Help with CardWarp credit info

[Jeff Pierce Magic]

I'm trying to collect all credit info on Card Warp and all it's published variations for a manuscript I'm writing. I'll start with what I know, and if you can fill in any missing spots it would be appreciated.

Jeff Busby (date:?)card reverses through hand

Roy Walton (date:?)routine for CardWarp using two cards.

Howard Schartzman (date:?) GreenWarp, using a card and a bill.

Mike Close (date:?) Workers #1 Dr. Strangetrick using card and bill.

I'm missing alot of info and I'm sure there are other variations in print worthy of crediting.

Help if you can.

Thanks
Jeff Pierce

[Richard Kaufman]

Well, you've got the first two correct: Jeff Busby (how it pains me to say this) slit a card halfway across the center and pushed it through his fist so it appeared to be half out and half in. Nobody paid any attention to it except ...
Roy Walton, who turned it into a brilliant trick by using a second card folded around the first.
The next step was Bob McAllister's, NOT Howard Schwarzman's--replacing the exterior card with a folded dollar bill. Even though Schwarzman published his version first (which he had no business doing since it was McAllister's idea), Howie openly admits he got the idea from Bob McAllister.
After that there are lots of variations.
The best idea I saw was Gene Maze's, which he developed in the early 1970s. He had an entire deck set for this effect: the lower half was all pretorn, and the upper half was not. He allowed a spectator to select one card from each half and then did the trick. Of course, this lovely idea was pinched by someone else and Gene has never gotten the credit he deserves.

[Guest]

"Of course, this lovely idea was pinched by someone else and Gene has never gotten the credit he deserves. "

Interesting. Are you sure that Gene didn't get the idea from the one who pinched it? (They were pretty good friends at this point and I believe they are still friends).

Also, if this idea was pinched, why would you publish and edit material that was stolen without adding the proper credit?

[Richard Kaufman]

Yes, I'm certain that Gene came up with it first. At the time it appeared under the other person's name in the book I published, it slipped by during the editing. I thought it sounded familiar, but couldn't place it. Later on I had a conversation with Gene about it and he confirmed my recollection that it was his.

[CHRIS]

Jeff,

why don't you take a look at the Magic Lineage Project (http://www.lybrary.com/mlp/). Under routines you will find Card Warp with a wonderful account by Peter Duffie.

Chris....
preserving magic one book at a time - and the history, too.

[Guest]

Be sure and check out Cervons work on the Card Warp (with bill.) His ideas can be found in: Ultra Cervon (good stuff.)

Honorable mention: (for taking the road less traveled) Sankey has an interesting version using a rubber band and a paddle move. Youll find this in 100% Sankey.

Side-note:

Why all the hush-hush regarding the name of the author, book,etc. about the torn (1/2) deck / card warp idea? Do we have a double standard for our editor's products?

Ill say it: The item in question is The Card Warp Deck and it was published in Darwin Ortiz at the Card Table.

Hiding info is not gonna rectify the crediting problem. And it makes it seem as though Darwin was pinching the idea Perhaps he was perhaps he wasnt. My guess: If the idea was being passed around in the 70s. and not published until the late 80s, Darwin probably just forgot where it came from I dont know Darwin, but from his studious pursuits, my guess is that his agenda is greater than pinching ideas. One things for sure, well never know unless the subject is freely discussed and boy-o-boy can we discuss crediting issues! Why the need for anonymity with this one?

On a more positive note:

For those that use the (Gene Maze:)
Card Warp Deck, heres a nice (minor) touch:
Ask someone to name/touch a card outjog it (a little less than) way and have your spec mark the card. I have em make an x on the outer corner of the card with a sharpie pen. In my experience, the mark adds an extra level of conviction for the climax of the trick.

regards,
Doug Conn

[Curtis Kam]

Not to be overlooked in the cardwarp awards:

Eugene Burger: (Most Sadistic Presentation) using jumbo cards, and featuring the sound of a card's back being broken.

Doug Henning: (Best contrast to Burger's routine) Done with jumbo cards, flash paper, and goofy patter. I vaguely recall that it had some sort of lead-in effect and had something to do with Mark Wilson.

