# How did Derren Brown predict the lottery numbers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [September 10, 2009, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542 "2009-09-10T11:20:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![mr.jp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/48db29/32.png) [@mr.jp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mr.jp)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/121 "2009-09-17T17:04:15Z")
Can I ask, what is it Derren Brown has done that commands such respect, that some of you think he is above camera tricks? ---
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/122 "2009-09-17T17:25:52Z")
Many many shows over the last few years. Some on youtube. Lots not. Nearly all of his stuff is brilliant, clever and comes with a nice twist on what you’ve seen before. ---
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/123 "2009-09-17T17:29:12Z")
One of the best was The Heist > [@](#): > > The Heist was shown on 4 January 2006 at 21:00, on Channel 4. In the show, Brown used his skills on selected participants who answered an ad. Under the disguise of a “motivational seminar” (where they would allegedly learn Brown’s skills) Brown recruited a number of participants, eventually manipulating a number of them into robbing a security van in broad daylight. > > The robbery involved holding up a security van and guard (played by an actor) using a realistic-looking toy pistol that Brown had given them earlier, and stealing a case filled with real money. Four people were selected to carry out the robbery from an initial field of thirteen, with three of them actually carrying out the “robbery”. The idea was that after the conditioning they received, they would voluntarily rob the van of their own accord. There was no mention of the ‘crime’ to the participants, and they were not (directly) instructed to do it. The three that did it did so as a result of the conditioning and their own choice, not instructions from any third party including Brown. > > Brown associated colour, music and phrases to build the participants into a highly-motivated state, converging all of those psychological empowerment tools into a single set up. The seminar subliminally anchored freedom, childhood, opportunity and romance into various criminal acts. After having previously been convinced to steal sweets from a shop based in Codicote High Street in Hertfordshire, they were shown the euphoria that could be gained from criminal acts. > > This programme also contained a re-enactment of the Milgram experiment carried out by Stanley Milgram in the 1960s with the aim of selecting four of the most obedient of the group. 65% of the subjects in this experiment were willing to administer lethal electric shocks to another person on the instruction of an authoritative figure (unbeknown to the subjects, the electric shocks were not actually real); these were the same results as Milgram himself found. [Derren Brown - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derren_Brown#The_Heist) ---
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/124 "2009-09-17T17:31:40Z")
Another. [http://vodpod.com/watch/279794-derren-brown-real-zombie-shooter](http://vodpod.com/watch/279794-derren-brown-real-zombie-shooter) ---
**Author:** ![mr.jp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/48db29/32.png) [@mr.jp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mr.jp)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/125 "2009-09-17T17:41:57Z")
I have seen a lot of his tricks. And I agree they are entertaining. But what I mean is, what is it about those tricks (or something else) that make you doubt that he would do a camera trick? I have seen him give false NLP explanations to tricks before, and also he gave a wrong explanation this time. He promises that he doesn’t use stooges, and I believe him in that. But he never promises not to use camera tricks. ---
**Author:** ![MrSquishy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9e5f3/32.png) [@MrSquishy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrSquishy)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/126 "2009-09-17T19:51:44Z")
> [@mr.jp](#): > > I have seen a lot of his tricks. And I agree they are entertaining. But what I mean is, what is it about those tricks (or something else) that make you doubt that he would do a camera trick? I have seen him give false NLP explanations to tricks before, and also he gave a wrong explanation this time. He promises that he doesn’t use stooges, and I believe him in that. But he never promises not to use camera tricks. I haven’t seen many of his tricks at all. Why do you believe his promise that he doesn’t use stooges? Just out of curiosity. Are there any magicians that would admit to using stooges? From what I’ve read, if you were to believe that he does use stooges, many of his tricks would be much less impressive (e.g. imagine that all the participants in “The Heist” were actors). So of course he’s going to say he doesn’t use stooges. ---
**Author:** ![MrSquishy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9e5f3/32.png) [@MrSquishy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrSquishy)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/127 "2009-09-17T20:00:26Z")
I think any magician that refuses to use stooges or camera tricks would be artificially limiting his career. And for what? The Magician’s Code of Honour? From what I’ve seen, I think what makes Derren Brown a great magician is that he’s somehow managed to convince people that he wouldn’t stoop to those kinds of tactics. Which makes it much easier to pull off amazing tricks. ---
