#39482 - 06/12/06 08:18 AM
Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I'm looking for a description of the Stevens Cull. I know that this cull was written up in 'Revelations', unfortunately I don't have a copy and it's long OOP.
I was informed that there maybe a scant description in 'The Classic Magic Of Larry Jennings', can somone offer some clues as to where it may be found, or indeed information on the cull itself....
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39483 - 06/12/06 08:20 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Ask Glenn Bishop, he invented the cull after all.
Euan
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39485 - 06/12/06 10:04 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
pduffie
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 37
Loc: UK
|
The Riffle Shuffle special issues of Epilogue are not in the L & L reprint. Fulves did not consider these part of the run of the magazine.
The Stevens control is also in Vernon's More Inner Secrets of Card Magic (complete with photo). But there is no mention of Dad Stevens!
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39486 - 06/12/06 11:05 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Also don't mix up the Stevens Cull and Stevens Control. You can also do a keyword search HERE to find further sources for both.
Denis
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39487 - 06/12/06 11:28 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The easiest place to get it is Andrew Wimhurst's "Down Under Deals".
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39488 - 06/12/06 02:25 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hi Denis,
The Stevens Control and the Stevens Cull are based on exactly the same method of blocking off. The only difference I know of is that the blocked off card is 'controlled' by cutting it to the top whereas the culled card is riffled to the top whilst spotting the next. Persoanlly, I think these terms can be used interchangeably ie The Stevens Cull Control. Hope this helps.
Regards,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39489 - 06/12/06 03:06 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
With no disrespect to the previous post, the Stevens Control and the Stevens Riffle Cull are very different in both technique and application. They deserved independent study and should not be viewed as one and the same.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39490 - 06/12/06 03:35 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
For those of us who don't know about the differences, where precisely is there a description discussing the difference between the two?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39491 - 06/12/06 03:58 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Drey:
There is no source that I am aware of that discusses and examines the differences in much detail. I am working on one at present but have several other projects - a Herb Zarrow book and a Paul Fox book - that I must complete before releasing information and technical notes related to Dad Stevens. I spend an inordinate amount of time on both the Stevens Control and the Riffle Cull, and so do religiously every day. It took me a very long time, for example, to learn why Vernon was so dismissive of Marlo's Riffle Shuffle technique. I believe I now know why and also where Marlo missed the mark. All I can say at this time is that both moves are very sophisticated and it will take me some time to detail it so it registers. I must also confess that I have probably delayed this project because I believe it is targeted for such a limited audience. I mean, other than the few obsessive people who tune into this post, who is really interested in this kind of nunace and work? It can't be a very large audience. I'm sorry that I can't be of more assistance to you at this particular time.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39493 - 06/12/06 10:12 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
How does Jennings method compare to the "thanks to zarrow" sadowitz offering?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39494 - 06/12/06 10:15 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
There is no source that I am aware of that discusses and examines the differences in much detail. I am working on one at present but have several other projects
Keep me posted, I'd be interested when you finally complete it.
I spend an inordinate amount of time on both the Stevens Control and the Riffle Cull, and so do religiously every day.
Sounds interesting, I'd love to hear your insights.
It took me a very long time, for example, to learn why Vernon was so dismissive of Marlo's Riffle Shuffle technique. I believe I now know why and also where Marlo missed the mark.
Now this I hadn't heard, would you mind sharing, even in vague terms? I must admit, I'm not terribly well read on the subject but my thoughts are/have been, generally this. Marlo's culling technique (as described in the Marlo Magazine Volume 6, which of his material that I'm familiar with is really the only major source worth looking at), is easier than the more conventional blocking off technique of the Stevens cull, however, visually, it's less deceptive (provided that you're looking for it of course). I also felt Marlo failed to make really good use of his own method in the complete release upon spotting the card (if you've read the material you'll know what I mean).
As I said, I'm not familiar with the writing on the Stevens material, unfortunately I haven't been able to procure a copy of the Fulves manuscripts (I actually won an ebay auction for the final one, but the seller never responded), so I can't comment on that work, but in my experience the Marlo writing on the subject is very lacking in sophistication. He really doesn't have much in the way of advice on things like increasing the odds, the oh so difficult process of speeding the shuffles up a lot (though based on his demonstrations in Prime Time Marlo his shuffles certainly weren't unbearably slow), locating multiple cards and control as you push the packets together.
I suppose if I'm to be fair, considering the wealth and diversity of material he published he could hardly devote a huge amount of time to riffle shuffle practice and riffle shuffle technique is difficult. I would have been interested in seeing Scarne work with it as very few people seem terribly well versed in culling techniques.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39495 - 06/13/06 05:29 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
I saw Jennings do the combined Stevens Cull and Control one day at his home. He took my shuffled deck and, in the course of riffle shuffling it, located, culled, and controlled the four Aces. It was quite something to see.
And it all looked effortless--not the heavy-handed fiddling that passes for riffle shuffle work with some groups.
How many riffle shuffles did it take him to control all four?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39497 - 06/13/06 11:16 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hi dben,
No offence taken, quite the opposite in fact. I am a keen Stevens riffle culler and have Fulves Blocking Off manuscript which is the only work I know to apply his own method and that of Scarne, similar to Stevens to a number of magical card effects. I would be most supportive and appreciative of your efforts to write a book or article on the Stevens, both the control and the cull. I had always assumed they were essentially based on the same principle. Please, please let us know when you intend to begin this project.
Best Wishes,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39498 - 06/13/06 11:26 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Thanks for your note. The project has begun. Finishing it, however, is another matter.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39499 - 06/13/06 11:50 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Will details on the cull/control be appearing in 'Jennings Takes It Hard'?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39500 - 06/13/06 12:19 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
After Peter Duffie's helpful comment, thanks Peter, I dusted off my copy of Vernon's Inner Card Trilogy. Blow me if the Stevens Control is described. The handling is a little different to the culling method and I can think if more straight forward ways of cutting a selection from forth now to the top of the deck without the control. But it is interesting all the same. Many thanks,
Regards,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39502 - 06/14/06 12:53 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Wasn't Jon Racherbaumer working on a complete Riffle Shuffle book that was going to include all the Marlo and Fulves ideas or something of the sort?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39503 - 06/14/06 08:43 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
RE RIFFLE SHUFFLE WORK:
Yes, I’m in the process (an arduous one) of examining Marlo’s “take” on Riffle Shuffle mastery and (finally) RIFFLE SHUFFLE FINALE will be on my Website soon. The challenge is still about sorting out what has been published and then adding what HAS NOT been published…and then to draw important distinctions and clarifications. There is also a huge difference between the magic arena and the gaming table regarding applications and techniques.
Marlo was frequently accused on “lifting” ideas re technique. This is an exaggerated claim because he was excluded from the “work” being shared by guys such as Vernon, Miller, Daley and others…in fact, this “work” was kept fairly sub rosa. They were even reluctant to tip the Zarrow stuff…Marlo worked most of his stuff out on his own. I suspect that most of the heat Marlo eventually received was because he released (although it was via private manuscripts of limited circulation) "inside stuff" re Shuffle Work…even if it was the result of his own experimentation and research. This is also why there was a great deal of contention and criticism of Marlo’s own stuff.
One of my early forays into trying to understand the background of certain techniques was expressed in an essay titled “Getting Lost in the Shuffle.” Unfortunately, this did not result in dialogue or further explorations of the subject. Instead, it degenerated into a pissing contest, followed by lots of counter-productive tirades.
