I'm not entirely sure how I feel about the Richard Bellers effect, I've pretty much figured it out now and in truth I didn't like the shoe twist which was really only put in there to make back tracking harder. The prediction should have been in the brief case the extra phase was actually illogical in my opinion. Bellers was clearly just terrified of being caught out loading it into the case.

I also want to add that while Kramer used tricks and presentation which weren't his own he was still far more entertaining than Soma. He'd picked a presentation style which suited his look and personality very well and had a lot of charisma and even used his "I'm a cute little boy" look to his advantage in winning the audience over. So I'd say he's got the tough part nailed he just needs to learn and invent and that'll all come with time and experience.

I agree with you on the shoe twist, the effect wouldnt have been so bad IF the reveals had have been something that was actually predictable. I mean how can you influence 2 people (who cannot play darts) to throw a dart where you want them to throw it...Yeah you could have made it appear as though you influenced the words, but COME ON 'Housey'?? thats not even a real word!

If he had have thrown in a near miss there with 'Houses', then that would have been a lot more logical. The effect wasn't consistant darts and then words? They are not even in the same context as each other... He came up with a way to load the shoe and then built a RUSHED routine around it.

If he had of made penn and teller wear airport workers uniforms, then opened the case and got teller to put on the glove, performed the gag and then said something like 'I admit it officers, I am carrying in my shoe' then they took the shoe off, at least this would be a scenario where it seems a little more in context. (but still stupid but at least the joke would have been in context)

Here's my take on the routine, (the way I would do it)

I would walk onto the stage and proclaim to Penn and Teller that the idea of this effect, I came up with whilst I was travelling abroad this year and it was infact a little embarrassing (but every cloud has a silver lining). I would hand Penn and Teller the briefcase as before and invite them up onto the stage (as before).

lead Penn and Teller to 2 easels on the stage and ask each one of them to think of an image (that would be recognised and draw it on the easel one at a time) and then proceed to the word stunt (as before).

Then ask teller to go get the briefcase as Jonathan Ross goes to fetch a clothes rack (that has been just off shot), on the clothes rack are 2 airport staff uniforms (one with the name tag Penn sewn in and the other Teller) Penn picks his uniform up to put it on (its too small) and teller picks his up (it drowns him) after exclaiming how useless the clothing company is (and get a laugh) ask teller to open the briefcase.

Inside is a rubber glove ask Penn to put it; look shocked and grown, say 'can I call you frank? He was the man that handled me at the airport and he was a monster as well' (another laugh)

Do the belt gag, and then proclaim in fact before they did this they used that little beeper stick thing, let Penn pick it up and run it up and down your body (it beeps on the shoe) say 'this happened in the airport as well. Ok officer I admit it I have something in my shoe' (then reveal) consistent, full of laughs, clean and there is a reason behind the prediction in the shoe!

That is not a bad way to go about a shoe prediction Peter.But I too feel that it should have been in the briefcase. Or something that was in their possession at the time. That's what makes Confabs so amazing. Either it is in some sort of box that is on display the whole time and the key to the box is in the possession of some audience member, or the prediction itself(envelope, briefcase, whatever) is in the possession of a spectator at all times. Revealing the prediction on yourself just seems a bit off to me.

In other comments, though it wasn't a routine that would "fool" them, I really liked Romany's spirit tie/jacket exchange. Very entertaining and it gave Johnathon Ross an opportunity to be Johnathon Ross....which really helped the entertainment value. Though, had she let Teller tie her up it would have been more of a fooler. Of course if she did that she would have to have used a rope tie technique that hasn't been in common use since Keller's day.

I agree about the prediction coming from the briefcase, I just thought I would offer an alternative that would have made sense if it was to come from your persons. I think he went about the houses to get to the prediction as well but hey it got him a free trip to vegas!

