The Magic Cafe Forums - Kennedy Center Deal

The Magic Cafe Forum Index :: The Gambling Spot :: Kennedy Center Deal (0 Likes)

Good to here.

Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 [Next]
ronfour Regular user 162 Posts	Posted: Jun 27, 2012 08:48 pm 0 Gazzo said that Scott told him that his real specialty was dice. Anybody else hear that?
Cagliostro Inner circle 2478 Posts	Posted: Jun 27, 2012 09:32 pm 0 Quote: On 2012-06-27 16:48, ronfour wrote: Gazzo said that Scott told him that his real specialty was dice. I thought it was Marbles. I heard he was the New England Marbles champion. Anyone have knowledge of that?
Cagliostro Inner circle 2478 Posts	Posted: Jun 27, 2012 09:34 pm 0 Tony Georgio wrote this article in the July 2004 issue of Genii magazine entitled, GUSIAS - Master Mechanic and I did a review of it. In it, he comments on the center deal which is why I am including it here. I should mention that real hustling in knowing company for high stakes is not about having a “magic” or “legendary” move. Certainly you have to have a good methodology, be able to employ your ploy in a proficient manner and be capable enough to apply it in play, but the “magic” is more in the hustler himself, not in the gaff. It is in the “grift” sense the hustler acquires over time, (timing, practicality of method, experience, demeanor, con, likability and a myriad of other factors). The fancy moves and “intrigue” stories are mostly for the magicians and card table aficionados. They make for a great read and I enjoy reading them myself. However, the real work (in total), and its application is oftentimes “different.” Here is my much shorter review of the article with my specific comments in parentheses: Quote: The article recounts is the story of William “Bill” Gusias who is noted as being “an extraordinary sleight-of-hand performer and a master craftsman of holdout machines and other arcane mechanical devices used by advantage players.” According to the article, Bill grew up in Chicago in the 1930’s, where mob controlled gambling flourished. Although illegal, gambling was wide open and drew card and dice cheats and hustlers from all over the country to the area. Bill got introduced to card tricks at a young age and performed in his father’s trade school and valet shop. Because many of the customers at his father’s shop where card mechanics, they took an interest in Bill and over a period of time taught him how to deal seconds, bottoms, and how to do hole card switches, dice switches and other moves. Bill became very knowledgeable and proficient in doing the “real work” with cards and dice. Because he was in a machine shop class in high school, one of the hustlers asked Bill to repair his holdout machine. Because a part was beyond repair, Bill not only constructed a working replica of the broken part, but built a duplicate of the entire machine. That led to him building several hundred holdout machines over the years, in addition to “gaffed dice cups, bean shooters, card punches, holdout and cold-deck machines, bugs, punches, Strippers, paper, whip cups, flop boxes, daub, check cop, and many other - some not so well know - devices.” Although Bill had many offers to join card and dice mobs, he evidently never had any desire to do so. According to Georgio, “Bill Gusias is indeed a master mechanic. He is an accomplished dice mechanic who executes the tip switch and the thumb switch both equally well. He can deal bottoms, seconds, handmuck, play a machine, bean shooter, or slick sleeve as well as any advantage player, and had he not heeded his father’s admonitions (against leading the life of a gambler), he would have stolen enough money to fill many box cars." In the article, Georgio relates Bill’s response to a number of questions posed to him about card cheating. One question was in regard to the current interest in the center deal, and its efficacy in actual play. Bill said, “I heard entertainers talk about it, and I saw Charlie Miller, Dai Vernon, and Ross Bertram do a center deal; but I have never seen nor heard of a card mechanic who dealt from the center.” He was also asked whether Vernon’s, Bertram’s or Miller’s center deal would get by in a money game. His response was, “No. First of all, the only reason for dealing from the center would be to over-come the cut. Aside from having a confederate cut to a brief or a crimp, there are far easier ways to overcome the cut. I cannot think of a reason for practicing such a meaningless move.” (I happen to agree with that statement and so did Giorgio. I have never heard of a center being attempted in any kind of knowing company and there are many far superior ways to “get the money” than using a center that are much more deceptive and far safer. In my opinion, mastering a center deal is a complete waste of time, unless you are using it for gambling expose or demo work. Additionally, even well-known gambling “type” demonstrators like Darwin Ortiz and Steve Forte are not above using a pseudo center deal when giving demonstrations as they apparently do not want to attempt to deal a center under even a layman’s unknowing scrutiny.) All in all a good article and an interesting