard's initial post, I also think that Jennings' handlings of Twisting the Aces (and it sounds as if he had a few more that I don't know about yet--get those into print, Richard!) are typically elegant and beautiful. Until I met the Asher Twist, it was one of LJ's handling that I preferred. (Interestingly, this handling concluded with a half pass beneath the spread used as a clean-up of the final ace. I agree with Richard about the reverse spread being Lee's most profound contribution to this kind of action half-pass.)

I also agree with those who have stated that the two methods have different real-world applications. Certainly whenever I've heard Lee teach the thing he was quite clear about what the workable angles were, in what situations he would and wouldn't perform it, etc. Perhaps one source of confusion regarding its visibility is that when Lee teaches it at a lecture, he is by necessity performing it for the assembled magicians in the "wrong" situation. If you are sitting across the room while he shows it and you see a flash, it is merely because he is teaching the move in an environment in which he would, I'm guessing, never perform it. My own preference is to perform it for no more than one or two spectators at a time, certainly never while I'm seated at a table, and with the spectators looking downward towards (not straight down at, necessarily) at the cards. Lee also emphasizes that the cards should be tilted slightly forwards towards the floor for maximum cover.

I would agree that an Emlsley-count-driven method is more versatile with regard to spectator positions. For that reason, I keep practicing up the Vernon/Jennings method for when I don't feel comfortable performing the Asher Twist.

Finally, I suppose my strongest opinion on this threat is that I have NO idea what people mean when they call Asher's method "juggling," "Harris-esque" or even "more visual." I would simply say it is more direct: nothing happens besides squaring the cards up and then spreading them out again. Unlike, say the McClintock Twist (another can of worms, surely) there is nothing remotely flashy or flourishy about the move as Lee performs it. Perhaps another misconception here derives from the fact that some magicians, when performing Asher's move, try to obscure the half pass further with a lot of squiggling and smooshing of the cards that does in fact make it look like a less "natural" way of handling the cards. One of the main things I learned from Lee himself when he taught the move at a lecture was to un-learn this tendency. Lee's spread is simple, straight across, and in one motion with no fancy stuff.

There is nothing less natural about a "reverse" spread than a "regular" spread, of course, because the terms are relative. So while I agree on the different real-world strengths of the count- and spread-driven handlings, I completely disagree with the characterization of the Asher Twist as unnatural. I think Vernon would have loved it.

--Ezra.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 27047
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Richard Kaufman » December 19th, 2001, 6:56 pm

This has turned out to be rather interesting! In response to the person who dryly suggested I was speaking with dead people when assessing what Dai Vernon's opinion of the Asher Twist might be: kiss my behind! I spent many hours in Vernon's company and talked with him about card magic a great deal. Not only did I watch him do things, but I did things for him and let him rip the hell out of me--it was a shock to the system but well worth it. I treasure that moment when his bony hand shot out and grabbed my left first finger when I did the pass.
It is my considered opinion that he would NOT have cared for The Asher Twist. Period. Other people who knew Vernon well can comment as they like. If you didn't know Vernon, then spare me your remarks.
Out of curiosity, I performed both Vernon's handling of "Twisting the Aces" and the same trick using the Asher Twist for two lay women. Both women were fooled by both handlings. I then asked which one they preferred, i.e., which was more "magical"? One liked Vernon's handling, the other liked Lee's handling.
Can I go back to sleep now?
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 19th, 2001, 9:50 pm

I didn't notice you were awake.

Dai Vernon (and Lee Asher) forever,

Seb.

Pete McCabe
Posts: 2332
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Simi Valley, CA

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Pete McCabe » December 19th, 2001, 11:21 pm

I'd like to hear more about Richard's thoughts re: Vernon's possible reaction to the Asher Twist.

I tend to think of myself as a "naturalist" in the Vernon school, although I've never met him. But I do feel pretty strongly that the use of a count in a non-counting situation violates that principle rather directly. Vernon obviously disagreed, or at least he didn't know of an alternative that didn't have some other, presumably larger drawback(s).

So my first question is, how much of Lee's technique was known when Vernon was finalizing TTA? (I will assume that if it was known, it was known to Vernon :-)

I am working on a theory of the two sides in this argument.

Axioms:
1) A spread is a more natural way to display the face-up/face-down status of four cards than is a count.
2) The Elmsley count is a more natural looking simulation of a count than the Asher Twist is a simulation of a spread.

