Card Counting

Discuss the latest feature articles in Genii.

Postby Jon Racherbaumer » 07/18/01 03:08 PM

Ever since Harry Lorayne published "The Epitome Location" and Karl Fulves published CARD COUNTING, the subject of "clocking a deck" to determine the identity of cards added or removed from a "clocked" deck or packet has interested inner-circle devotees. Pit Hartling recently used the principle in one of his tricks.

What do you think of the principle?

[ July 18, 2001: Message edited by: Richard Kaufman ]
Jon Racherbaumer
 
Posts: 822
Joined: 01/22/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Orleans

Postby Richard Kaufman » 07/18/01 10:46 PM

The Epitome Location used to look good when Lorayne did it at full speed, but of course his gimmick was to eliminate large sections of the deck from the counting, which meant cutting the counting by as much as half. He was also able to talk nonstop while simultaneously dealing and counting--a feat not many people could replicate.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 21084
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Charlie Chang » 07/19/01 03:39 AM

Having a great deal of experience with card counting, I believe it really isn't the best principle to apply to card magic. I have tried to use it in several effects and only once have I developed a practical use for it.

In my opinion, counting is better used in the effect rather than the method. Proposing a display of card counting and using another more subtle method is far more effective (and entertaining) than actually counting the cards.
Charlie Chang
 
Posts: 163
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Matthew Field » 07/19/01 09:13 AM

But remember that Jon referenced a damn good trick by Pit Hartling (from his Little Green Lecture video and notes) which use the Epitome Location -- and that effect is very strong.

Matt Field
User avatar
Matthew Field
 
Posts: 2502
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Hastings, England, UK

Postby shrink » 07/19/01 07:52 PM

Card Counting will always have its inherent weaknesses. A rarely cited source which offers innovative tips and techniques to speed the count along is in Lewis Jones'1996 book, Counter Feats, under the trick, appropriately titled, "Speedcount."
shrink
 
Posts: 5
Joined: 02/20/08 01:00 PM
Location: Altamonte Springs, FL

Postby Gerald Deutsch » 07/19/01 10:18 PM

RP Wilson suggests using card counting as an effect and not a method. Years ago I did use it as an effect. I would ask a spectator for a packet and then immediately tell him how many cards were in that packet.

It takes a little getting used to but it's not hard. When you get the packet compare it to the rest of the deck. If it's about half that's 26 - a quarter 13 etc.

At the beginning you can do the check counting and use a buckle count if you have too many. If you're short it won't be by more than 1 or 2 and that doesn't ruin the effect (but it's not as good as perfect).
Gerald Deutsch
 
Posts: 332
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Glen Head New York

Postby Richard Kaufman » 07/19/01 11:01 PM

Hi Jerry,
That's an excellent idea. Welcome aboard!
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 21084
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Tomas Blomberg » 07/22/01 06:46 AM

From more than one place I've heard people give the reaction "you saw which card was missing". While this is true, spectators do not realize how difficult this is. In my opinion, looking through all the faces of the cards after a card is removed, is therefore not a good thing.

Charles Jordan had several good ideas on how to overcome that problem which can be found in the Gambling Secrets section of Fulve's "Charles Jordan's Best Card Tricks".

Thanks for putting this new discussion board up.

/Tomas
Tomas Blomberg
 
Posts: 56
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Sweden

Postby Guest » 03/05/03 04:24 PM

I think that's the beauty of Pit Hartling's effect - i.e. the one ahead principle means that when you do 'the work' it's not perceived as such.

I've done that effect for people and no-one has said 'You just looked through the cards to see which one was missing'. They have, however, said the same thing - when the method was nothing to do with card counting.

I'd like to post a slightly related topic - and not sure whether it should be done here - but I wondered what the opinion was on those "Miracles of Moe's" - which involved a card count.

These effects didn't do it for me - despite the expertly written 'hype' from the publishers. Come to think of it - this was one of those effects that had that 'you just saw which one wasn't there' reaction.

I'd be interested in any other opinions on this?

Derek

p.s. (Wasn't the Moe book, in fact, a J*ff B*sb* publication?)
Guest
 

Postby ADG » 03/07/03 12:30 AM

Greetings Derek.....I read the manuscript about Moe when it first came out by Jeff Busby. It was very interesting. I presently perform some of Moe's stuff; however, at no time is the selected card missing from the pack. It is always replaced at a different location in the pack while my back is turned and the pack then cut several times. It's a killer that I only perform for other magician friends. It does not play well for lay people. I also perform a variation whereby any card in the deck from 1--52 is looked at and replaced and the deck cut several times while my back is turned. Selected card is then found. By the way, the deck can be borrowed & shuffled beforehand. I have corresponded with Moe the past few years; however, he doesn't seem to remember any of his methods. He must have been a mental genius in his younger days.
Alex
ADG
 
