riffle stacking

Discuss your favorite close-up tricks and methods.

Postby Silly Walter » 09/03/08 07:16 PM

If for some reason you decide to reshoot the video, you may want to zoom in on the cards at the very end because I had a very difficult time telling one hand from the other. I saw a couple of picture cards on hands 3 and 4 and I am pretty sure you probably had the winning hand but it was very blurry to me. Perhaps it is time for me to get some bifocals.

I won't comment on the poorly executed Vernon push through or the fact that you practically shuffled the tits off of the queens because I don't want anyone to think I am being picky.

Plus it is obvious that the routine you filmed was a result of years of hard work and real crunch time in front of paying audiences.
Silly Walter The Polar Bear
Silly Walter
 
Posts: 133
Joined: 03/16/08 01:31 PM

Postby David Thomas » 09/03/08 07:23 PM

Buy Richard Turner's The Cheat: Science of Shuffling and stacking. Richard teaches you over 60 ways and he teaches them very well.

Well, that's all I got.
User avatar
David Thomas
 
Posts: 250
Joined: 07/14/08 09:36 PM
Location: Burbank, CA

Postby mrgoat » 09/03/08 07:29 PM

Glenn Bishop wrote:
However the subject of this thread was about riffle shuffle stacking. Like the push through shuffle that is a false shuffle, is changed and modified to use when culling cards. Like in the Steven's cull that was written about in the book Revelations.

Like the push through shuffle was modified - I changed the triumph shuffle to cull and stack according to "my" needs. Two "expert magicians" like yourselves seem to have missed this.


Good job, Bish. I do applaud your methods. I really always though trick shuffles should be kept a secret from the audience. But you have proved here that you can actually expose the basic method of the trick shuffle, as long as you can cull 3 different hand from a slug.

It's a lesson everyone can learn from and something I urge RK to turn into a cover feature for the magazine.

Thanks for sharing.
mrgoat
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby Jeff Eline » 09/03/08 08:13 PM

mrgoat wrote:
Glenn Bishop wrote:This may interest you.

http://www.mrhypnotist.org/video/GlennB ... riumph.wmv


This has to be called The Lunesta Routine.
Jeff Eline
 
Posts: 647
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Baltimore, MD

Postby Larry Horowitz » 09/03/08 08:44 PM

Glenn,

I have never heard of the Bruno shuffle. I have heard of the Bueno shuffle. (Muy Bueno Shuffle, The Penumbra, #9 Oct.2005)

If you will look at your own video you will notice that the comments you are attracting have nothing to do with the cull or stacking of cards. Rather, You are clearly exposing that the two portions of the deck have not been pushed square. I may be wrong, but I have a strong suspicion this was not Vernon's intention.

By the way, if you do a lot of shows, as with any magician, that's more a credit to your business acumen then your ability to false shuffle.
Larry Horowitz
 
Posts: 387
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: L.A.

Postby Lemniscate » 09/03/08 08:46 PM

Several points are being missed here.

First off, one would assume there is something else than staring at GB's hands going on, so his methodology probably flies by. With that being said, I actually riffle shuffle by riffle shuffling, so I happen to think his way looks inferior in several ways compared to "real" riffle shuffling. Not saying my way is better, but I think it is (you don't have that extra step you see when you try to use Vernon's idea over and over... and over). It is the problem with any magic effect, shown without any patter, on the internet. It bored me so much that I quit watching twice. However I have no doubt that it could play quite strongly to an audience. Let me repeat, I have NO DOUBT that it could play quite STRONGLY to an AUDIENCE.

Second, true riffle shuffling involves a bit of math. Not a whole lot, but this can be a turn-off to some. I think, in my opinion, that is the allure of false shuffle stacking (basically, an inverse of the Zarrow idea really, I think Herb's DVD even has some takes on this). Math is not scary, it is your friend.

Third, Darwin Ortiz has a good introduction into riffle shuffling in one of his effects from Card Shark (I am pretty sure). It involves some other work on the cards but it gives you an opportunity to start practicing true riffle stacking. AFTER you have some experience doing riffle stacking then you can decide whether or not you want to use a false shuffle on top of riffle shuffling.

