Variations of Jim Steinmeyer's "Nine Card Problem"

[Marty Jacobs]

I've just published three variations of Jim Steinmeyer's classic packet trick on my blog:

I Got 9 Card Problems, But a Trick Ain't One!

I'm currently having a lot of fun with these tricks, despite their simplicity. I thought people here might enjoy them, too.

I've got an extensive list of variants for this plot. Does anyone have a favourite variation of this trick that they'd like to share?

Marty

[katterfelt0]

Jim Scott has a book on the Nine Card Problem with multiple variations/permutations using anywhere from five to fifteen cards. The really useful thing about the book is an index in the back that lists number of cards and length of words to achieve nearly any result you'd want.

[Richard Kaufman]

After I first published Jim's trick in MAGIC magazine, several variations appeared in my column in subsequent months. Peter Duffie, Larry Jennings ... others, I think.

[Marty Jacobs]

Jim Scott has a book on the Nine Card Problem with multiple variations/permutations using anywhere from five to fifteen cards. The really useful thing about the book is an index in the back that lists number of cards and length of words to achieve nearly any result you'd want.

Thanks, that book is on my wishlist. I stumbled across a good review of it the other day.

Marty

[Marty Jacobs]

After I first published Jim's trick in MAGIC magazine, several variations appeared in my column in subsequent months. Peter Duffie, Larry Jennings ... others, I think.

Thanks, Richard. I'll have a look through the back issues. I'm aware of Peter Duffie's work on the plot and the version by Larry Jennings. It is incredible how many variations exist.

Marty

[katterfelt0]

Here is a list of a few more resources.

[Bob Farmer]

I came up with the three-pile idea.

[Denis Behr]

Here is a list of a few more resources.

By browsing this category, you can find even more: https://www.conjuringarchive.com/list/category/2123

[Marty Jacobs]

I came up with the three-pile idea.

Hi Bob, funnily enough, I re-read "A Telephone Mystery" in Solomon's Mind today and noticed the credit to you hidden in the write-up. I've updated the credits on my blog.

Marty

[Marty Jacobs]

Here is a list of a few more resources.

By browsing this category, you can find even more: https://www.conjuringarchive.com/list/category/2123

Thanks, Denis; this is very useful. I'm working through the "Count and Drop" list to see which of the books and manuscripts I have in my magic library.

Marty

[Marty Jacobs]

I've updated the post to include the helpful link from Denis and added my thoughts on "Steinmeyer's Nine Card Problem With Seven Cards" by David Solomon.

I find the underlying principle behind this trick fascinating, so I will be returning to it in a future blog article, once I've studied some more of the existing variations.

Thanks,

Marty

[kkelly]

i use david's method over the phone all of the time and it gets great reactions.

[Marty Jacobs]

i use david's method over the phone all of the time and it gets great reactions.

I think I first heard about the "Nine Card Problem" at a Eugene Burger Lecture many years ago (the lecture was part of Blackpool Magic Convention). I'm sure he said that "over the phone" was the best way to perform David's trick.

We can now perform this on Zoom, FaceTime or whatever video chat app you prefer. I've yet to perform it virtually, but I'm sure I'll give it a go at some point.

Marty

[katterfelt0]

I'm really liking this thread. It's given me some great food for thought, and some things to research.

[Marty Jacobs]

I'm glad the thread is proving useful. I've just found a tremendous radio-magic-style performance of the trick. I've added it to my blog post, but here's the link as well: Can You Spell That For Me By Homemade Trickery

It includes a nice subtlety at the end, just before the location, that I haven't encountered before.

Marty

[BarryAllen]

Another source is within a book titled 'Card Tricks - Now and Then' (2001) by Al Smith of Rotherham, England. This is a compilation of his previous booklets that he'd released since 1980, starting with 'Cards on Demand'.

There is an overview of the principle and a simple formula for how it can be adopted/worked with different numbers of cards. The effects are titled 'Spell That Duck' and 'Duck-Deal-Packet-Plus'.

I doubt whether many on here will have heard of Al Smith - he's flown under the radar for 40 years, even this side of the pond.

Paul Gordon also explores the principle within his 2008 book - Card Collective. The routines are 'Nine Card Problem For Two' (2 spectators/2 packets), 'Nine Card Problem For Three' (3 specs/3 packets), Prelude to the Nine Card Problem and final Nine Card Problem thoughts/further ideas. Of particular note within this section is a really commercial idea of integrating Harry Lorayne's 'Stop' technique.

