jdwatchboy wrote:Eight brings the deck back in order does in not
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Yes it does or 52 shuffles depending if your doing an in faro or an out.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
jdwatchboy wrote:Eight brings the deck back in order does in not
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Christopher1979 wrote:jdwatchboy wrote:Eight brings the deck back in order does in not
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Yes it does or 52 shuffles depending if your doing an in faro or an out.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Christopher1979 wrote:
As you also mention if Roger can indeed do table faro's and never miss then he is one hell of a card worker .....
jkeyes1000 wrote:Pardon my ignorance concerning effects that require a perfect faro shuffle, but just how might one determine that it were perfect during the course if a performance? I mean, you can't stare at the deck and scrutinise it. Would an imperfect faro ruin the outcome? Or is it possible that some of us are merely guessing that we never muff it?
Bill Mullins wrote:jkeyes1000 wrote:Pardon my ignorance concerning effects that require a perfect faro shuffle, but just how might one determine that it were perfect during the course if a performance? I mean, you can't stare at the deck and scrutinise it. Would an imperfect faro ruin the outcome? Or is it possible that some of us are merely guessing that we never muff it?
Once you've done it a few thousand times (or how every many it takes you to get good at it), you know immediately if you hit it or not.
Roger M. wrote:After the fact you can tell just by looking at the halves prior to pushing them together.
Realistically (and with a bit of experience) you actually know the moment you've missed a card.
Bill Duncan wrote:I sat across the table from Martin Nash and watched him cycle a deck twice with his tabled faro. That's a better success rate than a lot of people have with their strike double lift.
I don't imagine anyone is 100% on any move, but clearly there are folks who get close enough for practical use.
Bill Duncan wrote:I wasn't there on merit, I know the guy who wrote his books.
: )
I will say that he was as nice, and as cool, as you imagine he was.
Christopher1979 wrote:Bill Duncan wrote:I wasn't there on merit, I know the guy who wrote his books.
: )
I will say that he was as nice, and as cool, as you imagine he was.
Ooh I see!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Christopher1979 wrote:Roger M. wrote:After the fact you can tell just by looking at the halves prior to pushing them together.
Realistically (and with a bit of experience) you actually know the moment you've missed a card.
Hey Roger, how do you know you have missed a card if you never miss?..... haha.
MagicbyAlfred wrote:Christopher1979 wrote:Roger M. wrote:After the fact you can tell just by looking at the halves prior to pushing them together.
Realistically (and with a bit of experience) you actually know the moment you've missed a card.
Hey Roger, how do you know you have missed a card if you never miss?..... haha.
I actually didn't read anything that Roger wrote that indicated that he was hitting 100% from day one of trying tabled faros. My assumption (and I believe it's a reasonable one) is that he worked hard on getting to the point where he could execute the shuffle flawlessly, but as he got more and more experience along the way to where he is now with it, he got to a point where he knew the moment that he missed. That doesn't mean that he misses anymore. IMHO, we should take one another at our word, unless and until there is evidence proving otherwise.
Brad Jeffers wrote:My assumption (and I believe it is a reasonable one) is that Christopher1979 was kidding.
I base this assumption on the combination of the word haha and a smiley face being strategically placed at the end of his sentence.
Brad Jeffers wrote:My assumption (and I believe it is a reasonable one) is that Christopher1979 was kidding.
I base this assumption on the combination of the word haha and a smiley face being strategically placed at the end of his sentence.
MagicbyAlfred wrote:Brad Jeffers wrote:My assumption (and I believe it is a reasonable one) is that Christopher1979 was kidding.
I base this assumption on the combination of the word haha and a smiley face being strategically placed at the end of his sentence.
I respectfully disagree.
performer wrote:When I do the Notis Cascade which requires a one hand weave I always know if the cascade is going to work properly. I can just sense it by way the cards feel after being weaved together. If I sense it isn't going to work I simply go into the one hand shuffle a la Howard De Courcy and nobody knows the difference. If I feel it is going to work then I go into the cascade proper. I can make it drop a foot or so instead of the piddly few inches everyone else seems capable of. But then some of us are born to lead and some of us are born to follow.
MagicbyAlfred wrote:Christopher,
Let me explain something. Nobody that I know of ever said it was not OK to air your views. Just be aware that if you do, others might have another viewpoint, and they get to express their views as well. We can disagree in a gentlemanly fashion; it happens all the time on here - and sometimes not so gentlemanly, so don't take it to heart.
You (and Mr. Jeffers) both saw your original comment as lighthearted banter, but using the words, "ha ha," and putting a smiley face icon do not necessarily make a comment nothing more than a joke. The wrapping on a package does not change what is inside. You say your intent was only to make a joke, and I will take you at your word. Now, the fact is I don't even know Roger personally, and he is clearly more than capable of standing up for himself. But I felt I wanted to come to his defense because, in my opinion, your comment could have been easily interpreted as a challenge to his statement that he hits the table Faro 100% - the tone of the comment struck me as kind of a "Gotcha!" That's all. Maybe I'm the one who's wrong. After all, anything can happen once...
Joe Mckay wrote:performer wrote:When I do the Notis Cascade which requires a one hand weave I always know if the cascade is going to work properly. I can just sense it by way the cards feel after being weaved together. If I sense it isn't going to work I simply go into the one hand shuffle a la Howard De Courcy and nobody knows the difference. If I feel it is going to work then I go into the cascade proper. I can make it drop a foot or so instead of the piddly few inches everyone else seems capable of. But then some of us are born to lead and some of us are born to follow.