Jim Klayder: (Another Cardwarp Deck) probably an independent invention, but suggests a deck of pairs (one torn, one not)kept in pocket for management of the props. See "Watch Closely"

[Curtis Kam]

Also, who's idea was it to end the effect with tearing the cards openly down the middle? That's not how the Walton routine ends.

[Richard Kaufman]

That's a good question, Curtis!

[Guest]

Don't forget Michael Close's "Dr. Strangetrick" from Workers 1 and his video Very Very Close Volume 5.

Ed the Magic Guy

[Bob Farmer]

Cardwarp is a beautiful trick., I've seen it butchered by hack magicians who pull and push the card about a hundred times a minute. This approach totally destroys the effect.

It is most effective when the card is pushed through very, very slowly.

[Richard Kaufman]

Yes, VERY slowly, and then only twice. ONLY twice, then tear it in half and let 'em freak out.

[Jeff Pierce Magic]

Originally posted by Bob Farmer:
Cardwarp is a beautiful trick., I've seen it butchered by hack magicians who pull and push the card about a hundred times a minute. This approach totally destroys the effect.

It is most effective when the card is pushed through very, very slowly.

Bob, I agree wholeheartedly. I've seen guys slide the card back and forth numerous times and it drives me nuts. Richard is correct when he said "twice is enough."

Thanks to everyone for their contrabutions.

Jeff

[Edwin Corrie]

I don't have my full library to refer to at the moment, but there are a couple of references I can add to the list of Card Warp routines:

Don England's 1981 book "Technical Knock Outs" has a version called Card Warped which uses a completely different method (actually reminiscent of an old single card tunnel type effect published years ago in England, which I would look up if I had my library). Of course, the various card tunnel routines (Trost, Krenzel and others) are in a similar category as far as the effect is concerned.

The French magician Jean-Jacques Sanvert has a routine called "Au del de la quatrime dimension" (Beyond the 4th Dimension) in his 1995 Mayette Days lecture notes which combines ideas from various sources, all of which he credits. The references include those already mentioned in other postings on this topic, and also Jay Marshall's Quick Warp from Apocalypse June 1985.

I also seem to remember a Ken Krenzel inside-out effect in Apocalypse, similar to Jay Sankey's routine in 100% Sankey (if I'm not mistaken).

L&L sell a version (not sure who it's by) with one red card and one blue card, although the description sounded a bit confusing to me.

Hope this is of some help.

[Darwin Ortiz]

In my book Darwin Ortiz at the Card Table (which Richard Kaufman edited and published) I described an item called the Card Warp Deck. Earlier in this thread, Richard Kaufman accused me of stealing this idea from Gene Maze. This is a serious charge. (Although you wouldn't think so, given the frequency with which Kaufman makes such charges on this board.)

Normally, I would treat this claim with the contempt that all of Kaufman's statements deserve. In this case, however, I was concerned that Richard might actually be reflecting the opinion of Gene Maze, someone for whom I have great respect and affection. Therefore, I did something that Richard could easily have done but didn't. I contacted Gene. He e-mailed me the following statement with permission to post it here:

"The idea of performing Card Warp using the principle of the Forcing Deck was never, and I say never, discussed with Darwin Ortiz. There is no question in my mind that the use of a forcing deck was an independent thought on Darwin's part. It's my opinion that Darwin has too much character to take credit for something that's not his.

"As magicians have learned, many times one will develop an idea or sleight only to discover it had been thought of by another. The use of a Forcing Deck by Darwin and myself is a prime example.

"Be that as it may, though two or more magicians may have come up with the identical idea, the one that has it put into print first will be credited for it, and in a way, I feel that's justified. There may be exceptions to this but in this case I feel it's warranted in Darwin's case."

GENE MAZE

(I might add that The Card Warp Deck concept I published consists not only of the forcing deck idea, but also the idea of using a rainbow-back deck, which opens various presentational possibilities.)

I think Kaufman's readers should keep in mind the irresponsibility he has shown in this case when reading future claims and accusations by him.