This will likely continue, even after RIFFLE SHUFFLE MASTERY is released.
Onward…
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39504 - 06/14/06 09:00 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by dben:
With no disrespect to the previous post, the Stevens Control and the Stevens Riffle Cull are very different in both technique and application. They deserved independent study and should not be viewed as one and the same.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39505 - 06/14/06 11:22 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
In my opinion, to say that merely the application is different as they both involve "blocking off" is to simplify things too much. Such simplification also makes it harder to master each technique because you tend to believe they are the same when, in fact, the technique of blocking off in each instance - and the strategies one uses to accelerate the blocking off process - are completely different in both concept and execution. To each his own.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39506 - 06/14/06 02:45 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Thanks Jon.
In my opinion, to say that merely the application is different as they both involve "blocking off" is to simplify things too much.
This is a point of interest, I was reading an article someone wrote recently regarding this view of the Steven's control or cull. Basically he mentioned that any form of blocking off seems to have degenerated into being called the Steven's cull, or control (most people don't know the difference or know that there is a difference). While the process of blocking off was not the Steven's cull (in his opinion and there's plenty of reason to agree with this assertion), but that how you handle the blocking off was what constituted the Steven's cull or control. In other words, blocking off in itself is just that, it's blocking off, what you do with that is what changes things. This makes sense especially in light of the fact that techniques involving blocking off existed prior to the publication of the Steven's cull (again, I don't really know the difference between the two, but the method of dealing with the block is actually very nice, arguably the best I've seen, though traditionally it remains somewhat limited).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39507 - 06/15/06 11:46 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I would also like to thank Jon for updating us on a difficult but potentially fascinating work on riffle shuffle technique.
With regards to the Stevens cull and the Stevens control, in fact the control described by Lewis Ganson is different in technique to the cull. In fact there seem to be a number of variation with blocking off in general. The work I am familiar with is Fulves 'Blocking Off' manuscript and the Stevens description by Wimhurst in 'Down Under Deals'. I believe he was taught by Darwin Ortiz. In the Fulves manuscript, the method for pushing the two riffled packs together is very different from the Wimhurst description which I find to be superior and more in keeping with a general riffle action. This in itself marks out a difference. Fulves blocking off technique is also different and enables the target card to be cut staight to the bottom. I have also found that the Stevens cull can be adapted so that the target card is cut to the bottom. However, this involves some extra manoevering at least from the way I have developed it. The Fulves method is harder than the Stevens as it requires even faster reactions. However, using this method to practice is a good way to speed up the Stevens even though its extremely demanding. Other subtleties include things like speed and consistency of the riffle including the size of the breif, tracking other target cards to be culled in later shuffles, different ways of splitting the cards, how to handle awkward distribution etc. Apart from Fulves, I do not think I have read about any of these and other related ideas. You just have to find out for yourself hoping that the development is not fundamentally flawed. As you can tell, I am most eager for the work of dben and Jon Racherbaumer to reach fruition.
Regards,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39508 - 06/15/06 06:09 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
With regards to the Stevens cull and the Stevens control, in fact the control described by Lewis Ganson is different in technique to the cull.
Where's the description by Lewis Ganson found? Is it still in print?
The work I am familiar with is Fulves 'Blocking Off' manuscript and the Stevens description by Wimhurst in 'Down Under Deals'. I believe he was taught by Darwin Ortiz. In the Fulves manuscript, the method for pushing the two riffled packs together is very different from the Wimhurst description which I find to be superior and more in keeping with a general riffle action.
I've played around with four primary variations and when it comes to the act of actually pushing the cards together I definitely have to assert that the method described in Down Under Deals is the best (most natural and involves the least fumbling), this being with the exception of a couple other non-standard techniques that offer a slight advantage over the Wimhurst method, though certainly include their own flaws.
This in itself marks out a difference. Fulves blocking off technique is also different and enables the target card to be cut staight to the bottom. I have also found that the Stevens cull can be adapted so that the target card is cut to the bottom. However, this involves some extra manoevering at least from the way I have developed it.
I'm not familiar with the Fulves method, but I adapt the method described in Down Under Deals to control the card to the bottom as well. I actually find a much more practical approach makes general sense for the process of blocking off in general
The Fulves method is harder than the Stevens as it requires even faster reactions. However, using this method to practice is a good way to speed up the Stevens even though its extremely demanding.
You seem to be implying the difference lies in what point you decide to block-off.
I'm actually surprised a lot more hasn't been published to improve the speed of both stacking and culling, as the brute force approach just seems ridiculous. I also haven't seen anything in print on culling multiple cards per shuffle, which seems like a logically superior approach since so much effort is involved in each shuffle, it just makes sense to cut down on the number of shuffles. It seems as though there's a lot of renewed interest in the subject though so we might end up seeing a wealth of material come to the market, hopefully it involves continued improvements on technique rather than simply reiteration of old technique.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39509 - 06/15/06 11:43 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hello Drey,
The Stevens control is described at the end of chapter 7 of Dai Vernon's More Inner Secrets of Card Magic. Peter Duffie above has given the correct reference. I'm not sure what the applications of this move are however and it certainly does not seem as useful as the cull. But then again I have only just started trying it out.
With regard to multiple culls, I highly doubt there is a useable technique for this during a riffle. The work on the Stevens Cull and similar is likely to be around strategies and techniques for more effective culling within the framework of the basic riffle cull method.
As a matter of interest, in conversation with some cardsharks, riffle culling is not really used very much due to the enormous amount of work needed to bring it up to professional speed. This is compounded by the combined tells of having to burn the deck during the cull and the need to employ a high riffle. Apparently there are much simpler, easier and more economical ways of culling at the card table in certain situations. Also in card magic, it seems the applications are very few and far between. I have noticed that at least some of Fulves applications can be achieved using simpler sleights rather than the agony of the riffle cull.
For me, the 'mystique' of the Stevens Cull is the ability to riffle up three and four of a kind from an apparently fair table riffle in real time as it were. Realising this dream however, seems to be a life long project.
Regards,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39510 - 06/16/06 12:33 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The Stevens control is described at the end of chapter 7 of Dai Vernon's More Inner Secrets of Card Magic. Peter Duffie above has given the correct reference. I'm not sure what the applications of this move are however and it certainly does not seem as useful as the cull. But then again I have only just started trying it out.
I'll have to look into it, thank you.
With regard to multiple culls, I highly doubt there is a useable technique for this during a riffle. The work on the Stevens Cull and similar is likely to be around strategies and techniques for more effective culling within the framework of the basic riffle cull method.
I have three or four techniques I use to accomplish this in different ways within the framework of a basic riffle cull method. Email me if you're interested in discussing methods.
As a matter of interest, in conversation with some cardsharks, riffle culling is not really used very much due to the enormous amount of work needed to bring it up to professional speed.
