( Full thread here )The best description of the shuffle so far is perhaps the first description of it in The New Phoenix, No. 346, although the illustration is, if not wrong, misleading. The description in Epilogue is not too bad, but still misses some fine points. The way that I learned the shuffle, before running it by Herb for his comments and corrections, was to listen to the DVD, Zarrow on the Zarrow. The reason I say, "listen" to the DVD is because at the very beginning of the DVD, Herb states that although he can no longer really do the shuffle, he knows what needs to be done, and can teach it. So, I decided then and there to learn it from his words, rather than from the visual representation. It made a huge difference. The good news is that we are nearing completion of Herb's book and it will have a very detailed description of the shuffle, its nuances and variations.
Two Shuffles Harry, a Brother John Hamman effect, was published in Apocalypse, 1978, in a version requiring a full deck set up, in Richard's Almanac in 1987, in a "From Shuffled Deck In Use" version, and finally in The Secrets Of Brother John Hamman, 1989, again, requiring no setup.Originally posted by Harry Lorayne:
Two Shuffles Harry, of course, was taken right out of APOCALYPSE - without permission. Oh well... hl
Actually, I think your analysis is correct. I was, as you noted, trying to generate discussion. The whole thing of who should ask permission for what is not as simple or clear cut as Harry Lorayne suggests in the Hamman example.Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
Pike, you do like to cause trouble.
No, it's not the same and no, Roy probably did not ask permission--nor should he have had to.
Busby's "Into the 4th Dimension" was a torn and restored card routine which included an insignificant phase where a card was passed through the hand and seemed to turn over. It was awkward and would have vanished unnoticed into history (actually it's already done that) if Roy Walton hadn't recognized that buried among the crap was a good idea. Roy turned what was a forgetable throw-away into a perfect piece of magic. In fact, it's a candidate for the best trick of the latter half of the 20th century.
In an earlier thread I posted that Roy Walton is similar to Ed Marlo, in that he seems to publish everything he creates, regardless of merit*. I noted that others may disagree.Originally posted by Ryan Matney:
Creepy is you trying to start an argument about Roy every chance you get. [/QB]Originally posted by Joe Pike: As to Ryan Matney statistically tracking my posts... that's just plain creepy.