Conclusion:
if what you value most is a natural movement, you'll go for the Asher Twist. But if what you prize is a natural-looking movement it's the Elmsley count.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum, baby.


So the second question, Richard, is what do you think Vernon would say about this? (Not the "Quod Erat Demonstrandum, baby" part.)

Obviously, I'd also love to hear from anybody else who knew Vernon.


BTW anybody who hasn't seen the video of Lee doing his routine at the link posted above really needs to do so before you make any comments about Lee's routine. Is there a copy of the Professor doing his version that someone can post a link to?

Pete

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 20th, 2001, 4:37 am

The film of Lee Asher performing the Asher Twist looks great. Other magicians should not be allowed to perform it until it looks as good as he did it. It is also filmed straight on and looking down which is the friendliest angle (translation - the only real watchable angle without the flashing problem).

Wesley James said that "few techniques are without some angle considerations". I can think of one. The Elmsley Count. This slight can truly be done surrounded and slowly.

He also goes on to say that "Certainly, limiting the arsenal of viable techniques to those without angle considerations to avoid your label of "Card Juggling" would severely hamper the vast majority of the performers and constrain us from performing the preponderance of the effects in the card literature."

Besides the fact that "card juggling" isn't necessarily referring to techniques using bad angles, a magician that makes his living performing for lay audiences absolutely must use techniques that are angle friendly because in the majority of working situations, he doesn't have the luxury of saying "OK you. Stand here and look down. Uh. You, please move this way and don't stand to the left of me." (Although magicians will stand or sit wherever you want them to). Working magicians will be surrounded and will even have people come up behind them (which is annoying, but what are you gonna do). That's why moves such as a Tenkai Palm are not practical. Even performing the pass would require some misdirection and practically flawless technique.

Also, the preponderance of effects in card literature are not practical enough to perform in the working world anyway. They may be fun to entertain some of your magical buddies, but the lay public would either fall asleep or walk out. But then again, that's is purely my opinion. However it reminds me of an anecdote from Strong Magic in which a performer describes a once prolific magician as someone that would "come up with 30 different ways to do an effect that I wouldn't do if I could do real magic". Most laypeople would agree with this.

My favorite quote is "It is easily possible you cannot perform the technique with adequate facility to make it a viable tool." The ole "sour grapes" argument. Gavin Ross is thumbing his nose at the Asher Twist because he can't do it? Please. He clearly expressed why and made his point crystal clear.

I have always had very enthusiastic responses from lay people when I have performed Twisting The Aces (as does Peter Duffie). Those of you that are not getting a good reaction overall, I would question your performance.

Hey. You can do which ever technique best suits you. If you think the Asher Twist is the more magical routine, please perform it, have fun with it and dazzle your audiences. It is visually pleasing and in Lee's hands (as you can see on the film), it is beautiful. To me and a few others, the Vernon routine is more magical to me (and most importantly, my audience) and I will continue performing it that way.

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 20th, 2001, 3:14 pm

Ennis,

<It is also filmed straight on and looking down which is the friendliest angle (translation - the only real watchable angle without the flashing problem).>

Have you ever seen a video where the magician performs a routine or sleight at the unfriendliest possible angle?

Maybe you should sport the $20 bucks to get the 'Well Done' video and see that I do the twist from 2 different angles. One from the front (the one on the Magic Smith site) and one from the back looking over my shoulder (on the older version at the end of the video). What? Another possible angle? No...that can't be!


Asher the arrogant

Randy DiMarco
Posts: 183
Joined: March 13th, 2008, 3:45 pm

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Randy DiMarco » December 20th, 2001, 3:50 pm

Some people seem to be stuck on the assumption that the Elmsley Count has to be portrayed as counting the cards. In this application it is used as a display of 4 cards, 1 at a time. When you do the move you should not verbally count the cards (and your lips shouldn't move either).

Randy DiMarco
Posts: 183
Joined: March 13th, 2008, 3:45 pm

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Randy DiMarco » December 20th, 2001, 3:56 pm

By the way, I also saw Lee perform the twist at FFFF and perform it myself. It has a different feeling than the Vernon effect. Both are good. Each has its place. It's like the difference between a standard ace assembly and open travelers. Both are good. They are just different.

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 20th, 2001, 6:32 pm

Hello Lee,

"Have you ever seen a video where the magician performs a routine or sleight at the unfriendliest possible angle?"

