New sleights , moves, techniques, principles?

[Jacky Kahan]

Hi,

I was just wondering what are, according to you, the most important NEW sleights, moves, techniques, principles invented or created in the last years? (Close-up)
If we can add a date it would be great ... :)

Thanks

Jacky
www.magicbooks.be

[Guest]

Originally posted by Jacky Kahan:
Hi,

I was just wondering what are, according to you, the most important NEW sleights, moves, techniques, principles invented or created in the last years?

Jacky
www.magicbooks.be

What date are you thinking of starting from?

[Jacky Kahan]

after 1980 ?
Jacky
www.magicbooks.be

[Pete Biro]

Matrix. That should be enough.

[Andru Luvisi]

When you say "important", what do you mean?

Popularity? (used in lots of tricks/by lots of magicians)
Deceptiveness? (made some move or trick a lot more deceptive)
Scope? (made new effects possible)
Something else?

There's also the question of what you mean by "invented". There are degrees of newness. Some of Erdnase's passes are pretty close to completely new. Most modern passes are variations on and remixes of preexisting ideas. For example, Steven Youell explicitly disclaimed having "invented" the Mongrel Pass, preferring instead to say that he "engineered" it. Looking at the credits for the Mongrel Pass, one could make the case that there are no new ideas in it, but one could also make the case that the way Steven put those old ideas together is very new, extremely valuable, and truly inspired.

Andru

[Jonathan Townsend]

Originally posted by Jacky Kahan:
... the most important NEW sleights, moves, techniques, principles invented or created in the last years? (Close-up)...

Might want to add Mickey's two sleights. I forget what he calls the production. The vanish move he calls the SUV.

[Philippe Billot]

Originally posted by Pete Biro:
Matrix. That should be enough.

Matrix ? by Al Schneider ?

First printed 1974. Out of play !!!!

[Pete Biro]

Well, then maybe Armando Lucero's Matrix moves. I don't think but a very select few even know what they are or how to do them.

[Larry Horowitz]

It's not Armando's move so much as, It's the brains with which he puts it to use.

The anti-faro is the work of the devil.

[Philippe Billot]

The Gallo Pitch by Lou Gallo (Coin)
(Richard's Almanac, Vol. 1, N 4, dec. 1982, page 25)

Flap Jacks by Paul Harris (Card flourish)
(Close-up Fantasy I, 1980, page 31)

Linking Ring Spin Flourish by Tony Lopilato
(Apocalypse, Vol. 8, N 4, april 1985, page 1045)

The Table's Edge by Edward Marlo (Pass)
(Marlo Magazine vol. 4, 1981, page 185)

[Jacky Kahan]

Thanks for all the replies...
I agree with Pete about Armando's Matrix.
It's not only the moves, it's the whole continuity of all the moves together and of course mainly the brains or better said Armando's way of thinking and structuring...

Jacky
www.magicbooks.be

[Guest]

Originally posted by Philippe Billot:

Originally posted by Pete Biro:
[b] Matrix. That should be enough.

Matrix ? by Al Schneider ?

First printed 1974. Out of play !!!! [/b]

What do you mean by *out of play* ???

Al Schneiders original Matrix is still the most commercial one!
Just watch Bill Malone doing it !

Armando Lucero's is great..but the impact on *laymen* might not be bigger then Al Schneiders original handling?

And..one can also, of course, figure out Armando's handling..(on a capture, NOT when seing it 'first' time live)and when one has done so, one even -as a 'magician'-does appreciate his handling even more!!!!!

This still doesn't lessen the impact Al Schneiders original handling has on 'normal' ppl...and that is what counts..

Armandos (f.ex) work in general is oustanding, but only fellow magicians can appreciate the finer points, and as a such (fellow magician) I'm full of admiration re his work, but that is not what counts in the world out there! (though it counts re ones own 'look' and aim at perfection and satisfaction re what one does spend ones time on!!)

It's the impact on innocent onlookers, probably never before having seen any magician doing miracles, that counts....

Watch Paul Potassy doing the razor blades...anything else he does..and the impact that has on his audience..

Oldfashion 'tricks', presented by a master..

I heared, at the Magic Circles 100 year anniversary (London), he did a bit of his stuff..even being retired, he charmed even the magicians watching...
Just to point out, that it's not the fingerflinging stuff that always gets remembered, not even by fellow magicians..

I love that stuff too, but I also 'judge' by looking at any performance from the other side of the stage...
My advice is to always have that in mind... :p

Sorry for my ramblings, just my thoughts on 'magic' in general and how to judge its value....

[Jacky Kahan]

Philippe Billot said Out of play because we were talking about 1980 + and Schneiders Matrix is apparently from 1974 ...

Regarding Armando's performance versus Schneiders I don't think it's comparable... except for the materials (card & coins) : Schneiders is Close-Up and Armando's is Stage ...

I've seen Armando perform for very few to 1500 Laymen and i can say that his presence on stage equals very few on this planet... (yes i'm a fan)

Regarding his sleights : Armando engeneered his own moves...

Best,

Jacky
www.magicbooks.be

[Guest]

I'd have thought that the Sylvester Pitch was a candidate.

Dave

[Guest]

Originally posted by Jacky Kahan:
....and Armando's is Stage ...

Best,

Jacky
www.magicbooks.be

That's news to me..Armando does perform the exact same routine in *extreme* close-up, right under anybodies nose... :D

[Jacky Kahan]

Werner, of course you're right! but his Matrix is excellent Close-Up but it's ALSO "staged" for a Large crowd... i know he performed in Japan for 2500+ people... and 1500 people in Belgium ... I've been there i saw/heard the crowd... I'm not sure many magicians have Armando's stage presence...

---

I agree regarding the Sylvester Pitch it's a great Move !

Jacky
www.magicbooks.be

[Philippe Billot]

Originally posted by Dave Le Fevre:
I'd have thought that the Sylvester Pitch was a candidate.

Dave

Please, could you tell me where this move is described ?

[Philippe Billot]

Originally posted by Werner G. Seitz:

Originally posted by Philippe Billot:
[b]

Originally posted by Pete Biro:
[b] Matrix. That should be enough.

Matrix ? by Al Schneider ?

First printed 1974. Out of play !!!! [/b]

What do you mean by *out of play* ???

[/b]

I beg your pardon for my poor english.
Is the expression "out of time" better ?

[Edwin Corrie]

"Out of time" means that you have run out of time or have no time left. We'd probably say that Matrix "doesn't count" or is "disqualified".

Am I imagining it or was Matrix first published in the 1960s?

As for new moves, how about the Muscle Pass, and also that principle involving two moving objects, one in the foreground and one in the background, that was in Gary Ouellet's "Close Up Illusions"? Sorry, I can't remember the name and don't have the book to refer to at the moment.

[Guest]

Sorry Philippe,
I still read it as if you mean *oldfashioned*, *irrelevant nowadays/in modern times/age*, *obsolete*, *not worth doing*...
Mind you, that's just how I interpret what you wrote, might easily be my mistake, as I suppose, that is not what you ment?

[Jacky Kahan]

Philippe, The Sylvester Pitch was explained on a video by Sylvester de Jester...
To my knowledge it was only published on video...

All the best,

Jacky
www.magicbooks.be

[Philippe Billot]

Originally posted by Edwin Corrie:


Am I imagining it or was Matrix first published in the 1960s?

In fact, it was first described in Genii, november 1970 (dixit Al Schneider)