Fourth, I'm not exactly sure what your qualifications are for being an expert (doing card tricks certainly doesn't cut it), but insulting other people because they don't happen to like your approach is pretty juvenile. There are three rules for being an expert, and you hit almost all of them:

-excessive ego (check)
-inability to see things any other way (check)
-completely flawless technique (um...not by any stretch of the imagination, your counts were slow, your steps big, your riffling uneven; you would be eaten alive in any card game I have ever seen)

Now, me, personally... not an expert. Pretty darn good, mind you, but this brings me to the fourth rule of being an expert:

-an expert uses what works.

If it works for you, GB, then my hat is off. I wouldn't personally leave my house if anything I did looked like that (NOT an insult, I just don't like the pairing of a false shuffle with stacking; again NOT AN INSULT ON YOUR SKILLS, just a vast difference in opinion in what looks good).

Thanks for sharing, quite brave. Not so much thanks for being a total ass but hey, we all have our days.

Lem
Lemniscate
 
Posts: 37
Joined: 04/08/08 03:16 AM

Postby Glenn Bishop » 09/03/08 10:29 PM

Larry Horowitz wrote:Glenn,

I have never heard of the Bruno shuffle. I have heard of the Bueno shuffle. (Muy Bueno Shuffle, The Penumbra, #9 Oct.2005)

If you will look at your own video you will notice that the comments you are attracting have nothing to do with the cull or stacking of cards. Rather, You are clearly exposing that the two portions of the deck have not been pushed square. I may be wrong, but I have a strong suspicion this was not Vernon's intention.

By the way, if you do a lot of shows, as with any magician, that's more a credit to your business acumen then your ability to false shuffle.


Thanks Larry - thats the one. I have that issue however did not have it handy - It is in one of my piles of magazines. Still I think that it is one of the best false shuffles out there.

However to the rest of this post and this thread - really not worth my time to respond to!
Glenn Bishop
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 03/14/08 10:52 AM

Postby Silly Walter » 09/03/08 10:35 PM

Good call, Glenn. You really should take the time you were going to use to post and spend it practicing the Bruno shuffle.

Just my opinion !!!!
Silly Walter The Polar Bear
Silly Walter
 
Posts: 133
Joined: 03/16/08 01:31 PM

Postby Glenn Bishop » 09/03/08 10:51 PM

Lemniscate wrote:Several points are being missed here.

Fourth, I'm not exactly sure what your qualifications are for being an expert (doing card tricks certainly doesn't cut it), but insulting other people because they don't happen to like your approach is pretty juvenile. There are three rules for being an expert, and you hit almost all of them:

-excessive ego (check)

Lem

Sorry - never claimed (to magicians) to being an "expert".

Never claimed to be an expert to the lay audience in my promotion as well. However I will add one or two opinions if I may. The triumph shuffle is a false shuffle that in my opinion has fallen by the wayside in magic.

I took the idea and gave it a twist - changed the handling a bit first so I could use it to stack cards like the four aces. Later I found out I could use it to cull cards. And later still to cull and stack cards on the fly.

The real beauty of the triumph shuffle it in it's simplicity. In performance in front of an audience keeping things simple and not complicated is a good thing. Others may like making things hard to do but I like to keep things simple and use what works.

The other part of why the triumph shuffle is so great (in my opinion) - in this culling and stacking in my opinion is that because it is a false shuffle - the problems of culling and stacking deep - or losing one of the stacked cards as each card is culled and stacked in turn. Well the triumph shuffle solves many of those problems.

One more comment about my video - IT IS "NOT" A PERFORAMCE!

Only a "SHORT DEMOSTRATION" TO SHOW WHAT IS POSSIBLE. When using the triumph shuffle to cull and stack three different hands from a slug!

NOT USING IT AS A FALSE SHUFFLE!

It would be my guess that no one seems to be able to pick up on that!

Thank you all very much for your opinions!
Glenn Bishop
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 03/14/08 10:52 AM

Postby Glenn Bishop » 09/03/08 10:57 PM

Silly Walter wrote:Good call, Glenn. You really should take the time you were going to use to post and spend it practicing the Bruno shuffle.

