You can now download the Faro-list (PDF) at Lybrary.Com for free. Enjoy.

http://www.lybrary.com/faromania-p-680843.html

I can't recall which volume but on one video I have, Vernon's 'A Match Made in Cinncinatti' had been routined out of a brand new deck, where the cards in two of the suits are 'shuffled' into A-K order (new decks have two suits already A-K and two suits arranged K-A) and then faro'd twice as the set-up...killer effect and it's where I started learning my in-the-hands faro...I don't always do this with a brand new deck, but the effect is very strong either way.

After many years of practice (and lots of Tally-Hos), I can do a complete 'cycle' in a little over a minute with a halfway decent deck...

I tried Bikes , including the R Turner hyped traditional cut decks but its hit and miss unless your just doing table Faros. So far I have found the Phoenix deck to be the most reliable when doing a standard in the hands Faro. Or maybe I just need another 20 years practice. Anyone else suggest a deck that's not hit and miss other than Bikes

Also thanks for such a nice forum and all the info on Faro , its a gold mine.. been away for to long..nice to be back

I think this thread could benefit from a response to the following question I'll ask:

Some have "taught" the faro. Harry Lorayne has self-promoted his teaching (as he is always wont to do) in this thread. However, Lorayne's "teaching" (if it can be called that!) while still offering some very minimal insights (which are honestly only useful for people who can already faro well, as I can) pales in comparison to Ed Marlo's discussion in _Revolutionary Card Technique_. So who offers more insight on the faro than Ed Marlo? In short, what are some of the absolute best discussions of the faro which top Ed Marlo's stellar discussion? Is there anything better than Ed Marlo on this? Or is Ed Marlo's discussion the absolute best?

Hey Mr. RiderBacks: Please; I've just gone over this entire thread. Would you please tell us all where I SELF-PROMOTED my teaching. Sure; effects/routines I've published in my books are mentioned - which is the POINT of this thread, isn't it? And others started the mentioning of some of my faro effects here first. So, please, explain your un-called for remark about my SELF-PROMOTION.

I'm always willing to learn, and I can see from your 63 posts that you have INVALUABLE experience - so please, show me and everyone else where I SELF-PROMOTED. Point out where I said - where I EVER said - that I teach how to do the faro better than Marlo OR ANYONE ELSE. Please; we all breathlessly await your immense fount of knowledge. It's important for all of us to realize that you KNOW WHEREOF YOU SPEAK, or that you have NO IDEA WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

Now, since you brought it up --- since for the last couple of decades I never carry my own deck, and because I have some arthritic fingers, I can't really use the faro very often. In my current book, JAW DROPPERS! I spend some time, and space, teaching how to ELIMINATE the faro within certain effects/routines and, believe it or not, the routines are STRONGER and easier to do. Thank you so much for the plug opportunity, which I know makes you sooooo happy!

Oh, and I just checked again - and there's only one mention of learning the faro from me, and that mention is by DomKabala, not by me.

But, and I know this will make you happy, Mr. RiderBacks (as it is "wont to do" - I just love your ability with language! - just love your quotes around "teaching" when discussing me) --- over the decades literally thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, have stated, written, etc., that THEY LEARNED THE FARO FROM MY FIRST MAGIC BOOK. THEY said/stated/wrote it, not me. So what is your "unbelievably knowledgeable" response to that?

Incidentally, Ed (Marlo) and I were personal friends. Did you know him personally, Mr. RudeBacks? I loved his teaching of the faro (and anything else he taught) and he loved my short teaching version of the faro in that first book of mine. Incidentally, I never said that it was the "best" way to do the faro. I never said that anything I teach/taught is the BEST. I know better than to use "best" at all, as you do above. I admit I'm stupid, but I'm not THAT stupid!

Harry, I love your stuff. I was, of course, referring to the sixteenth post in this thread, written on Mar. 13, 2010. Let's be honest. It is not uncommon (that's an understatement) to find a thread in which you mention your surprise that your work (which is quite stellar) isn't mentioned. I'll refrain from quoting and citing examples here, though if forced to do so, I'd unhappily oblige.

