What the heck-- let's make it a trilogy! (Another effect)

[Guest]

If you want it in word format, just e-mail me!


Gaffus Maximus

The Effect

After performing a few miracles with a blue-backed deck of cards, the Cardguy decides he will demonstrate his awesome power of mind-control. Taking out a single blue-backed card, he places it on the table and puts the blue-backed deck in its case. He then pulls a red-backed deck of cards from his pocket and places the single blue-backed card on top of the red-backed deck and then cuts and ruffle shuffles the deck thoroughly. Flipping through the faces of the cards, the Cardguy asks the spectator to think of any card she sees and then he ribbon spreads the deck face-up on the table. What card are you thinking of? asks the Cardguy and when the spectator answers, the thought of card is slid out of the spread and turned over to reveal its the blue-backed card!


Making the Gaff

This effect requires a totally gaffed deck but its one piece of killer mentalism. It also has a built in way to ring in and out the gaff.

The gaffed deck consists of 26 short red-backed cards alternating with 26 normal blue-backed cards that comprise a Svengali Deck, but with the backs rather than the faces.

To make the deck, take out a shiny brand new deck of red-backed playing cards and remove the Jokers and advertising cards. Shuffle the deck well and deal out 26 random cards. These will be your short cards. Cut the cards and round the corners in the traditional fashion and then take out a shiny new blue-backed deck and remove the duplicates of the gaffed red-backed cards, the Jokers and advertising cards. Combine whats left with the short red-backed cards and you should have a complete deck of 52 cardsbut 26 of them will be short red-backed cards and 26 will be regular blue-backed cards. Alternate the red and blue backs, ending with a blue-backed card on top of the deck and then put the deck in a red-backed card case.


Preparation

The only secret preparation for the effect is to remove the blue-backed card from the top of the gaffed deck and leave it at home, out of the waybut remember the identity of this card!! Your gaffed deck should not appear as a red-backed deck in a red-backed case. The only sleights used are those that are normally involved in using a Svengali Deck: The Dribble, The Riffle Shuffle and the ability to riffle the deck so the spectator can mentally select a card.

The Move Sequence (Sans Patter)

1) Perform a few tricks with a normal blue-backed deck of cards. (This is important!!)

2) Make a prediction by spreading the blue-backed cards towards you and picking out the duplicate of the blue-backed card you removed from your gaff earlier. (I told you to remember the card!!) Place the prediction card on the table without letting anyone see it and then case the blue-backed deck.

3) Remove the gaffed deck and dribble it into your left hand. Only red-backed cards should show. Talk while you do this; dont do it more than once or twice and dont say anything like: I have here an ordinary deck of red-backed playing cards which is not prepared in any way

4) Place the blue-backed card on top of the gaffed deck and cut in into the deck. If you lift up from the back of the deck with your right thumb, you will not cut a blue-backed card to the top. This is important, of course, because if you cut to a blue-backed card the audience will either think that youre cutting the deck at the same exact place and that you are not to be trusted or they will correctly conclude that you have more than one blue-backed card in the deck. Cut the deck a few times in this manner.

5) Riffle shuffle the deck a few times by the ends in the traditional Svengali Deck fashion.

6) Explain to the spectator that she can pick any card she sees as you flip through the deck. Emphasize that she must select a card that she actually sees, because you want her to have a clear picture of the card in her mind. Clamp the lower end of the deck between your left thumb and your left middle and index finger, riffle through the cards from the face-card on up to the top card of the deck. This will only let the spectator see the faces of the blue-backed cards.

7) Ribbon spread the gaffed deck face-up (a very wide spread will eliminate any hint of that rough/smooth stuff) on the table and ask the spectator what card she is thinking of and when she names the card, slide it out of the spread and turn it face-down to reveal that it has a blue back.


Ditching the Gaff

After youve had your moment of glory, replace the card the spectator named and as youre picking up the spread, cut the deck so the card you originally removed from the blue-backed deck is on top. Place the deck in the red-backed card case and then as you start to put them away, suddenly realize that the blue-backed card is still on top of the deck and then remove it and place it in the blue-backed deck without letting the audience see the face. This should appear as if you forgot to remove the prediction card and went back, removed it and replaced it in the blue-backed deck. It should not appear as anything importanttreat it like an afterthought!

A Few Tips

1) When you first start working with this gaffed deck some blue-backed cards will show. After a suitable breaking-in period, you should have no such problems.

2) Please note that the sleights used in this routine are not usually recognized by lay people who are in the know about the Svengali Deck. Most lay people who are familiar with the Svengali Deck do not know that you can riffle shuffle it, use the dribble or use any selection procedure besides having a spectator stick his finger in the deck.


****Permission to manufacture these decks for personal use, but not for commercial sale is granted by Steven Youell.****

Entire contents copyrighted (1994) by Steven Youell

[Guest]

No feedback? None...?!?

[Guest]

Steven

I like the sound of it - but I must confess I'm still busy perfecting your "trick that has no explanation", which is SUPERB!
When I've mastered that one then I will move on to this. I can't seem to get the dribble peek right: when I turn the pack face up (holding the break) I end up beveling the cards rather than creating a nice step. I'll keep practising...

Andrew

[Guest]

Steve--two (related) questions:

1. When you ribbon spread the deck to eliminate the idea of rough and smooth, do you not show the 26 duplicates (I'm not familiar enough with a Svengali deck to know without experimentation)?

2. Thus, would you not want the non-matching cards (not duplicates) from the normal blue-backed deck when making up the 52-card gaffed deck?