read. (I could go deeper into my review of the article and hustling concepts, but it seems like the discussion dries up and loses too many people when I go too far into the real application of cheating techniques). If you happen to have access to the July 2004 issue of Genii magazine, you might want to take a look at the article. As a matter of fact, you might want to take a look at anything and everything that Giorgio wrote. He had been there, was capable, knowledgeable and knew what he was talking about. As a final aside, does anyone really think that these hundreds of hustlers mentioned in this article and whom Guisias came in contact with, cheats who flourished in the 20s, 30s, 40 and 50s and who could hand-muck, deal No. 2, deal base, use holdout and cold deck machines, bean shooters, slick sleeves, card punches, bugs, strippers, paper, daub, check cop and many other “not so well known devices,” would be fooled for very long by someone dealing from the center of the deck. Well…believe what you like gentleman, but I have been around the block too many times and can tell you it just ain’t possible. Could he fool the average person and magician with this move at that time history. Probably, because it was before the days of massive exposure of the past few years that informed not only magicians, but also the public and card players in general as to what could be done at the card table. Nowadays, many of the magicians on this board who have learned and mastered card table moves would not be fooled by Kennedy’s center deal either. Times have changed in that regard. I suggest Kennedy originally got his reputation from Vernon who promoted him very heavily for personal reasons. It satisfied Vernon’s agenda of being on the leading edge of card table artifice, knowing more about the subject than the other magicians, employing one-up-man-ship and toying with the other magicians’ heads which he liked to do. Like Scott, Kennedy’s story was further embellished by magicians that took the tale and ran with it. Kennedy no doubt had a good center deal and probably was able to use it in some games, but not in tough games with top hustlers. We have to appreciate and recognize Kennedy for developing a center deal to the level that he did, especially back at a time was the concept was probably little known. We also have to appreciate the magicians who have studied the history and development of the center deal and gambling moves down through history. Their comments and observations, like bishthemagish’s, give us important references to what has gone before and enables future generations to build on and improve the methods of the past. However, in my opinion the Kennedy center deal story has some elements of truth, some elements of exaggeration, sprinkled with a touch of BS and served tongue in cheek. As Humphrey Bogart, in the persona of Sam Spade said in The Maltese Falcon, “It’s the stuff that dreams are made of.
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16554 Posts	Posted: Jun 27, 2012 11:36 pm 0 So what is new? If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it. Tommy
bishthemagish Inner circle 6013 Posts	Posted: Jun 28, 2012 02:19 am 0 Quote: On 2012-06-27 16:27, Cagliostro wrote: Here is an interesting addition to the Walter Scott mystique that is little known. In the GBC reprint of The Phantom of the Card Table by Eddie McGuire, McGuire raves about how Scott fooled some of the leading magician of his day with his punch deal. It was a demonstration at Al Baker’s house in which Al Baker, Cardini, Leo Horowitz, T. Nelson Downs, Max Holden and Eddie McLaughlin were present. (Vernon was not present at the time.) It was after this “blindfold” deal demonstration, which supposed wowed all these expert magicians, that Max Holden passed the “crown” of being the most expert exponent of wonderful card table magic (or some such designation), from Vernon to Scott. This irked Vernon to no end. (Those who are not acquainted with the story can read about it in McGuire’s book which sells for about three dollars and can be obtained from Gamblers’ Book Club.) I have the book and one of the interesting parts of the book is how magicians argued if Walter Scott was the real deal or not. One can speculate but the truth if he was a real card cheat could be lost in time. And if I may add in the paperback that came out years later, it was talked about that Walter Scott was a member of a music group (if I remember right he played a string instrument) and he performed in Vaudeville. In this book it was also said that he was an amateur magician and did his punch work in some close up contest and did not win. Also if I may add, that if he was a vaudevillian and he did deal the punch or use the punch or edge/work as an advantage player. He could be speculated to have played in many games with show business people. According to my conversations with Jay Marshall and my Dad (both performed in vaudeville). The stage hands, agents and acts, a lot of them played cards before and after shows. I speculate that Walter Scott if he played cards this was where he did it - while he was performing in vaudeville that is. Quote: On 2012-06-27 