The brief description of the faro which appears in your _Close Up Card Magic_ doesn't count ask teaching it (though you did describe that description as offering a "teaching" of the faro in the aforementioned sixteenth post in this thread.) What you write in _Close Up Card Magic_ is this:



This is not to teach the faro. Ed Marlo does teach it, and he teaches it well. When I was learning the faro, I spent about twenty minutes studying Ed Marlo's description. Then, I hit a near perfect faro on the fifth, seventh and tenth try. Let's call that past bit of learning experience a whole half hour of "work" for hitting near perfect faros in five to ten attempts. This was made possible by the high quality of Ed Marlo's teaching of the faro. Now that's not to completely knock your description. Your handling is interesting (and different from Ed's (who, by the way, I have not met.) For those who already know how to faro, your handling is worth studying. I like it! But I stand by my claim that your description in _Close Up Card Magic_ doesn't count as teaching it. It counts as teaching a nice way to move into or present the faro. And that is, of course, quite valuable!

I never stated that you teach the faro "better than Ed Marlo or anyone else." In fact, I said quite the opposite (at least with reference to your brief discussion in _Close Up Card Magic_.) It is possible you elsewhere have a lesson on the faro which I have missed. Again, I like your discussion of the faro in _Close Up Card Magic_. But what I'm interested in is whether there is a better discussion of the faro than the insanely great discussion (and incredibly awesome teaching) which Ed Marlo provides. If there is, I don't know where it is, and I'd like to know about it if it exists. Ed Marlo's discussion of the faro is going to be hard to top.

If you're referring to something other than _Close Up Card Technique_ that I don't know what your'e referring to. I will state (with utmost confidence) that nobody learned the faro from _CUCT_.

Good. Glad you "love my stuff." And you are, of course, entitled to your opinion, so long as you state it AS AN OPINION. And your opinion, of course, is wrong - IN MY OPINION. We can leave it at that. I never said, in CLOSE-UP CARD MAGIC (not "Technique") that I'd really go into deep teaching of the faro - the short piece was along with a short piece on the jog shuffle, Hindu Shuffle, etc. Anyway, I'll stick with this statement

"But, and I know this will make you happy, Mr. RiderBacks (as it is "wont to do" - I just love your ability with language! - just love your quotes around "teaching" when discussing me) --- over the decades literally thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, have stated, written, etc., that THEY LEARNED THE FARO FROM MY FIRST MAGIC BOOK. THEY said/stated/wrote it, not me. So what is your "unbelievably knowledgeable" response to that?" We can leave it at that. Again, glad you love my stuff!

Just to be clear - it was this statement of yours that "rankled" ---

"Some have "taught" the faro. Harry Lorayne has self-promoted his teaching (as he is always wont to do) in this thread. However, Lorayne's "teaching" (if it can be called that!)..."

Had you just stated your opinion about Marlo's great teaching of the faro (with which, incidentally, I'd agree) and not mentioned me, there would have been no response from me - except perhaps to agree re: Marlo's teaching. But when someone comes in with any UN-CALLED-FOR remark about me, I'm going to respond. Nature of this beast. Just wanted to be clear. You can't start something and not expect a response.

No hard feelings. And I"m not interested in a fight. What I'm interested in is the location of a better teaching of the faro than Marlo provides. That interest isn't a knock on Marlo, who does an insanely good job of teaching the faro. What I want to know is whether some folks feel Marlo's teaching (which is stellar) has been beaten (and if so, where!)

Fine. That's not precisely what your original post said - like: where do I (Harry Lorayne) come into that "picture"? - but, fine, good luck finding whatever it is, that important information, that you're searching for. Wish I could help.

Happy to explain more in a PM (but won't do it in public.). And thanks for the well-wishes! There is no question that I've benefitted greatly from some of your writing!