:confused:

[Guest]

Originally posted by Andrew B.:
I can't seem to get the dribble peek right: when I turn the pack face up (holding the break) I end up beveling the cards rather than creating a nice step. I'll keep practising...

Sounds like your left pinky isn't keeping contact
with the break when you're turning the deck over.
Try maintaining just a little more pressure and
let me know how it goes...

Steven Youell

[Guest]

Originally posted by WarlockDrummer:
1. When you ribbon spread the deck to eliminate the idea of rough and smooth, do you not show the 26 duplicates (I'm not familiar enough with a Svengali deck to know without experimentation)?

2. Thus, would you not want the non-matching cards (not duplicates) from the normal blue-backed deck when making up the 52-card gaffed deck?

The deck is composed of 52 different cards. 26 of those cards are short red-backed cards and the other 26 are regular blue-backed cards. When you ribbon spread the deck face-up, the audience will see 52 different faces. If you ribbon spread the cards face down, they will see 26 red-backed cards alternating with 26 blue-backed cards. In this case, the Svengali principle is being applied to the BACKS of the cards, not the faces.

Does that clear things up?

Steven Youell

[Steve Hook]

Steven:

Thank you very, very much for all four routines. :)

Steve H

[Jeff Eline]

Yeah, Steve - Thanks!

[Guest]

Steve,
Thank you for being so generous with your routines. When will your new notes be out?

Alton

[Nathan]

Hey thanks for posting all these great effects!

One thought on Gaffus Maximus: I'm a little uncomfortable with the idea of demonstrating mind-control yet having to ask the spectator to tell you their card after you just controlled their mind to think of the one you wanted them to.

I guess one solution to this is to ask the spectator tell their card to the rest of the audience in preparation for the climax. Of course this doesn't work in every situation (for example if you're performing one on one).

How about presenting this effect as a demonstration of the spectator's ESP. Follow the same exact procedure, however tell the spectator try to pick out the blue back by looking at the faces of the cards during the selection process. Then spread the cards face up and ask the spectator to pull his card forward from the spread to see if he's succeeded. This way the spectator is the star and he never has to tell you the name of his card. You may think it telegraphs the climax too much to ask the spectator to try to pick out the blue card by its face, but I think it will help build tension-anticipation suspense thus making the climax very strong.

The procedure of putting the decks away at the end gives the magician an excellent opportunity to switch in a blue deck set up for Out of this World. The effect of Out of this World is essentially the same but the scope is much larger so the performance of Gaffus Maximus followed by Out of this World gives a natural and powerful progression.

[Guest]

Originally posted by Steven Youell:
Your gaffed deck should not appear as a red-backed deck in a red-backed case.

I hate to nit pick, but do you really mean that?

As I type this, I realise that not might be a misprint for now.

Dave

[El Mystico]

No one else seems to have pointed this out - but there is a very similar effect, using what I think is a technically supreior method - in the Ron Wilson book. I won't tip it, otherwise Richard would shoot me, but I'd urge anyone to look it up - its terrific.

[Richard Kaufman]

El Mystico ... and the name of the effect is ...
drumroll ..........

[Jeff Haas]

What is "The Highland Hop?"

[Guest]

A belated yes to your answering my questions. Great idea!

Thanks. :)

[Guest]

Originally posted by Nathan Becker:
One thought on Gaffus Maximus: I'm a little uncomfortable with the idea of demonstrating mind-control yet having to ask the spectator to tell you their card after you just controlled their mind to think of the one you wanted them to.

Let's say that you could really do this. If you ask someone to think of a card and then pull out the Nine of Clubs, what is to prevent them from saying "That wasn't my card."?

Instead, you could tell them "Look, I've committed to a single card now you have to commit to a single card....

In that context it makes sense.

Steven Youell

[Guest]

Originally posted by El Mystico:
No one else seems to have pointed this out - but there is a very similar effect, using what I think is a technically supreior method - in the Ron Wilson book. I won't tip it, otherwise Richard would shoot me, but I'd urge anyone to look it up - its terrific.

Thank you for the reference. However, I wasn't
attempting to design a "technically superior"
method. I was attempting to design a method that
could successfully be used by the majority of
the magicians out there...and if I didn't
mention it before, I'll mention it now. This
effect fooled a group of educated CardGuys that
included Mike Skinner, among others...

Steven Youell

[El Mystico]

In reply to Richard's question - the Wilson effect is called "Second Sight". According to the write up in the book, it fooled Jennings.
It is a terrific effect. And the whole book itself is excellent for the working performer.
Oh, and for Mr Youell - the Wilson version is also well within the reach of the average magician. I'm not suggesting a rip off - Mr Youell's comment clearly suggests he is not familiar with the Wilson trick!

[Guest]

Originally posted by Dom:
In reply to Richard's question - the Wilson effect is called "Second Sight". According to the write up in the book, it fooled Jennings.
It is a terrific effect. And the whole book itself is excellent for the working performer.
Oh, and for Mr Youell - the Wilson version is also well within the reach of the average magician. I'm not suggesting a rip off - Mr Youell's comment clearly suggests he is not familiar with the Wilson trick!

I will e-mail Ron Wilson and if he feels it's
too close to his, I will delete my original post
and stop publishing the effect.

Thank You all for your assistence.

Steven Youell
www.cardguy.net

[Guest]

Okay, I spoke to Ron Wilson personally and he doesn't feel that the effects are similar enough to warrant a conflict. I told him I would trash it if he wanted me to, but he has no problems with Gaffus Maximus..


Steven Youell
www.cardguy.net

[El Mystico]

Great!
The key thing is - this is a great effect - often overlooked.