DERREN BROWN - The Events (How it was done 9pm tonight)
09-09-2009, 03:35 PM
#1
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DERREN BROWN - The Events (How it was done 9pm tonight)
Anybody watching this tonight? 10:35pm - 10:45pm LIVE on Channel 4
Think it will probably quite interesting to predict the lottery!! Lets see if he gets it right.
Think it will probably quite interesting to predict the lottery!! Lets see if he gets it right.
Last edited by JokerDisco; 11-09-2009 at 08:45 AM.
Trending Topics
09-09-2009, 04:37 PM
#10
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: .
Posts: 5,831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Youngben - you cant predict horse races either but he did until he explained it ten mins from end of show
copied and pasted for you mate, explains it better than I can
In this one he told us that he had invented a fool-proof system for predicting the winners of horse races. To demonstrate this system he introduced us to Khadisha who had received anonymous five winning tips from Derren. On the basis of these previous wins she borrowed Ł4,000 which she wanted to place on one final bit.
What Khadisha and the audience didn't know was that there was no real system. Khadisha was one of 7,776 who Derren had initially contacted. All of those people had been given a tip for the first race. That first race had six runners and each of those horses was sent as the tip to 1,296 of those people. So 1,296 of them had a winning prediction and the other dropped out. This continued for four more races, with 5/6 of the group being eliminated at each stage. Over the course of five races this whittled the original 7,776 people down to one, Khadisha, who had received five winning tips. But because of the way the experiment was arranged, one of the original group had to have received five successful tips. Of course, at the beginning of the project, Derren had no way of knowing which of the original participants this would be.
So after five races, Khadisha is convinced that the system works. But that's because she didn't have the full picture. She only saw the system from her point of view. But that (flawed) perspective gave her enough confidence in the (completely fake) system to borrow a huge sum of money to bet on a horse race.
This was then used as the set-up for a magic trick where her horse loses, but Derren changes her betting slip to be a bet on the winning horse. To me, that's not the interesting part of the programme. To me, the interesting thing is what this experiment shows about the nature of believe.
Going into the final race Khadisha had total confidence in the system. She had seen it working on the five previous races. She didn't know how it worked (if you stop to think about it logically, there's no possible way that it could have worked) but that didn't matter to her. She just knew that it worked.
Of course, if she had seen the full picture there's no way that she would have had the same amount of confidence in the system. If she had seen the full picture then she would have had no confidence in the at all. With all the information, she would never have borrowed that huge sum of money.
Derren hinted that this was a similar process to the one that convinces some people that homoeopathic remedies or alternative medicine works. A small number of people do see positive results following these treatments. But for a far larger number of people there's no effect at all. But you rarely hear about the failures. If you went against you better judgement and tried a homoeopathic remedy that didn't work, you probably wouldn't shout about about it. You'd probably feel a bit embarrassed and want to keep it quiet. It's the tiny number of people who feel better that you hear from. They are the ones who the homoeopaths shout about. They are the people who are only too happy to give you anecdotal evidence about how doctors could do nothing for their mother but how at the first sniff of primrose oil she was leaping around the room again.
Those people are like Khadisha. They don't have the full story. Arguing from your personal experience has no relevance in cases like this. Something that works for you might not have worked at all for the majority of people. You might, like Khadisha, just be the random person who it will work for.
I remember towards the final they had to send out a load of film crews to film as anyone could have won
copied and pasted for you mate, explains it better than I can
In this one he told us that he had invented a fool-proof system for predicting the winners of horse races. To demonstrate this system he introduced us to Khadisha who had received anonymous five winning tips from Derren. On the basis of these previous wins she borrowed Ł4,000 which she wanted to place on one final bit.
What Khadisha and the audience didn't know was that there was no real system. Khadisha was one of 7,776 who Derren had initially contacted. All of those people had been given a tip for the first race. That first race had six runners and each of those horses was sent as the tip to 1,296 of those people. So 1,296 of them had a winning prediction and the other dropped out. This continued for four more races, with 5/6 of the group being eliminated at each stage. Over the course of five races this whittled the original 7,776 people down to one, Khadisha, who had received five winning tips. But because of the way the experiment was arranged, one of the original group had to have received five successful tips. Of course, at the beginning of the project, Derren had no way of knowing which of the original participants this would be.
So after five races, Khadisha is convinced that the system works. But that's because she didn't have the full picture. She only saw the system from her point of view. But that (flawed) perspective gave her enough confidence in the (completely fake) system to borrow a huge sum of money to bet on a horse race.
This was then used as the set-up for a magic trick where her horse loses, but Derren changes her betting slip to be a bet on the winning horse. To me, that's not the interesting part of the programme. To me, the interesting thing is what this experiment shows about the nature of believe.
Going into the final race Khadisha had total confidence in the system. She had seen it working on the five previous races. She didn't know how it worked (if you stop to think about it logically, there's no possible way that it could have worked) but that didn't matter to her. She just knew that it worked.
Of course, if she had seen the full picture there's no way that she would have had the same amount of confidence in the system. If she had seen the full picture then she would have had no confidence in the at all. With all the information, she would never have borrowed that huge sum of money.
Derren hinted that this was a similar process to the one that convinces some people that homoeopathic remedies or alternative medicine works. A small number of people do see positive results following these treatments. But for a far larger number of people there's no effect at all. But you rarely hear about the failures. If you went against you better judgement and tried a homoeopathic remedy that didn't work, you probably wouldn't shout about about it. You'd probably feel a bit embarrassed and want to keep it quiet. It's the tiny number of people who feel better that you hear from. They are the ones who the homoeopaths shout about. They are the people who are only too happy to give you anecdotal evidence about how doctors could do nothing for their mother but how at the first sniff of primrose oil she was leaping around the room again.