Ricky Jay did a great job with that move on The X Files:
https://youtu.be/K8IPKqzehFs?t=46s
Christopher1979 wrote:MagicbyAlfred wrote:Christopher,
Let me explain something. Nobody that I know of ever said it was not OK to air your views. Just be aware that if you do, others might have another viewpoint, and they get to express their views as well. We can disagree in a gentlemanly fashion; it happens all the time on here - and sometimes not so gentlemanly, so don't take it to heart.
You (and Mr. Jeffers) both saw your original comment as lighthearted banter, but using the words, "ha ha," and putting a smiley face icon do not necessarily make a comment nothing more than a joke. The wrapping on a package does not change what is inside. You say your intent was only to make a joke, and I will take you at your word. Now, the fact is I don't even know Roger personally, and he is clearly more than capable of standing up for himself. But I felt I wanted to come to his defense because, in my opinion, your comment could have been easily interpreted as a challenge to his statement that he hits the table Faro 100% - the tone of the comment struck me as kind of a "Gotcha!" That's all. Maybe I'm the one who's wrong. After all, anything can happen once...
I am not taking anything to heart I have broad shoulders. I can understand how my comment could be misconstrued and I just wanted to reply to make a point that my comment was light hearted and certainly not meant to have a poke at anyone on here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
performer wrote:Christopher1979 wrote:MagicbyAlfred wrote:Christopher,
Let me explain something. Nobody that I know of ever said it was not OK to air your views. Just be aware that if you do, others might have another viewpoint, and they get to express their views as well. We can disagree in a gentlemanly fashion; it happens all the time on here - and sometimes not so gentlemanly, so don't take it to heart.
You (and Mr. Jeffers) both saw your original comment as lighthearted banter, but using the words, "ha ha," and putting a smiley face icon do not necessarily make a comment nothing more than a joke. The wrapping on a package does not change what is inside. You say your intent was only to make a joke, and I will take you at your word. Now, the fact is I don't even know Roger personally, and he is clearly more than capable of standing up for himself. But I felt I wanted to come to his defense because, in my opinion, your comment could have been easily interpreted as a challenge to his statement that he hits the table Faro 100% - the tone of the comment struck me as kind of a "Gotcha!" That's all. Maybe I'm the one who's wrong. After all, anything can happen once...
I am not taking anything to heart I have broad shoulders. I can understand how my comment could be misconstrued and I just wanted to reply to make a point that my comment was light hearted and certainly not meant to have a poke at anyone on here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Years ago I was advised by David Ben that it was imperative not to have a sense of humour on the Genii Forum.
Roger M. wrote:I've always maintained that nobody should undertake any faro work for any reason whatsoever that requires a specific interlace of the cards if they can't do it perfectly 100% of the time.
Pulling the halves apart to re-try for a desired interlace is as good as saying "oh - excuse me, I have to get these interwoven in a specific manner and I just missed it, give me a second while I try again!".
Tom Gilbert wrote:Roger M. wrote:I've always maintained that nobody should undertake any faro work for any reason whatsoever that requires a specific interlace of the cards if they can't do it perfectly 100% of the time.
Pulling the halves apart to re-try for a desired interlace is as good as saying "oh - excuse me, I have to get these interwoven in a specific manner and I just missed it, give me a second while I try again!".
I was talking to Frank Garcia about using a faro. He gave about the same advise as Roger. He said something to the effect of if you miss and repeat, you turn a casual shuffle into a studied move. His advise was either don't use a routine needing a perfect faro or having a plan B routine to go into from the missed faro.
performer wrote:Harry Lorayne had a great trick in "My Favourite Card Tricks" and I think you had to have two (or maybe more faro shuffles). It was some kind of spelling trick. I wanted to do it badly but the repeated faro shuffling was too much for me and I gave up. However, today as a result of this conversation I have figured a way to get out of trouble so that the move can be repeated without it being a studied move. It will only work once though. God alone knows what you will do if can't do the move on the repeat effort.
This is what I had in mind. You start the weave and if you get the early warning signal that it isn't working then do not panic since the audience won't know you have screwed things up. Don't unweave them and try again. That may indeed be a bit fishy. Simple turn it into any one of those myriad in the hand false waterfalll shuffles that leave the deck in the same order. They are usually done from in the air riffle shuffles but they can easily be adapted from screwed up faro shuffles. There are two methods that I can think of off hand but there are many, many more. I am referring to the method in the Henry Hay "Amateur Magicians Handbook" or there is also a good one in the Paul Le Paul card book.
You just simply act as if you were going to do that all along and repeat the shuffle as if that is what you intended from the beginning. Of course now you attempt the weave again. If you screw things up a second time then you had better stick to the 21 card trick.
erdnasephile wrote:Was it Vernon who said you should never do a trick with more than one (or at most, two) faros?
(Obvious exception: "Unshuffled")
Brad Jeffers wrote:You should never do a trick with more than eight faro shuffles.
performer wrote:I wanted to do it badly
Dave Le Fevre wrote:performer wrote:I wanted to do it badly
You should have asked me, Mark.
I can usually find a way of performing any trick badly.
Dave