Posts: 62
Joined: 02/21/08 01:00 PM
Location: San Antonio,Tx

Postby Guest » 03/07/03 04:33 AM

Moe is still alive (although he is in his 90's) and apparently has a website.

http://www.moesmagic.com/intro.html

I played around with the move a card routine and did it a few times.
Guest
 

Postby NCMarsh » 03/07/03 10:27 AM

If folks are interested in a very clean version of Moe's Move A Card that doesn't involve memorization, check out Dave's Move a Card on one of the Regal DVD's (it's probably also in Star Quality as I have David's other books and can't recall seeing it in those)

best,
nate.
OrlandoCorporateMagician.com Orlando Magician
User avatar
NCMarsh
 
Posts: 1173
Joined: 02/16/08 01:00 PM
Location: Orlando, FL

Postby Paul Cummins » 03/07/03 02:23 PM

Originally posted by Jon Racherbaumer:
Ever since Harry Lorayne published "The Epitome Location" and Karl Fulves published CARD COUNTING, the subject of "clocking a deck" to determine the identity of cards added or removed from a "clocked" deck or packet has interested inner-circle devotees. Pit Hartling recently used the principle in one of his tricks.

What do you think of the principle?
Hey Jon,

I've gotten to where I can clock a half-deck (reds or blacks) in 12 or 13 seconds, just about as long as it takes me to spread through the deck. With that amount of speed, and within the context of a routine, clocking the deck has been extemely effective for me because magicians don't even suspect that I might be doing so. I'll show you the routine in question at TSD IV if you'll be there.

Best,

Paul
Paul Cummins
 
Posts: 123
Joined: 01/24/08 01:00 PM
Location: Jacksonvile, FL USA

Postby jimmycards » 03/07/03 03:22 PM

Jon,

Do you remember where this originally came from. I remember doing this type of effect long before Lorayne published his material. The canceling out of 10 or 13 goes back a ways. I can't remember if it had its roots in Hugard & Braue, or Charles Jordan. I know Scarne had something in his 'card tricks' book which he credited to Jordan but it used the canceling out of 10 instead of 13.

I used to present this as a gambling trick. Like blackjack. have the spectator remove a card, then tell them what the last card left to be played is. Gives a good reason to go thru the deck because like a blackjack game, you would be seeing all the cards. At least in the OLD days when you played with one deck.

Jim Molinari
Jim Molinari
www.jimmycards.com
jimmycards
 
Posts: 61
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Waterloo, IL

Postby Max Maven » 03/11/03 07:10 AM

Originally posted by Paul Cummins:
I've gotten to where I can clock a half-deck (reds or blacks) in 12 or 13 seconds, just about as long as it takes me to spread through the deck. With that amount of speed, and within the context of a routine, clocking the deck has been extemely effective for me because magicians don't even suspect that I might be doing so.[/QB]
Exactly. Back in the mid-1970s I could clock a full deck at a consistent sixteen seconds (personal best: fourteen). Hitting that stride meant, among other things, that I could let a spectator do the dealing, making the circumstance seem less "conducted" by the performer.

Most of the related work I developed in the late 1970s remains unpublished, although it was established by demonstrations for various people. (You can find kind comments by Harry Lorayne in some issues of Apocalypse of that time.)

The point is, applied straightforwardly it's a somewhat impressive skill demonstration. Using a clocking technique in conjunction with other elements. however, can make for some very strong stuff. The combinatory work that has been published, notably the recent Pit Hartling routine, gives ample proof of that.
Max Maven
 
Posts: 368
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Hollywood, CA

Postby Jon Racherbaumer » 03/11/03 12:39 PM

I can attest to Max's prowess in the 70s when "card counting" was getting lots of fresh attention. Ken Beale (in IBIDEM) sped up the deal by separating the reds and blacks (calling it something like "...By Half"). Harry Lorayne reinvented the same idea and published it in THE EPITOME LOCATION.

Max had many effects; however, the structures of these effects cleverly and logically masked the drawback of having the deal through the entire deck.

Onward...
Jon Racherbaumer
 
Posts: 822
Joined: 01/22/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Orleans

Postby Pete McCabe » 03/11/03 07:19 PM

Does the presence of this thread in the Feature Articles section indicate an article on this subject in the upcoming April Genii?
Pete McCabe
 
Posts: 2085
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Simi Valley, CA

Postby Richard Kaufman » 03/11/03 10:18 PM

I wouldn't count on it!
hahahahahahahahahahah
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 21084
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Jon Racherbaumer » 03/11/03 11:34 PM

Max could entertainingly dispath the three-part effect in about 90 seconds. It would take 12 pages of text to limn the method and if read aloud, would take 6 times longer (or more) than it did when Max performed it.

