Vis-à-vis the choice of "tool", there was no diversion of attention.
"...more complicated than it was" - again with the dogmatism. It's not that complicated, and it's a standard magicians' "thing". You try to sound so sure that you know how it was done, yet demonstrate that you have paltry knowledge of things legerdemain. A child who'd got beginners' magic books out of the library would likely have seen through that part of the routine.
No I didn't say the diversion was at the choice of tool.
It's not necessary to do that though. Most famous magicians have tricks that are so easy when you know how they're done.
You're just talking about "the secret", though. If that's leaked, then the whole thing falls down. But - there IS a "whole thing". A performance. An experience. Words, images, direction of attention, gestures, presentation - many elements, crafted together with practice, to produce an experience of something magical. If you took the "secret" and did the "trick" successfully, it'd just be a puzzle.
No I didn't say the diversion was at the choice of tool.
Well, that's what you and I were talking about at the time.
I think it was a simple illusion.
Meaning what?
You can prove me wrong if you can.
No, thanks. I, or we, could tell you how we think it was done. But it wouldn't be proof, and you'd likely just turn around and say, "Yeah, well, I don't think so. You haven't proved it." Besides, going from reading your posts on threads about the supernatural, I really don't think there's any way of changing your mind, even with cold logic and rationalism.
Vis-à-vis the choice of "tool", there was no diversion of attention.
"...more complicated than it was" - again with the dogmatism. It's not that complicated, and it's a standard magicians' "thing". You try to sound so sure that you know how it was done, yet demonstrate that you have paltry knowledge of things legerdemain. A child who'd got beginners' magic books out of the library would likely have seen through that part of the routine.
It's not necessary to do that though. Most famous magicians have tricks that are so easy when you know how they're done.
And you are telling me that?
'Easy' yes, but to actually create them takes amazing talent, imagination and years of practice. It is why even though I know a lot about magic when I see a trick that I love I try my best not to work out how it is done or find out how it is done as it would remove the thrill. For those who no little about magic it is more disappointment when they find out how easy it is.
Although for any sort of manipulation like cards, coins and notes...that takes practice...just like what happened in the trick we are talking about.
'Easy' yes, but to actually create them takes amazing talent, imagination and years of practice. It is why even though I know a lot about magic when I see a trick that I love I try my best not to work out how it is done or find out how it is done as it would remove the thrill. For those who no little about magic it is more disappointment when they find out how easy it is.
Although for any sort of manipulation like cards, coins and notes...that takes practice...just like what happened in the trick we are talking about.
'Easy' yes, but to actually create them takes amazing talent, imagination and years of practice. It is why even though I know a lot about magic when I see a trick that I love I try my best not to work out how it is done or find out how it is done as it would remove the thrill. For those who no little about magic it is more disappointment when they find out how easy it is.
Although for any sort of manipulation like cards, coins and notes...that takes practice...just like what happened in the trick we are talking about.
I think it was Harry Lorayne who said something like: "Some magicians watching another magician will switch off as soon as they spot a DL. Well, they'll never learn. There's plenty to pick up about presentation and patter, but these types will never progress in their pride and arrogance at having figured out "how it's done"." [Extremely paraphrased!]
Only if you don't want to talk about how the right tool came out of the thermos.
OK at this point I am reassessing my view on you: you are either a very good troll or wilfully stupid.
We have explained how that bit of the trick works up to the point that saying anything else would expose to much of the trick...although 'force' pretty much indicates how that bit of the trick was done. That's 'the easy bit of the trick'. The difficult bit was doing the swap later on under the noses of the judges and it was the piece of paper around it will have sold it to the judges that it was still the same one.
OK at this point I am reassessing my view on you: you are either a very good troll or wilfully stupid.
We have explained how that bit of the trick works up to the point that saying anything else would expose to much of the trick...although 'force' pretty much indicates how that bit of the trick was done. That's 'the easy bit of the trick'. The difficult bit was doing the swap later on under the noses of the judges and it was the piece of paper around it will have sold it to the judges that it was still the same one.
The piece of paper was there all along, on the bolt.
Comments
No I didn't say the diversion was at the choice of tool.
I think it was a simple illusion.
You can prove me wrong if you can.
You're just talking about "the secret", though. If that's leaked, then the whole thing falls down. But - there IS a "whole thing". A performance. An experience. Words, images, direction of attention, gestures, presentation - many elements, crafted together with practice, to produce an experience of something magical. If you took the "secret" and did the "trick" successfully, it'd just be a puzzle.
Meaning what?
No, thanks. I, or we, could tell you how we think it was done. But it wouldn't be proof, and you'd likely just turn around and say, "Yeah, well, I don't think so. You haven't proved it." Besides, going from reading your posts on threads about the supernatural, I really don't think there's any way of changing your mind, even with cold logic and rationalism.
The bolt was already in the thermos.
Tell me it wasn't.
You are trying to make it sound really tricky.
And you are telling me that?
'Easy' yes, but to actually create them takes amazing talent, imagination and years of practice. It is why even though I know a lot about magic when I see a trick that I love I try my best not to work out how it is done or find out how it is done as it would remove the thrill. For those who no little about magic it is more disappointment when they find out how easy it is.
Although for any sort of manipulation like cards, coins and notes...that takes practice...just like what happened in the trick we are talking about.
The bolt was already in the thermos.
Tell me it wasn't.
Stop slipping around. I said, "Vis-à-vis the choice of "tool"...".
The bolt was already in the thermos. That's the answer.
I said that many posts ago.
You got it. That's the whole routine. It was just illusion. Oh, and stooges.
End of thread?
Please, please end the thread...this is getting too painful for words.
We can reveal the rest of the trick, if you want.
"We"? You're a force of one! ('Scuse the pun.)
Only if you don't want to talk about how the right tool came out of the thermos.
I havent seen anyone deny that anywhere. Its how that is the trick.
I think it was Harry Lorayne who said something like: "Some magicians watching another magician will switch off as soon as they spot a DL. Well, they'll never learn. There's plenty to pick up about presentation and patter, but these types will never progress in their pride and arrogance at having figured out "how it's done"." [Extremely paraphrased!]
The answer is in how the bolt is in the thermos and the other two tools "appear" not to be there.
OK at this point I am reassessing my view on you: you are either a very good troll or wilfully stupid.
We have explained how that bit of the trick works up to the point that saying anything else would expose to much of the trick...although 'force' pretty much indicates how that bit of the trick was done. That's 'the easy bit of the trick'. The difficult bit was doing the swap later on under the noses of the judges and it was the piece of paper around it will have sold it to the judges that it was still the same one.
The piece of paper was there all along, on the bolt.
*facepalm* No one has suggested it wasn't.
* Is there an echo in here?*
No matter which of the 3 tools he poured out of that thermos, each one was going to say this is the one.
Disappointingly simple.
Hang on; I thought you reckoned it was a stooge who chose the bolt?
I thought they used a stooge to choose the pile of tools closest to her.
She didn't have to choose the bolt, and saying it was a " forced choice" is misleading.
She could have chosen ANY tool in that pile.
And what she chose would come out of the thermos with paper on it.
U uuuuu...do you want to go for double or nothing?
So far off the mark it makes you look like an Imperial Stormtrooper...
If you know how the trick was done you can reveal it.
But it could easily have been done using a thermos with a bolt, a tiny hammer, and a tiny screwdriver inside.
No matter which one was picked, the right one could be poured out of the trick thermos.
As an amateur magician, the tool part is painfully obvious. So, how do you suggest it was done? Btw, I know how it was done.