Thanks for the welcome Ben! My post probably holds less weight being new to the forums, but hopefully some will find useful information there.

I really am enjoying the fact that so many seem to agree that this manuscript cannot be just skimmed through. I believe Vlad said it well in an earlier post. This is something to be savored. Personally I love reading an effect, knowing from the start I would never perform it that way because it doesn't fit my style or whatever, and still emerging with some subtle bit I had not thought of before. There is just so much to be mined from great works like this. I look forward to incorporating much of what is contained here.

On a slightly lighter note, I am feeling a bit spent. It really is a lot of material to ingest in one day...

I am quite puzzled to read all these posts about this sequel of SR. In fact
I bought SR when it got out and I join TimEden's point of view.
At first I found the method brillant when studying it but I never pulled
a performance right. Spectators kept telling me things like "so I only have a 10 card choice range ?"
when using the main script. I Still don't know what is wrong.

So I don't say you are all wrong, I want to trust all your reviews
but it is baffling how people minds changed about it. So again,
does anyone who didn't like SR has his own review even if you love
and perform this effect with the sequel now ?

I'm lost really since I really want this effect to work for me.

Hi Boy,

One of the reasons RSRD was published was to address the very problem some have had. Steve Shufton spends many pages giving you the nuances. I think (as there has been zero hype on this--a change of pace for me) that the problem perceived by some HAS been addressed.

Fingers crossed--a LOT of work has gone into clarifying the procedure for those who found difficulties.

And, the other reason to publish this--the amazing routines!

Benny

I agree with Ben. The scripts from Steve will give you lots of tips and more improtantly confidence in performing SR.

Kyle

Still a bit of worry I see.

Steve's work on this will truly make you feel confident. The problem that I perceive at least that some people have had with the effect is the number range limitation. Yet, there are hundreds of effects that use ranges. In all the years I have been doing magic (20+ professionally and semi-professionally) I have NEVER been questioned on the good old 10-20. Never.

I cannot reveal here exactly what Steve does in his scripting, but, when you read it, think about it, then read and think about it ten more times, it is going to make absolute sense.

This however is NOT risking exposure: do NOT make a big deal about the number selection. It really IS that simple.

Still not certain, then try THIS approach that I had messed with: Have your spectator think of her birth month, or a month that means something to her. She does not reveal the month ...

Try a day of the week ...

A vegetable or fruit...

Do you see the disconnect from the number? Also, the month dodge shifts thinking away from a selection of a number to something PERSONAL. Refer always to the MONTH your spectator is thinking of, or the vegetable, or fruit. In other words, think away from the number. Now, if you combine my little idea with Steve Shufton's scripting ...

I cannot go any further in this post because Steve's scripting comes into play, but, it fits PERFECTLY with this ruse. I am reading your minds - you are constricting even more! Yes, BUT, to return to the very deceptive 10-20, think about how THAT is more obvious than 1-10!! THINK about how you present the 10-20. Intrinsically, there is NO VALID reason to use this range, yet, it works. And it works because you "create" the validity. Now, if the stress is on the month, or whatever you choose, and you reiterate THAT when going into the next part, the last thing the spectator will remember is that you had her think of a MONTH or whatever that is special to her.

However, with Steve's scripting, you will knock yourself on the head and think ... YES!!! That makes sense! And you really don't need my bit of weirdness. Just offering something to direct attention away if you have some paranoia.

How many people were TERRIFIED of Blizzard when it was first released? I was demonstrating in a shop when it was released. We blew magician's MINDS with it. Then, they bought it, read it right there in the shop, and, after having been obliterated by it would state "that will NEVER get past ANYONE!"

One more little bit: in RSRD, there IS a ruse using invisible dice. This is a PROVEN ruse my friends. One example is Marc DeSouza's excellent effect "Die of Destiny."

Now, having said all of this, it may well be that SR isn't for everybody. In fact, I would argue that ALL of us have tried really great effects and for us they BOMB. I have tried Sam the Bellhop and many variants of the plot for years. It NEVER played for me AT ALL. There is even a RAP type approach in Apocalypse. I am a MUSICIAN with a great sense of rhythm, and even THAT didn't work. Conversely, I have made grown MEN scream, literally, at how I present the old chestnut The Haunted Key while other guys I have worked with could not make it fly if it was equipped with warp engines from the Enterprise.