16:27, Cagliostro wrote: However, there is more to the story than recounted by McGuire. According to Jeff Busby, in his book, The Secret of the Palmettos, Scott’s demonstration for the New York magicians at Al Baker’s house, on June 14, 1930, was a set-up. According to Busby, Scott, McGuire, Baker, Downs and McLaughlin joined together in a plot to devastate their New York targets: Horowitz, Cardini and Holden. It was Baker who introduced the “gaffed” (edge marked and punched), decks for Scott's use. Busby wrote a lot of things including the Man who was Erdnase. I take this with a grain of salt. Quote: On 2012-06-27 16:27, Cagliostro wrote: Evidently, three years before the New York demonstration, in June of 1927, Downs and McLaughlin traveled with Faucett Ross to spend a week with McGuire and Scott, in which they exchanged moves and ideas. So Downs and McLaughlin were in on the methods that Scott used on the night of the “big” New York demonstration. Scott evidently used scratch (edge work on the cards) plus a punch deal to do the demonstration. The scratch enabled him to see how far down in the deck his desired cards were, and he could anticipate when to go into his punch deal because of the edge work. It the cards were not close enough to the top of the deck to be dealt on the next round, he would have the deck shuffled and then check again to see if his desired cards were close enough to be dealt. If not, he would have the deck shuffled again, "just to be sure they are all mixed." He wore a blindfold to conceal the fact that he was looking down at the deck to see his edge work. I have no idea if the above story is true or not. However Downs was very interested in card shark info and wanted to learn the center deal. Which he did learn and use in his close up card work. Greater magic has some info on Downs and the center deal. Another magician that was very interested in card sharp methods was Louis Zingone who did a comedy magic act in New York. He was one of the first magicians dealing centers. I saw a film of him doing it in the back of Magic Inc. He dealt on a glass table so they could show the center from underneath. Quote: On 2012-06-27 17:34, Cagliostro wrote: Finally, I don’t want to irritate any sensitive magicians on the BB, but if Scott was such a great card hustler, why did he associate with and share his moves and methods with magicians? My answer to that question is only speculation - Walter Scott could have been a magician too. And having a background in magic as suggested above and the other Phantom of the card table book - I suggest that perhaps Walter Scott was “ego” driven. In my opinion part of the reason magicians session and tip - often to often in my opinion is the be the guy in the know. It was also talked about in the Phantom of the card table ( the paperback) that Ed Marlo pinched Walter Scotts second and the master grip and his punch system that forms the basic of the last part of the book Marlo in Spades. Quote: On 2012-06-27 17:34, Cagliostro wrote: Tony Georgio wrote this article in the July 2004 issue of Genii magazine entitled, GUSIAS - Master Mechanic and I did a review of it. In it, he comments on the center deal which is why I am including it here. I should mention that real hustling in knowing company for high stakes is not about having a “magic” or “legendary” move. Certainly you have to have a good methodology, be able to employ your ploy in a proficient manner and be capable enough to apply it in play, but the “magic” is more in the hustler himself, not in the gaff. It is in the “grift” sense the hustler acquires over time, (timing, practicality of method, experience, demeanor, con, likability and a myriad of other factors). The fancy moves and “intrigue” stories are mostly for the magicians and card table aficionados. They make for a great read and I enjoy reading them myself. However, the real work (in total), and its application is oftentimes “different.” Here is my much shorter review of the article with my specific comments in parentheses: The article recounts is the story of William “Bill” Gusias who is noted as being “an extraordinary sleight-of-hand performer and a master craftsman of holdout machines and other arcane mechanical devices used by advantage players.” According to the article, Bill grew up in Chicago in the 1930’s, where mob controlled gambling flourished. Although illegal, gambling was wide open and drew card and dice cheats and hustlers from all over the country to the area. Bill got introduced to card tricks at a young age and performed in his father’s trade school and valet shop. Because many of the customers at his father’s shop where card mechanics, they took an interest in Bill and over a period of time taught him how to deal seconds, bottoms, and how to do hole card switches, dice switches and other moves. Bill became very knowledgeable and proficient in doing the “real work” with cards and dice. Because he was in a machine shop class in high school, one of the hustlers asked Bill to repair his holdout machine. Because a part was beyond repair, Bill not only constructed a working replica of the broken part, but built a duplicate of the entire