Just my opinion !!!!

Please let me know if you ever come up with anything that in my opinion is this practical to use to cull and stack cards on the fly - from a slug - or to cull and stack three or more different poker hands from a slug - Silly Walter!

Or if you come up with anything at all.

Just my opinion!
Glenn Bishop
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 03/14/08 10:52 AM

Postby Denis Behr » 09/04/08 03:51 AM

mrgoat wrote:I am FAR from an expert, but I always thought that Vernon's Triumph shuffle was intended to be performed in such a way that the audience didn't see you were just pushing one card across the top and pulling out the cards on the other side?

You are absolutely right. I observed this some time ago, too. The execution is simply wrong.

If you want to learn riffle stacking, go to other sources. Any other sources. Here are some suggestions:

More or less easily available are Card College (for a first introduction), then see the publications by Darwin Ortiz, Joseph Schmidt ("New Card Control Systems"), Jack Carpenter and Andrew Wimhurst for numerous applications and tips on the execution, maybe also the second half of Ernest Earick's book.
And if you can find them, Ed Marlo and Karl Fulves published more on riffle stacking than anyone else. (Fulves has a relatively recent manuscript called "Setting-Up Exercices", which contains practice sequences to learn the art of riffle stacking.)

Denis
Denis Behr
 
Posts: 273
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Munich

Postby Nikodemus Siivola » 09/04/08 04:00 AM

I'm currently working on my Triumph, so this was of some interest to me -- not the stacking bit as such, but the deceptiveness of Glenn's handling of the Triumph Shuffle itself.

I wanted to know how a layman would see Glenn's shuffle. I played it to a friend from 0:17 to the deal, without commentary or title other than "Please tell me what happens here."

I don't want to draw too many conclusions from this: most people might see it differently, a higher-quality video might have produced entirely different comments (or not), and the way I posed the task almost certainly altered the way she watched the action.

At any rate, I found her comments interesting, and maybe someone else does too. Here's what she thought she saw:

1. All the aces went in the same place in the deck.

2. During the shuffles, he didn't shuffle properly, but rather stopped, let a few cards fall from one side, and a few from the other, etc. Doing it on purpose.

3. There was something strange about the cuts. Did he put the top portion back on the top and the bottom back to the bottom or something?

The one thing she *didn't* remark on was the fake squaring action or the strip-out (though possibly that might fall under the rubrik of "something strange".)

Cheers,

-- Nikodemus
Nikodemus Siivola
 
Posts: 29
Joined: 01/24/08 01:00 PM
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Postby El Mystico » 09/04/08 04:30 AM

The query was about "good sources" to learn riffle stacking.
I'm not really sure why mr Bishop posted his video, since, as he says, he is no expert, and it wasnt meant to be either a performance or a teaching aid.

It requires a lot of work to do riffle stacking, and even more work to do it well - Richard's point about how artificial much of it looks is a good one and well illustrated here.
El Mystico
 
Posts: 870
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Leamington Spa

Postby Bob Farmer » 09/04/08 05:07 AM

The whole point of the Triumph Shuffle is to do it ONCE and stop. Remember, Triumph is a magic trick, not a gambling demonstration. If you keep shuffling it ceases to be a magic trick and becomes a gambling demonstration -- it cease to be a demonstration of the impossible and becomes a demonstration of skill.

My impression of all of the various gambling demos I've seen is that the performer is intently studying the deck, like a juggler trying for the 9th ball, so it always looks like skill it never looks like magic.
Bob Farmer
 
Posts: 1637
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Short card above selection.

Postby Cugel » 09/04/08 06:39 AM

Richard Kaufman wrote:Many of the so-called experts out there lecturing on this are either looking at their hands while doing it, or are staring at the audience, attempting and failing to look relaxed, and their hands look as if they clamping the deck like a vice.


LOL. You are so right, and that's why people should skip the crap out there and just go straight to Darwin Ortiz's and Jack Carpenter's material. There is also some reasonable stuff in the first Jim Swain book and you can find a very nice finesse in the hard to locate David Malek notes, "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap".
User avatar
Cugel
 
Posts: 441
Joined: 01/26/08 01:00 PM
Location: Overworld

Postby mrgoat » 09/04/08 07:39 AM

Glenn Bishop wrote:
NOT USING IT AS A FALSE SHUFFLE!