In my experience what is used and what is usable depends in large part on the audience and environment. There is for example a monumental difference between cheating at a casino and cheating in a private game, high stakes or not. There is again a monumental difference between cheating in a high stakes game and a casual low stakes game. Structure then becomes relevent (do you have a fixed dealer or rotate, how familiar are the other players with cards (in other words do they fumble cards, do they overhand shuffle, riffle shuffle in the hands or on a table, how do they deal), are they cautious, do they care a lot about cutting the deck, do they pay attention a lot during the deal, during the cut, while checking the cards, do they use new decks each time, do they use standard decks or variable decks etc. etc. etc.) and dictates accordingly. I know in magic it seems like the world of gambling is granted this esoteric prestige, veiled as though it is the greatest test for a card worker, but the reality is quite different. It's amazing what you can get away with in the majority of games, particularly relatively low stakes casual games. That isn't to knock what you've said or been told, I'm sure it's totally valid within the context of certain situations, but it does depend on the situation. In talking to people who cheat for money (I've cheated on numerous occasions but not for money), I've heard a number of common threads. Generally, riffle culling is minimized for a few reasons. First, complex riffle work is unnecessary, as we both know, culling four of a kind or a royal flush, which is what magicians like to do because it's impressive, is just plain stupid at the card table, you want to win without drawing attention to yourself so you cull lower hands. Lower hands are easier to cull so they don't require complex riffle work. Second, most people aren't that good at it and don't want to take time to learn. Third, and partly a reason for the second point, other easier methods (discard culling being a big one) are easier and sufficiently effective. Thus, you might cull one card in a three of a kind hand, which doesn't take nearly as much heat as culling four of a kind in four shuffles or however many the case might be. That's my experience with what people have told me anyway. Personally, I always relished in the card control and since I wasn't cheating people for money, I often preferred to make it overt (not always, but some of the time), hence the royal flushes and four of a kind hands were common.
This is compounded by the combined tells of having to burn the deck during the cull and the need to employ a high riffle.
Burning the deck is always a bad one, I find you can minimize the high riffle sufficiently by adjusting the technique. Probably not enough for work in a casino, I tend to think you're generally crazy to cheat there, but for more private games. I suppose it depends on one's level of refinement though.
Apparently there are much simpler, easier and more economical ways of culling at the card table in certain situations.
Indeed, especially if you're just looking for a slight advantage. I once used a method where the only thing I did was peeked the identity of the top few cards so I had some idea what my opponents were holding. It doesn't win you every hand, but it gives you a slight advantage that pans out nicely when played over the long term.
Also in card magic, it seems the applications are very few and far between. I have noticed that at least some of Fulves applications can be achieved using simpler sleights rather than the agony of the riffle cull.
Again, I'm not familiar with the Fulves methods, but yeah, I don't personally use riffle culling in magic except for the possible exception of gambling routines and demonstrations. Actually, I was noticing recently that in spite of all the complex card controls we learn (side steals, passes, one-handed steals and controls, multiple shifts etc.) I use almost none of them in practice. There are much more elegant and economic methods of achieving the same thing, often in a more deceptive manner, a double lift being a simple example of it. Added to which, most of the best effects, or at least a large percentage of them, don't require any such card controls, but are more about displays, palming etc. Triumph, Out of This World, Twisting the Aces, A Dream of Aces (MacDonald Aces), The Color Changing Deck, Card Warp, the ambitious card, turn and restored card, various mind reading effects, Do as I Do etc. etc. etc. require minimal use of controls such as passes, double undercuts, side steals etc. Even the likes of Travelers is achieveable without it in many cases.
For me, the 'mystique' of the Stevens Cull is the ability to riffle up three and four of a kind from an apparently fair table riffle in real time as it were. Realising this dream however, seems to be a life long project.
My goal was always two four of a kind hands, being able to deal my opponent four kings and myself or a friend four aces from a random order deck. Easier said than done, depending on the number of shuffles, but always a fun goal.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39511 - 06/16/06 12:56 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hello Drey,
Excellent post. I will PM you regarding the multiple culling idea. As for culling the double duke....good heavens, I have no idea how you could possibly manage this cold from a random deck. Very impressive. Anyway, I'll be in touch.
Regards,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39512 - 06/16/06 01:19 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
As an addendum to my previous post, Fulves manuscript 'Riffle Shuffle Controls...Part 2 Blocking Off' describes Scarne's feat of cutting the aces for the gangster Arnold Rothstein. I think he uses the preface from 'Scarne on Cards' as the source. He goes on to describe a session with Scarne in 1974 in which 'the man' revealed his method for the first time. Fulves was full of admiration for Scarnes handling of the riffle cull and thought it the best and most deceptive he had seen. Scarne's method described here is pretty much the Stevens Cull but with a Fulves like handling of the cards being pushed together. It also involves part of the pack being over the edge of the table which appears unnecessary to me. Its all very fascinating to read about however.
Regards,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39513 - 06/16/06 01:54 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
r paul wilson
Registered: 01/20/08
Posts: 19
Loc: Scotland
|
I've spent over twenty years obsessing over the Steven's Cull and have found many interesting ways to achieve the effect Vernon described.
I have found several variations on the technique itself and have combined it with other techniques with varying success. Steve Forte suggested one such marriage of methods resulting in a Stevens cull that leaves the deck in the same order (apart from the cards you culled out).
The big problem with the Steven's cull is that you simply have to look at the deck as you shuffle. Lots of honest card players do this anyway but rarely with that same look of concentration or their tongue projecting awkwardly from the side of their mouth.
It is also near impossible to perform the cull at speed with any degree of accuracy.
My research has thrown up some interesting approaches to this problem.
One is that I can perform the cull quickly (when I'm in stroke) without the need for accuracy.
This idea lead to a non-cull cull - where the cards were riffled, a card located and then controlled as the next card was found - WITHOUT the need to riffle off a block during the shuffle.
All of this is to say that there's a lot of fascinating ideas to discover with this cull but I think Jerry Sadowitz published one of the most interesting.
He called in the Major D'Alby Brag Stack and it appeared in The Crimp. Jerry created a method for locating three cards of the same value during ONE shuffle. He was then able to look away for the next two shuffles (i.e. not stare at the deck) while bringing all three cards to the top.
I later published two variations on the Sadowitz shuffle in MAGIC magazine (with no illustrations to discourage the casual reader).
In one variation you are able to locate and stack three cards for any number of hands and to any hand called for. In other words: You take a shuffled deck - shuffle once as a spectaor names any number of players. shuffle again as they decide which hand wins. Shuffle a third time and deal - trips to the chosen hand.
The other variation dispensed with two slip cuts from Jerry's sequence, looked much fairer and scanned the deck in sequence making it possible to find the fourth card in most cases.
If you look through Racherbaumer's columns in Magic you should find it easily, though I have written up a more in-depth (illustrated) manuscript that should appear online soon.
Jerry also published some interesting cull work in Thanks To Zarrow (he later had to credit Dingle for the idea as it was buried in an obscure DD book). As Jerry rightly points out, as magicians we can decide on our own conditions when performing and, using the technique explored in his Zarrow booklet, Jerry teaches how to move selected cards using the Zarrow shuffle.
Jason England also re-invented the Dingle concept resulting in an excellent Ace cutting sequence, which he featured on our unreal Work DVD.
P
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39514 - 06/16/06 11:14 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hello Paul,
Thanks for a great post. I feel like a man staggering around in a Dad Stevens desert only to stumble on an oasis of ideas. I will be one of the first in the queue for your new manuscript. Your description of the strain of culling is hilarious by the way. The only other tell is the bulging eyes. With regard to tempo, it was very reassurring to read that culling at speed is almost impossible. I spent a good few months with a metronome trying to complete each riffle in one second, the Fulves recommendation. What a farce that was. Still, I also very much like the ideas of Jerry Sadowitz in 'Thanks to Zarrow' and Jasons'performance in the unreal work was so smooth that I didnt recognise the method until sometime after. Its an excellent DVD in my opinion and one I often refer back to.