Many (particularly perhaps?) younger/newer Card Magicians probably consider such principles to be 'boring'. Maybe, they overlook the fact that it is usual practice to deal playing cards (rather than juggle with them) - and its therefore possibly their own presentation which is boring.

A superb example of the principle being dressed up was presented by Paul Daniels, on one of his TV Shows. Playing the part of a bartender, he had a number of drinks printed on the cards (similar to the old packet trick - Cocktail Cards). As each alcoholic drink was turned up by the assisting spectator, Paul poured it for himself as the bartender and drank it. The spectator always got Orange - until the one card remaining, when he got the drinks/bar bill. I seem to remember reading somewhere that the drinks were genuine and he felt worse for wear afterwards. I've scoured the internet but sadly, can't find the episode on YouTube. However, it was a superb example of how a mathematical principle can be dressed up into a great comedy routine.

[Marty Jacobs]

Thanks, Barry. These references are fantastic, and I've got the Card Collective book somewhere; I bought it from Paul years ago when he first released it. It sounds like my idea to combine the "Nine Card Problem" principle with a Duck and Deal might be very similar to Paul's work on the plot.

I thoroughly agree that tricks that involve a lot of dealing need not be dull. Cards are supposed to be shuffled, cut and dealt; I find it odd when a magician refuses to do any card trick that includes these perfectly natural processes. Of course, you need a solid script to make them exciting and entertaining (but that is also true of most sleight-heavy tricks as well). I think this is why Henry Hay talked about hard easy tricks and easy hard tricks. David Britland discussed this in his excellent Cardopolis Newsletter a few months ago: Newsletter 13: Shut Up and Deal

The Paul Daniels trick you describe sounds fantastic. As someone born in the 1980s, I have a lot of fond memories of watching Paul Daniels on TV. I was also lucky enough to see him perform live twice.

Marty

[Bob Farmer]

Cardistry is boring for the spectators because they are not involved. An effective magic effect has to involve the spectators, so as long as it does that, whether there is dealing or not, is irrelevant.

Yes, I hate Cardistry--it's not magic, it's juggling, there is no illusion of the impossible. I hope it goes away soon.

[katterfelt0]

Yes, I hate Cardistry--it's not magic, it's juggling, there is no illusion of the impossible. I hope it goes away soon.

Agreed. Not only is it not magic, it kills the illusion of magic. "If he/she can do all those fancy things with the cards, it's not surprising the aces turn up like that".

[Edward Pungot]

Cardistry is very much like stage manipulation acts done in close quarters. Done sparingly and with a bit of thought and constraint, it’s actually quite aesthetically pleasing to witness the intricate gyrations that take on a ballerina like quality.

Maths
Minimum Finger-Flicking
Maximum Patter
.
.
.
Cardistry
Maximum Finger-Flicking
Minimal to No Patter

Many years ago at the Magic Castle at the main bar, Kevin Ho did a little Cardistry for a few of us standing around during last call closing time. It was an aesthetically quick bit that he shared with us without any introductory patter or fanfare. It was quite beautiful and ballerina-like, like some kind of abstract machination of a dream sequence for cards on acid. But what made it remarkable for me was the restraint and brief interlude in the break of normal cocktail chatter that made you pause and enjoy in silence the offering of something qualia-like like the color blue or the smell of coffee. Bill Goodwin was there and said that it was beautiful. Remembering it after all these years I would concur.

[Richard Kaufman 2]

Nine Card Problem was created for David Copperfield to do on TV—in other words, it was created to be done remotely


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MagicbyAlfred]

In regard to the cardistry issue, I don't think it poses any threat to dispelling the illusion of magic. I don't perform cardistry when I do shows (or ever, for that matter). And I would guess that the vast overwhelming majority of magicians don't do it either. So it's kind of apples and oranges, two separate art forms that people will rarely, if ever, see performed in the same venue. And I will admit, when done well it is very impressive and quite aesthetically pleasing -- at least to me.

[JHostler]

Magic <> Cardistry

Hockey <> Lasagna

You could theoretically eat lasagna while playing hockey, but...

[Edward Pungot]

People like to eat popcorn during a movie.
I never really understood that.
Max Maven talks about “popcorn magic.”
Cardistry is sort of a portable art installation piece.
The cards oscillate and you can feel your brain doing the same thing.