Ok, so a little more faro work, forced by memdeck interest, has resulted in a new handling which I much prefer to the Marlo-based handling I've been using. I'm not sure if this handling is in print, but I think I'm now mostly (though not completely) happy with how my faro *looks* (from the spectator's point of view.) I've now deviated from Marlo's handling by a fair degree.

Marlo runs a bottom-up faro. I prefer a top-down. Marlo's finger position (depicted in Fig. 6 of Ch. 6 of RCT) has also been abandoned. I place the right forefinger along the back of the deck and use it to help square the backs of the deck by extending the tip of it slightly over the right-hand's deck (back) so that it touches the left hand's deck. The spectator sees the backs of the cards and at no points gets a very good view of the weave. The goal here is to not make it fracking obvious that you are perfectly interlacing the cards, and this is assisted by doing the faro quickly with the spectator's view being of the backs only under some hand cover. The spring is performed not from the short ends, but from the sides, which further conceals the perfect interlacing. (Alternatively, a fast and sloppy standard spring from the short ends can work, and probably should also be used. Still thinking about this.) If the odd shuffle is questioned, I'll just say that I learned to shuffle by just jamming the cards together, and thought this was standard!

A few points about this handling. First, it won't work well if you have small hands. Fortunately, I don't. I can grip the base of the right-hand deck while still extending the right-forefinger (by about a full joint) over the tip of it so as to contact the left hand's deck. Second, if you can manage this, the right hand's forefinger speeds up the squaring process and removes the need for starting at the cards while you faro them. With more practice, I think I'll be able to out-faro blind using this method, though some visual inspection is of course recommended if you need a perfect weave. Still, the right forefinger helping with the squaring speeds up the whole process for me.

Interesting...after your strong, VERY strong, statement about how Marlo's teaching for doing a perfect faro was, without question, the very, VERY, BEST, as you in an un-called-for way compared it to my teaching - you're now stressing "...a new handling which I much prefer to the Marlo-based handling..." And now you've "deviated from Marlo's handling by a fair degree." And, also interesting - those changes occurred in just a few days!

Marlo taught a bottom-up faro but, after your stressing how his teaching is the VERY BEST, you now "prefer a top down" faro. And now you stress what you're intimating is YOUR idea of the right forefinger's action.

Well, what's interesting to me is - in my original short version re: the perfect faro - back in CLOSE-UP CARD MAGIC, 1962 - which, in your original post you put down severely (putting quotes around the word "teaching" when discussing me) I teach the perfect faro TOP DOWN, and I stress the right forefinger action - which, to me, as stated way back there/then, is the important part of the whole thing.

And, you state that the idea won't work well if you have small hands. WRONG! I have small hands - and I mention how to handle it if you have small hands in my original (53 years ago!!) piece about the perfect faro. Sorry, but your "teaching" just doesn't hack it. Interesting...no? You state that you've "benefitted greatly from some of my writing". Obviously!! And thanks for saying so.

What I said is that Marlo's teaching was the best I know of. What's the best? The *teaching*. The *teaching* is the most detailed, in-depth, and thorough of which I am aware. I did not say that the handling taught was the best handling or *anything* remotely like that. Again, when I learned how to faro, I learned it from Marlo, and I learned it almost instantly given the detail of his teaching. Again, you basically teach a handling for those who already know how to do the faro, as I've already stated. What you provide isn't an analytic discussion.

Your handling in CUCM is not the one I'm currently using. I'm doing a few things differently. First, I hold the cards so the sides of the deck face up and down, while you seem to want the backs of the deck facing up and the faces down. (This view obscures a clear view of the weave. I'd like to watch my weave. And if I start sideways for an estimation cut, I might as well finish sideways too.) Second, I do not use my right forefinger to press down on the deck, causing the bottom half to spring up. In my current handling, and to simulate this, I would need to use my right forefinger to press the cards left causing them to spring to the right. But I don't think I want to simulate this portion of your handling either.

