Brief foreword:

You have probably never heard of me, so let me give you an introduction as to
who I am.

I didn’t grow up around magic shops or magicians, mentors or teachers. In fact, I

enjoyed a quite happy and normal childhood in Belgium. The first time that I
experienced magic, I instantly was fascinated by it.

My fascination came from magic's ability to bring others into a state of

amazement, combined with my interest in psychology. I have now been practicing
magic and mentalism for the past 7 years.

I am excited to finally take my first step in contributing to the magic community. I

hope that this is the beginning of a much larger adventure.

I appreciate you taking the time to read this pdf and I hope you will enjoy it as
much as I do,

Luke Turner.

1st of January 2018.

©Copyright no part of this pdf may be reproduced in any form without written
permission from the author Luke Turner.
Introduction and overview:

When I first started magic, I was obsessed with cards. I would spend hours
perfecting my ambitious card, twisting the aces, my pass etc... just like most other
magicians.
After a while, I got more interested in the psychology of magic, things like NLP
and body language. In other words, Derren Brown.

As I learned more about mentalism, I became interested in what some people

called the “whisper”. Others called it “real" mind reading.
Eventually I learned this to be called “propless" mind reading. This type of mind
reading was inspired by the works of: Peter Turner, Fraser Parker, Atlas Brookings
and so many more. Many of which are students of The Great, and All Powerful…
Gandalf The Grey (Kenton Knepper).
As you might know, Kenton is the creator of a concept called “Dual reality”. He is
also the author of Wonder Words and many other great contributions to our art.

As I continued to study propless mind reading, and continued to learn from other
great mentalists such as Luke Jermay, Luca Volpe, Banachek, Cassidy, and more… I
began to understand that I didn’t know nearly as much as I had originally thought.

I kept searching for those effects that could be done at a moments notice...
No sharpies, gimmicks, pencils, pads, cards or envelopes. Different ways to
answer when someone says “read me".

This search has lead to me create my own ways of answering this question, and in
this PDF I will be sharing one of those ways.

Though this effect is just a small addition to the world of propless mind reading,
this is my contribution to the community which I have learned so much from and
that I’m proud to be a part of.
Effect:
The performer asks the spectator if he is allowed to create a connection with
them, and attempt to read them.
After the spectator agrees, they are asked to build up a playing card in their mind
and think of a country.
They are then asked to imagine being in that country, and visualize the
environment as realistically as possible.
This process allows the performer to divine the country that the spectator is
visualizing, and potentially the city as well (if the spectator would like to take the
process further).
Then, the performer also divines the suit of the spectator’s thought of card.
The spectator is asked to think of the value of the card.
After concentrating on it they are allowed to change their minds, at which point
the value is revealed.
(As an alternative reveal, this is used to build a pin code or some other ideas
covered later on)

Warning!
Please do not overlook the importance of using the following script. Not only does
it elevate the performance, it is also crucial to the method.
Also make sure to check the bonus section for additional ideas presentations and
outs.

Breakdown:
In order to best explain the effect, let's go through the script and break it down:

Performer: “If you would allow me, I would like to build up a connection with you,
and get a sense of how and what you think. Don’t worry, I wont get into any
private thoughts as those are none of my business.”

Side note: I can't stress how important I find it to show a certain level of care
towards the spectator. This genuine care also brings a level of authenticity to your
claims of being able to go deep into their mind.
Performer: “To start off you will build up a playing card in your mind. First imagine
a blank screen. In the corner of that screen imagine seeing the number of your
card.
Great, now I would like you to imagine the suit of your card. Imagine now the
amount of dots along the card, filling in the whole screen until you have the
picture of a random playing card in mind.”

Side note: Not only does this piece of scripting give our “mind reading” a bit of a
mental process (hinting to the fact that this is a delicate one), but this gives us the
first opportunity to create a small deception which will help us out later.
If you have missed it here it is: “...Imagine seeing the number of your card....” we
have very nonchalantly “forced" the spectator to think of a number card as
opposed to a picture card. Now if you are reading this wondering if this works in
the “real world" let me tell you that not only does this fly by, but due to the fact
that they don’t fully know where this is heading they simply and happily follow
your instructions.