Unfortunately yes I have. It may not have been the unfriendliest angle, but the angle was certainly bad. Believe it or not, I have at least 2 A-1 videos that feature guys flashing because of angle problems (and 1 because he botched the move and he didn't do it over). You would think they would have caught and reshot it but sure enough it's there. Now granted, I do not recommend this technique when filming a magic video.

"Maybe you should sport the $20 bucks to get the 'Well Done' video and see that I do the twist from 2 different angles. One from the front (the one on the Magic Smith site) and one from the back looking over my shoulder (on the older version at the end of the video). What? Another possible angle? No...that can't be! "

Great !! Now 2 people can see the Asher Twist. The guy in front of you looking down and the guy standing behind you looking over your shoulder.

What's the advantage of being able to watch it from behind you over the shoulder? Is it so you can show it to the guy seated behind you on the bus? :D

Look. I am glad the move has served you well and you should be quite proud of it. You have made quite a name for yourself as a result (although my personal favorite of your effects is "Joking Around"). I just don't think it has the advantages you claim it does over the Vernon routine.

Steve Hook
Posts: 833
Joined: October 21st, 2008, 11:50 am
Location: Raleigh, North Carolina, USA

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Steve Hook » December 20th, 2001, 8:29 pm

1) I agree with whomever made the point that we're really discussing two different tricks. For me, the "battle" promoted here between the two effects is pointless. As Peter said, the effects are different. The methodologies and demonstrations are so dissimilar that it does little good to compare them.

2) The Asher Twist is an excellent trick. Just look at the demo. It's a great trick! For me, the ending is the killer.

3) The Asher Twist is most definitely angly. Lee demoed it in his lecture in Charlotte (last year?) after breaking the attendees into smaller groups because, to paraphrase Lee, "this is a bit angly and I want you to see it in the best possible conditions." So maybe Lee and others would agree that it's a great "time and place" trick. Nothing wrong with that, eh?

4) A logical explanation by an intelligent observer would be that somehow the bottom card is being turned over. There can be little argument about that, yes? It doesn't make it a bad trick. (That's probably where the "card juggling" observation came from, though.) And that's why I like the last two phases because, for me, the beautiful suddenness of all the cards changing short circuits the logical explanation the brain was formulating.

Steve H

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 21st, 2001, 5:58 am

In response to Steve Hook's post:

1) This is debatable. I think they are the same trick using 2 different methods. Paul Wilson demonstrates this when performing them back to back.

2) I think it looks great too.

3) I totally agree. Even Lee said it was angly and broke the lecture up into groups which more or less is an indication that it cannot be done surrounded. A time and place trick is a good description (and there is nothing wrong with it).

4) "A logical explanation by an intelligent observer would be that somehow the bottom card is being turned over. There can be little argument about that, yes?"

If the audience can still figure out what must have happened (turning over the bottom card) then it really doesn't matter whether or not the method is invisible. What is important is that the method has to appear impossible. It will not be magical if they believe you are invisibly turning over the bottom card. However, in the Vernon routine the method is not only invisible, it's conceptually impossible. It is impossible for a card to have instantly turned face up between 2 cards in a squared packet held by the spectator.

The beauty of the Elmsley Count is the fact that you are concealing a face up card while showing all 4 cards as face down. If they are convinced the cards are all face down and the Ace of Spades turns face up in the hands of the spectators between 2 cards, their reaction should be that what just happened is truly impossible. This is the impossibility that stirs the amazement in the spectator and gives them an incredible magical experience.

Jon Racherbaumer
Posts: 843
Joined: January 22nd, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: New Orleans

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Jon Racherbaumer » December 21st, 2001, 9:22 am

Ya gotta love it! 75 messages so far...

...all regarding a trick where cards turn face up WHILE THE MAGICIAN IS HOLDING THEM. From a GEnii Forum-standpoint, this has proven to be a lively topic that can be endlessly discussed, debated, and dissected. We parry and parse words, hoping that "paralysis by analysis" doesn't set in. Yet sometimes we overlook questions that are obvious to the lay people we hope to deceive and entertain.