Regards
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39515 - 06/16/06 11:22 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
As an addendum to my previous post, Fulves manuscript 'Riffle Shuffle Controls...Part 2 Blocking Off' describes Scarne's feat of cutting the aces for the gangster Arnold Rothstein. I think he uses the preface from 'Scarne on Cards' as the source. He goes on to describe a session with Scarne in 1974 in which 'the man' revealed his method for the first time. Fulves was full of admiration for Scarnes handling of the riffle cull and thought it the best and most deceptive he had seen. Scarne's method described here is pretty much the Stevens Cull but with a Fulves like handling of the cards being pushed together. It also involves part of the pack being over the edge of the table which appears unnecessary to me. Its all very fascinating to read about however.
Thanks, too bad I missed out on that one, Scarne's riffle work was always a subject of interest for me. I can achieve the Scarne ace cutting using various methods with a borrowed deck, but what always interested me more was his story about cheating the card sharks and apparently dealing up one complex double duke after another. No matter how you do it that's got to be some intensive work there, I always found that inspiring.
R Paul Wilson
The big problem with the Steven's cull is that you simply have to look at the deck as you shuffle. Lots of honest card players do this anyway but rarely with that same look of concentration or their tongue projecting awkwardly from the side of their mouth.
Indeed, I think comfort is part of that. Also, in my experience studying martial arts (at least certain martial arts) helps with this because you learn to look at one point while picking up others with your peripheral vision which allows you to be much more casual. In a sense you might liken it a bit to some of the exercises Robert Houdin practiced with juggling, and I'd suspect similar exercises would help. I'll have to go pick up some balls and give it a try.
It is also near impossible to perform the cull at speed with any degree of accuracy.
At speed is always an interesting issue because there isn't a guarranteed speed, except perhaps in a casino. What I'm saying is, not everyone shuffles at the same speed. I've spent a fair amount of time timing shuffles to get some idea what works within reason, what's fast, what's slow etc. In my experience, a one second riffle is pretty fast, anything faster is extremely fast. The point being, it's unnecessary to shuffle that fast even though some people get caught up doing that. This makes either culling or stacking for that matter extremely difficult if not impossible. Yes, Darwin Ortiz has some ungodly riffle stacking work, but we can't all be Darwin and I don't know about the rest of you, I'm not interested in putting in that much work to learn so other methods or a slightly slower pace is necessary. Frankly, shuffling using two second riffles isn't at all suspicious (again, if you're in a casino environment that's quite another matter, but I've already stated my opinion on using material like this in a casino). In reality, though it's not so desirable, you can get away with three second riffles, so you have some flexibility. A huge part of it, in my experience also doesn't concern the speed of the shuffle nearly as much as your focus (as you elluded to with your comment about burning the deck). If you're very casual etc. you can get away with a lot more than if your focus is off. In fact, one of the few cases where I was actually caught it wasn't the speed nearly so much as my attention that gave me away. Stories of Walter Scott illustrate this quite well.
Generally, in my view, riffle shuffle speed is much like false dealing. You'll never be able to shuffle as fast while culling as you can when performing a fair riffle shuffle, I find its pretty much an impossibility, but then again, you don't have to. Some people rush their regular shuffles and there's no harm in slowing the shuffles down a bit. Just as you adjust your regular dealing grip so it matches your false dealing grip, you can adjust your regular riffle shuffles to make you false (stacking, culling etc.) appear more natural. Keeping in mind that the key to natural often has a lot more to do with consistency and atttitude than it does with the actual method (within reason of course).
One is that I can perform the cull quickly (when I'm in stroke) without the need for accuracy.
I'm not sure what your method is, but I do something very similar.
This idea lead to a non-cull cull - where the cards were riffled, a card located and then controlled as the next card was found - WITHOUT the need to riffle off a block during the shuffle.
That's an interesting idea, I have a number of variable approaches I use on the subject, but blocking off has remained the most reliable of them.
He called in the Major D'Alby Brag Stack and it appeared in The Crimp. Jerry created a method for locating three cards of the same value during ONE shuffle. He was then able to look away for the next two shuffles (i.e. not stare at the deck) while bringing all three cards to the top.
Sounds interesting, I'll have to look into that, do you know what issue of The Crimp that was in? My typical approach to the situation has, as an alternative been, instead of locating three then not looking for the next shuffle, to cull all three, or at least two at once, thereby minimizing the number of shuffles and using the next shuffles to stack when you don't need to look.
I later published two variations on the Sadowitz shuffle in MAGIC magazine (with no illustrations to discourage the casual reader).
Do you have any source where I could find a copy of those?
In one variation you are able to locate and stack three cards for any number of hands and to any hand called for. In other words: You take a shuffled deck - shuffle once as a spectaor names any number of players. shuffle again as they decide which hand wins. Shuffle a third time and deal - trips to the chosen hand.
That in itself doesn't sound like anything terribly special, but if you can do that without looking after the first shuffle that's quite nice.
The other variation dispensed with two slip cuts from Jerry's sequence, looked much fairer and scanned the deck in sequence making it possible to find the fourth card in most cases.
Still without looking after the first shuffle?
If you look through Racherbaumer's columns in Magic you should find it easily, though I have written up a more in-depth (illustrated) manuscript that should appear online soon.
Keep us posted, I'm sure I'm not alone in my interest.
Jerry also published some interesting cull work in Thanks To Zarrow (he later had to credit Dingle for the idea as it was buried in an obscure DD book). As Jerry rightly points out, as magicians we can decide on our own conditions when performing and, using the technique explored in his Zarrow booklet, Jerry teaches how to move selected cards using the Zarrow shuffle.
I've heard good things about the Sadowitz method in Thanks to Zarrow, but I've also heard you need to know where the cards are initially which to me defeats a considerable purpose in the method, though it certainly has applications of its own. As mentioned earlier, I don't think the applications of riffle culling in magic are terribly wide which makes it more of a novelty item or demonstration item than anything. Though if you can achieve great effects with a riffle cull, more power to you. Generally, I avoid shuffling the deck myself in most situations, preferring to let the spectators shuffle it when it needs to be shuffled. I've used the Zarrow shuffle quite extensively as a means of culling, it's nice and offers a lot of benefits over regular shuffle. Of course one must acknowledge that it remains a Zarrow shuffle, which is in part a drawback, but still, very useful.
Thanks for your insights, they are greatly appreciated.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39516 - 06/17/06 04:13 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by Paul Hayward:
As an addendum to my previous post, Fulves manuscript 'Riffle Shuffle Controls...Part 2 Blocking Off'...
Faro & Riffle Technique
Gambler's Third Lesson
Riffle Shuffle Control
Riffle Shuffle Controls - Part Two: Blocking Off
Riffle Shuffle Methods
Riffle Shuffle Set-Ups
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Part I
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Part II
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Part III
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Preliminary Notes on Part I
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Preliminary Notes on Part II
Setting Up Exercises
Are there more manuscripts by Karl Fulves devoted exclusively to this topic?
Denis
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39517 - 06/17/06 04:50 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by Denis Behr:
Are there more manuscripts by Karl Fulves devoted exclusively to this topic?
The answer is "yes, but not many"...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39518 - 06/18/06 12:41 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Faro & Riffle Technique
Gambler's Third Lesson
Riffle Shuffle Control
Riffle Shuffle Controls - Part Two: Blocking Off
Riffle Shuffle Methods
Riffle Shuffle Set-Ups
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Part I
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Part II
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Part III
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Preliminary Notes on Part I
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Preliminary Notes on Part II
Setting Up Exercises
Thanks for the listing, would you mind listing briefly the topics covered? I seem to recall that Riffle Shuffle Technique Part 1 was devoted to the Zarrow shuffle, Part 2 was devoted to the Steven's cull, what about part 3? Also, what was the difference between Preliminary Notes volumes and the volumes themselves? What's "Gambler's Third Lesson" about? I've never heard of that one.
