Hi Folks,

This is a credits/Invention question.

The third card turning over in the Vernon twisting routine - where a card face up in position three of the packet changes to a different ace that's face up in the packet.
Who's invention is that change? What was the original context?

Thanks in advance,

JonT

Hey Jonathan. I think you are somehwta mistaken about the original Vernon routine. The third ace that turns over in the routine happens after turning over the second card (straight out, not as an effect), then the cards counted through and you show the third ace is face up.

I think you are referring to the SECOND ace that turns over in the routine. The first one is shown as the only face up one using an elmsley, and immediately you follow with another Elmsley to show that the second ace is the only one face up. In other words, the first ace changes to the second ace, as you say. I do not present it that way. I keep it cosistent with the theme that the first ace turns face dwon and the second one turns face up, all at once.

Anyway, I do not know if anyone specific takes credit for this "change" as it is not so much of a change, just the genius of the Elmsley count and how it is used. I guess Vernon came up with it...

Yehuda

Yes, the face up change of a card using Elmsley's count. Has that been explored before?

Yes. Elmsley himself used it in his 'Four Card Trick' which I believe was the first routine developed with/for the count. In fact, the routine uses almost all of the applications the elmsley count can have (with it being a four-as-four count).

A quick update from Elmsley's routine: looks like he credits Roy Walton. Thanks Roy!

Hello. Jon, I think you can milk the most out of the presentation by claiming that with another "twist" one ace (the last one seen) turns face down. Then with another "twist" the next one turns face up - so it really isn't one ace changes to another. I was just discussing this with David Roth who knew the Professor, and he does the trick as well.
I think that what is at play is that if you play it as if one ace changes into another, granted...an interesting idea, you run the risk of the spectator becoming confused. Also...it extends the run-time of a great trick to just use acting and create a phase that really doesn't have to exist.
I didn't answer the actual question as to who came up with it.
And your way could be interesting to change an indifferent card to a selected card in some packet trick. Best, Gregg