machine. That led to him building several hundred holdout machines over the years, in addition to “gaffed dice cups, bean shooters, card punches, holdout and cold-deck machines, bugs, punches, Strippers, paper, whip cups, flop boxes, daub, check cop, and many other - some not so well know - devices.” Although Bill had many offers to join card and dice mobs, he evidently never had any desire to do so. According to Georgio, “Bill Gusias is indeed a master mechanic. He is an accomplished dice mechanic who executes the tip switch and the thumb switch both equally well. He can deal bottoms, seconds, handmuck, play a machine, bean shooter, or slick sleeve as well as any advantage player, and had he not heeded his father’s admonitions (against leading the life of a gambler), he would have stolen enough money to fill many box cars." In the article, Georgio relates Bill’s response to a number of questions posed to him about card cheating. One question was in regard to the current interest in the center deal, and its efficacy in actual play. Bill said, “I heard entertainers talk about it, and I saw Charlie Miller, Dai Vernon, and Ross Bertram do a center deal; but I have never seen nor heard of a card mechanic who dealt from the center.” He was also asked whether Vernon’s, Bertram’s or Miller’s center deal would get by in a money game. His response was, “No. First of all, the only reason for dealing from the center would be to over-come the cut. Aside from having a confederate cut to a brief or a crimp, there are far easier ways to overcome the cut. I cannot think of a reason for practicing such a meaningless move.” (I happen to agree with that statement and so did Giorgio. I have never heard of a center being attempted in any kind of knowing company and there are many far superior ways to “get the money” than using a center that are much more deceptive and far safer. In my opinion, mastering a center deal is a complete waste of time, unless you are using it for gambling expose or demo work. Additionally, even well-known gambling “type” demonstrators like Darwin Ortiz and Steve Forte are not above using a pseudo center deal when giving demonstrations as they apparently do not want to attempt to deal a center under even a layman’s unknowing scrutiny.) The above is interesting and they are interesting opinions. But if I may add we still don’t know enough about “how Allen Kennedy worked the center” If he did work the center that is. I speculate that one of the games Allen Kennedy perhaps played was five card stud. However if he did use the center I would also have the opinion that he dealt at the most two centers on the first two deals. Giving him two of a kind. The reason I think this is the deck (might have been tabled) is tabled after the first two cards are dealt. This is only speculation after hearing Vernon say that when Kennedy did his center for him on Kennedy’s kitchen table. He dealt out hands of five card stud. This adds more questions because Kennedy may have worked alone. Also how many times would he have done this in a game - and if it would have gotten past them - back then? Also what kind of games did he play - and what kinds of people did he play with? Did he play in big money games or not? Was he playing (and Walter Scott) during the depression era? However a good two of a kind in a game of five card stud would be an advantage to someone that knew how to play the game in my opinion. Quote: On 2012-06-27 17:34, Cagliostro wrote: I suggest Kennedy originally got his reputation from Vernon who promoted him very heavily for personal reasons. It satisfied Vernon’s agenda of being on the leading edge of card table artifice, knowing more about the subject than the other magicians, employing one-up-man-ship and toying with the other magicians’ heads which he liked to do. Like Scott, Kennedy’s story was further embellished by magicians that took the tale and ran with it. Kennedy no doubt had a good center deal and probably was able to use it in some games, but not in tough games with top hustlers. We have to appreciate and recognize Kennedy for developing a center deal to the level that he did, especially back at a time was the concept was probably little known. We also have to appreciate the magicians who have studied the history and development of the center deal and gambling moves down through history. Their comments and observations, like bishthemagish’s, give us important references to what has gone before and enables future generations to build on and improve the methods of the past. However, in my opinion the Kennedy center deal story has some elements of truth, some elements of exaggeration, sprinkled with a touch of BS and served tongue in cheek. As Humphrey Bogart, in the persona of Sam Spade said in The Maltese Falcon, “It’s the stuff that dreams are made of. Thanks for posting all the info and for a great conversation. Glenn Bishop Cardician Producer of the DVD Punch Deal Pro Publisher of Glenn Bishop's Ace Cutting And Block Transfer Triumphs
