ODD is reminiscent of the Invisible Deck (ID), and both tricks have a strong impact. However, I
prefer ODD for strolling purposes for three reasons. First, ODD uses 52 perfectly ordinary cards.
It’s true that there’s something “ODD” about the deck and it can’t be handed out for inspection.
However, the individual cards are quite normal so that you can slowly thumb through them and allow
the spectator to see all their faces. The ID doesn’t look nearly so normal and, in close-up
situations, spectators sometimes notice its peculiarities.
Second, I think the effect of
ODD is more magical, or at least more inexplicable, than the effect of the IV. In the IV, the
selected card flips over. Spectators find this outcome impressive but not bewildering – they
imagine that the magician somehow turned over the card. In ODD, however, a red-backed card appears
in a blue deck. This seems much harder to explain than a flipped-over card.
The third
reason I prefer ODD is that it is easy to make. Two ODD decks can be assembled from two ordinary
bicycle decks (and no other materials) in a matter of about ten minutes.
ODD is fairly easy
to do – about 3 on a 1 to 10 scale. Angle problems are minimal. Marcus Eddie is a great teacher,
although I suggest that you ignore his lesson on how to construct a special cardboard card case for
ODD. If you use a metal or leather card case and keep the deck face-up during the first part of the
trick, you don’t have to worry about matching the color of the card case and the deck. Otherwise, I
highly recommend this trick.
Respectfully, most of the "drawbacks" of ID you mentioned are due to the performer.
"The ID doesn't look nearly so normal...spectators sometimes notice its peculiarities." In 19 years of performing the ID, hundreds of times, only ONE spectator noticed that the cards didn't look quite right. He had eagle eyes.
19 years. Hundreds of performances. Hardly worth mentioning.
You may be holding the cards at the wrong angle (face the cards directly facing the spectator's eyes).
I have encountered the "he must've turned it over" explanation, years ago.
But in the past few years I haven't heard it once.
The only thing that's changed is that there's more presentation the way I do it now. There's more window dressing. For this reason, I think this is a performer issue.
If you just say, "Name any playing card...Look, one card is different from the others." Then you've given them too much freedom to explain it anyway they feel like.
Have you tried Brainwave deck? It has the "blue" card in a red deck aspect as well. I like it, but there's more suspense with ID because the card is face down when revealed.
DO NOT WORRY about matching the color of the card case and the deck.
I used to do Brainwave a lot, and it simply does not matter.
If you want, use a BLACK CARD BOX (buy a deck of black Bicycles).
Nobody ever notices or cares that you pulled a red deck out of a blue box (or vice versa). But eventually (I cared) I used a black box. In fact, even though I use a red deck when performing, I keep my ordinary red deck in a black Bicycle box (I like it).
I just watched ODD, and it's a clever concept,
but frankly it doesn't compare to ID.
As you mentioned, the creation of the deck is less of a hassle, true.
But I create my ID in an afternoon (or just buy it) and it lasts 100 performances. If I had to create a new one for each event, this would be an issue. But since the ID lasts so long, it's not an issue.
Here's why I prefer ID:
1. The revelation is straightforward.
Getting to the point that "the card you named has a different color back" is more convoluted than the ID. With ID, you dump the cards out of the box and spread them. BOOM. One card reversed.
With ODD, you remove the card box from the box (the case),
then remove the cards from the box.
Then upjog the named card, do some undercuts, flip a bank of cards face up, then face down, etc. Spread some more cards showing the back color.
10 to 15 seconds of these movements, moving the cards around (almost flourishes) to explain to the spectator that magic happened.
Add a comment
Better than Invisible Deck
Report this review