If you do spring flowers and tie balloon doggies, you are most likely NOT going to suddenly perform Docc Hilford's At The Mountains of Madness.

Sure, I want to see this effect done by MANY magicians and mentalists. Stage hypnotists looking for an opener would do well to consider it too. But, if you are in doubt, then you are wise NOT to jump in. I DO understand the trepidation. There are TONS of other great effects for everyone.

Please though, keep this paradigm shift in mind if you DO want to give this a go: do NOT present SR or the approaches you find in RSRD as "card tricks."

Sorry for this long winded post. If I may offer one more thing. When I was starting out, I did Curry's original version of OOTW. I made the mistake of presenting as a "magic" effect. It never worked. People never sussed the method, but, they were stunningly UNIMPRESSED. I couldn't understand why. This was supposed to be one of the greatest card effects of the 20th century! So, I thought about it; thought about what is supposed to be happening, and I realized that this needed different wording and a whole new approach. I do Harry Lorayne's Impromptu OOTU now, but, I do it only on certain occasions. I present it as an "experiment." (Thank you mentalists for that WONDERFUL ruse!!). My character changes, and I do it with a sense of trepidation. But, I had already adopted the "experiment" approach with Curry's original. Guess what?? WHAM!!! This "experiment" BLASTED people.

If YOU believe it is an experiment, your AUDIENCE will believe it too. And the man I am paraphrasing here was one of our great Masters, Tommy Wonder. Wonder talks a LOT about conviction. Ramsay and Slydini knew it SO well. In live theater we call this "pointing." So, when I place a coin into my hand for a vanish, I truly "feel" the coin there. I BELIEVE it IS there.

I'll shut up now.

Ahimsa,
Vlad

Hi Vlad,

Thank you for your clear and well formed thoughts.

Benny

As one of the people who wasn’t keen on SR, I would disagree with that. A few did have issues with the "between" aspect, but the number selection is, at least, a genuine free mental choice. More people had a problem with the suit selection, which isn't a free mental choice - or indeed a choice at all. The biggest problem I had is that the method is extremely easy to reverse engineer by anyone who thinks about the procedure afterwards. IMO, if someone actually remembers the simple procedure by which the card was selected and thinks about it for even a few seconds, then it's almost impossible for them NOT to realise how it works.

Obviously, those, like me, who simply didn’t like the original method won’t be buying the sequel. I expect Run Silent Run Deep to get very good reviews here. Clearly, a lot of people DID like the original and those are the people who will buy the second book.

Thank to you all folks ! Still, I'd like to Hear from Some who didn't or still don't like SR.
There is also something important I should point out. Most of my friends and also most people I know, due to our studies, easily see through things with mathematical aspects. It may be the
case for SR.

LOL Man oh MAN would I love to meet you and your friends and slay you for an hour with the kind of effects you apparently see through.

Your own words prove my point about needing a paradigm shift.

Anyhow, Caliban has posted here and he is NOT keen on SR.

Ahimsa,
Vlad

Vlad's posts continue to amaze me. If that's rambling, he's going to be dangerous when he focuses. Ben, you may just want to compile his posted thoughts and include them in the third book!

BTW, Vlad--working on applying SR to ten varieties of cat food . . .

@ vlad
Yes I read Caliban's message but AFTER I wrote (am writing slowly on a buggy iPhone) and too late so I could'nt edit my own message.


Sorry if what I wrote sounded a bit like if I wanted to showoff (can "showoff" be used as a verb like this? Thanks anyone for the correction if necessary). I am studying in an engeneering school and please believe me, people here think fast with math. There are a lot of plots using mathematical tools in mentalism but SR is just (mathematically speaking) an association between two elements. The value and the suit and they easily Count down to the 10 possibilities (8 is quite close).
I really don't want to put myself up saying this but speaking honestly. Surely you would make SR look way better in front of them but it would not be as amazing as in front of other people.

I hope you understood well what I was saying now, sorry if it wasn't clear for anyone...

If you have the occasion to perform SR for a math student ask him how he felt about the selection.
For example if you take too much Time to clock a deck, they may think you are looking for the missing card and maybe adding values. It happened to me once for a clocking of half a deck (takes me 20s usually) and the guy said "you count quickly" with a smile.