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16554 Posts	Posted: Jun 28, 2012 03:49 am 0 Well you can test the Walter Scotts system, which is more or less what Doc did and from all accounts it worked for him. You will never know until you test it at the table. Least you will know if it does what it says on the can or not. If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it. Tommy
Cagliostro Inner circle 2478 Posts	Posted: Jun 28, 2012 11:34 pm 0 Bishthemagish’s comments on vaudeville and the assumption that Scott played in those game is certainly likely and a fascinating read and a possibility I was unaware of. However, given the premise of Scott being in show business, it makes a lot of sense. I want to clarify a couple of things that are important and rather than going back to specific references, I am going to make it easy on myself and just clarify some areas and state some conclusions. There is a distinction between two publications with similar names. The original manuscript penned by McGuire, and subsequently reprinted by Gamblers Book Club is entitled, The Phantom of the Card Table. The word “Phantom” is singular. The second book came out at a much later date and is entitled, The Phantoms of the Card Table by Gazzo. The word “Phantoms” in this instance is plural. These are two different books and contain similar but not the same information. For example, the bottom deal in the McGuire book was evidently Scott’s original bottom deal and is different than the bottom deal in the Gazzo book. Also the McGuire book has a very detailed description of the punch deal, bottom deal and slick ace preparation used by Scott and was originally written for a very small and select group in manuscript form. It was not meant for public consumption like the Gazzo book. Both books should be in the library of anyone interested in the Phantom “legend” and card table chicanery in general. In the post, both books are referred to individually depending upon point being made. Bishthemagish (hereinafter “Bish), refers to Marlo taking the Scott’s bottom deal grip, written about by Gazzo, and calling it the Master Grip. Let me further clarify this. Laurie Ireland was the first to describe this grip for the bottom deal in his excellent booklet, Lessons in Dishonesty. It was subsequently described for the bottom deal in Expert Card Technique with reference to Lessons in Dishonesty therein. The card hustler Artanis also wrote a booklet on the bottom deal using this grip, so as Bish stated previously, Marlo’s use of the grip is original in name only (the Master Grip), not in the grip itself. In fact, it is very likely that Scott himself got this grip from one of the above three mentioned books since that was not his original bottom deal grip. (His original grip was somewhat of a “straddle” type grip with a “fanning” or “spreading” of the cards to reduce finger flash and make pulling of the bottom card easier.) I also believe that Five Card Stud was THE money game during that era. Old timers that I knew played a great deal of Five Card and I believe it was more of a skill game than say Seven Card Stud or Hold’em. I was privy to some of the moves and gaffs used in Five Card and they are very clever and dynamite in play to say the least. A good Five Card Stud player could beat any lesser opponent “on the square” because the game is more skill than luck and further someone using a center deal or punch deal could not overcome this. He might not lose his money but he would not be the big winner. Further, using paper (whether it is a punch deal or any other form of paper) in conjunction with a second deal will get the money. That has been proven over and over again throughout the years. There is nothing magic about punching the card. It goes back well over one hundred years and nowadays there are much more deceptive and modern ways of getting the top card’s value rather than a punch (or scratch) for that matter. Also, as Bish alludes to, the conditions of play and knowledge of the players was different in those days. That is a key point. Playing on a round table with four to six players is not quite the same as playing on a modern poker table with ten players. Also, “stopping” the top card in a modern full table round game is not the best use of a punch deal nowadays. It is better applied to games like Blackjack, or games in which a card does not have to be repeatedly “stopped” all around the table. Using a second deal with paper (any kind of paper), is not really the best application of paper. As Maskelyne stated over one hundred years ago in Sharps and Flats, being a good player and using knowledge the paper imparts, will not only get all the money over time, but the hustler will last forever if he is capable at playing the work. In FAST company games for HIGH stakes, stopping the top card around the table or dealing from the center will not fly for very long. In “lesser” games with more casual players is a different story, although in even tough games, an “occasional” No. 2, in the right hands at the right time, will usually fly. What has started out as a relatively simple and innocuous post has developed into a great thread imparting some unusual and little know information (especially from the show business angle), which has shed further light on: ...“The stuff that dreams are made of...”
