My first thought is that this isn't a one handed cut so much as a tabled false cut. My second thought is that this will only work if no one is really paying attention to your hands, like the Gambler's False Cut in EATCT. In that instance, you need to work on making it much more casual, and not a "move".
Also cuts like this have been published for at least a century.
Also cuts like this have been published for at least a century.
My thoughts exactly. Usually a one-handed cut is a cut that uses just one hand, and nothing else, even if it's not the other hand.
Well, it didn't seem like a false cut to me at first, so it can fool people, but you seemed to be relying on speed, and it looks too much like a move. It would be better if you could make it seem more casual. That would stop people from suspecting that it's a secret move or something. Plus in my opinion, tabled cuts are the cuts that shouldn't be flourishy or complicated. Your move seems to be going to some pattern, and I think it might be better looking as a two handed cut. If you've read RCCM, there is a chapter on cuts. There is a tabled false cut that uses three packets, is super simple, and can be done super slowly but will still fool people.
Basically, what I'm saying is, keep the tabled cuts as away from complexity as possible. Leave the flourishes to in the hands cuts only. (I'm not saying your move was flourishy, but it was complex, which is just as bad with tabled cuts.)
It looks like a move, which IMO is the biggest give away that something is going on. No one really cuts the deck like that, especially not that quick.
Nice idea though.
Nice idea though.
I'm surprised nobody mentioned the whoops cut from Daryls encyclopedia of card tricks.... that was the first thing that came to mind.
Thanks everybody for your replying. Its very good to have this conversation that i take a lot of things from it. So this move its "banned" from doing it cause is too suspicius? And this susp cames from the quick movement that i use? Do i have to try another way in the same philosophy?
@Alarte, it is good that you are attempting to create your own moves. And it is also very wise to seek the opinions of the magicians of this forum to get their honest feedback. That is something that can help us all to grow as performers, as we analyze both our own work and the work of others. The comments people have made in this thread are spot on and should be taken seriously.
To be perfectly honest (and hopefully not unkind), yes, the move should, as you put it, be "banned" because it is too suspicious. But the suspicion does not arise only because of the "quick movement." Even if you did this false cut slowly, or at medium tempo, it would still look suspicious. The problem is that it is unnatural, confusing and does not look like a real cut. Dai Vernon said that: "Confusion is not magic." The object of a false cut is to make it look like a real cut without changing the order of the cards. This cut does not achieve that goal. I would recommend focusing on a completely different way to achieve a false cut and just chalk this one up to an experiment that did not work out.
To be perfectly honest (and hopefully not unkind), yes, the move should, as you put it, be "banned" because it is too suspicious. But the suspicion does not arise only because of the "quick movement." Even if you did this false cut slowly, or at medium tempo, it would still look suspicious. The problem is that it is unnatural, confusing and does not look like a real cut. Dai Vernon said that: "Confusion is not magic." The object of a false cut is to make it look like a real cut without changing the order of the cards. This cut does not achieve that goal. I would recommend focusing on a completely different way to achieve a false cut and just chalk this one up to an experiment that did not work out.