Which is more difficult: shifting around and keeping hidden five 20 pound notes which are completely different colors from the envelopes, or one extra orange envelope?
Watch when Penn is suggesting the possibility of sliding an extra envelope into the envelope. Archer does not have a good poker face. As soon as Penn mentions an extra envelope, Archer gets a very disappointed look on his face, like he’s been caught.
Maybe. If so, his response (saying that’s not how he did it) is more likely to get him a shot at Vegas with P&T than admitting the trick was uncovered.
The trick wasn’t uncovered, at least not completely. He said that he did not slide anything into anything.
What Penn & Teller seemed to be missing was that he didn’t have to slide the extra envelope into another envelope. He just had to keep it behind one.
If you listen to the patter, it’s got the same Something, Nothing, Mine, Yours, and Sex labels, so still 5 envelopes.
However, in that same video, when he pulls out the money, he shows both sides of the envelope. I’d think it would be really tough to be holding two envelopes there and not have it be visible. I don’t think there is a sixth envelope.
I think I’m gonna have to call *Bullshit *on P&T here and say the whole thing is a set up, and that they were not actually fooled. Are you telling me that Teller, possibly greatest the magic historian, wouldn’t put together the 5 ₤20 notes/5 envelopes bit? Why not use a ₤100 note? The answer has to be because the trick can only work with five ₤20s. So many tricks must depend on this type of ‘coincidence’ that it would have to be obvious. Don’t you wonder a little why P&T accepted Archer’s half answer about not putting anything in the envelopes without following up about taking something out? My guess is that P&T selected the guys they felt would fit in best with their Vegas show, and the rest is all scripted so that they ‘win’.
Of course, this would be very hard to prove…but isn’t that what makes these guys the best?
The only question for me at this point is “Is it unethecal for them to pretend that it wasn’t scripted, or is it no different than ‘pretending’ to saw the lady in half?”
(I also should note that I had no idea how the trick worked until reading **JSexton’s **spoiler. And now it seems obvious)
Two envelopes stacked together could look like one, especially if the extra one doesn’t have a flap. You really don’t get that good a view of the back of the envelope.
To me, at least, this seems to be the method Occam’s razor would indicate. It’s simpler than starting out with money in every envelope and then somehow sneaking it out as you hand out each chosen envelope. It’s also simpler than somehow slipping the money into the final envelope after the others have been handed out. Also, when Penn suggested that he had slid an extra envelope into the last envelope, Archer did not deny an extra envelope. All he denied was sliding something into something else. If there was no extra envelope then why not also deny that?
Let me modify my statement about Occam’s razor. Occam’s razor actually points to the four audience members being shills and knowing which envelopes to pick, or at least it would if it didn’t seem obvious that something like that would be banned by the rules of the competition.
Another possibility was that he got lucky. He figured that he had a 20% chance that he would be left with the envelope with the money and no way for P&T to detect any trickery because there was none. Of course, there’s an 80% of failing and looking like a fool, but weigh that against a 20% chance at a trip to Vegas (from the U.K.) and at least a small possibility of becoming a star. A lot of people might go for it. Of course, that’s obviously not what he did because we have at least one other tape of him doing the same trick.
There’s no such thing as a £100 note.
And even if there was, and he’d used one, you’d be saying “*why didn’t he use ten £10 notes, it must be because it can only work with a £100.”
*
I did not know that.
Why would I say that? It wouldn’t help with the trick.
The trouble with that theory is that Archer was actually the last magician of the bunch you’d choose on those grounds.
It’s very hard to imagine his downbeat stage persona and patter - let alone that particular trick - translating to the demands of a glossy, spectacular Vegas lounge act. I mean, he’s not exactly Mr Glitz and Glamour, is he?
No, It wasn’t a BBC special . it was produced for ITV, one of the main advert supported rival broadcasters in the UK.
It’s supposedly a pilot for a possible series but viewing figures weren’t that great.
So isn’t that the perfect one they would ‘pick’ if they didn’t want to seem obvious? And P&T are rarely obvious, which is what makes them such great showmen.
I thought the “we thought we’d get fooled, but we didn’t want to be fooled by HIM!” line was a bit of a giveaway.
Or maybe I just like thinking I’m the smartest guy in the room.
I agree with the people that think it’s BS on Penn & Teller’s part
Not only does the 5 x 20 pound notes work, but the fact that when they present their theory to him he kind of gives a look like he needs to clarify a technicality.
It has a bit of a Susan Boyle vibe to it for me.
…or at least the one with the most convoluted logic.
Your argument seems to be that Penn & Teller picked the guy “they felt would fit in best with their Vegas show” (Jan 14), by choosing the one least suited for that role “because they didn’t want to seem obvious” (Jan 16). Huh?
There’s room in Vegas for every kind of act you can imagine.
If Archer’s just going to be a warmup act for P&T, he just needs an entertaining trick.
5 of the 7 UK retail banks authorised to issue Sterling notes issue £100 ones
Maybe so, but if you’re opening for Penn & Teller, that means playing the big room in one of the major casinos - and that’s where glitz and glamour does tend to be at a premium.
One trick’s not enough to make up a whole act - not even a support act.
Occam’s razor dictates that the simplest explanation is always most likely to be correct. In this case it’s that Penn & Teller accepted an honest challenge, and were genuinely blind-sided by a couple of details in the tricks they saw. As I said earlier, I think the producers erred a little on the side of generosity towards the challengers in deciding what counted as a genuine “fooling”, but that’s another matter.
Occam could also make a case that P&T are charlatans by trade (I mean that in a good way), and that any presentation they make should be viewed with a skeptical eye.
And, since my ignorance on the availability of £100 notes has been fought, let me ask…“why not two £500 notes?”
I heard Penn talking on radio about the show before they went over to film it. He said his job would be to pretend he knew what he was talking about and then rely on Teller to tell him how it was done.
I sought this out thanks to this thread, and really enjoyed it.
Just skimming this thread, you’d think Archer was dour and lifeless, but I thought he was energetic and engaging. Sure, the trick itself was lame, but very funny, and I think he’ll do a good job warming up an audience for P&T. Not sure if I feel the same about the guy who does non-false shuffles, silently.