[Marty Jacobs]

I didn't mean to ignite the magic vs cardistry wars. I was defending card tricks with a lot of "process". I believe almost any card trick can be made entertaining with the proper presentation. Unfortunately, the opposite is also true.

I do magic with a bit of flourishing here and there. Magic (with flourishes) is not the same thing as cardistry. I think throwing in the odd flourish can enhance the magic if used at the right time. But if you'd rather not include them with your magic, then that's fine, too. It is simply an artistic choice.

Most modern practitioners of cardistry would agree that cardistry is not magic; it's not meant to be. It is more akin to object manipulation or juggling. Both of these things, when done artfully, can be magical. But they're not magic. As someone who loves juggling, cardistry and magic, I think all these things can happily co-exist.

Nine Card Problem was created for David Copperfield to do on TV—in other words, it was created to be done remotely

I wasn't aware it was specifically designed for David to perform on TV. Anyway, although it works well as a remote trick, I've had great success with it in person. It works well as an effect to be performed with a group of people, all following along with nine cards in hand. I also think it works as a deceptive placement procedure.

Marty

[MagicbyAlfred]

I agree with pretty much every point Marty made in his last post. I agree that almost any trick or routine can be (and should be) made entertaining. See, e.g., Bill Malone's presentation of the 21 Card Trick. (It can be found on YouTube). I also happen to really like flourishes, although I use them sparingly. People react really well to them, and I don't think they diminish the "magic" in the least. Rather they heighten the entertainment and add an aesthetic quality. I doubt that after seeing a flourish, spectators are thinking, "Aha! We thought this guy was like Merlin or Dumbledoor -- the real McCoy. Now we know better." But like Marty said, it's an artistic choice. When you realize that, then a lot of debates in magic become moot.

[Marty Jacobs]

Back to the topic at hand, I stumbled across this fantastic handling of the "Nine Card Problem" by Pete Stedman:

Tutorial on the 9th Card by JS

This handling is more suitable for in-person performances. It also reminded me of an excellent location using a crimp that I knew about, and used many years ago, but had forgotten entirely.

Marty

[katterfelt0]

Back to the topic at hand, I stumbled across this fantastic handling of the "Nine Card Problem" by Pete Stedman:

Tutorial on the 9th Card by JS

Marty

Thank you for posting this, Mr. Jacobs. I'm fascinated with the Steinmeyer plot and am always looking for variations.

[Marty Jacobs]

Back to the topic at hand, I stumbled across this fantastic handling of the "Nine Card Problem" by Pete Stedman:

Tutorial on the 9th Card by JS

Marty

Thank you for posting this, Mr. Jacobs. I'm fascinated with the Steinmeyer plot and am always looking for variations.

You're more than welcome. I know it is a bit early to talk about Christmas, but as you're so interested in this plot, I thought you might like it. It's a variation with twelve cards based on a Marti Kane version called "The Gift of the Magi". We filmed it as a video trick to promote my team's services at work. It is still available to watch on Vimeo.

Following the instructions, you'll always locate the selected card after performing a Down-Under Deal on the packet. I'm planning to re-record this for YouTube at some point. Unfortunately, the table I was performing on was very slippery, and when I recorded the voiceover, I had a cold!

Marty

[katterfelt0]

One more to add to the collection! Thank you again.

[Paco Nagata]

A wonderful version!
Not only a great spelling routine, but a truely unexpected kind of transposition of the selected card.
Thank you for sharing it!

[Marty Jacobs]

A wonderful version!
Not only a great spelling routine, but a truely unexpected kind of transposition of the selected card.
Thank you for sharing it!

You're more than welcome. Thanks for the kind words.

Marty

[Marty Jacobs]

Nine Card Problem was created for David Copperfield to do on TV—in other words, it was created to be done remotely

By the way, I asked Jim Steinmeyer about the origin of his trick. He was kind enough to tell me that he did not invent it for David Copperfield; David purchased the rights to perform it on TV before it was published in MAGIC Magazine. Jim also didn't devise the handling David used on TV. Instead, David started with the original, as published by Richard Kaufman, and modified it to suit his own purpose.