*Now* it makes sense.

You had no intention of deceiving your audience into thinking you were actually shuffling.

Mission accomplished.
mrgoat
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby Darryl Harris » 09/04/08 08:37 AM

Alex Elmsley's Just Lucky shuffle system (The Collected Works of Alex Elmsley, Stephen Minch, 1991, page 391) has a lot going for it, if you want to cull and stack four of a kind for a four or five handed deal, with three or four riffle shuffles. The description in the book is for a four handed deal, but it's easy to see what adjustments need to be made to increase the number of hands.
The top card of the deck is always buried on each shuffle, and each shuffle is identical in appearance.
As these things go, the Just Lucky stacking system is relatively easy to become proficient with in a reasonable amount of time. I was fortunate enough to see the system used by both Larry Jennings, & Michael Skinner, and neither one did more than glance at the deck periodically.

~ DV
Live with honor
Act with integrity
No regrets
Darryl Harris
 
Posts: 81
Joined: 02/03/08 01:00 PM
Location: Woodbridge, NJ

Postby Glenn Bishop » 09/04/08 08:53 AM

mrgoat - Cugel - El Mystico - Nikodemus Siivola - Denis Behr

Please let me know if you ever come up with anything that in my opinion is this practical to use to cull and stack cards on the fly - from a slug - or to cull and stack three or more different poker hands from a slug!

Just my opinion!
Glenn Bishop
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 03/14/08 10:52 AM

Postby mrgoat » 09/04/08 09:25 AM

Glenn Bishop wrote: mrgoat - Cugel - El Mystico - Nikodemus Siivola - Denis Behr

Please let me know if you ever come up with anything that in my opinion is this practical to use to cull and stack cards on the fly - from a slug - or to cull and stack three or more different poker hands from a slug!

Just my opinion!


Is that the only time you will listen to us telling you that the pull through aspect of the shuffle is completely exposed?

Just to save time.
mrgoat
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby Glenn Bishop » 09/04/08 01:48 PM

mrgoat wrote:
Glenn Bishop wrote: mrgoat - Cugel - El Mystico - Nikodemus Siivola - Denis Behr

Please let me know if you ever come up with anything that in my opinion is this practical to use to cull and stack cards on the fly - from a slug - or to cull and stack three or more different poker hands from a slug!

Just my opinion!


Is that the only time you will listen to us telling you that the pull through aspect of the shuffle is completely exposed?

Just to save time.


I might as well be talking to a wall. This reminds me of another thread in the magic cafe where I showcased a jog shuffle cull and a group of people climbed all over the jog shuffle video saying all sorts of things about how it wouldn't work in a card game. And how I shuffle the deck several times - runs of single cards to cull four cards.

They were so busy talking about and insulting the shuffle and the amount of single cards shuffled (as what happens in all jog shuffles) they never even noticed that I was using the punch to cull cards.


I was using the punch with a jog shuffle cull and they did not know that. When I performed a week at the Magic castle I again used the jog shuffle cull now called the "punch cull" in many card routines I did in the close up gallery and - no one knew it.

The breakthrough idea was using the punch with a jog shuffle cull.

In my opinion the breakthrough is culling and stacking on the fly - from a slug. Is using a variation of the triumph shuffle. A false shuffle idea that Dai Vernon used that has in my opinion fallen by the wayside today as magicians seem to favor other riffle shuffle work over the triumph shuffle. Almost every magician I have seen do the magic effect Triumph - they all seem to use the Zarrow shuffle over the Triumph shuffle.

mrgoat - Cugel - El Mystico - Nikodemus Siivola - Denis Behr

Please let me know if any of you ever come up with any riffle shuffle technique that in my opinion is this practical to use to cull and stack cards on the fly - from a slug - or to cull and stack three or more different poker hands from a slug!

Just my opinion!
Glenn Bishop
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 03/14/08 10:52 AM

Postby Jim Maloney » 09/04/08 02:02 PM

Glenn,
I think the point others are making here is that, regardless of whether or not you have a new idea here, if the shuffles are in any way suspicious, you've already lost. That is, even if they don't know what you did, they know that you did something. Once that happens, you've missed the primary criteria of deceptive card handling.