**Author:** ![mr.jp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/48db29/32.png) [@mr.jp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mr.jp)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/128 "2009-09-17T20:37:22Z")
> [@MrSquishy](#): > > I haven’t seen many of his tricks at all. Why do you believe his promise that he doesn’t use stooges? Mainly because I think that if he did, he risks that they could blackmail him for a lot. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/129 "2009-09-17T21:42:23Z")
> [@MrSquishy](#): > > I think any magician that refuses to use stooges or camera tricks would be artificially limiting his career. And for what? The Magician’s Code of Honour? If a magician needs stooges or camera tricks, there is no act. He’s just an actor in a poorly plotted short film. Once people recognise that the magic isn’t real, skilled displays of legerdemain are pretty much the only reason to have any interest in what he’s doing. ---
**Author:** ![nivlac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/3bc359/32.png) [@nivlac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nivlac)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/130 "2009-09-17T23:19:59Z")
Using video trickery is by far the likeliest explanation if you watch each move of the video and take into account the setting for the trick. However, regardless of how he did the trick, it really irks me that he gave such a BS explanation involving the wisdom of crowds. I kept waiting for a more reasonable explanation, but none was offered. He should have just said I’m not going to tell you how I did it, but here are some possible explanations. If he had done that I’d had kept more respect for Mr. Brown. It was a great act. Why spoil it with the BS? ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/131 "2009-09-18T02:24:28Z")
> [@Colophon](#): > > To repeat what I said earlier, there is just an overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence supporting a split-screen effect.. …most of which are entirely compatible with something other than splitscreen… > [@](#): > > both in the design and execution of the trick: > > - The design of the set, with the podium on one side of the screen and the TV set and Brown on the other. You would expect the balls to be close to Brown? If you were doing a physical trick it’s not going to be impressive unless you make it clear he can’t touch them. You would expect perhaps the balls to be in front of him or the TV? Does that makes sense to you in terms of set design and visual clarity? This point means nothing. > [@](#): > > - The needless second camera, which was only used once, for one shot. Why bother even having this if not to create a convenient cut point to switch from the handheld camera in the intro to the fixed (but digitally wobbled) camera that filmed the rest of the trick? Maybe but hardly decisive > [@](#): > > - See above - the camera shake that looks to be added artificially. Compatible with obscuring a physical trick as much as a split screen. > [@](#): > > - The unnecessarily long delay between the lottery being drawn and the reveal. You’d want as much time as possible to do a physical trick too, this means nothing. > [@](#): > > - The bonus ball not being part of the prediction - OK, you may say it’s not vital anyway, but it all allows extra time for the switch to be made. ditto > [@](#): > > - The left-hand ball jumping up slightly. Not only that, but jumping at _just the exact moment you would expect_ the switch in video feed to be made, just before Derren crossed over to the podium side of the screen. See above, in my view the fact it stuck partway up is not compatible with the very simple physical design required if the whole thing is video trickery. The timing is compatible with the last ball having something physical done to it last, just before Brown walks across. > [@](#): > > - The use of a very similar split-screen effect in the trailer for the programme - with Brown talking on the right hand side of the screen, while on the left, the picture is replaced by fakery. If this isn’t a giant “here’s how I did it, folks” then I don’t know what is. Maybe. > [@](#): > > PS: Regarding the size of the stand for the balls, I would have thought it was deliberately made tight so that the balls couldn’t move at all laterally - if all the balls were able to roll half an inch to the side, it would also reveal the video wipe. You’re ignoring my comments above. There is a much better way of ensuring accurate placement while allowing speedy removal and placement. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/132 "2009-09-18T03:33:28Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > I don’t think the rising ball is necessarily any more evidence of video trickery than of physical trickery. Ask yourself this: you are making a perspex stand with little boxes for ping pong balls, into and from which your assistant is, while hidden by split screen, going to do a rapid change of balls. Would you make the slots so tight that a ball can get stuck on the sides and not sit on the bottom of the box unless pressed down properly? Yes, I would. I would make it a little snug rather than a litle loose. Think of what would have happened if the ball tray was so loose that, when the split screen was wiped, several balls were seen shifted to one side or the other. Tightness was required to avoid this outcome. Not too loose, not too tight, but just Goldilocks-right. Or, like the German virgin, Goesintight. Hot lights, rushing the trick, a little carelessness under pressure, possibly non-uniform balls, and there was a tiny mishap, which never would have been revealed if it weren’t for video recording and the Internet. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/133 "2009-09-18T04:46:11Z")