Is "Riffle Shuffle Controls - Part Two: Blocking Off" still the most recent of them?
I found the answer to my question in the bibliography on page 205 of "Blocking Off" :-)
Out of curiosity, what are they?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39519 - 06/18/06 03:19 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Ok... I take the time to type what Fulves wrote in his bibliography.....
Fulves lists three booklets in his bibliography that are entirely on the faro shuffle and don't really fit the topic in my opinion (Faro Possibilities, Bonfeld's Faro Concepts, The Return Trip). The riffle shuffle manuscripts are in chronological order:
Faro & Riffle Technique
Faro Transforms, Gray Codes, Interlocking Stacks, Displacements, Locating the Aces, Triple Faro, Mechanical Controls, The Gray Liar, Unit Transpo, The Interrogation Technique, Block Transfer, Negative Block Transfer, Double Transfer, Stripper Controls, routines by Zavis, Walton, Neale
Riffle Shuffle Set-Ups
A riffle shuffle set-up is one which produces controlled results even though the spectator gives the deck an honest riffle shuffle. Contributors include Marlo, Gardner, Hudson, Johnsson, Walton, Schmidt, Finnell, Johnson, Sarles, Krenzel, Jordan, Thompson Jr.
Gambler's Third Lesson
Card stacking demo which gives the spectator a good hand and the dealer an even better hand.
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Preliminary Notes to Part One
contains definitions of terms, continuous push-thru, modified Zarrow Full Deck Control, Block Transfer Shuffles, shuffles problems.
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Part One
is devoted to Zarrow's Full Deck Control, with contributions from Walton, Southall, Dingle, plus the Zarrow Transfer Shuffle.
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Preliminary Notes to Part Two
contains Cop From The Shuffle, Tabled Deck Controls, a discussion of blocking off, The Fake Insertion, and Derek Dingle's Roll Over Aces.
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Part Two
is devoted to the Dad Stevens Control, with contributions from Braue, Vernon, and Jennings ('Gambler's Aces').
Riffle Shuffle Technique - Part Three
opens with Avis' notes on Daley's Strip Out Shuffle, Gardner on the Daley red/black shuffle, Bush's description of Oeink's false shuffle, Vernon's Diamond Mental, and Avis on the Zarrow shuffle. The next chapter deals with Run-Up Systems (Searle's 'Las Vegas Shuffles,' Avis on Dr. Elliott's run-ups, Harry Green's one shuffle stacking, and Walton's double ended run up). There is a chapter on the overhand shuffle systems of Jim Wheeler, Avis and Dan E. Mayers, a chapter on block transfer shuffles, and a chapter on the restacking problem.
Color Capture
A discussion of riffle shuffle set-ups, including the Diagonal Rleationship, Nexto, Memory Mix, Chain of Events, Smart Modern, Shuffle DIagrams, Scribble Shuffles, Reverse Riffle Shuffles.
Riffle Shuffle Methods
Scarne's Shuffle Control, Any Named Ace, Tropp's Cop, False Shuffles (Erdnase, Hilliard, Larsen & Wright, Victor, Sarles), shuffle tricks.
Block Transfer Mathematics
Advertised but never released. An extract formed the chapter on the restacking problem in Riffle Shuffle Technique III.
Riffle Shuffle Control
Nearly self-working control that starts with two halves of the deck riffled together but not squared. Text includes Double Selection, Riffle Placement, Mathematical Triumph, Perfect Speller, with contributions from Robertson, Swinford, Rosenthal and Tropp.
Shuffle Off
Commentary on some of Marlo's claims re the so-called Shank Shuffle.
Riffle Shuffle Controls - Part One
is entitled Setting Up Exercises; a treatise on run-up systems, and includes chapters on Hold Backs, The Even Riffle, Drop Offs, Pre-Established Breaks, Shuffle Controls (Zarrow Faro Shuffle, Perfect Riffle Shuffle, Speed Shuffling) and a chapter on advanced shuffle work.
Riffle Shuffle Controls - Part Two
deals with blocking off and includes chapters on The Riffle Glimpse, Blocking Off Defined, More Block Controls, Card Effects, Cull/Stock Shuffles, No Breaks/ No Looking, Cut Controls and Gambling, Numerous routines by Scarne.
Puuh... That's is.
Concerning your question on the difference between the Preliminary Notes and the actual parts: The first two parts are a few pages in the design of a single issue of Epilogue but the preliminary notes and part three are thicker booklets and stand on their own. The pages are numbered from the first preliminary notes to part three which ends with page 201.
Denis
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39520 - 06/18/06 11:36 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Thanks very much Denis, it's greatly appreciated.
Paul H
It also involves part of the pack being over the edge of the table which appears unnecessary to me. Its all very fascinating to read about however.
That actually makes sense on reflection to avoid a tip off, though I suppose it creates another and the solution isn't the only one, interesting idea though, I wish I'd thought of it.
As for culling the double duke....good heavens, I have no idea how you could possibly manage this cold from a random deck.
I don't think it's that much of a problem, it's just a question of how fast and in how many shuffles. Even Marlo had a section in the Marlo Magazine Volume 6 I believe that examined the concept, but he used a relatively high number of shuffles and didn't approach it very systematically.
Talk to you later.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39521 - 06/18/06 12:07 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by Drey:
Even Marlo had a section in the Marlo Magazine Volume 6 I believe
Denis
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39522 - 06/21/06 08:53 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hi Denis,
Just a quick note to thank you for the hard work you put into the making such a comprehensive summmery of Fulves available on this excellent thread. You have provided us with an excellent reference that, to my knowledge is not available anywhere else. Many thanks.
Best Regards,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39523 - 06/23/06 07:40 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Paul I've got to second that! I've used Denis's site extensively in my studying, it appears we have a similar passion in material.
Denis, my hats off to you for the Fulves listing as well as your excellent database. It's like a treasure map! As I'm certain you know, finding and obtaining such a collection is as challenging as mastering the work itself.
I hope that R. Paul Wilson will stoke the riffle shuffle fire and inspire us all with his upcoming work. I look forward to his offerings. Who knows the devil from down under may finally tip his "other" culling methods and the Robinson Deal too!
BTW, did anybody ever figure out which issue of The Crimp contains the Major D'Alby Bragg Stack?
tcb
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39524 - 06/23/06 10:55 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hi T.C.
Being a great fan of the 'devil from down under' may I ask the nature of the 'other' culling methods you are referring to. Many thanks in advance,
Regards,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39525 - 06/25/06 02:40 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by T.C. Blalock:
Denis, my hats off to you for the Fulves listing as well as your excellent database.
I started entering some of Fulves' early riffle shuffle manuscripts, see the update:
http://archive.denisbehr.de/
I thought that might be interesting for some who don't own the material.
Denis
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39526 - 07/05/06 04:48 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Thanks Denis, that was insightful.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39527 - 02/13/07 05:43 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Does anyone know in which issue of Magic I can find Paul Wilson's variations on the Major D'Alby Brag Stack discussed above?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39528 - 02/13/07 08:59 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The effects are 'Vested Sand' and 'Canister Jury'. They can be found in the May 1998 issue of MAGIC magazine (Vol. 7 No.9) - Karrell Fox is on the cover. I have just checked over at magicmagazine.com - the issue is still available for sale.