-Jim
Books and Magazines for sale -- more than 200 items (Last updated January 10th, 2014. Link goes to public Google Doc.)
Jim Maloney
 
Posts: 706
Joined: 07/23/01 12:00 PM
Location: Central New Jersey

Postby Jeff Eline » 09/04/08 02:05 PM

Glenn Bishop wrote:They were so busy talking about and insulting the shuffle and the amount of single cards shuffled (as what happens in all jog shuffles) they never even noticed that I was using the punch to cull cards.

Ahhh...the too perfect theory in action. I see, I see...
Jeff Eline
 
Posts: 647
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Baltimore, MD

Postby Eoin O'hare » 09/04/08 02:09 PM

Glenn, I would enthusiastically urge you to prove to everyone here just how practical and deceptive your technique really is : go find a poker game and bet big.

I feel confident that this will end the need for these consistently derisive comments.
Designer & Maker of The Stripper Jig Card Trimmer
User avatar
Eoin O'hare
 
Posts: 123
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Ireland

Postby Sebastien L. » 09/04/08 03:33 PM

Glenn, I was one of those who criticized the long runs of single cards. You are insulting my intelligence if you think I was unaware of it being a punch cull when I viewed it.

If you consider criticism to be insulting, may I suggest you'd be happier not posting videos? Or if you do, you can always insert the disclaimer that all breaks, jogs and techniques are exaggerated, like in your book. By doing that you may be more successful in getting others to focus on the idea behind the video.
Sebastien L.
 
Posts: 113
Joined: 03/30/08 05:36 PM
Location: Canada

Postby Silly Walter » 09/04/08 04:25 PM

Glenn Bishop wrote:I might as well be talking to a wall. This reminds me of another thread in the magic cafe where I showcased a jog shuffle cull and a group of people climbed all over the jog shuffle video saying all sorts of things about how it wouldn't work in a card game. And how I shuffle the deck several times - runs of single cards to cull four cards.

They were so busy talking about and insulting the shuffle and the amount of single cards shuffled (as what happens in all jog shuffles) they never even noticed that I was using the punch to cull cards.


You posted a video on the Magic Cafe' and they tore it up? They like everything over there. The video must have stunk worse than the one you posted on here.

You may want to start focusing on self working tricks. Fulves has a few self working card trick books you can pick up for a few bucks at your favourite magick shoppe.
Silly Walter The Polar Bear
Silly Walter
 
Posts: 133
Joined: 03/16/08 01:31 PM

Postby Glenn Bishop » 09/04/08 05:55 PM

Silly Walter wrote:
Glenn Bishop wrote:I might as well be talking to a wall. This reminds me of another thread in the magic cafe where I showcased a jog shuffle cull and a group of people climbed all over the jog shuffle video saying all sorts of things about how it wouldn't work in a card game. And how I shuffle the deck several times - runs of single cards to cull four cards.

They were so busy talking about and insulting the shuffle and the amount of single cards shuffled (as what happens in all jog shuffles) they never even noticed that I was using the punch to cull cards.

You posted a video on the Magic Cafe' and they tore it up? They like everything over there. The video must have stunk worse than the one you posted on here.

You may want to start focusing on self working tricks. Fulves has a few self working card trick books you can pick up for a few bucks at your favourite magick shoppe.


For old time sake here is a link to my punch cull video...

http://www.mrhypnotist.org/video/glennb ... chcull.wmv

Please let me know if you ever come up with anything that in my opinion is this practical to use to cull and stack cards on the fly - from a slug - or to cull and stack three or more different poker hands from a slug - Silly Walter!

Or if you come up with anything at all.

Just my opinion!
Glenn Bishop
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 03/14/08 10:52 AM

Postby Glenn Bishop » 09/04/08 06:05 PM

Eoin O'Hare - mrgoat - Cugel - El Mystico - Nikodemus Siivola - Denis Behr

Please let me know if any of you ever come up with any riffle shuffle technique that in my opinion is this practical to use to cull and stack cards on the fly - from a slug - or to cull and stack three or more different poker hands from a slug!

