subversplat
writer of wrongs
Erk sorry, I thought people liked to find this stuff out? 


Erk sorry, I thought people liked to find this stuff out?![]()

Remember the chess game against all the Grandmasters?
That was similar but I couldn't figure how he won the last game.

It was against a weak player (university chess club chap) and quite possibly Derren was simply better than him.
Don't believe that for a second but I can believe that Derren mentally overpowered him somehow and won the game with rudimentary chess.

hmm! Don't think he could have beaten him with a few mental tricks - the guy said he'd played like a grandmaster against him![]()
Err...this is worrying
http://scrummymamma.blogspot.com/20...-night-which-made-me.html#c748041993714833900
Check her link - she's a Dr at Bristol University.......sounds dodgy as fuck if you ask me.
----looks like she's a loon, she is on other blogs saying how he's telepathic and goes into great detail about how she's tested him etc.




Win.Do this for mutiple people and only broadcast the one with all succesful guesses?
Fail.ok, so how do you know this? i think he would use something a little more ingenious to stage his tricks + there would be plenty of people out there to testify how he does them.
Fail.That would make sense, and has made me slightly happier.
I don't think DB would have the audacity to film several versions of this prgram, and only run the successful one. He's an intelligent man, wouldn't leave himself as wide open as that. There has to be something else to it.
Win.Given that he can't actually predict the results of races, it's pretty much the only way he can have done it. I think it likely that the whole point of the programme will be at first to show how he can appear to be doing it, and then show how he tricked us and the participants.
A big reason why many magic tricks work is that the audience don't believe the performer would have gone to as much trouble as they have done.
Fail.Maybe it's as simple as convincing the participant that their horse is the one they see winning when infact it's not. Sounds too simple but this is what he did at the dogs when he convinced the bookie he had the winning ticket.
Fail.Win. That sounds very likely.
Win.there's no other way he can do this. mesmerism and sleight of hand are one thing, but 'psychically' predicting winners on the nags? no chance.
It wasn't a system or an exercise in anything.
Win.
Fail.
Fail.
Win.
Fail.
Fail.
Win.
I was hoping for something better than this. It was a poor effort. It proves and tells me nothing. It's fairly obvious that if you do something for long enough you can get the desired result. Wasting nine hours flipping a coin is an exercise in futility in anyone's book surely.Of course it wasn't a system, it was an exercise in demonstrating the probability of predicting an unpredictable outcome. If you expected him to reveal a system that defies all known logic, then I'd imagine you probably would be a bit dissappointed in the show.
That one where he beat all the master chess players? He just memorised their moves and played them against each other![]()
I was hoping for something better than this. It was a poor effort. It proves and tells me nothing. It's fairly obvious that if you do something for long enough you can get the desired result. Wasting nine hours flipping a coin is an exercise in futility in anyone's book surely.
I think everyone should be made to watch Derren Brown. The point is, he isn't magic. And the messages he's getting across are messages everyone should know. Some people know them intellectually, but don't internalise them, and this show was a demonstration in what probability actually means.
Sure, everyone with any degree of understanding of probability guessed what was going on by the time he got ten heads in a row. The point is, ten heads in a row is possible. And if you were to get them, you'd be freaked out. But you shouldn't be. Because eventually anyone can get ten heads in a row. Derren could have got them first, second or fifth time. But that wouldn't have changed the odds.
I'm not sure why people want wizardry, when all any magician does is explicable.

I imagine watching the finished show would have had the opposite effect.I did find myself wondering what would happen legally if the woman featured on the programme, or any other of the participants who had never gambled before they were told to, developed gambling problems after the show.
Win.
Fail.
Fail.
Win.
Fail.
Fail.
Win.
I think you kind of missed the point....
But I guess if someone discovered a thrill to gambling which they had never experienced before because they had never tried.... You would think that watching the programme would make it less likely that people would develop gambling problems because of it stating that there is no system, but that would be a very rational analysis, and people aren't always rational.I imagine watching the finished show would have had the opposite effect.
I quite enjoyed it last night. I still don't know how he did the trick with the 4 people picking a random picture and the picture matching what was in their envelopes.![]()
I quite enjoyed it last night. I still don't know how he did the trick with the 4 people picking a random picture and the picture matching what was in their envelopes.![]()