I think it’s much more interesting to think of how this could be done without video trickery. The shaky cam could have been a way of hiding any movement from inserting the numbered balls into the half-shells. I could see how this is possible. The background could have been a 2-D image hiding a space where an accomplice could be located with a stick and a set of numbered balls. I think there may be some significance to the fact that the balls are not in the same order as they were drawn ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/134 "2009-09-18T16:05:34Z")
**Night, so be it** said: > [@](#): > > As to the implications of lottery fixing, as I previously implied, if they chose to prosecute him - thereby admitting that the lottery can indeed be fixed - it would be more harmful to them than him. If they instead ignore it and put it down to mere trickery - and in the process secure their reputation - then they would benefit to a much greater degree than if they were to have one man imprisoned. If Brown were somehow able to fix the lottery, it would have to involve confederates who work for the lottery. The lottery would definitely have an incentive to catch those people and prosecute them. > [@](#): > > I do indeed think there is more chance of Derren Brown fixing the lottery than using a split-screen (or any other camera trick). Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! You seriously think it is far more likely that he engaged in a complicated and illegal act involving several other people (who could rat him out) than it is for him to use a simple, cheap, legal means to allow misdirection and masking of the switch? Really? > [@](#): > > Maybe I’m being naive over this. Extremely. > [@](#): > > The fact that a $200 video editor can do the trick legally is precisely the point. Why would someone with his reputation and credibility resort to such petty trickery? Why would he bother to do anything remotely elaborate (as he has done in the past)? Magic is never about the ease or complexity of how the trick is accomplished. Magic is about the smoothness and convincingness of the presentation. There’s a TV show, Magic’s Greatest Secrets Finally Revealed, that demonstrates how magic tricks of all scales (from up-close sleight of hand, to street magic, to big stage magic, to escapes) are accomplished. Often the simplest and most underhanded techniques are used. For example, how about an escape where the magician is locked in a bag, stuck in the back seat of a car, and then a weight crushing the car? The magician is seen wiggling right up to the last moment. But it’s done with a robotic body that wiggles in a duplicate bag, and the magician slips out almost at the moment he’s placed in the car. Or think of the trick of walking across a pool. Performed by making optically clear plastic stands just under the surface and using paid accomplices in the pool to make you think he’s doing it in front of a live audience? Or how about making an elephant appear out of nowhere in the middle of a parking lot, while surrounded by audience members? Again, paid accomplices and some misdirection with really large sheets, combined with a hidden opening in the sheets. I don’t know if Brown has done anything like that, but the point is that magic is full of the cheap stuff. Why should Brown be any different? The point is, did he accomplish his goal of pulling off an act that looks impossible, and making the audience believe there was no way he could cheat? > [@](#): > > With his bank robbery trick, for example, where the guy was hypnotised into doing it, by your logic it was probably just his friend who was in on it, and that no hypnosis was involved, it was all just his friend acting. Where’s the fun in that? So your answer is, because it isn’t fun to believe that it’s just a simple trick, then he shouldn’t use a simple trick but should use some complicated and illegal method to simulate his mystical powers instead? > [@](#): > > It just seems completely alien to me (and perhaps wrongly so) that a ‘magician’ who has based his career around explainable trickery, who has consistently revealed his methods and whose ‘magic’ is, as he freely admits and we all obviously know, not magic at all, but normal manipulation and misdirection, would now resort to the cheap and easily replicated camera trickery which is being put forth. So what you’re saying is, because _you_ believe Darren Brown is better than this trick, he therefore didn’t resort to a stupid lottery prediction gimmick that magicians have done for centuries? Or is it just the execution that bugs you? You’re okay if he did it by having a laser engraver inscribe the balls on the stand real time, but are pissy if he used a camera fade to mask physically swapping the balls? Why is one tech gimmick okay but another tech gimmick a cheap shot? > [@](#): > > If one believes, as I do, that in his fairly long list of programs he _hasn’t_ used actors, then I think it follows logically that he wouldn’t resort to the equally cheap and equally simple use of camera tricks. If, on the other hand, one believes that this recent illusion was camera trickery, then there’s no reason to believe he’s used anything but actors in his past tricks. Proving it either way is difficult. If we’re going only on simplicity, then sure, actors and camera trickery it is. Nonsense. Maybe he does use actors in some cases - he apparently hired a juggler for that promo. But really, just because he might use accomplices in one trick does not mean he uses them in another, similar trick. There are plenty of conjuring tricks