Pete MacCabe tell us he has a presentation good and entertainig for ace assembly, thats fine but I suposse Andini reply was directed to the effect by itself. I think like him. In usual ace assemblies (no gaffed) the impact I think is not strong enough.
The effect in sum is : Three aces TRAVEL from his packets to gather the ace leader (really the aces transpose with the cards acompaining the leader ace, but that way the effect is much more confusing).
Well if you think about he STRENGTH OF THE TRAVEL: you have card to wallet, envelope, box, cardcase, mouth, pocket that are stronger. What makes the travel effect stronger ?:
1/ A proof the card that travel is the same (torn corner, sign...); in ace assembly this is not true.
2/ The travel is to a difficult acces place. In ace assembly leader packet is at the open air.
The only version with normal cards I think aproximates to this premises is : "Aces in excelsis" by Vernon. The effect of the ace assembly is in direct proportion to the believe that the four aces are in the four packets ( In second travel you see the ace in his packet, and the last ace in Vernons version dissapears visually). In the rest of versions you do the trick with ordinary cards this is not true. But in Vernon version also the desaparition of aces is not the effect you cannot focuse on. (its not the strong point of the routine). You have to concentrate on the aparition of the aces in the leader packet. But the packets are very near on the table. And you have to touch leader packet continually (the main drawback of slow motion assemblies).
But the weak point, very weak, is the method (dont misinterpret me the Vernon Version is one of the best). The method is what laymen think you have to do, you take away the aces and put them in the leader packet: ( the second by a cop, the last by a palm and transfer movement). You finish the trick and audience will tell you ,you moved the aces by stealing them for their original packets and delivering them into the leader packet. And because is true you cannot focuss in a strong selling presentation for making it a reputation maker. And I think no magician is able make a version with normal cards a closer.
The other version with normal cards I enjoy is Charles Bertram version in. " Expert Card technique" because people is involved and efect is focussed in travel, and knowing is not a closer trick Bertram added a encore very strong.
But for table hoping for laymen I use "Billogical shuffle " from "Close up Kind a guy" Paul Harris. Because is a quickie in which 4 kings appears and after being lost in packets and isolated by a spectator and magician flocks together. The method combines:
1/ The initial part is not time consuming, also allows the effect of the aparition of kings.
2/The aparition of kings prepares the travel (method).
3/People is sure kings are in their original packets, beacuse very little time happens between the showing of the kings and the travel .
4/Audience involvement, a very great drawbak in almost all ace asemblies.
5/Knowing is not to strong I present it like a quickie, and for that has the impact I know it deserves.
For the reasons I told before gaffed cards versions are very strong in effect because the dissaparitions are very clear,and doesnt rely in showing, the leader packet continually and the effect and methos follows diferent paths.
Look at Copperfield routine. The important part is the desaparition of aces, when they appear is only for completeness.
This follows the path pointed by Hozinsers (the best gaffed version becuse in the last actions and wordings conveys the impresion was a slow assembly whose final is dictated by audience decisitions, and has audience involvement througth the routine).
Of the modern ace asemblies with gaffed cards Gabis version is very good: is in "Best from Spain" video).