Joe
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39529 - 02/14/07 12:43 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
It's weird how I see some one posting about the Steven's Cull and I just re-invented it tonight. I guess I'm gonna call it "The Doc/Steven's Cull. Why? I know that Steven's is the originator but "The Steven's/Doc Cull doesn't sound right.
Tonight while studying how to beat a 7-Card Poker game I started using Steven's culling technique and the secret suddenly dawned upon me of which I'm not telling because it's a gambling move and not for magicians.
After pulling out my Annotated Erdnase book by Darwin Ortiz of which hold my copies of the Vernon encounter with Dad Stevens I realized something that I and other good hustlers do....we might demonstrate to you a move but damn if we teach it to you. Example my Expose....I show but I don't teach so this made me re-think about the Vernon encounter...
According to the notes why would a hustler who practiced learning a money move for 18 years just teach a sucker/lame like Vernon his secret for nothing, what can he possibly gain by doing this? I wouldn't so why should Stevens?
So I went to the Revelation Series DVD vol. 8 to hear Dai Vernon's encounter with the Mysterious Kid and guess what? Vernon although good was still a kid himself when he met Stevens, as a matter of fact he was in his late 20's.
What we all fail to realize is that even though Vernon was a legend he only became a legend many years later just like Steve F. Yes in Steve's 4 part GPS he's great but I know for a fact that he's way better now than he was then and I have the proof.
When I had my encounter with Steve discussing the Steven's Control/Cull he said that he doesn't think that anyone can do this move perfectly without any hesitation or burning the deck and in my opinion he was absolutely correct in his evaluation.
Vernon clearly state that Dad Stevens just took a deck and culled 3 cards to the top just like that...without all that looking etc confirming what Steve said. Now if any of you don't believe me just re-watch the video and see what he says for yourself.
Now due to the fact that I know that expert gamblers don't tell suckers a thing, plus what Steve said and what Vernon said along with the notes my conclusion is that Vernon with all his experience pieced together what he felt Steven's had did and presented it to the world as the Steven's control.
We have to admit that Dai came up with an excellent idea of how it was done but to me he was absolutely wrong regarding what Stevens did of which I will show ya’ll in the near future. This is the reason why all these years we all never exactly figured out how to perfect the Steven's cull/control because Steven's never actually told Vernon and we had the wrong info.
The 18 years of studying story that was told to Vernon to me was a bunch of crap to throw Vernon off track because I accomplished doing this move within a couple of minutes after knowing the secret.
Doc have you perfected it as of yet? No, I just learned it last night but when I get it to my liking I'll definitely post a video of me doing the technique exactly the way Vernon described "The Mysterious Kid" done it for/on him.
Take Care Everyone.
Respectfully,
Signed
The Doctor
P.S. If I'm wrong in my evaluation then I just re-invented a new cull which will be called Doc's Cull and Stacking Technique.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39530 - 02/15/07 12:57 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
A great explanation of this can be found in Glenn Bishops DVD "Tested card works for card sharks".
quote= doc:
"It's weird how I see some one posting about the Steven's Cull and I just re-invented it tonight. I guess I'm gonna call it "The Doc/Steven's Cull. Why? I know that Steven's is the originator but "The Steven's/Doc Cull doesn't sound right. "
If its been reinvented why not just leave it its original name as the Stevens cull..
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39531 - 02/16/07 12:26 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
To be honest with you because it may not be the Steven's Cull. Why confuse the readers about The Steven' Cull when it was actually (probably but not sure) what Dai Vernon perceived it to be and by the knowledge he had tried to piece it together and came up with what we now call the Steven's Cull/Control.
What I was thinking about doing is leaving Vernon's "The Steven's Cull alone and name mine after me. Hence there would be no confusion of the two and each individual can study whatever one they choose.
Doc
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39532 - 02/16/07 02:20 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Yeah I agree, that's not confusing at all.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39533 - 02/16/07 11:01 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
NCMarsh
Registered: 02/16/08
Posts: 270
Loc: Tampa, Florida
|
Doc,
Thanks for your thoughts, and I would love to see the video!
N.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39534 - 02/16/07 12:05 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I made of a video of it two days ago but I can't seem to find my cord in order to connect my camcorder to my computer to upload it.
I now have 3 hours to find it before I go out of town.
Doc
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39535 - 02/20/07 02:55 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Any luck with the cord? Looking forward to watching your demo.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39536 - 02/23/07 02:45 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
For those whose interested here's the link to my Doc/Steven's Cull
This is my version of the Steven's Control/Cull. I hope ya'll like it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVXTctSrc2c
Doc
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39537 - 02/25/07 12:16 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Thanks Doc it was worth waiting. Any chance you could share your discovery with us? 
There is another possibility about the Vernon story that you didn't consider: Dad Steven's could have tipped the work to Vernon. But Vernon only shared the exact work with a selected few (like the ping pong shift).
Your other video (expose) is pretty impressive too, some of those moves will sure get you the money!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39538 - 02/25/07 05:35 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The resourceful professional failing to improve the method changes the conditions -- this wouldn't work with the kings pre-shuffled into a ordinary deck. The way the cards are placed in the deck and the deck is cut for the shuffles are give-aways.
Looks good anyway.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39539 - 02/25/07 07:52 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Doc- The more I see of your card work the more impressed I am. The video I saw of you doing your deck switch is the best I have seen to this date. And the video of your Stevens cull is the best I have seen to this date as well.
It is a privilege to watch rare and wonderful work on cards - thanks very much.
Glenn Bishop
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39540 - 02/25/07 05:47 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
This is an interesting simulation of the Steven's cull...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39541 - 02/25/07 07:39 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
To My Readers
If this is a good simulation that I've invented then I'll call it the The Doc Cull/Control and ya'll can keep on trying to perfect The Steven's Cull.
Thanks Again
Doc
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39542 - 02/26/07 06:37 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Doc
You should take credit for the cull as there is not enough information to say that it is or is not the Stevens Cull. The hallmark of the Stevens Cull, in my opinion, is that it has be started with cards in a randomly shuffled pack. So, inserting the cards before the cull is not allowed. That's the point of the cull. It gathers the cards from where ever they may be on an improvised basis. So, although your cull/shuffle looks terrrific, it can't be classified as a Stevens Cull unless you start with a randomly shuffled pack.
One way to test your chops on this is to say, "I'll cull the sevens", and then do so and then immediately say, "I'll cull the tens," and do so, and then cull another set, etc. Also, after you have culled each set of three cards, you need to give the deck one perfect faro shuffle to destroy pairs. This is not my protocol, but the protocol that was in vogue at the time that Dad Stevens did the cull.
If not, take great pride in your own cull as it looks very good.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39543 - 02/26/07 08:49 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hello David,
Do you really think this is remotely possible using the Stevens Cull, ie to riffle the cards at professional speed with no slowing or hesitation and cold cull three of a kind to the top in precisely three riffle shuffles a la Stevens? I ask this because it seems to me that there are a number of variables which cannot be controlled under these 'cold culling' conditions. The main one of course being distribution. Unless the expert can spot cards from both packets simultaneously as they are riffled together, concentration on one side often results in four or five shuffles. And that assumes an unfailing ability to nail to target cards at speed. Or am I missing something?