that are fully convincing and that do not require accomplices. There are often numerous ways to pull of a similar result. The key to a successful magician is to use lots of different techniques, so he can’t be outguessed. Doing the same thing the same way repeatedly leads to people figuring out the gimmick. **Nars Glinley** said: > [@](#): > > Most magic, with the exception of sleight of hand tricks, are ridiculously simple once you know the secret. The difficult/skillful part is coming up with new ways to show misdirection etc. Even the gimmick of sleight of hand is simple, it’s the execution that requires talent and training. The real skill in magic is in making the presentation and misdirection look natural. Two people can pull off the exact same sleight of hand trick, and do it with the same skill in handling, but one not be as good at making the rest of his motions similar so that the sleight of hand looks like a natural part of his body and hand motions rather than a deliberate action. That one will be a poorer act. **Princhester** said: > [@](#): > > If I was building something like this I would make the boxes loose enough that the ball fell straight into place. I would put a little doughnut shaped pad at the bottom to solve the first problem in your list. No way would I solve it by making the boxes tight. Isn’t that pretty much “If I ran the zoo”? “If I ran the zoo, I’d put the tigers next to the zebras because they’re both striped. I’d put the platypus next to the duck because they both have bills.” Just because _you_ would think to do something a certain way does not mean everyone else would. In this case, apparently Darren Brown did not think to use rubber sockets for the balls. **Colophon** , thanks for that gif. Definitely indicates something happened with the balls. **Peter Morris** said: > [@](#): > > There is a vast literature on the subject. There are a huge number of ways that he could have made his reveal using standard conjuring tricks. There would be no need for him to resort to camera trickery. I know there are numerous ways to do this kind of trick, but how many of those actually apply to the performance we witnessed? The balls were apparently in place on the stand in full view the entire time from before the numbers were announced until he rotated the stand for the reveal. If the video is live and unretouched, at no time did he have the opportunity to swap the balls himself, or to apply labels or anything. The stand is thin and clear, so there is very little likelihood the stand could have mechanisms in it. The stage appears to be a large room with the wall a distance off. I know appearances can be deceiving, but this gives every indication of being the undecorated room wall for the soundstage and it is some distance back from the tray, not much room for an accomplice to use a stick from behind, for instance. If he didn’t know the numbers before the drawing (and most of us are assuming that is the case), then _someone_ had to swap them or mark them while they are in plain view. There is no time the balls are not on the camera. However, there is no live studio audience. That is a **strong** suggestion that the trick _he_ pulled off _in this instance_ could not be done live. **Half Man Half Wit** said: > [@](#): > > What about the possibility of virtual balls? Put three coloured dots on the face of every (otherwise blank) ball, have a computer track those, overlay each ball’s picture with a texture showing the correct number (and no tracking dots, obviously). And presto! Lottery number prediction. And how is that any less a cheap trick than using a camera feature? Why is a technological camera trick to insert a digital image of numbers onto balls okay but a technological camera trick to mask the swapping of physical balls for ones with the right numbers too cheap and unacceptable? Anyway, that’s far more complicated and prone to detection. The text moves with the balls as the stand is rotated, and the text distorts properly on the curved surface. I’m thinking not likely. **Princhester** said: > [@](#): > > See above, in my view the fact it stuck partway up is not compatible with the very simple physical design required if the whole thing is video trickery. The timing is compatible with the last ball having something physical done to it last, just before Brown walks across. In point of fact, we’re not saying the whole thing is video trickery, and we are saying that something physical was done to the ball. We just are saying it was done while a camera trick was masking that physical activity, rather than it being done in full view. **DanBlather** said: > [@](#): > > I think there may be some significance to the fact that the balls are not in the same order as they were drawn I thought about that, but I don’t think so. All he did was change the order of presentation from smallest to largest, which is how they are typically presented by the lottery on TV and printed results. Typically a person enters their numbers in the same order. The balls come out in any order, and the drawn numbers are sequenced for subsequent presentations. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542/135 "2009-09-18T23:48:26Z")
New thread about his latest stunt > **[Derren Brown sticks the nation](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=532597)** > > … or does he? Brown’s latest stunt, just shown a moment ago on UKTV, was to use suggestion to make people unable to get up from their chairs. About half the in studio audience were stuck, and unable to stand. Brown said it would be less effective... [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-derren-brown-predict-the-lottery-numbers/509542.md?page=6)