Being constantly asked “Show me a simple card trick I can show my friends”, or, “How is it done ?” is a burden that must continually be carried by the exponents of our art. We’ve all had to flatly refuse to divulge a method at one time or other whereby incurring displeasure, even to the point of being dubbed “a poor sport”. This routine can be presented impromptu with a borrowed deck and is designed to show how a selected card can be found in four different ways, and still not expose anything. You have apparently complied with their request but leave the spectators more bewildered than ever. All methods used herein are self working. Let us assume that you have been asked to expose the method by which you are able to know the identity of the selected card. Explain that the information is obtained, together with the actual card, by four different ways. The first is by LOGIC. While your back is turned a spectator shuffles a deck and deals a small pile of cards onto the table, noting how many cards it contains, and then pocketing them. Then he is told to deal another pile containing the same number of cards. You ask him to fan the remainder of the pack with the faces towards him, mentally choose one, and then to take it out and place it face down on top of the cards he is holding. Then he is to place the deck on the table, place the pile of cards there on top and finally square the pack. At this point you turn around, and taking the pack explain that logically his card is either RED (or) BLACK. You spell these colors and place a card on the table for each letter. Continuing, you say it is either a SPOT (or) COURT card, still spelling and placing one card down for each letter. Of course, the spectator will agree with you.
Replace the dealt off cards on top of the pack and ask him to return the cards from his pocket to the top as well, so the pack will be complete. Proceeding you assert that by logic his card is either RED (or) BLACK, SPOT (or) COURT, spelling the words and dealing a card for each letter as at first. WHEN YOU START TO SPELL THE WORD “court” MAKE A BREAK IN THE CARDS ON THE TABLE — FOR YOU ARE PREPARING FOR THE NEXT EFFECT.
Complete spelling the word “court”, turning over the card as you say “T”. It will be the selected card.
You immediately proceed to explain the second method of discovering a selected card. Fan the deck in hand for one to be chosen. While the spectator looks at his card, you pick up the cards that spelled “court” and place them at the bottom of the pack. Pick up the remainder from table and put on top, holding a little finger break. Then have the chosen card returned, dividing the deck at the break which automatically leaves it 13 from the top when the deck is squared and given a dovetail shuffle not disturbing that top stock of 13.
Explaining that if logic is not used you resort to SLEIGHT OF HAND, you proceed to spell SLEIGHT OF HAND, once more dealing a card onto the table for each letter. Turn over the last card on the letter “D” and it is the right one.
Now a third card is chosen from the deck, and while fanning you count 8 cards from the top and hold a break. The selected card is returned to this spot after the spectator has noted it. The thirteen cards from the table are picked as though missed, dropped on top, and this leaves the picked card 22nd from the top.
Deal the pack into two face down heaps, starting with the first card in front of the spectator. As you deal remind the onlookers that you have shown how a card can be found by logic and sleight of hand. In this case the location will be by CHANCE.
This talk serves to cover the dealing interval. Fan the spectator’s pile so he sees the faces, saying it’s “chance” that his card is not there, when he can’t find it. This pile is put aside while the other is once more dealt into two, the first card going to the spectator. This is continued until you are left with three cards, the spectator’s pile being put aside each time after fanning. These three are dealt the same way so the spectator’s pile consists of two cards and you have but one. Again he agrees that his card is not among his two, and the climax comes when “by chance” your single card is shown to be the correct pasteboard.
On the other hand you mention that it’s possible that you knew beforehand what card might be chosen. To illustrate this statement you shuffle and then show the faces well mixed, getting a glimpse of the third card from the top as you do so.
The pack is laid down while you take a piece of paper and write upon it the name of this noted card. Another spectator now cuts the deck into three heaps. Then he is told to mix the heaps around but you keep note of the heap which has the deck’s original top part. Ask the spectator to take the top card of this pile, AND IF IT IS A BLACK CARD to put it on one of the other heaps, gesturing which one, AND IF A RED ONE, indicate the other. Ask him to do the same with the second card. With the third card ask him to remember it, mark it in some secret way on its BACK, put it into the middle of any heap, assemble them all, and mix the pack well. Taking the deck you fan through it quickly, locate the card and cut it to the top. Saying that you have found the one chosen, you double lift the top two cards, asserting it to be the correct one. After showing you replace on top and as the spectator says “No” you deal the top (correct) card off face down with the one hand holding the deck. This action can be timed nicely so the putting pack on deck is never evident. You open the piece of paper and have read what you wrote. The spectator acknowledges the correctness of the prediction. Then he, himself, turns the card on table over and finds it has become his own. Here you mention that you knew beforehand the identity of the card he would select as proven by the record on the paper. And thus you have repeatedly located cards (4) and, to your way of thinking (?), have explained satisfactorily (??) just what everybody wanted to know.
To give credits were due, the 1st location is one of those ancient principles used in many forms. The 2nd idea first saw light in Jean Hugard’s More Card Manipulations #2. The 3rd stanza was an idea of Vosburgh Lyons in Jinx #54. The 4th is one of the old “force” ideas too moss covered to make out the name. (Mr. Tothill is too modest. His presentation, mentioning colors and marking, are perfect throwoffs. Ed.) All in all, you now have an impromptu routine with a reason.
Leave a Reply