Now it is time to move into:

Phase one:

Performer: “First I would like you to concentrate on the suit. This only exists in you
mind correct? Wow, I am feeling a very strong connection with you. I think you are
much better at this than others. You know what, let's try something even more
impossible, would you want that?”

Side note: What we have done here is not only built rapport with the spectator by
making them feeling unique and thereby more likely to comply later. But we have
played up the revelation of the suit so when we go for something even harder it
makes it that much more impressive.

Performer: “Great, so let's try and make this a little more intricate and
challenging. Keep focusing on the first letter of the suit, and why don’t you......
I got it. Think of a country that begins with that letter can you do that for me?
Perfect! Now imagine what that country looks or how you would imagine it be.
Picture yourself there, walking through the scenery, smelling the smells and
hearing the sounds. You can hear people speaking in that language or how you
imagine that language would sound. In fact, can you think of a city in that
country? As that would be one layer deeper into your mind.”

Side note: Let's think about what we just did. We gave our “mind reading” a
realistic process by having them visualize the country. Just like before, when we
had them build the card up in their minds. This will stop the spectator
(subconsciously) from thinking about method as we have just presented them
with one (having them visualize the card and country).
Now when asking the spectator to think of a country, try and make it a spur of the
moment idea and not something pre-planned. This further masks the method
(since we just came up with this idea, we couldn’t have planned a method).

This brings us to the end of the script, where we ask them to think of a city in that
country.

The truth is that if they were to think of a city we would have no way of revealing
it. So, we just need to give them the impression that we still could have gotten it.
Most of the times when prompted to think of a city, they will not be able to. In
that case we proceed with the following script:

Performer: “That is also fine, we’ll just stick to the country... Bearing in mind that
we could have gone for a city as well and it would have been that much more
specific and further away but it’s fine, you are doing great.”
Basically what we are trying to do is make it seem that we would have been able
to get the city.
So, when you reveal the country, you will also get credit for being able to reveal
cities (which you couldn’t have done).
It is also very important to add the line at the end saying that they are doing well,
so as to not let them feel stupid for ruining your effect.
Now let's imagine that the spectator does think of a city, you say the following:

Performer: “Amazing just concentrate on that city for me and on the country as
well. Okay, the country is coming clearer at this moment so let's go with that.”

We can use the fact that the spectator doesn’t completely know what’s coming to
ask them to focus on the city and country, and just reveal the country. This
doesn’t diminish the effect even slightly. Because we’ve communicated to the
spectator that there is a process to mind reading, we can make that process
whatever we need it to be.

The truth is that I have NEVER had that scenario probably because of the
following tip: When you see the spectator thinking of a city after a second just
say: “You know what it’s okay, we can just stick to the country as well it’s all the
same.”

What you can also do is add the line from before stating how the city would have
been even more impossible but you have to watch that the spectator shouldn’t
take it the wrong way and feel guilty enough to start saying that he will try and
think of a city. Just do whatever you feel comfortable with.

That brings us finally to,

Country:

Performer: “So just continue to imagine that country, all of the smells, sounds,
and sights. Imagine seeing a pamphlet flying through the wind. As it begins to
come into focus you realize that is has that country’s name written in big letters,
large across the paper. The closer it gets, the more your eyes begin to focus on the
individual letters. Going through them in your mind. Mixing all the letters.”

Let’s first look at what is going to happen and then see how it fits into the next
script.
As some of you are guessing we are going to proceed with a progressive anagram.
A progressive anagram, for those who don’t know, is basically what it sounds like.
It's a way of using letters to “progress" along a list of words and help to eliminate
others.
I would like to point out that this is one of the SAFEST and most FOOLING
anagrams I have come across. The reason being that most of the time you will get
a maximum of one full “no”, which you can instantly back up with a definite “yes”.
I say fooling because even those who know about anagrams assume that there
are a lot of countries to include, making it impossible to be so clean.

(Check out bonus idea 8 for an alternative method NOT making use of an
anagram.)

Let's get into it.

As mentioned, there are too many countries to keep the anagram clean. So, I just
used the most thought of countries. There is no need to be afraid that the
spectator will think of a country not on the list. However if you are scared you can
always add this script when asking them to think of a country: “I would like you to
think of a country starting with that letter, but make it a country I would know
otherwise there is no way I could make sense of it all.”
And once again thanks to our “mind reading" process, and using the ambiguous
words "it all", it makes perfect sense. Again, I have not found the need to use this
line but feel free to use it.

