Everyone said they always thought it was "card shark".One of the etymologies that is frequently debated in bars and other public gathering places is that of card shark v. I just took a very informal, unscientific poll of 5 people. I think they are interchangable in the minds of 99% percent of people who really don't care about it that much. But as Tommy said fish and shark are used differently in different situations, as a gauge of a players skill. Maybe it's back to that "advantage play" VS "cheating" thing. There really is no definition of sharp that would indicate, advantage, ruthlessness or the like. One definition of sharp is a very keen or astute person. One definition of shark is a ruthless person, or a person who victimizes others. You rarely ever hear of a pool hustler refered to as a "pool sharp". Pool Shark is a common term for a pool hustler. Especially if they have a similar connotation. Some of the confusion may come from other words that sound similar. But he was one that did it as a side line and was a music teacher and a performer by trade. I don't consider Walter Scott a professional cheat. I feel that anyone doing it and not necessarily writing or publishing a book or other media - or out there cheating - but being skilled with cards and the subject matter would fit the mold. Or those bits of business would not be written up the way that they were. And the magic section is filled with bits of business you get the feeling that he did do magic. But in the books it is written that he played cards. He could have been both or just a guy with a heavy interest in both subjects that worked for the railroad.īut his skill with a deck is sure because he wrote the book and know one knows if he made a living doing card cheating or magic. He could have been a cheat he could have been a magician. The book expert at the card table represented both magic and the world of advantage playing or cheating. It was the book that inspired Vernon, Miller, and countless others. The reason is that he wrote the book that started it all for magic. I would say Erdnase was a card shark or a card sharp. What makes a person a card shark? From my point of view and the way that I feel about Erdnase I feel that they do not have to be a card cheat. They know a few stacked-deck gambling effects by Scarne and the basic handling of base dealing, but they'd probably spend more time getting shot at than actually getting the money.Īnd for the record, I could very well be included in that list of ne'er-do-wells! However, I haven't the sand to even try and pull it off!Īnd Tommy, thanks for the breakdown. These guys don't really have the skills they would need to get it done. I guess I was caught up in thinking about those blabbermouth knucklebusters I see hanging around magic shops and trying to come off like their the next person that the ghost of Vernon will come searching for. I really wasn't looking at it that broadly. My point is that while most magicians can't throw out a bunch of centers or riffle stacking to win each hand, they DEFINATLY can "get the money" by just applying a glimpse or peek throughout the night. I point this out because a simple bubble peak or heel glimpse can EASILY get a ton of money and something well within most magicians skill level. Generally(and I mean generally), magicians have much greater SKILL than card cheats but mearly lack the knowledge of how and when to apply it(and the morals and guts to actually do it). that it would be difficult to "get the money" and that many could. Interesting comment because this is general view magicians have. Some of them may want us to think they're truly on the grift, with all the romatic notions that may include, but I doubt they could really get the money. From my limited point of view I have always viewed magicians who use gambling cheat themes in their magic to be nothing more than playing the part of the card shark (or sharp).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |