An Interesting Little Avenue...pdf

Bias Force The following is something with which I was rather pleased for about three months. In short, it is a method for forcing one of twelve playing cards, which I discovered independently back in January 2016. Since then, it has become clear that numerous other magicians/mentalists have also been playing around with this idea, which was virtually inevitable, I suppose. However, this technique is something I absolutely refuse to use anymore, after realising that it was more impressive in theory than in real life. I have Jerry Sadowitz to thank for this elucidation, as he was the only magician I performed this for who explicitly told me that it was ‘too obvious’. Nevertheless, I feel that the structure of this force provides some worthwhile food for thought, having since incorporated the basic principle into far more effective and deceptive techniques, one of which has flummoxed numerous knowledgeable magicians. As such, I am outlining the fundamental concept here. So, in a deck of cards, there are picture and number cards. This, effectively, is the bias we are going to be exploiting. I really got to thinking about this whilst walking along a residential street in West London one winter’s morning. It occurred to me that if I were to group all the number cards together - forty in total - then it would be an easy matter of spreading through the deck and forcing a spectator to think of a number card. I could then request that if they were thinking of a number card, they should change to a picture card or vice versa, knowing full well that they could only do the former. Resultantly, a picture card would end up being thought of, thereby rendering a one-in-fifty-two choice a manageable one-in-twelve without the spectator being aware of it (apparently). It did not take me long to think that we could get rid of the physical deck altogether. I was using odds here: if one were to count from one to thirteen (thirteen values in a deck of cards) in their head, stopping somewhere along the way, then the likelihood of them ending on a number card seemed high. Nobody would end on one or thirteen, therefore out of eleven choices, nine were suitable for the above force. Now I would proceed as outlined earlier, requesting that if a number card was being thought of, it should be changed to a picture card, or vice versa. This means that with words alone, we have forced one of twelve cards whilst appearing to permit a totally free choice. I must have performed this anywhere between one and two hundred times; it failed on no more than five occasions, if that. Furthermore, I recall at least three extremely well-versed magicians left absolutely stumped once I had performed a hands-off reveal of their thought-of card (I had a specific reveal prepared for the twelve picture cards, all of which could be executed without my having to touch the deck at all). However - and this is a BIG however - I also recall three or four less palatable instances in which lay spectators asked me, ‘Are you just relying on probability?’ Where to hide?! This is exactly what was

happening! So, I thank you again, Jerry Sadowitz, for criticising this force as obvious, thereby painfully letting me know that what I was doing - and what I had been praised for by so many magi folk - was not actually as deceptive as it might be. There are some very useful concepts detailed here which should not be ignored, in particular the counting. Again, after having used this procedure so frequently, I can vouch for the vast majority of spectators - 90 per cent, maybe more - electing to stop anywhere between five and nine inclusive. That’s got to be worth something, in fact, I know from personal experience that there is at least one way of using this knowledge to devastating effect. Have fun! Beau 12/05/20