Anagram:
I will first outline the anagram with added information about the words, and then
explain it bit by bit.
Like any other anagram if you have a “yes” simply move down and if you have a
“no" simply move to the right.
A-----[C/S]------[6]---- Cyprus (6)
| Sweden(6)
|
N-----[C/S]---------[even]-------Cuba (4)
| Slovakia (8)
|
C----[C/S]----S----[7]--------- Denmark(7)
| | Hungary (7)
| |
| [odd]--------- Switzerland (11)
| Spain (5)
D------------ China (5)
|
YES-> -------[C/S]-------[even]--------Canada (6) Scotland (8)

Please don’t find this anagram intimidating as it is the easiest thing in the world!

First just memorize the word ANCD (like ANaConDa), study each of the steps, and
you will have it in no time.
The added words in brackets along the dotted lines are definite hits. This means
that you can use that information to strengthen the anagram along the way.

I recommend that with every anagram you should always look for those definite
hits.

C/S : The C and S represent the first letter of that country. This means that you
can still get a hit by saying that you are getting a sound....like a C or an S. And
simply look for the reaction by mentioning the C and delay a bit until you say S. If
you get no reaction just guess. More on this point later.

Odd or even means that it definitely has an odd or even amount of letters.

A number means that number is the definite amount of letters you will get.
Let’s see how this all fits into the script:

Performer: “Great, keep on mixing all of the letters in your mind. (wait a bit) Hold
on go back...that was an A, yes?”

Side note: This piece of scripting makes it seem as if we nailed the letter they are
thinking of, in reality we just wait long enough for an A to have passed their
minds.

If no: “Hmm... I might be getting ahead of myself, just count the letters in your
mind for me. Ah, yes now I’m getting it clear. It is Exactly 6 letters yes?”

Side note: During anagram I like having them verbally confirm the hits even when
I’m sure of it.
Also when asking them to count, make an effort to look away and then state that
you know exactly how many letters it is.

Performer: “Yes it's coming through now. I’m also getting a sharp sound like a C
(wait for a reaction) or an S?
Reveal the country accordingly. (Later on I discuss another option, which is to not
yet tell them we know the identity of the country)

If yes: “That’s perfect you are very good at this. Just keep on going through all of
the letters for me. That was an N as well yes?

If you get a NO proceed with the C/S script assuring a hit and reveal the country
accordingly. If you don’t want to do it that way you can have them focus on the
amount of letters and say “it's an even amount.... it isn’t 4 is it” which is a closed
question so if yes you respond with: I thought so. And if not : no I didn’t think so.
I personally don’t use this but if you think this extra step doesn’t diminish the
effect but strengthens it go ahead.
Also, learn the amazing C.U.P.S technique by Michael Murray to enhance the
anagram.
If yes : “Its going good so far...the next one is more of a sound, a sharp sound like
a C (wait for reaction) or an S?”

If no: “Hmm... I might be getting ahead of myself, just count the letters in your
mind for me. Ah yes now I’m getting it clear. It is Exactly 7 letters yes?”
Then you can use the “repeat it ploy" by Derren Brown to figure out which one of
the two it is. By saying" just say it over and over in your mind like Denmark.....
(wait for reaction, if you don’t get any) over and over… it is Hungary correct?”

If it is an S : you can ask them to count the amount of letters in the word and say
it is definitely odd and ask a closed question just like before. Or you can just use
the “repeat it” ploy like before.
Once again I highly recommend learning C.U.P.S. by Michael Murray.

If it is a C : “I had the feeling that you would do well with this, and I think I’m
getting another one. It isn’t a D is it?”
Once again through using a closed question we can find out whether they have a
D or not.

If yes: “ I thought so.” And once again you can either use the “repeat it” ploy. Or
tell them there is an even amount of letters in there.
(I have found that it is most likely Canada as Scotland is much less frequent).

If no : Well then you know it is China.

(Check out bonus idea #6 for a great way to hide this process.)

That’s the end first part!

I know this seems long but in performance it all happens quite quickly.

