The topic of I.B.M. Contest limitations have been raised in several of our monthly Ring 56 meetings. "Limitations" refer to the following:

https://www.magician.org/convention/contest

NOTICE- NO Pyrotechnics or the use of candles or sustained open flame may be used in either the Close-Up or Stage Contests. Note: The use of large amounts of confetti, (small pieces of any material -i.e. silk, cotton, foil, etc.) which can be caught in air conditioner uptake, sand, or glitter is also prohibited. Any violation of these criteria will result in immediate disqualification.

At one point, smoke devices (including misters) were also prohibited but seemingly they have been added back.

The concern is that this is impacting the style of magic which can be done and thereby lessoning diversity of acts. If we think back to some of the most innovative contest acts, many used items which are now banned: Fantasio Candles, vanishing torches, flash sting/cotton/paper, Sands of Egypt, cut ribbons in silk fountains, flash pots with grand illusions, etc. And these items are still popular in other venues such as television competitions.

Is it be possible to reverse this trend? Or will the restrictions continue to expand? For example, there has been activist pressure to ban magic acts using animals in the past. Will that be the next ban?

What is the I.B.M.'s decision making process for these limitations? Has the experience over the last ten years since these restrictions started to take hold been reviewed? Has it impacted contestant involvement? Would appreciate any information regarding the process which has been gone through.

I think the restrictions are based on the venue (hotel meeting space - not a theater) and is also for clean-up between acts. Last year, I believe it may have affected the Chinese team. They had pyro and confetti. They didn't get DQ'ed. But for the 2nd round, it was sans pyro and confetti.

I manage conferences as part of my non-magic job, with contracts at practically all the U.S. conference/hotel chains and many independents. Outside of one classic theater, I have never found a venue with a blanket fire restriction for all performances, even the small ones. The conference venues are used to hosting music acts, new product launches, etc. using pyrotechnics beyond what we magicians do (ok, maybe not Franz Harary...he knows pyro!). But, in some circumstances a local permit is needed and you do need to have a fire crew on hand during performances (usually one or two dedicated persons backstage with an appropriate fire extinguisher at the ready whenever fire is in play). So there are legitimate operational concerns.

This said, I was told by a recent former IBM President that the main decision factor on pyro was cost on the event insurance policy. But I didn't understand that as several professional hired acts used fire on the same stage while competitors were banned from competition. So they had to have had the proper legal and safety infrastructure in place for the show. And they could require each act to have fire insurance liability coverage if they use fire. I am insured as both a magician and a fire entertainer.

Confetti and water is a different matter as there are definitely cleanup issues involved. At the 2022 Atlanta IBM Convention, small confetti was banned in part because of the HVAC system. And, yes, even the limited amounts of "bigger" confetti required staff to bring out the brooms between acts.



Yes. That was The Wushuong. Nice "theatrical" magic act in the flavor of movies/television programs such as Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Snow Sword Stride. I am glad they weren't disqualified. But it brings up the question if it was fair to the other competitors for them to advance while breaking the technical rules while the other acts were hampered because they couldn't us pyro, etc. in the qualifiers. Ultimately, The Wushuong won the Adult Stage Award of Merit, and deservedly so. But that begs the question from the other side, if The Wushuong were not forced to hastily swap effects, could they have won 1st place? Maybe not because Artem Shchukin had an exceptional act and executed perfectly.

Another side of this is that the acts are now putting in more lighting flash and strobing effects to compensate for the other options being restricted. This now means that epileptic warnings are needed for the audience.

It would be nice to have an independent panel review this topic which can look at it from all angles. There is no easy answer. It may come down that an act-by-act technical approval like has been done by FISM is the only way this could be done. And that may be impractical for the IBM contests. But maybe there could be a little movement back? For example, Abbott's Magic contest allows for the use of open flame and fog machines with technical approval. Open flame would at least allow the return of manipulation candles, fickle devices, etc. And smoke vapor devices would at least bring that effect back into the mix.

But maybe I am just getting old and disappointed in the disappearance of some really great, exciting magic with candles, cigarettes, animals, etc...