Just my opinion!
Glenn Bishop
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 03/14/08 10:52 AM

Postby Eoin O'hare » 09/04/08 06:34 PM

Glenn Bishop-

Please let me know if you ever come up with any riffle shuffle technique that in my opinion is practical to use, to cull and stack cards on the fly - from a slug - or to cull and stack three or more different poker hands from a slug!


Just about everyone else's opinion!
Designer & Maker of The Stripper Jig Card Trimmer
User avatar
Eoin O'hare
 
Posts: 123
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Ireland

Postby Cugel » 09/04/08 06:54 PM

Glenn Bishop wrote:Please let me know if you ever come up with anything that in my opinion is


This is the source of the problem here. You don't listen to anybody unless they tell you what you want to hear. Where's David Alexander when you need him?
User avatar
Cugel
 
Posts: 441
Joined: 01/26/08 01:00 PM
Location: Overworld

Postby Larry Horowitz » 09/04/08 07:01 PM

Glenn,

Punching cards so that they can be identified is "practical".

Running single cards in numbers, more then once or twice, is NOT PRACTICAL.

....unless you define practical as something that can be physically accomplished.

And no, I do not have a better idea. But I also didn't know it was impractical to build New Orleans below sea level until I saw the video!
Larry Horowitz
 
Posts: 387
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: L.A.

Postby mrgoat » 09/04/08 07:06 PM

Glenn Bishop wrote:
mrgoat wrote:
Glenn Bishop wrote: mrgoat - Cugel - El Mystico - Nikodemus Siivola - Denis Behr

Please let me know if you ever come up with anything that in my opinion is this practical to use to cull and stack cards on the fly - from a slug - or to cull and stack three or more different poker hands from a slug!

Just my opinion!


Glenn, I specifically asked you a question, which you seem to have missed.

Let me try again...

Is the only time you will listen to criticism when someone has actually created a control that allows one to deal multiple hands from a slug?

I mean, there are several people here trying to let you know your triumph shuffle is really bad. That you actually are exposing the method because your handling is so poor.

I just want to know if this is the case, because I don't want to waste any more time trying to explain to you that your working of the push through move is totally obvious.

I understand the argument that unless you can't do better you have no place in criticising. I disagree with it entirely, but I understand it.

Thanks

Damian
mrgoat
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby Lemniscate » 09/04/08 07:25 PM

Glenn Bishop wrote:The triumph shuffle is a false shuffle that in my opinion has fallen by the wayside in magic.
...
One more comment about my video - IT IS "NOT" A PERFORAMCE!

Only a "SHORT DEMOSTRATION" TO SHOW WHAT IS POSSIBLE. When using the triumph shuffle to cull and stack three different hands from a slug!

NOT USING IT AS A FALSE SHUFFLE!

It would be my guess that no one seems to be able to pick up on that!

Thank you all very much for your opinions!


We'll go from the bottom up:

You are quite welcome although your earlier posts showed the exact opposite sentiment.

You keep saying you are not using it as a false shuffle, and that baffles me. So, you are using a false shuffle (you call it a false shuffle) as what then? Are you toying with the cards? What do the spectators think you are doing? If they "think" you are shuffling, then it is a false shuffle (more like a reverse Zarrow since you are putting cards on, as previously mentioned). In ANY case, you aren't doing what you say you are.

So, simple question, what does your audience think is going on? Very simple, very direct, because whatever it is, I would love to know the justification for doing something so unnatural over and over again. You might as well just have aces on top, Kings in the center and do two faros if you are going to handle the cards that much.

I know that it was a demonstration only. I stated that AND gave you the benefit of the doubt. However, in a rather political manner, you deleted what I said and replaced it with what you said. Rather something like this:

Me: It's A
You: It's B
Me: The evidence proves it is A, I am sorry.

You, later, talking to me: You know, the evidence is really that it's A.

So utterly reprehensible and sad, really.

Finally, you sure as hell implied you were an expert compared to everybody else. Check all your posts if you haven't edited them if you don't believe me. Read the actual words you wrote (not what you meant since you claim it is different).