P.S. If you find that in your part of the world other countries are chosen simply
adjust the anagram accordingly.
Practice and rehearse the anagram until you know it cold then the only thing you
have to and should focus on is your presentation. Don’t make this seem like you
are simply pumping for information. Instead use the idea that has been built up
until this point that “mind reading” has a process, use that to your advantage.

Don’t forget to check out the Bonus section for additional ideas.

Now we can move into :

Phase two:
There are a lot of directions that we can take this but let's start simply by
following the current script of revealing the value.

Performer: “That was incredible wasn’t it? The way that you were able to transmit
your thoughts to me”.

Side note: It’s awkward to compliment yourself, but it’s perfectly acceptable to
compliment your spectator. When you say “That was incredible wasn’t it”, it
sounds like you’re admiring what you’ve just done (which is tacky). However,
when you then follow up with, “The way that YOU were able to transmit your
thoughts to me”, you transform your admiration for yourself into a compliment
for your spectator. They know that it wasn’t them, but instead you, so that
admiration eventually comes back to you anyways.
If they believe that they’ve had a role in this phenomenon, they are much less
likely to look for a method, as it would discredit any ability that they have. They
would have to discredit themselves in order to discredit you.

This is based on a idea of Kenton Knepper in wonder words.

I highly recommend checking out Kenton’s material as it is the best place to learn
the fundamentals in mentalism and magic.
Performer: “So that tells me the suit of your card was… (fill in accordingly to the
first letter of the country). But if you remember you have also attached a value to
the suit you were thinking of, yes? Great, so please focus on that value for me
now.”

Side note: This is the conclusion of the deception we have started way in the
beginning. By asking them earlier to think of a number and now reframing it as a
“value" it will make the spectator remember he could have chosen the picture
cards as well. We obviously know he didn’t so we are going to use that to our
advantage.

I later learned this to be the “o force" by Fraser Parker and Ross Taylor.
I had individually come up with this idea and am allowed to explain this with the
approval of both Ross and Fraser.

Performer: “Now the values in cards can range from ace to king. To make this as
simple as possible let’s group the values ace to ten in the number cards. The Jack
through to the rest will be picture cards”.

Side note: I very specifically don’t mention all of the court cards as (I think) it
gives the illusion that there are more than 3 (even though they might technically
know that there are only 3). And we have purposely grouped the ace with number
cards to make our life easier later on.

Performer: “If you are thinking of a number card I would like you to switch in your
mind to a picture card. And if you’re thinking of a picture card just switch to a
number.”

Side note: Here again we are taking advantage of the underlying “mind reading”
process that we have built up. So they will just happily follow along instead of
asking why they should do the things that you ask them to. But if you think that
you need some more justification simply say: “The number you have been thinking
of has already become a bit “old". Lets try and make it a fresh thought...”
 Performer: “Now in your mind, just like before I would like you to spell out your
value. So four would be....4 letters, five would....also be 4 letters but you get the
point. Ah like three would be 5 letters. So just do that now.”

Side note: The examples chosen in the script are VERY carefully chosen. First of all
by making the “mistake" of five also being 4 letters we subtly point out that even
if we might find out how many letters they are thinking of it still doesn’t mean we
know their card. Also this helps us later on when they are on a picture card they
will also be thinking of 4 or 5 letters, so this helps sell the illusion that there are
many values with the same amount of letters.

Performer:
“Do you have a number in mind? That’s great. Keep on repeating it in your mind…
hold on I’m getting a smile from you here. This is also 4 just like my mistake
before? No but its close, its a 5 yes? Great ,you are thinking of the Queen am I
correct?”

Side note: Let’s recap. We know that the spectator must have chosen a number
card to begin with. This means that the spectator must have switched to a picture
card. Because we have placed the ace with the number cards, the only cards the
spectator can be thinking of are the JACK, KING and QUEEN. This means that the
possibilities are limited to either 4 or 5 letters. The methods of knowing which
one of the three are being thought of are plenty. You can use a hanging
statement or the C.U.P.S. technique. What I use is the closed question as
described in the script, if it happens to be 4, I just use a repeat it ploy or any other
method described above.
I also recommend learning the two way out by Peter Turner which is ideal for this
situation.

I chose this particular method for revealing the value as I find it fits in with the
whole “process” we have built. Therefore it is a continuation of what we have
achieved before as opposed to something different.
That’s it! That is the basic performance of the routine.

