There aren't any blatant misrepresentations in the effect discription, but in my opinion, it doesn't
appear nearly as miraculous as the description would lead you to believe. This is because the
method relies on a few techniques that I'm not really a fan of.
First, the choice isn't
completely free. You need to steer the spectator's selection, and hope that they properly comply.
Secondly, it relies on some fishing that doesn't seem natural in this context. Seriously, if one
truly had mental powers and was trying to deduce the identity of a card, would they be seeing random
letters from the spelled-out name of the card, or would they be seeing numbers and images that
corresponded to the card? I would say the latter, obviously. Third, you must rely on quick reads
of a spectator's reactions. Nothing wrong with that, but you need to realize that this isn't going
work 100% of the time.
With this effect, you end up stacking a lot of techniques that
aren't 100%... once you start compounding them, the odds of something not working means you're
probably going to miss on this more than you'd want to. It's also important to point out that you
do NOT identify the suit of the chosen card. It's very easy to imaging a scenario in which you
correctly tell the spectator, "You're thinking of the queen", and they immediately respond, "Whicn
one?" You'd better have a good response ready if you plan on performing this.
Honestly, I
can see how some people might like this effect, since it's relatively easy and totally impromptu.
But for me, the uncertain hit rate, the awkward fishing, and the partial reveal (no suit) add up to
an effect I wouldn't use.