Basically, you are the type of person I despise, you change the past so you don't look as stupid as you were, you take credit for other's ideas, and, the worst, you can't handle any opinion that doesn't match yours.

I stand by every letter and word I wrote, almost everybody else seems to have some issue with what you are doing, but it is all us who are wrong. Very, very interesting. Not for me, I've seen a-holes up close, but for some others I am sure.

Lem

Edit: replaced "ss" with "-"
Lemniscate
 
Posts: 37
Joined: 04/08/08 03:16 AM

Postby Glenn Bishop » 09/04/08 10:52 PM

mrgoat wrote:Let me try again...

Is the only time you will listen to criticism when someone has actually created a control that allows one to deal multiple hands from a slug?

I mean, there are several people here trying to let you know your triumph shuffle is really bad. That you actually are exposing the method because your handling is so poor.

I just want to know if this is the case, because I don't want to waste any more time trying to explain to you that your working of the push through move is totally obvious.

Sorry but I do not agree. The reason I do not agree with "everyone" is because it is only video of a short demonstration to show what is possible with this shuffle.

In performance - that is crunch time in a real show it is different. I know because I have been there. I will also add that I have seen many magicians do magic that are well known on the web. Some of them on you tube. And some I have gone to their web sites. I know of one magician that is posting in this thread. I watched video of a Zarrow shuffle that he had at his web site. Everything that "the group" said about my video of the triumph shuffle I could say about this person's Zarrow shuffle. And there is more I could say if I were the kind of person that wanted to rip this person apart.

However I choose to take the high road and would not rip this person apart in a public forum. Even when this person has taken several shots at me.

Now the reason I did the camera shot the way I did it was that I wanted magicians to "know" that I was "doing" a triumph shuffle and using it for culling and stacking. I did not want them to see everything involved with this culling and stacking from a slug. But enough to let them see that this was going on.

If I wanted to fool magicians or make the shuffle look better on the video I would have picked a completely different camera angle and shot the footage in a different way. Plus tightened up on the shuffle and doing it cleaner.

The reason I shot the footage this way was to show the shuffle to sell a book - where I wrote up all this up.

What I did not want was video of the shuffle of magicians thinking that I was using just a stacked deck - and then did the triumph shuffle as a false shuffle and then - saying falsely that I was culling and stacking from a slug. And the hands were stacked and I was just false shuffling the deck.

So the point was to honestly show - the shuffle - and the point of the shuffle is that I really am stacking and culling three different hands from a slug using the triumph shuffle. And this is what I teach in the book. And if they buy the book and "read it and use it" it is up to them to make the moves clean and do it as clean as they want to do it.

Such as the reality of learning a new idea or a new technique and then making it work for each and everyones different style and under the different performing conditions that each of us have.

So in short the point of the video - as in my triple duke triumph and the punch cull and my cull cut the aces is to show magicians that I am really doing what I say I am doing with the technique.

As for who does the triumph shuffle better? Or the Zarrow shuffle better? Or a jog shuffle cull better? I leave it up to others that enjoy arguing such things.

Like is a red close up mat better than a green close up mat? Or is a read deck better than a blue deck?

Better - best - only an opinion.
mrgoat wrote:I understand the argument that unless you can't do better you have no place in criticising. I disagree with it entirely, but I understand it.

Thanks

Damian

I understand and respect your point of view. However in my opinion there is a right time and a wrong time to give criticism. I grew up around quite a lot of the old school acts. These people were people like Don Alan, Jay Marshall, Jack Pyle, Tony Marks and a lot more.

If this point of view is given without being asked to one of these old school showman at the wrong time - like if they were involved in some business at the time - like doing a show - getting ready to go on - setting up - with an agent talking business - with a client talking business.

Let me tell you because it is a business they would not take it lightly.

Magic for me is also a business. For some it is a hobby or a semi profession - or a business.

Let me go back to what I said about my triple duke triumph video and the business reason that I put the video up the way I put it up. So the magician could see that I am using the triumph shuffle to do what I say I am doing (culling and stacking three different hands from a slug). And not using short cards, belly strippers, or any other culling edge or have the hands stacked in advance and using the triumph as a false shuffle.