BONUS IDEAS AND OUTS :

You can also apply the following ideas:

#1. When going for the country do not reveal it just yet. In other words do
everything until starting the anagram. Tell the spectator that you will get back to
that. Then use Springboard by Michael Murray (which I sadly can’t explain) and
use the spectator’s value to create a pin or reverse pin guess.

Then say this: “As you imagine walking around in that country, imagine
remembering that you need some cash. You pass by the nearest ATM machine and
punch that pin in. Your pin (small reframe).”
Now you are able to reveal the place and a pin at the same time. “Your pin is [X],
and you are in [X]!”

Embedding the pin code in their visualization of being in that country adds to the
imaginary world that you’re having them create, this reinforces the credibility of
the process that we’ve been building up.

(The idea of using Springboard to create a pin or reverse pin guess came from
Peter Turner's at the table lecture and utsukushii by Fraser Parker. )

#2. You can also force a card or read a marked deck, and say this when asking
them to focus on the suit (it’s AMAZING):
“You know what, in fact change the suit you are thinking of”

When revealing the number:

“Think of the number of the card....”

And afterwards you reframe:

“...You even thought of a random card...”
Even though they only thought of the suit of their card (they didn’t think of a
random number), with some reframing, we can make it seem as if the entire card
was thought of. This gives us the ability to also know the exact number and use
that to do whatever you want. For that I also highly recommend checking out
Springboard.

#3. What you can also do is after having them think of a card ask the follow closed
question: “ your card isn’t red is it?”
And simply reply according to the answer: “yes I thought so" or: “no I didn’t think
so". What we have gained here is that if the spectator is thinking of a red card the
possible countries would be limited to : Denmark and Hungary. Thus dismissing
the need for an anagram.
I personally don’t want to add that question or go down that road but if you think
its suits you go ahead and use it.

#4. Invisible deck out.

If for some reason it all fails. You miss the Country and you miss the card, it has all
gone wrong. Or you just don’t feel comfortable enough performing this yet, I
would suggest the following out.

Have an invisible deck set up as you normally would. But on the backs of all of the
hearts and diamonds write the countries Hungary and Denmark respectively large
across the card.
On the backs of the clubs and spades however since there are more possible
countries write Canada and Spain( as those are chosen quite often) respectively
on the width of the card on the bottom. In that case if another country is thought
of you can cover it with the previous card and simply reveal the reversed card in
the deck.

#5. When anagramming and getting a no at the C, you have a higher chance of it
being either of the red cards and can state that it is exactly 7 letters as opposed to
asking for an S.
#6. During a wonderful video chat with Peter Turner he suggested using the “ one
ahead" principle and the idea of not needing to anagram out lout so it looks
cleaner. Which has ultimately lead me to the following handling:

During performance when asking them to imagine the country say this: “I would
like you to focus on specific details of that country. Imagine looking around at
certain things. Good.”
Now grab a pen and write down :”there is an A in this(or the country)” show this
only the that spectator and say: “ is this correct?”
To everyone around you it seems as if you are hitting on the things the spectator
is imagining about that country. They have no clue you are talking about the
name of that country, creating a beautiful “dual reality”.

Keep asking them to continue to focus on things in that country.

(Again this makes sense because that is our “process”)

Continue to write down the letters of the anagram and continue to ask them if
that is correct until you hit a no.
Now you could write down the amount of letters or any other information
needed to eliminate any other option.
Or you would leave it there and use a two way out.
(If you happen to get all if them correct (Canada) simply continue to reveal the
country as usual and finish the effect.)

The beautiful thing here is that everyone around you doesn’t know you were
trying to figure out what country this is, only that you were hitting on things the
spectator imagined.

Which allows you to say this: “ I can’t seem to get the country right now, we’ll get
back to that in a moment.”

Ask the spectator to focus on their card and say that it is coming through.
Take a piece of paper and write down the COUNTRY and fold it.
Give that to the spectator and say that you have committed yourself to the card
and can’t change it anymore. Ask them what card they chose and let them tell
you. Now say that you will give the country another try and write the CARD down.
Give that to the spectator as well and let them name the country out loud.

Now you can take both pieces of paper and open them up to show you have
correctly got both thoughts.