bishthemagish Inner circle 6013 Posts	Posted: Jun 29, 2012 02:51 am 0 Cagliostro Let me start off by saying thank you for your time and the information that you have put into this thread. It has made it one best threads in my opinion. I would just like to add a few more thoughts on Vernon and Charlie Miller. Lets start with Vernon. He seemed to have met two important gamblers. Allen Kennedy and the center deal story. And Old Dad Stevens and the riffle shuffle culling system that was published in the book Revelations. What I find interesting about both stories is that they have become "legend" in magic. What I found interesting about the stuff written in the Walter Scott book - the second one. Is that it is supposed that Vernon was not interested in seeing Walter Scott demo his deal. He was said to have been invited to see him demo but he refused and walked out. I find this story interesting because in Revelations Persi Diaconis who traveled with Vernon for a while and was with him when he hunted down some advantage players - it seems that Vernon had a need to see these people do what they do. Charlie Miller at one time worked in Las Vegas as an eye in the sky. Geno Munari told me this a few years ago and Geno met Charlie at this time. Jay Marshall also told me an interesting story about Charlie Miller. He said that he was booked to do a lecture in England somewhere. A lot of card magicians were looking forward to seeing Charlie Miller do his card stuff and lecture on cards. Well he ended up doing his magic act stuff, chinese sticks the rice bowls. Jay Marshall said it was because Charlie Miller was a nervous wreck before a lecture and he got so nervous doing the card sharp stuff in front of a larger lecture room audience - he changed the lecture to magic at the last minute. As I understand (Jay said) this upset a lot of guys that came to the lecture that wanted to see Charlie do his stuff. I look at it as an interesting story and it could be why some magicians would not make it as advantage players. It is just not in the cards for them. Cheers! Glenn Bishop Cardician Producer of the DVD Punch Deal Pro Publisher of Glenn Bishop's Ace Cutting And Block Transfer Triumphs
Cagliostro Inner circle 2478 Posts	Posted: Jun 29, 2012 10:50 pm 0 Quote: On 2012-06-28 22:51, bishthemagish wrote: Cagliostro Let me start off by saying thank you for your time and the information that you have put into this thread. It has made it one best threads in my opinion. I would just like to add a few more thoughts on Vernon and Charlie Miller. Lets start with Vernon. He seemed to have met two important gamblers. Allen Kennedy and the center deal story. And Old Dad Stevens and the riffle shuffle culling system that was published in the book Revelations. What I find interesting about both stories is that they have become "legend" in magic. Ditto to you also, Bish, and thank you for the kind words. It has been a pleasure for me to impart what little knowledge I have in the hopes that it proves to be somewhat interesting and perhaps even educational to some of the members. Lest I create the wrong impression based upon my post herein, we cannot forget the tremendous contribution Vernon made to the field of close-up magic, close-up card work and doggedly tracking down gamblers at every opportunity to glean whatever information he could from them. At that time, gamblers moves were superior to the moves used by close-up magicians and he primarily wanted to incorporate these moves into his card magic. His legacy and contributions were monumental in this regard and I had a great deal of respect for him. At one time I had read and studied everything he had written, even going back to the old booklets, like the $20 manuscript, first edition of Revelations and Revelation tapes – you name it I had it. Quote: On 2012-06-28 22:51, bishthemagish wrote: What I found interesting about the stuff written in the Walter Scott book - the second one. Is that it is supposed that Vernon was not interested in seeing Walter Scott demo his deal. He was said to have been invited to see him demo but he refused and walked out. I think Vernon had a strong resentments toward Scott because Max Holder had passed the title of “Exponent of Wonderful Card Table Magic” (or some such title), from Vernon to Scott which was unfair and unjustified. All Scott could do was some gambling moves. Vernon was a giant in close-up magic and development at that time. However, Vernon did eventually get to see Scott’s work and his comments were covered elsewhere. Quote: On 2012-06-28 22:51, bishthemagish wrote: Jay Marshall said it was because Charlie Miller was a nervous wreck before a lecture and he got so nervous doing the card sharp stuff in front of a larger lecture room audience - he changed the lecture to magic at the last minute…I look at it as an interesting story and it could be why some magicians would not make it as advantage players. It is just not in the cards for them. Most demonstrators nonchalantly make their moves with equanimity not realizing that if they tried moving in a game, they would either freeze up or their move would fall apart on them. Moving under fire, under the watchfull eyes of people who have serious money at stake, is not something to take lightly. Most people can’t do that regardless of their skill level with cards.