Regards,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39544 - 02/26/07 09:30 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Paul, yes, it is possible to cold cull three of a kind at regular speed in three shuffles. One cannot guarantee, however, that it will always be done in three shuffles. You are correct in that it may take more than three as there are too many variables. Vernon never said, however, that it was 'three shuffles'. In Revelations he wrote "four". In the raw transcripts from the Buffum interviews, however, he actually said that Stevens would give it a series of shuffles, not a requisite number. I can do the cull. I spend 30-45 minutes per day on it, seven days a week, and have done so for about two years now. I'm now just getting it a regular speed. I enjoy practicing the cull because every day - every shuffle is different. It is like sitting down at the piano and going off on some improvisation. Many times, I'll nail it in three shuffles. (There are lots of techniques one develops - sort of rules of improvisation - that facilitate the process and which I am writing up for a book project.) Other times you will be looking for a set and then jump towards a different set, again like a jazz improvisation, and it feels great. So, again, yes, it is possible, but one cannot guarantee it. Hope this helps.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39545 - 02/26/07 10:13 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Here is some more information on the Stevens Cull. I was planning on releasing this with some other material later but since there seems to be some interest in this subject, and I have shared this info with a few others privately, I might as well toss it out for everyone.
The shuffle was developed by Stevens for cheating at faro. It was not designed originally for poker. The expression "three will get you the money" has been interpreted by magicians as pertaining to poker. I believe when Stevens told Vernon that there was no need to cull four of kind because "three would get the money", he was referring to faro.
Now, I started out on this quest with question why would Stevens want to cull three of a kind to the top, particularly when Stevens made his money at faro.
That put me on the trail of the rules of faro. The best description that I have found of the rules of Faro, how to deal it, record the plays, etc is in “The American Hoyle – Revised Edition” , 1883 edition by Dick and Fitzgerald.
Played by the rules, Faro was the most fair bank game. The dealer’s sole advantage was derived from splits. In Faro, two cards appear in each ‘turn’, one represents a card for the dealer, the other the players. Players place bets on sort of a roulette-style layout, putting bets on either individual values or in combinations. A split is like a zero or double zero on a roulette wheel. If both cards in a ‘turn’ are of the same value, that is a ‘split’, and the dealer – depending on the house rules – gets half of all bets on the table – all bets, no payouts. That is the ‘house advantage’. The players know that a split will occur once, perhaps twice, naturally, in each game.
As a side note, that is the origin of the faro shuffle. The faro shuffle was designed to be perform just once prior to the deal in order to assure and actually demonstrate to other players that all previous ‘splits’ have been separated. That is why the technique in Expert Card Technique, which Vernon learned from Frank Toby, and I refer to in my biography of Vernon, is so important. It is also why, in my previous post to Doc, I suggested he use a faro to split pairs before executing the cull.
So, the Riffle Cull allowed the dealer, Stevens, to add an extra ‘split’ to the deal. You should note that, in Faro, only the dealer handles and cuts the cards. I first discovered this fact in Erdnase . Erdnase makes reference to this exact handling procedure. So, Stevens riffle culls three of a kind – any three of a kind to the top. (Note the rank of the three of a kind is irrelevant. This also speeds up the cull for him as he does not have to worry about his three of a kind losing to another player’s three of a kind at the table. He can cull any three of a kind.) He will then finish the shuffle sequence by burying the three cards together somewhere in deck with one more shuffle. This is important as it adds an extra level of polish and misdirection to the shuffle. My own guess is that he would bury it near the top, certainly below the top four cards which would be involved with 'calling the turn' near the end of the deal.
This is very important because, in faro, the deck would be placed face-up in the box, so that the cards near the top would become the cards near the bottom when it comes time to the actual deal.
Deferring this stack until near the end of the deal will focus more bets on these cards, thus improving the take on the 'split' once it appears. You see, in Faro, there is a card counter who tracks the play of each card so that no one will place bets, for example, on a value when all those values have already been played. So, as I mentioned, it forces, in latter stages of the game, people to direct their bets towards a restricted number of options.
Now, with the riffle culled three of a kind buried in the pack, the dealer does not need to know exactly when they will appear. As he has culled three together, he doesn’t have to. Either the first two values of the three of a kind will appear on a turn, in which case the dealer has a split, or only one of the values will appear. If only one of the values appears, the dealer knows that he will obtain the split on the next turn. It is absolutely brilliant. (The deck can be hand held of played in the box. It doesn’t matter.) Imagine how a house would do if it could secretly add an extra 00 to a roulette wheel?
So, that's a little background that can help provide you with greater insight into the technique, how and why it was executed. It also tells you, for example, on how Stevens could execute the shuffle at regular speed and change course in mid-shuffle because he was unconcerned with the value of the cards, and could alter the shuffle accordingly if a better mix presented itself.
Although the shuffle can be performed 'cold', one can also get a sense of the cards that have been played, note values that are close together as they have been turned and accounted for by the card-counter, in order to facilitate the location and culling of those cards prior to the next deal. All of these things affect speed.
There is SO much more that can be said. It is, however, a start.
Again, hope it helps.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39546 - 02/26/07 10:53 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Jeff Haas
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 108
Loc: San Mateo, CA
|
Since we've gotten into a discussion of the game of Faro, there is actually a free playable version online at:
Wichita Faro
It's quite well-done.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39547 - 02/26/07 11:40 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hello David,
Outstanding posts. The information is excellent and inspirational for me. Stevens use of the cull in Faro is ingenious. I can't wait for your menuscript on the Stevens Cull, the techniques and its roots. Many thanks.
Best Wishes,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39548 - 02/26/07 12:15 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Paul, I'm pleased that you found the information useful. I just re-read my post and want to clarify one point about the use of the faro shuffle. The procedure at Faro would be to gather the cards at the completion of play, give them a faro shuffle - as described in E.C.T. - pausing after the weave, to demonstrate to the table that pre-existing pairs have been separated. Complete the faro shuffle and then embark on a series of table shuffle (Stevens Cull) while the players place their bets on the table. (I said in my original post that the faro was used prior to the deal, but I meant to say as above, before the series of table shuffles.)
This shuffle sequence also illustrates why it was easier for Stevens to do the riffle cull. He wasn't expected to talk to anyone. He could concentrate on the shuffles as others were placing their checks on the board.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39549 - 02/26/07 03:37 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Bob Farmer
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 234
Loc: Short card above selection.
|
Does anyone have Dad Stevens' email address?
Thank you.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39550 - 02/26/07 03:37 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Scarne On Cards has information about the rules of Faro as it survived in mid-twentieth century Nevada. I went there and looked it up after David Ben's December 1 post on another thread.
The beauty of the cull as a applied to Faro instead of poker, (forgive me if I'm being obvious here) is that once you get your three of a kind culled at the poker table, you then have to do something with them.
You have to stack them, palm them, crimp them, nullify the cut, deal bottoms, switch them in, or whatever your favorite method of getting beaten up if you get caught is.
In Faro, once you've got them together, you do nothing, and you double the amount of money you win in a game.
The cull at Faro is also cut-proof.While the rules don't necessarily allow the players to cut, if they did insist on it, it wouldn't help, it would just move the split to another part of the deck.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39551 - 02/26/07 05:14 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Does anyone have Steven's Dad's email address?
Thank you.
(Seriously, this thread has become increasingly more interesting in the past day or two).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39552 - 02/26/07 07:23 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I remember the angle pop-out thing from the Fulves book but...
where is the part about watching the cards go by during a riffle? And wouldn't folks notice if you were watching the deck during a shuffle?