#7. During that same chat with Peter he also suggested the idea of throwing in a
revelation that isn’t connected to the card so as to dismiss the idea of the country
also being connected to the card.
What I like to do is use Fraser Parker's “bold o" to do a propless drawing
duplication and reveal that drawing whilst they are imagining walking in that
country.
What you could also do is perform a “name guess" suggesting that they meet this
person in that country.

You can find great name guesses and propless drawing duplications in Fraser’s
“book of angels” and in Peter Turners “devil in disguise 2” and “bigger fish 2”.
(The" bold o" can be found in Fraser’s book of the fallen.)

#8. After talking to Fraser he suggested I find a way to streamline the process and
eliminate the anagram entirely.

This is my Bold but streamlined handling.

Have them think of a country as you usually would. Instead of using an anagram
we are going to take advantage of the fact that the cards are naturally divided in
two groups: red and black. This means that half of the time (or more if you
consider the fact that hearts is chosen very frequently) you will have the
spectator think of a red card.
This means that the only possible countries are Hungary and Denmark. And we
have the advantage that they are both 7 letters.
Using this and all of the other details we know about the possible countries we
are able to do the following process.

Performer: “ Continue to focus on the name of the country. Now might be one
higher but this is exactly 7 letters yes?

Side note: Like we mentioned before, at least half of the time they will be
thinking of a red card. Which means half of the time it will be 7 letters.
The way I scripted the sentence :” Now MIGHT be one higher...”.
I specifically don’t say what might be one higher, whether my digit (7) or their
digit (8). This means that we are covered for the numbers 6,7 and 8.
The spectator will simply assume that they misheard you.
What you can also use is the script: “ Now THIS might be one higher.” Not
explaining what “THIS" means and are covered for the previous mentioned
possibilities

If 7:
Performer: “ that is perfect, you are doing great. Just say it over and over in your
mind like...Denmark...Denmark.”

Side note: This is the scenario that you will come across at least half of the time.
Now you simply use the repeat it ploy or a two way out to reveal the correct
country, as the only possible countries are Hungary and Denmark.

If 6:
Performer: “ I should have trusted my first instinct, I already thought I was one
higher.”

Side note: The possible countries here are Cyprus, Sweden and Canada.
(Cyprus I found is less frequently chosen.)
What you could do is use Frasers “three way out" or a repeat it ploy throwing out
Canada(or Cyprus). And then differentiating between the C and S with the
method described in the main handling of the effect.
If 8:
Performer: “ I should have trusted my first instinct, I already you would be one
higher.”

Side note: Here the possible countries are only Slovakia or Scotland.
Simply use the repeat it ploy or the two way out.

If 5:
Performer : “ Alright I was getting ahead of myself. I sense that you are a more
creative person so just continue to focus on the image of the country.”

Side note: Because we have given our mind reading a “process” this makes total
sense.
The possible countries are only Spain or China. You could differentiate between
the C and S. You could also use the repeat it ploy or a two way out.
Since we have only “messed up" once and justified it, the effect stays as strong.

If 4:
Just use the same script as if it would be 5.
The only possible country is Cuba.
You can hit that perfectly, have fun.

If 11:
Just use the same script as if it would be 5.
The only possible country is Switzerland.
You can hit that perfectly, have fun.

That’s it. In performance it flows well and half of the time you hit the 7.
This is much more streamlined and direct.

The idea of being on off by one with numbers is from Peter Turner. This method
is allot of fun and allows you to have a different method than the usual anagram.
Conclusion:

Well, I guess this is the end of our journey together... or perhaps the beginning.

I really love this effect because it hits hard, and is impromptu.

It is, in essence, my small contribution to the ever growing pool of knowledge in
our community.

The point I would really like to bring out is how a good script can change a
performer. Through this effect you give your performance a structure. You are not
performing a single effect anymore. Instead you are giving the audience a view
into your world. I hope that you will take the principles scattered throughout this
PDF and apply them to the rest of your repertoire.

I would like to give a huge thanks to Christophe Jelinski for his endless patience
and devotion. This PDF would not have been possible without him.

Thank you Kenton Knepper

Thank you Fraser Parker
Thank you Peter Turner

And last but not least I would like to thank you (the reader).
Thank you for taking your time to read this and I really hope you find something
within these pages that you like and benefit from.

Wishing you all the best,

Luke Turner. YLW119