Then, unfortunately, it would have to be reread a couple more times unless you are a Mensa graduate.

In Genii?
I doubt it.

In any magazine?
Naw.

In a Goldstein book?
Maybe.

Onward...
Jon Racherbaumer
 
Posts: 822
Joined: 01/22/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Orleans

Postby Ian Kendall » 03/12/03 03:29 AM

Hello,

Has anyone else tried the Kato count from Magic a couple of months ago?

Take care, Ian
Ian Kendall
 
Posts: 2158
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Edinburgh

Postby Reinhard Mueller » 03/12/03 02:53 PM

Jim Molinari asked where Card Counting originally came from.
Here I give you an interim report of my findings:
Stephen Minch talked in his “From Witchcraft To Card Tricks” (1991), page 9, about Jacques Ozanam's book “Rcrations Mathmatiques et Physiques” of 1693, and he mentioned an early system for adding the cards of a deck to discover the value of a missing card. I found that system in “Natuerliches Zauberbuch” of 1745, p.230.
In Friedrich Wilhelm Conradi's “Der moderne Kartenkuenstler” (1896) I found on p. 100 “Der Gedaechtniskuenstler” (=The Memory Man) with the following effect: a spectator takes one card out of the deck, shuffles the remaining cards, and calls out the names of the cards, card by card. The performer names at once the missing card! Method: Card Counting with casting out ten. In 1903 Conradi gives in his book “Magisches Allerlei”, p.102 an improvement. He adds up the value and the suit at the same time in two columns of numbers. Then Conradi expands the effect in letting a spectator call out any number and the performers names the card at that number.

Reinhard
User avatar
Reinhard Mueller
 
Posts: 152
Joined: 02/08/08 01:00 PM
Location: Passau Germany

Postby Brad Henderson » 03/12/03 04:09 PM

Mr. Mueller,

I would love to complete my set of your wonderful Escorial resource booklets. Please contact me at mrbradman1@aol.com, if you wouldn't mind.

Brad
Brad Henderson
 
Posts: 2539
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: austin, tx

Postby Steve V » 03/14/03 08:37 AM

I'm not familiar with the term 'card clocking'. What is it?
Steve V
Steve V
Steve V
 
Posts: 642
Joined: 01/20/08 01:00 PM
Location: Silver Springs, NV

Postby John Bodine » 03/15/03 03:09 PM

Steve,

I believe it is the counting of value and suit to determine a card missing from the deck. For example, if you summed the value of every card in the deck (omitting any value for suit) you would arrive at a constant value. If you removed an Ace, the counted number would be 1 less than the constant. Add in a variable for each suit and you can then identify the value and suit of a missing card.

I could be wrong, but that's what I recall.

john bodine
John Bodine
 
Posts: 107
Joined: 07/23/08 03:50 PM

Postby Dustin Stinett » 03/18/03 01:20 AM

John,

You must be right since no one has corrected you by now (and I hope that they would). I'm glad I didn't post what I thought it was. I had my cards, got a stopwatch, and the deck just sat there: the turtle was much faster.

Dustin
User avatar
Dustin Stinett
 
Posts: 6023
Joined: 07/22/01 12:00 PM
Location: Southern California

Postby Guest » 07/24/03 10:11 PM

There's some work on card clocking in Outs, Precautions, and Challenges by Charles Hopkins.

It gives you something to fall back on if the spectator says "What if I don't replace the card in the deck for you to shuffle, et cetera?"

Hopkins suggests the 220 count, which eliminates the court cards(by having the spectator pick a number from 1 to 10, and a suit, and remove that card) and allows you to add up to 10, rather than 13, which is easier on the Mental Arithmetic muscles.

I've tried this, but I find it much harder to do while people are watching.

One suggestion, which I believe goes back to Ellis Stanyon, is to arrange the deck in pairs adding up to 13, and then allowing the spectator to overhand shuffle before removing a card.

You just breeze by the intact 8,5 and Q,A pairs, without thinking at all, and you're usually left with one card. which you subtract from 13, and look back through the deck for the 3 mates, which tells you the suit.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 07/25/03 07:18 AM

Your posts got me thinking, maybe someone that knows lots of published methods of clocking card can tell me if this has been done before, because I can't believe it hasn't. But as I am siting here I came up with this elimination method.
Card is removed.
Count red cards (or black), if you get 26 you know chosen one is black.
Count spades (or clubs) and if the spade count is 13 your card is a club.
Count clubs. If your total is say 80 your card is a Jack of clubs, because total number for a suit is 91 so you substract your total from 91 and you get a value of your chosen card.
Is this an old trick? If it is than I am sorry to bring this up I just didn't see it in the posts. :confused:
Guest
 


Return to Feature Articles