Stromberg Regular user 160 Posts	Posted: Jul 19, 2012 12:11 am 0 First of all thanks a lot for taking so much time and effort to give such valuable information, this is a brilliant thread. Quote: On 2012-06-29 18:50, Cagliostro wrote: Most demonstrators nonchalantly make their moves with equanimity not realizing that if they tried moving in a game, they would either freeze up or their move would fall apart on them. Moving under fire, under the watchfull eyes of people who have serious money at stake, is not something to take lightly. Most people can’t do that regardless of their skill level with cards. This is absolutely true, and furthermore, add a LOT of money to that and the pressure will be even higher. I mean, raising the stakes is something high stakes gamblers use all the time to put their opponents off guard. Andy Beal almost succeeded with this very ruse against the top poker players a while back, but failed in the end. Also, which is related to this, it is important to realize two important things: (1) the edge you need to get the money is very small, thus small edges are often more important than straight out false dealing. A small edge with a large number of iterations is a safer way to get the money than a one shotter. This connects to the second important thing (2): "you can shear a sheep many times, but only skin it once". True hustlers want to keep the money stream coming, rather than do a "one shot wonder", more often than not. Keeping the fish happy is vital for any live hustling, which in turn means that skinning someone is uncommon, and that - in turn - means that false dealing is even more uncommon. That said, the false dealing is very interesting from a card mans perspective, especially if he is likes card magic. The stories about "real life use" is nice, and it gives it a certain flair. And I doubt that anyone who have read "the Magician and the Card Sharp" hasn't felt inclined to find out more about the Kennedy deal... I am sorry if I have repeated some things that has already been mentioned, I just felt there was a need to clarify it a little further. /Stromberg
Bobbycash Special user Australia 694 Posts	Posted: Jul 24, 2012 09:17 am 0 I'm on university holidays at the moment and I thought I would share a video of me demonstrating the Wimhurst Center Deal. Still needs some work. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wNJFvEGqgE
Cagliostro Inner circle 2478 Posts	Posted: Jul 24, 2012 06:34 pm 0 Quote: On 2012-07-24 05:17, Bobbycash wrote: I'm on university holidays at the moment and I thought I would share a video of me demonstrating the Wimhurst Center Deal. Still needs some work. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wNJFvEGqgE Obviously this is strictly a demonstration move and for that purpose it is okay. (You can do almost anything in a demonstration.) However, in a real money game, you would be at a serious disadvantage, regardless of the power of your hand, if your hand was face up and the other players’ hands were face down. Lol Seriously though, you might want to set up the break by having the deck cut normally and then complete the cut as you would in a game. I think it would have more credibility done that way. Even if you cannot do that well, you could complete the cut normally and then, ostensibly to show the Jacks are really in the center, get the break on the square-up.
Bobbycash Special user Australia 694 Posts	Posted: Jul 24, 2012 11:40 pm 0 You are absolutely correct. As I said in the video I was just following the patter from the Wimhurst Poker Deal in down under deals. You are correct in that I could have done the cutting with a crimp etc but in all honesty I kind of rushed it, one take to get it out before I caught up with some mates. Cheers anyway for the critique! Very valuable.
KardSharp89 New user 17 Posts	Posted: Mar 5, 2021 03:23 am 0 I've enjoyed this thread. I too have been card player my entire life. I have played in some of the biggest games in the country, and played in both casinos as well as private games for high stakes with the likes of Ivey, Hellmuth, Russ Hamilton, Phil Laak, Antonio Esfandiari, Durr... pretty much everybody. In all of my years of playing I agree with Cagliostro about the simple fact that its the skilled card player who gets the money. Any edge beyond that, even the slightest edge... be it playing the punch, marked cards or sleight of hand is an added edge. I don't necessarily agree with the notion that everyone who uses sleight of hand eventually gets caught. You could say the same thing about any form of cheating and I feel be just as accurate. There were hold out men in Vegas in the 70's and 80's working all the time. and at the same time, there were bottom dealers and second dealers working the clubs in Los Angeles. I've seen old security footage or some of the worst second deals ever... but no one at the table had a clue. This is because the greatest cheats no when to pick their spots, no matter what form of cheating they use. When I was coming up in the cornfields of the midwest, I didn't have a mentor turning me out so to speak. Everything I learned in terms of "Getting The Money" came from whatever books I could find