Did anyone else not like Nick Einhorn's spectator selection? It seems to me for an effect like that you really need to sell the fact that the spectator was selected randomly. Stooged or not it gave the whole performance a stooged "vibe," for me.

Haven't seen this properly yet but a cursory glance at google brought up the effect. This isn't stooged, it's Barrie Richardson's chair test called "The Lazy Mentalist" and is available along with a host of other great effects in his book theatre of the mind. There was just a bit of extra presentation tacked on here. Without giving the effect away all the work was done the moment the meals were on the tables, that's how clever this one is.

I know it wasn't a stooged effect. But I am saying, his spectator selection gave it a stooged vibe. I am talking less method and more presentation. Some effects are just so strong(as that one was) that you really need to sell the idea of a random spectator selection. If you don't then 1/2 your audience merely thinks it was stooged, even if it wasn't, leaving that skeptical half to clap politely as they would to a 15 year old showing off their first card trick. So what I am saying is to ring in the whole audience, so everyone is just as amazed as the next, you toss a paper ball into the audience. How much extra time does that really take? And your effect goes from, "That was nice," to "HOLY CRAP! That was AMAZING!" So what I am really saying is 30 more seconds of presentation would have made a world of difference to that effect.

I suppose it wouldn't have hurt to just get Penn or Teller to point at someone but I think it is in the rules of the show that there are no plants in the audience. Although he didn't mention it this week Johnathan Ross has said in earlier shows that there are no stooges in the audience. When I perform the lazy mentalist I plan on throwing ping pong balls into my audience and bringing up whoever catches one.

When I have used this I have the person who mixes the envelopes (That was chosen at random) select 3 volunteers as I want to influence her actions when she mixes them up. My ending not only predicts the chairs but whether the people sitting in them are male or female it is strong in that sense as she choose random members of the audience could have been all female, all male, 1 male 1 female and she sits them into any order and then the envelopes the subjects hold are mixed up into a random order.

So all in all, she mixes the big envelopes places them under the chairs in a random order, then invites three random subjects places them into any order on the chairs, they are handed 3 envelopes and they are mixed into any order and they open them, they state the colours that have sealed into their envelopes and they match whats under their chairs (in the big envelopes). I then remind everyone she mixed the people into random order for example Male, Male and female (she could have chose three females if she had liked) and then the chairs are turned around and on the back of the chairs is the order she placed the people in people in

Going back to VDP for 1 second, are the gimmicks used for VDP reusable? If not is it beneficial to to buy a 1 way forcing deck of the particular type of card needed to perform the effect (any c**rt card I imagine would work?)?

For all of you who saw the latest show, didn't it appear as if the acts were mostly to attract publicity? Gazzo's Cups and Balls are definitely one of the best out there, but even so it's still based on classic moves that Penn and Teller know and use. The quick change act seemed very, very standard also. Great perfomances, but the Swedish/Polish (I can't remember which) were the only act that came close. I was sure he switched out the card as he returned the tongs to his jacket, but I guess he just tried to make Penn and Teller think that. Kind of misdirection towards another magician rather than the audience. I'm fooled.

Most performances seem like that. Especially Piff the Magic Dragon ...

VDP isn't a widely used effect though, at least he used something unique. I love Gazzo, but I don't know how in the world he expected to fool Penn and Teller with cups and balls. He had to have known they perform a version themselves. And the quick change act looked like every other act in the world. Not one unique change.

In an interview I once watched, Teller mentions seeing a magician in another country. I think it was in Africa. At any rate, he explains how a performer fooled him with a chop/cup and balls routine. What's interesting is the way he was fooled was he was expecting the magician to do as he would for a layperson, but this magician REVERSED the finally. A layperson would not find it magical at all, but Teller loved it.

Maybe this is something competitors are forgetting. Performing for magicians is NOT like performing for laypeople. But I suppose if these magicians did perform more for Penn and Teller the show would be alot more boring for laypeople. (Which I bet is the larger audience that watches that show)

-ArchAngel_G