Maybe I need a paradigm shift like you say but certainly More a better thinking in choosing the right audience.

Wow Ben you already have great reviews about the book. I got around to ready more then half of it and I'm just blown away! I want to use almost all of them, but using the same principle for everything in a routine would get old (maybe...). I am still amazed when I read Marc Paul's forward. I mean it's Marc Paul! I have tried out a lot of the ideas and for those who use my method I reccomend playing with the idea and combining it with a fortune cookie fortune... =]
I also enjoyed a lot of the patter's people used for example the idea of the "White Room" was awesome! I just loved how he used the idea with it and it's just so simple haha.
I enjoyed the book a lot and I'm still reading through it (hope to write a more in depth review after I finish). My review may seem biased seeing that I'm in the book, but I don't personally know any of the magicians except for chats with Ben that I have had while I shared with him my ideas using his concept. So I'll end my speech by saying the book is amazing and I HIGHLY RECOMMEND IT!

Bernardo Rodriguez

Hi, The.Amazing.Boy.

Steve Shufton deals extensively with your concerns. He provides so many layers of shade that you should (I would hope) see that it can be well covered and no one should have any inclination to back track. Supplying this clarifying material was one of the main reasons behind the release of RSRD. (That, and of course, all the wonderful material from a diverse range of performers--some hobbyists, some pros).

Further ideas and comments also appear in the "Penny For Your Thoughts" section, here at the Café:
http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......&start=0

Cheers

Benny

Thanks Ben !
I realise that people tend to say so too.

The contributions from the magic café at the end of SR (and to those who think I criticize too much, just know I contributed) should help a lot alone already without the sequel.

I'm working on a new script and new ideas still using the core of the SR principle. It includes the idea of a full deck free choice (the spectator really feels like he could have chosen any card). It is far from ready yet but if I am able to find the missing pieces from this puzzle I'll be glad to share it with you Ben, and a few other membrers of the café.

Thanks, The.Amazing Boy.

That's exactly what Steve Shufton has done with his work in Run Silent. Run Deep. The procedure is nuanced to the point that it really appears like a completely free choice from a carefully specified 52 card deck.

I look forward to your further ideas along these lines.

Cheers

Sorry I meant "contributions from lybrary.com purchasers".

Mmh was that said in RSRD ad on lybrary.com ? I didn't expect less from this sequel
so maybe I'll find something but I think it won't be worth mr shufton's idea...

My thoughts on RSRD.

A few days back I received RSRD.

ALEX (BMWGuy) started this thread with good opening note and a great review.

More than a month back I had an said that RSRD will be one of the most liked e-book. And at that time THIS is what I had said.

IMHO, RSRD was a very significant & substantial project undertaken by Ben. The result was a whopping 216 page manuscript filled with outstanding & brilliant contributions from the many great minds in magic & mentalism.

The e-book is filled with a plethora of quality material (routines/ ideas/ tips) full of brilliant and practical ideas/ effects, making use of the SR concept. I personally feel that those who were unable to use the original SR concept (for whatsoever reasons), RSRD will certainly change their thinking and will be of great help in understanding the SR concept. There are many subtleties for the SR concept that will help you perform SR in a much better way.

The e-book contains practical working scripts, which will help you device your perfect script. RSRD is a wonderful resource. Said that, I feel most of you will start to like & no longer dismiss the SR concept as "rubbish".

Some of the ideas/ routines in here have stuck with me and have got me thinking. I must say that Steve Shufton's ideas on SR are simply brilliant.

IMHO, RSRD is truly brilliant and thought provoking; and takes mentalism to a whole new level.

The e-book is very well written and the layout & graphics are pleasing to the eyes. If you happen to use just one idea or effect from this book, then I feel you have got more than your moneys worth.

Just my thoughts!

Thanks for your thoughts Ustaad it's very kind

Thank you, Ustaad.

A clearer explanation of the SR Procedure was the aim, and I'm so happy that the book seems to have achieved this. When, in the past, I've heard people refer to the concept as "rubbish" I simply could not believe it. But, that was my own fault for not being clear enough (or detailed enough) in the original description.

Benny

Well one thing is for sure if you really do end up getting them printed, then ill be the first in line to order one =]


Bernardo Rodriguez