You may not agree with my video - and that is OK - but it is my web site - my business and I will do my business my way because it is my business!

When I posted the first video of my cull cutting the aces routine I had magicians e-mail me thinking that the aces were crimped - some had no idea that I was using a cull - so I changed the video to show the cull a little more and then magicians said in message boards - stuff about my handling of my slant on the Steven's cull.

I understand - there doesn't seem to be any way to please everyone but I think that if I were going to buy a book about a technique I would like to know a little bit about what is in the technique - of a book or a DVD that I am interested in buying. So I can make a choice.

So I have tried "unsuccessfully" it seems to let a little bit of information go - letting magicians in on it - but not to much - in the video's that I have posted at my web site.

And If I may add to this one more opinion that is "old school" and one that I learned growing up around these professionals. That in my opinion there is a right way and a wrong way to give criticism in magic.

I dont think that the right way to do it is in public - like in front of their audience - or a client - or an agent. Or in a public forum.

In my opinion there is a right time and place for criticism in magic and in my opinion "this isn't the place". Especially because - I never asked!

I hope this answers your questions.
Glenn Bishop
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 03/14/08 10:52 AM

Postby Cugel » 09/05/08 02:01 AM

There's only one other person in this thread who may have a Zarrow on a website: Denis Behr. Is that who you were talking about?
User avatar
Cugel
 
Posts: 441
Joined: 01/26/08 01:00 PM
Location: Overworld

Postby El Mystico » 09/05/08 02:43 AM

I find it interesting that Mr bishop considers the camera angle to be one that reveals the gist of what is going on, because the angle to me seems to be that of someone sitting opposite him at a card table.

However - Mr Bishop has made the point that his posting was not about ihs performance of the Triumph shuffle, but to demonstrate that he has found a 'practical' use for the Triumph shuffle to cull and stack four aces.

to bee fair to him, most of the criticisms here are of his shuffle technique, and there has been little comment on whether, in our opinion, his technique is practical.

So, play fair, guys - focus on Mr Bishopp's core point; do you think that eight successsive riffle shuffles would be practical in a card game?
El Mystico
 
Posts: 870
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Leamington Spa

Postby Kent Gunn » 09/05/08 03:15 AM

I, for one, would be genuinely interested in, say a table of contents from Mr. Bishop, from his new book on riffle stacking. I see, on his website he wants 75 dollars for it.

Perhaps his body of work has wonders we've only dreamed of. There is precious little information on the punch deal available. I know nothing of its intricacies. Glenn, I know we've had our differences in the past. Could you share with us a table of contents? I think that might go miles toward a positive dialogue from all corners.

You've obviously spent considerable time on the shuffle sequence that you are so proud of. I think sharing the TOC could go miles to repairing some bridges, on this forum. I'd genuinely like to know the topics you're going to share with the magic community that you know to be worth 75 dollars.
Last edited by Kent Gunn on 09/05/08 03:16 AM, edited 0 times in total.
Reason: multiple word usage in a paragraph.
Kent Gunn
 
Posts: 571
Joined: 05/15/08 02:05 PM
Location: Florida

Postby Glenn Bishop » 09/05/08 06:31 AM

I am very sorry but I have answered all the questions that I am going to answer at this time. If you will now excuse me - I have a business to run.

I wish everyone good luck with their magic and I hope that they make all their own personal magic goals and dreams.

Just my opinion.
Glenn Bishop
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 03/14/08 10:52 AM

Postby mrgoat » 09/05/08 07:50 AM

Ah. All is now clear.

He was DELIBERATELY exposing the shuffle.

If only he'd thought of that explanation 3 pages ago some time could have been saved.
mrgoat
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby Glenn Bishop » 09/07/08 08:57 AM

After re-reading this thread all I see mostly in my opinion is - how not to be a magician. And that has nothing to do with riffle shuffle stacking.

Just my opinion!
Glenn Bishop
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 03/14/08 10:52 AM

Postby El Mystico » 09/07/08 09:03 AM

On that we can agree!
El Mystico
 
Posts: 870
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Leamington Spa

Next

Return to Close-Up Magic