Or is this a proper use of a shiner?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39553 - 02/26/07 07:32 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Jonathon Townsend asked
And wouldn't folks notice if you were watching the deck during a shuffle?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39554 - 02/26/07 10:26 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
to David Ben: thanks for your insightful post. I'll be one of the first inline to get your manuscript on the Steven's cull. I just hope you'll find the time to work on the project as I am also waiting for the second volume of Dai Vernon's biography  (if the first volume wasn't so good we might give you a break... sorry).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39555 - 02/26/07 10:28 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Btw, would any one know where I could put my hands on "Down under deals"? Thanks.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39557 - 02/27/07 01:34 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Dben I have to agree with Paul Hayward. I've tried what you asked but when the distribution of the cards is not correct I have the same problem as every one else.
Now if I do a series of shuffles I can do it but not one after the other. I haven't been doing it for 18 years but at the moment it seems impossible. I sometimes grab to of another number but to do three sets consecutively 3 times in a row is impossible for me at this moment.
If you can do two sets in a row I will be impressed.
Ya'll must be trying to trick me or something or ya'll must think I'm a god, either way I'm human just like the rest of you here.
Respectfully,
Doc
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39558 - 02/27/07 03:21 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Doc
There is no doubt in my mind that, given your general touch with cards, if you were taught the proper technique for the Riffle Cull, you would be able to cull consecutive sets with ease. It would take you a year or two to become proficient, not eighteen. It has taken me a couple of years of steady work to properly understand the mechanics of it. (Although I still discover new things about it all the time.) I just don't think that the Riffle Cull has been described with sufficient clarity so workers can master it. As I said, once it is described in more detail - or you are shown the proper technique - you'll pick it up in no time.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39559 - 02/27/07 04:44 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Stop teasing us and get the manuscript finished!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39560 - 02/27/07 05:12 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Bob Farmer
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 234
Loc: Short card above selection.
|
I'll be seeing DBen on Friday and I will suggest IN THE STRONGEST TERMS that he get this out ASAP.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39562 - 02/27/07 07:04 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
A must read for cheating at the game of Faro is "Faro Exposed" written in 1882. Almost the entire book is on cheating at the game of faro.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39563 - 02/27/07 10:06 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Jeff Haas
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 108
Loc: San Mateo, CA
|
Another side note, here's an article that goes into detail about Faro. Includes the game, history, cheating, and why it was addictive. (It's on a website by The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.)
Faro article
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39564 - 02/28/07 12:00 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Bob Farmer wrote:
I'll be seeing DBen on Friday and I will suggest IN THE STRONGEST TERMS that he get this out ASAP.
Dustin Stinett wrote:
Two Canadian lawyers going toe to toe: This should be a hoot!
_____________________________________________
I'll put up a large cash prize if they'll do it in a ring filled with jello and I can sell the Pay-Per-View rights. No second dealing and no riffle shuffling by either man. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39565 - 02/28/07 04:34 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Bob Farmer
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 234
Loc: Short card above selection.
|
Actually, it's not two but five Canadian lawyers. We are part of a panel discussion at Queen's law school (the Harvard of the great white north) on alternate legal careers. David is representing the magic business, I'm there with two others from the music business.
Since this is all happening in Kingston, Ontario, Canada, the location of the Royal Military Academy (the West Point of the great white north), which is Vernon's alma mater, we'll be going over there afterwards to light a candle or fire a cannon or whatever it is you do at a miltary academy.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39566 - 02/28/07 07:20 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Jeff, what a fantastic article! Many thanks for sharing it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39567 - 02/28/07 11:19 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Jeff Haas
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 108
Loc: San Mateo, CA
|
Glad you liked it.
After all, here we are talking about how to cheat at a game...we should really understand what the game was about!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39568 - 03/01/07 08:40 AM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
How does the Fulves write up compare to the write-up in Revelations?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39569 - 03/02/07 02:33 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Fulves method is even more difficult than the Stevens and apparently he can do his version at speed. The guy must have bionic hands.
Elaborating on Doc's fine and honest post, I do believe that, with proper technique it is possible to cull three cards consecutively or at least within four shuffles. For those interested, one idea is to use the push through shuffle when a target card is absent from the sighted packet. Fulves, being the dreaded perfectionist, advocates strongly against this ruse. But for lesser mortals like myself, it serves the purpose well enough. I am not sure if David Ben would agree with this wrinkle or not, but its worth a try. As David suggests, there are in fact several strategies to try when faced with awkward distribution problems, which is why this cull is so compelling, refreshing and infuriating.
Regards,
Paul H
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39570 - 03/04/07 04:41 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Theoretically, I see the value in using a push-through in the course of the shuffle sequence. But is it really necessary to move half of the deck when you're only searching for three cards? I don't think so; it's taking a sledgehammer to porcelain...it's culling that fourth ace...it is excessive.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#39571 - 03/04/07 05:20 PM
Re: Dad Stevens Cull
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
If I may I would like to add some thoughts.
I would say that the Stevens cull is one of the more useful moves that I have learned in magic.
The problem with it is - say you want to cull three or four of a kind. If the deck is shuffled then the (lets say magician) has no idea where the aces are in the deck. They may be in the right hand half or left hand pile. Close to the center or the bottom of one - or both of the two piles of cards before the shuffle.
I peak that is spread the deck on the table like Persi Diaconis suggested in the classic book Revelations. A thumb fan or riffling the deck to get a peak works to. Knowing where the desired cards are before the shuffle in my opinion is an advantage.
I find culling has the same problem as the second deal as the second deal is almost worthless (at the card table not magic) unless the magician (or card sharp) knows what the top card is. This is why marked cards or a peak is used with the second.
Buddy Farnan years ago showed me how to deal blackjack using the peak and the second deal and I use it in a blackjack demonstration using the second deal and a peak. In the book Marlo in spades Marlo has a great black jack deal using the punch.
With culling with a jog shuffle I use a punch for demonstrations. And with the table cull (the Stevens cull and the Triumph cull) when I do a show I sometimes use sand work. I do not have a problem with that in formal shows because I like to stay a step ahead of the audience.
I use the Stevens cull and the triumph cull to cut the aces from a shuffled deck. It is my opinion that the audience doesn't want to see the magician shuffle the cards a lot taking more than four shuffle cuts to cut to four aces one at a time.
The aces or desired cards are easier to get under control if the magician or sharp knows where they are before the shuffle. A sharp may have an advantage with the cull if they use the knowledge from looking at the discards.
Others may not agree but that is OK with me.
Best ahead!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: Dustin Stinett, Jim Maloney
|
187 registered
(magicking, Gerhard Dutschke, Jacky Kahan, Brandon Hall, P.T. Murphy, erlandish, Baph, Dick Koornwinder, Anne Christie, Jason England, John Signa, Magic Mike, Mark.Lewis, bnburns, Tom Frame, mai-ling, Pete Poskiparta, Jonathan Townsend, AnthonyBrahams, Kenardo, Steve Brooks, Steve Bryant, Scotto, El Mystico, MaxM, jim rawlins, Joe Mckay, Bob Farmer, Marco Pusterla, jason156, Joe S., James Alan, Rennie, Tomas Blomberg, Tabman, Phil Schwartz, David Oliver, Josef Held, Barefoot Boy, Benny K, Jeff Pierce Magic, Bob Gerdes, Jeffrey Korst, Magic Newswire, Glenn Bishop, Jager, Bo Jonsson, Andrew Pinard, Huggie, Steve Cobb, 11 invisible)
and 970 anonymous users online.
|
|
|
