I suspect that Mike Close's take on the invisible deck is well known by many around here, but I am surprised it doesn't get performed or talk about much, and I wonder why.

I have grown to prefer it over my gimmicked IDs, of which I own a few, for the following reasons:

1. The single required sleight is not a knuckle-buster and is well covered by misdirection and a natural gesturing of the hands.
2. The reversed card is ALWAYS dead centre.
3. A full-deck stack is maintained (save the displacement of the reversed selection), making this a great way to introduce a stack (memorized or otherwise).
4. Best of all for me, the spectator gets to handle the deck, spread it, and remove and identify the selection with her own hands, leaving the impression she handled the cards the bulk of the time (which she did).

I suppose that so many are familiar with our RS friend, but this ungimmicked take is a dazzler. I wonder if folks who know about it through Workers passed it over (as Michael suspected many might) as they fear that the prepared nature of the deck and the "move" might be caught. Frankly, with the traditional ID I am more worried about someone wanting to examine a deck that won't stand up to scrutiny. In the Close effect, the spectator DOES handle a completely normal deck.

Any thoughts on this?

Les

I am with you, but didn't like to talk about it. It is a gem and very workable - and with some fantasy, trials and errors you might also find a different handling... Jan

I've got a handling of this where it's sort of an inverted version of the Close handling. I use it quite a bit and, like you, now prefer it to the original ID. Another huge advantage is you can put more than one card together reversed in the dead center of the pack.

Steven, you did a Youtube video of your handling some months back and I can't seem to find it. Do you have a link? Thanks.

Les

I use this quite often, because I can. For walk-around performances, it allows me to save pocket space by not having to carry around an ID.

Personally, I find many "magicians" are not actually familiar with this as might be suspected.

And that's a good thing....so I have nothing further on the issue to say. Can we keep this one quiet, please?

Yes, I will do and did - for a long time already . Jan

Yes, I keep this one quiet as well, and it is great! I will say though that there are times I would rather use a normal ID - but those are for specific routines I've developed that utilize the ID in a non-traditional way. So both have their uses....but doing the classic effect I have come to prefer the ungimmicked one as well.

Les, here is the video. At the risk of repeating myself, the critical move is far better covered while standing. Since I shot this, I've come up with 3 other motivated and natural ways to do the dirty work. This is the most common use of a memdeck for me, I just love the versatility.

https://vimeo.com/94212590

The password is Doofus99

Thanks for sharing, very good handling ! Jan

Man, that's smooth! The face-down handling, and lucking out with the selections coming from the same half of the stack really made my head explode... I had forgotten how good this was!

Les

Thanks, gentlemen! In cases where the cards are in different halves, I have a 3rd person just name ANY card and that card will match halves with one or the other. Then I use equivoque to get down to the two that match and proceed as in the video.

Oh man, that's good!

Kudos to Steven. What an amaging face-down variant! I am impressed.


@Jay@

I like Ackerman's

Ackerman is the man! Les talked about Mike Close's ungimmicked ID, which, if I remember, was based on Ackerman's "Impromptu Ultra-Mental" from Las Vegas Kardma. Are you talking about that one or "Ackerman's Opener"?

Impromptu Ultra-Mental is superb for its impromptu-ness, but has the drawback of the spectator confining his choice to a few cards he is shown. Close's application of the Open Index makes it more closely confirm to the traditional gaffed version, and your ingenious way of navigating the index without viewing the faces makes it even more mysterious.

I don't even use my ID anymore. I use Michael Close variation. on this. It's been work.

Would someone who does this effect be willing to answer a few question from me via PM on this? I'm having trouble understanding the cover for the clever move.

Watch Steven's video. The move is done when he brings his hands up to flash the face card of the deck. That's it.

I have ID version with a normal deck of cards .
No memorized deck .
You can perform the routine impromptu.

I have a demo video only in german language.
I hope it's still good to see what happens in the routine .

What happens in the routine?

A spectator names a card and this is the only face down card in the deck.
The spectator turn over this card. This is his card .

OK.
In the video is to see how the routine looks .

I had no audience in the demo video .
That's why I used a red deck of cards.
In the video I cut red deck of cards (this is not card force in video) and that is the card would the spectator names.

Here is the Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQPz7aigLSU&feature=youtu.be


There are three possible handlings .
In the video I show one of this three possible handlings.


Jan Forster posted me his idea for this routine, another different handling.
Jan, I do not know if you still remember it?



dj