Marty

[Marty Jacobs]

Since creating this thread, I've developed a few additional variations of Jim's classic card trick. Ten in total. Here are links to the explanations:

• Elaborative Encoding - This is, essentially, Jim's original handling of the trick with a memory-inspired presentation.
• Lucky Card - Another alternative presentation for "The Nine Card Problem" framed as a "good luck ritual".
• Nine Card Polygraph - Based on the Lie Speller plot by Martin Gardner. Includes an alternative selection procedure that's worth knowing about.
• The Truth Will Out - Another version of the Lie Speller plot using seven cards. Based on "Steinmeyer's Nine Card Problem With Seven Cards" by David Solomon.
• Bad Password - "The Nine Card Problem" combined with the Princess Card Trick.
• Hello, My Name Is - A variation designed to be an effective icebreaker when meeting strangers.
• Lucky Ducky - Another good option to build a more intimate connection with a person. Like "Lucky Card", this one also has a "good luck ritual" presentation.
• Double Duck and Deal Discovery - An unusual two-person version of the effect.
• Spell the Magic Words - A three-person version of the trick, perfect when performing for parents with young children.
• The Twelve Cards of Christmas - A festive version of "The Nine Card Problem" using twelve cards and words from the popular English Christmas carol, "The Twelve Days of Christmas". Based on “The Gift of the Magi” by Marty Kane.

My current favourites are "Elaborative Encoding", "Lucky Card", and "Nine Card Polygraph". In fact, you can ask someone if they want to see a card trick based on memory, luck or lying and then perform one of these three routines. Essentially, you show them the same trick with a different presentation regardless of what they pick!

Enjoy,

Marty

[Richard Kaufman]

I don't know why I wrote that comment uner "Richard Kaufman 2." The first handling of the Nine Card Problem appears in New Invocation magazine years before I published the handling in MAGIC magazine. Also, I only published the handling AFTER David had done it on TV.

[Marty Jacobs]

I wasn't entirely sure "Richard Kaufman 2" was you, Richard. You could have claimed it was an AI-powered bot spreading disinformation. I hear they're all the rage these days!

The handling in the New Invocation is the eighteen-card version, though. Jim told me that he considers that version inferior to the one you published and popularised in MAGIC magazine.

And to be fair, it was 30 years ago. I have a hard time remembering what I had for breakfast some days!

[Jack Shalom]

Great thread, and a fascinating principle.
My question is: is there a version of the trick that doesn't reveal its self-working nature as soon as the specs are at home and try it out for themselves, and realize it always works if you just follow the directions?
Otherwise, it's just a principle and not magic IMO.

[katterfelt0]

Great thread, and a fascinating principle.
My question is: is there a version of the trick that doesn't reveal its self-working nature as soon as the specs are at home and try it out for themselves, and realize it always works if you just follow the directions?
Otherwise, it's just a principle and not magic IMO.

IMHO, the key is to do your best to not show the number of cards being used. I present it pretty much as Mr. Steinmeyer has it written up in Impuzzibilities. I just say "we need a few cards" and I throw them out in bunches until I get to the magic number. It seems to work for me, as I've gotten some really good reactions.

[Marty Jacobs]

I agree that it's important to avoid mentioning the number of cards used in order to make it more difficult for the spectator to reconstruct the method. You can also use the Count Back Force to enable a spectator to name a two-digit number below twenty to force a nine-card packet on a person without openly counting out nine cards into a pile. In my experience, this added process makes it very difficult for people to remember how many cards were used.

However, in my performance of "Elaborative Encoding", I do mention the number of cards as it is relevant to the script that I use, which focuses on working memory. Including a Swindle Shuffle makes it more challenging to figure out the method, but it does compromise the purity of "The Nine Card Problem" as an "impuzzibility". Nonetheless, I find the trade-off to be worth it. I have had colleagues attempt to replicate the trick, but they were unable to do so, as most people struggle to remember the correct sequence. While some have been able to figure out the effect's inner workings, I have developed different approaches to minimise the chances of this happening.

For instance, in "Bad Password", I use a method that allows the spectator to think of any card in the packet, which makes it harder to figure out the method. In "Lucky Card", "Lucky Ducky", and "Nine Card Polygraph", I spell-deal the cards into a pile without mentioning the number used. I borrowed this idea from Larry Hass.

But, I don't believe that "The Nine Card Problem" is meant to be a miracle-class effect. It is a puzzling card trick that provides a lot of entertainment, even if it doesn't knock people's socks off.

Marty

[Richard Kaufman]

I can't imagine that a lay person would be able to go home, remember the entire sequence, and repeat it.