I devised the Card Warp Deck within months of Roy Walton marketing Card Warp. For all I know, Gene Maze may have come up with his idea within weeks of the effect being marketed. I do know that, in the fourteen years since my book came out, this is the first time Kaufman has raised this charge. The fact that it is utterly baseless should be clear from Gene Maze's statement. I think, however, that it is no coincidence that it coincides with my decision to seek a new publisher for my next book. I expect this to be only the first of many attacks by Kaufman against me. I hope, however, that in the future he leaves honorable people like Gene Maze out of his petty vendettas.

Darwin Ortiz

[Richard Kaufman]

I will respond to Darwin Ortiz' ranting with some simple comments:
When Darwin began to show his handling of "Card Warp" around the Deli in New York, Gene Maze called him a foul name (it wasn't the first time) and grumped about it being stolen. Gene never said anything to Darwin because he doesn't like confrontation and goes out of his way to avoid it. I am not the least bit surprised that his recent e-mailed response said what it did: anyone who knows Gene also knows that he does not confront people who've taken his material.
And, when I published "Darwin Ortiz at the Card Table," I DID in fact tell Darwin that this was something Gene had invented. Darwin chose to ignore my editorial comments, as he did with most of the editorial comments I made in the three books of his I published.
You'll note in Gene's response that he DOES confirm that the idea is his, but kindly lets Darwin off the hook with the "independent reinvention" excuse. Gene has always been the nicest guy I know.
This is the same situation that has occurred with Geoff Latta, Wesley James, and the pass which was discussed in another thread. Someone showed me something many years ago and said it was original. I had no reason to doubt either Gene Maze's or Geoff Latta's claim, now or then.

[Guest]

Richard Kaufman writes...

"At the time it appeared under the other person's name in the book I published, it slipped by during the editing. I thought it sounded familiar, but couldn't place it. Later on I had a conversation with Gene about it and he confirmed my recollection that it was his. "

Richard also writes...

"I DID in fact tell Darwin that this was something Gene had invented. Darwin chose to ignore my editorial comments, as he did with most of the editorial comments I made in the three books of his I published."

So...which is it? You COULDN'T place it and it slipped by or you COULD place it and Darwin ignored your editorial comments?

[Guest]

Man oh man, how do ya respond to that?

First you call Ortiz a "pincher" now you say Gene Maze is mendacious (about something he wrote himself! I guess anything is possible.)

You may be right about the credit(s) which you so vehemently claim to be accurate (ya, whatever.) None the less, your prior ACTIONS are still unjust. Making malicious comments in a public forum (when the issue has never been discussed with the party youre charging, or those who you say the credit belongs) is simply in bad taste.

Debate that (anyone)

Sincerely,
Doug Conn

[Guest]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
[QB]I will respond to Darwin Ortiz' ranting with some simple comments:

Your definition of "rant" is strange.

You call that "ranting"? Darwin's posting was no rant. Not even close.

Ken

[Richard Kaufman]

Well, okay, you don't like my description of Darwin's post as a rant. Grotesque over generalizations such as "Normally, I would treat this claim with the contempt that all of Kaufmans statements deserve" are typical of ranting. He may treat the claim with contempt, but then he treats most of the world with contempt. That's his problem, not mine.
It's obvious, however, that I have remembered part of the incident in two different ways. Both scenarios are certainly possible: 1) It certainly might have slipped past in the editing, or 2) I certainly might have remembered that it was Gene's and told Darwin that, and Darwin might have told me to screw off. Both are certainly possible: my memory is not always infallible, and Darwin has told me to screw off on any number of occasions.
However, the essential point is not changed, and in fact it has been confirmed by Darwin himself when he contacted Maze: Maze DID have the idea for the so-called "Cardwarp Deck." My contention is that I saw Maze do it before Ortiz, and that Gene was annoyed when he discovered that Darwin was also doing it, and he was suspicious of that. I've also explained why Maze would probably not come out publically with his suspicion.
Frankly, I'm tired of defending my friends for ideas they had decades ago that they either didn't publish or didn't complain about publically when someone else did. Let them fight their own battles--I have another issue of Genii to prepare, and a forum to moderate, and a book to write.