combined with whatever just made sense to me. Sure, I got popped trying moves in the family rummy game, or in the church basement game as a teenager. But those were the perfect place to learn what works and what doesn't. but anyone who has played a significant amount of poker for money will tell you... there's no need to beat the heat when the next hand is right around the corner. Having said this, I would like to propose some thoughts about Walter Scott and Allan Kennedy. And some of these thoughts might differ from yours Cagliostro or from Steve Forte's who is a mentor and dear friend of mine. So... Here goes, food for thought. Every great hustler I've ever known has been very good in the art of "Never giving you the full story"/. Consider this... What if Scott and Kennedy really were professional card cheats who for whatever reason became amused with fraternizing amongst top sleight of hand artists and fooling them. I can totally see this being viable. That doesn't mean they would give them what magicians might call, "The Real Work." I can totally see Scott explaining the punch to be used for second dealing, and not even bothering to address the fact that it was really used to keep tab of high value cards and play accordingly. Let's face it, the later would be boring to a room full of magicians. And if these guys were true hustlers, I would think they would get a kick out of hustling a bunch of guys like Vernon and Scarne etc. I personally spent a couple years trying to perfect Allan Kennedy's center deal when this very thought occurred to me. Maybe Allan Kennedy was using the center deal in a completely different way than he explained to Vernon. Of course I could be completely wrong about all of this. But if you believe me when I tell you that a world class hustler who is a true master of deception under fire rarely tells you the full truth... then this might shed some light on the matter that is worth considering. He's leaving town tomorrow...so let's go ahead and skin him.
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16554 Posts	Posted: Mar 5, 2021 09:18 pm 0 Anybody who uses the Glenn Bishop Scissor Base has to be the real deal. If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it. Tommy
KardSharp89 New user 17 Posts	Posted: Mar 8, 2021 09:24 am 0 After making this post I randomly got a call from Steve Forte the day after. (it had nothing to do with the post.) Steve was checking up on me because I was recently hospitalized for a heart condition. during the call I mentioned my recent post here and he urged me to read the most recent article in Geni magazine "One Night in Brooklyn" that lays out a very strong opinion about Walter Scott. And while I think my theory about some of these near mythical characters like Scott, Kennedy and even Erdnase might hold some weight, youou can't deny the research. After reading the article I was convinced that Walter Scott's profile as a cheat was most likely blown way out of proportion by Eddie Maguire as a means to gain insider status with other magicians whom he wanted to learn secrets from. that doesn't take a way from some of the contributions Scott made...but in the end, it appears Scott probably was a magician who enjoyed fooling other magicians. When Forte told me about getting his hands on some of Scott's punch work, that settled it for me. If the deck Forte was given was really from Scott... and Steve dismissed it within 5 minutes (which is also mentioned in the article and in Steves new books... Then I don't need any ore convincing. He's leaving town tomorrow...so let's go ahead and skin him.
Mr. Bones Veteran user 325 Posts	Posted: Mar 8, 2021 05:17 pm 0 There are lots of threads in this forum, and elsewhere, that posit the likes of Kennedy, Scott, and Erdnase weren't hustlers at all, but rather magicians posing as hustlers. Lots of information out there one can use to make their own decision ... and lot of folks who put stock in the old Joe Louis/Jimmy Hoffa quote, which notes that *"if you have to say you is ... you ain't"*. Mr. Bones "Hey Rube"!
Gamblingman007 New user 65 Posts	Posted: Apr 25, 2021 07:59 am 0 A lot of you guys don't even know what you are talking about especially you KardSharp89. Walter Scott was the real deal because I'm living the life and I use his teaching techniques all the time while in play. Everything that he speaks about in his book I've experienced in one way or another. I'd go up against anyone here who speaks differently. If you don't live it, how can you explain it? Steve doesn't live nor do this technique (Unless he just started). You don't even know how to make a punch nor do you know what needle size to use. Respectfully The Gamblingman007
5ggg New user 90 Posts	Posted: Apr 26, 2021 06:35 pm 0 Guessing SF knows how to make a punch, and already has a few.
Gamblingman007 New user 65 Posts	Posted: Apr 27, 2021 07:12 am 0 Quote: On Apr 26, 2021, 5ggg wrote: Guessing SF knows how to make a punch, and already has a few. I don’t know how he would know how to make one because I never taught nor showed him; and yes he does have at least one or two punches because I gave them to him and Sal upon meeting them when they were helping and teaching me.