If you really want to show an undeniably MAGICAL version of "Twisting the Aces," then devise one that happens in the SPECTATOR's hands from start to finish. (Marlo did.) As long as the "operator" (a delightful, old-fashion term for sleight-of-hand worker) has the cards in his hands or possession, especially if he has ALREADY ably demonstrated that he can skillfully handle them, laymen automatically assume that anything is possible and was probably accomplished by MANIPULATIVE means. This of course is perfectly fine. Years ago Derek Dingle confided to a group of us session-hounds that he wanted to be known as a SLEIGHT-OF-HAND MASTER. In his inimitable voice, Derek said: "Lay people know there's no such thing as 'magic.' They know that its done...when it's done well...by bloody skill and cunning!" (So much for the Mystery School Approach.)

Forgettable Sidelights:

(1) I remember a laymen asking a magician who was performing several packets tricks (using lots of Elmsley Counts): "What's that SHUFFLE called?"

(2) I remember a lay person saying, after a card MAGICALLY turned over while the packet was inside a card box and NOT in the magician's hands: "Now THAT's impossible. That's really MAGICAL!"

(3) Another lay person asked me: "Do magicians fool each other?"

"All the time," I said. "Especially when they are arguing about this or that trick!"

Hmmmmmm....

Onward?

Jeremy Medows
Posts: 111
Joined: March 29th, 2008, 2:05 am

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Jeremy Medows » December 21st, 2001, 10:42 am

Wow, there's alot of discussion about the merits of Twisting the Aces and the Asher Twist. I'm not sure why. I believe that I can perform both tricks rather well, but seldom use either routine in a performance for non-magicians.

If you were going to perform for 10 minutes infront of an important audience (tv, the ceo, the Perfect 10 models, whatever), who hear would perform either Twisting the Aces or The Asher Twist in that 10 minute performance?

Angles are very touchy when performing The Asher Twist The best angles are from the top. I've usually seen it performed at crotch level. I'm not sure what subliminal message that magicians who perform the Asher Twish are trying to send me.

When Lee Asher performed The Asher Twist when he lectured in New York a few years ago, he had to perform the routine several times for people around the room, so they could get a flash free angle. From my experience, the best angle for the trick is performing it with your arms wrapped around a spectator who is in front of you, especially when you're at the Perfect 10 party. (I've heard from a second hand source this is how Asher performs the Twist, but it's just rumor). However, I am sure that the guy performing at the Perfect 10 party will be doing spongeballs and the ashes.

Best,
Jeremy

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 21st, 2001, 11:31 am

We should archive this one when it reaches 100.

As far as whether or not a layperson believes in magic is debatable. We live in a world where people believe in (and claimed to have seen) Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, Ghosts, Zombies, UFO's, the Bermuda Triangle, ESP, God, Fate, Premonitions, Psychic Predictions, Luck, and many more items which have to be taken on faith. Some people don't even question as to whether it doesn't exist, especially when they are witnessing the miracles with their own eyes !! They absolutely believe in it. (Some are scared of it!!) To assume that no one believes in magic and everyone knows that effects are accomplished by mere sleight of hand is probably not accurate. I have met many people (even intelligent people) that are still convinced that some magic that magicians learn (even entertainers) are still well guarded secrets that are only accessible by those that seek it. The mystique of magic seems to exist mainly in the minds of laypeople because magicians are convinced that since they know that "it is all a trick", then the rest of the world assumes it is as well.

So much for my philosophy.

"As long as the "operator" (a delightful, old-fashion term for sleight-of-hand worker) has the cards in his hands or possession, especially if he has ALREADY ably demonstrated that he can skillfully handle them, laymen automatically assume that anything is possible and was probably accomplished by MANIPULATIVE means."

Another debatable point. To make it appear more "magical" you would have to strengthen the conviction phase. If the spectator would bet any amount of money that the cards he is holding are indeed all face down, he will be more amazed when one of the middle cards turns face up. The stronger the conviction, the less likely they will assume you did something. They actually won't know what to believe.

As you can tell, I am heavily influenced by Strong Magic by Darwin Ortiz and by the Magic Way by Juan Tamariz. These points are clearly stated and my magic has become more magic like as a result.

I don't want to sound too preachy, but this is what I truly believe.

PS - I do use Twisting the Aces when performing for people. It can be done in practically any setting and it gets a very strong reaction when I perform it.

Guest

Re: Twisting the Aces

Postby Guest » December 21st, 2001, 11:35 am

I am reminded of Oscar Wilde's criteria for the qualification of a given work as "art" or "not art":

If everybody loves it, it is not art.

If everybody hates it, it is not art.

If it causes controversy, it is art.


Return to “Close-Up Magic”