Finally, the purpose my right forefinger is serving is to assist in the positioning of the two halves of the deck. That's the same purpose your right forefinger is serving, yes. But we're using different methods to achieve that positioning, and my method works better with longer fingers and larger hands, as I use much more than the tip of my forefinger than your method requires. You can, if you like, thing of my entire right finger as creating a sideways table upon which to faro. The first full digit of my right forefinger lies along the original bottom of the deck. And once again, as I stated, this does not work well with small hands. I get my right forefinger into position while squaring the cards well (by tapping them together, another notable absence from your handling.) It is hardly the same thing you're doing in CUCM.

In short, none of your points apply. Not one. I am not wrong, I have not made any mistakes, and I have not contradicted myself in the slightest. And yes, I have switched my handling of the faro by thinking about it a fair bit in the last few days. And that's totally fine. And still, if someone wants to learn how to faro, CUCM is not the place to point them. After they learn how to faro from Ed Marlo, it'd be a fine and dandy idea to point them to your CUCM for another handling. What handling one prefers will vary on an individual basis, and I'm quite sure many do or would prefer yours. That's also fine. I won't say that my handling is objectively better than yours, but I will say it's objectively better for me. I've already shown my handling to someone else, and they instantly said it was no good for them (because their hands were too small).

Okay, fine. Forgive me, but "psychobabble" comes to mind. I'll just let whoever cares read ALL the posts in this thread - yours and mine - and let them make up their own minds.

In the meantime, I'll stick to, repeat, emphasize, point out, etc., "...over the decades literally thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, have stated, written, etc., that THEY LEARNED THE FARO FROM MY FIRST MAGIC BOOK. THEY said/stated/wrote it, not me." The "first magic book" that's being referred to is CUCM - 1962. This from literally tens of thousands of people all over the world and over all the decades even though I've said that I wrote a short piece about the faro along with short pieces on the jog shuffle and Hindu Shuffle. I never claimed it was a great instruction piece, just seems that those literally tens of thousands DO. So, up to others to decide - - -

Oh, and Mr. Rider... you may want to "tell off" the person quoted below. He's one of the many thousands that states emphatically that he learned the faro "in the first place" from that short piece of mine in CUCM, that you put down. How dare he??

Actually, my explanation of my method and my comparison of it with yours was perfectly clear and articulate. That it is is patently obvious.



Sounds good to me.



There is a division of labor in any student-teacher relationship. The better the teaching, the less student labor is required. The worse the teaching, the more the student has to teach themselves. I count teaching as better the more it moves beyond giving the student a slight push and then setting them on their own. A student who is given just a slight push and then told to figure it out themselves might still credit the teacher when they do... There has historically been (and still is) a great emphasis placed on this type of "slight push teaching" within a significant portion of the magic community. Part of its point is precisely to gate access to techniques.

What I find distinctive and valuable about Marlo's teaching in RCT is that it is not of the "slight push" variety. So if someone asks me where to find a source for learning the faro (it should be perfectly clear that I mean learning the faro when one doesn't have any kind of good idea how to do it), I'm going to point them to RCT, since there, the teacher does most of the work. If someone told me they didn't really want to be taught the faro, but just be given a slight push towards learning how to do it, so they'd have to fiddle around with it themselves for a longer time, then I'd happily point them to CUCM and let them fiddle around until they get it.

Another way of putting this is measuring the quality of teaching a technique like the faro in terms of "time to acquisition." If we compare two teaching sources A and B, and students who rely on A have a faster acquisition time than students who rely on B, that would be provisional evidence that source A is higher quality teaching. With the faro, I think a time to acquisition measure is itself almost decisive when it comes to measuring the quality of teaching sources. After one learns the faro, one can think about the handling themselves (as I did). Or one can look at other's versions of handling, such as yours! Perhaps at some point I'll put together a booklet on the faro. ;-) If I do, I'll send you a copy gratis.

Thanks anyway, but no thanks. I've had enough psychobabble to last for years.