Those people are like Khadisha. They don't have the full story. Arguing from your personal experience has no relevance in cases like this. Something that works for you might not have worked at all for the majority of people. You might, like Khadisha, just be the random person who it will work for.
I remember towards the final they had to send out a load of film crews to film as anyone could have won
Last edited by PT; 09-09-2009 at 04:41 PM.
10-09-2009, 08:38 AM
#15
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest I reckon that the left hand side of the screen was replaced digitally with a still image, then an assistant puts the numbers onto the balls as they are being read out on the BBC, then it cuts back to the normall image.
Something about the way they were holding a hand held camera to make it jumpy gave you sense that this was for real.
Something about the way they were holding a hand held camera to make it jumpy gave you sense that this was for real.
10-09-2009, 12:11 PM
#19
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest I reckon that the left hand side of the screen was replaced digitally with a still image, then an assistant puts the numbers onto the balls as they are being read out on the BBC, then it cuts back to the normall image.
Something about the way they were holding a hand held camera to make it jumpy gave you sense that this was for real.
Something about the way they were holding a hand held camera to make it jumpy gave you sense that this was for real.
Yeah, that is the most likely way that I can think he achieved it. Hope that is not correct though, as that kinda seems like cheating to me. I mean that trick would then have not worked in front of a live audience.
Steve
10-09-2009, 01:06 PM
#21
PassionFord Regular
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: scotland
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-09-2009, 01:10 PM
#22
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However as Dan says.... he doesnt normally use camera trickery.
Plus it would have been a right mission for a live audience to be there for 10 mins worth of filiming.
hhmmmmmmmm......back to the drawing board or maybe just wait untill Friday.
10-09-2009, 09:59 PM
#25
Regular Contributor
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: scarborough
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I watched it last night and spent hours trying to figure it out, sky plus is great!!!!
I noticed the last ball no39 was sitting slightly higher than before, he writes the numbers down after the draw to give assistant putting balls into rack a little longer to finish!!
Dont forget DB aint a magician he just manipulates everything and is bloody good at it. If he had shown the balls first then the draw...........NOW that would be a awesome!!!
Anyway Paul Daniels would have got em all and the Bonus Ball!!!!!
I noticed the last ball no39 was sitting slightly higher than before, he writes the numbers down after the draw to give assistant putting balls into rack a little longer to finish!!
Dont forget DB aint a magician he just manipulates everything and is bloody good at it. If he had shown the balls first then the draw...........NOW that would be a awesome!!!
Anyway Paul Daniels would have got em all and the Bonus Ball!!!!!
11-09-2009, 08:19 AM
#28
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 6,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BELOW LINK CONTAINS EXPLANATION....... (dont watch if you want to wait until Derren Brown explains it himself...)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jae7M6htaiM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jae7M6htaiM
11-09-2009, 08:33 AM
#29
Regular Contributor
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Scotland, Ayrshire
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BELOW LINK CONTAINS EXPLANATION....... (dont watch if you want to wait until Derren Brown explains it himself...)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jae7M6htaiM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jae7M6htaiM
Still don't get it
11-09-2009, 08:44 AM
#31
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cant go on youtube at work.
is it like my theory of the camera trickery? i.e still digital image on the left whilst an assistant changes the balls as they come out?
11-09-2009, 08:57 AM
#32
Regular Contributor
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Scotland, Ayrshire
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed. Camera tricks aren't an illusion, that's why I still not understand. If in tonights it is camera tricks I'll be dissapointed.
11-09-2009, 09:25 AM
#33
Weird how the fact its the lottery numbers makes it so much more interesting to people?
The trick is no more difficult than if he asked someone their name then had that written on the balls, but that wouldnt stir up anywhere near as much interest for most people.
He's very good at capturing the public's attention.
The trick is no more difficult than if he asked someone their name then had that written on the balls, but that wouldnt stir up anywhere near as much interest for most people.
He's very good at capturing the public's attention.
11-09-2009, 09:57 AM
#34
I'd wager that the majority of the population have, at some point, wished they could predict the lottery. I doubt many people have wished they could guess their neighbour's middle name.
11-09-2009, 10:26 AM
#35
It's not really weird - Saying you can guess someone's name, and saying that you know how to predict the lottery (so you could win millions of pounds) are two very different claims.
I'd wager that the majority of the population have, at some point, wished they could predict the lottery. I doubt many people have wished they could guess their neighbour's middle name.
I'd wager that the majority of the population have, at some point, wished they could predict the lottery. I doubt many people have wished they could guess their neighbour's middle name.
Unless people are actually stupid enough to think he really did do it in advance when of course he didnt as there are 14 million to one odds stopping him.
Maybe im just more logical than a lot of folk, but to me the only question is how derren wrote on or changed some balls, the fact that it was lottery numbers or a name is irrelevant as I know in both cases it happened after he knew the results anyway.
Last edited by Chip; 11-09-2009 at 10:27 AM.
11-09-2009, 11:18 AM
#37
But given that we know he HASNT predicted the lottery numbers, as he told us them AFTER they were announced, so all we are wondering is how he managed to write on the balls or swap out the balls, its no different surely?
Unless people are actually stupid enough to think he really did do it in advance when of course he didnt as there are 14 million to one odds stopping him.
Unless people are actually stupid enough to think he really did do it in advance when of course he didnt as there are 14 million to one odds stopping him.
I totally get your point, and when you strip away all the showbiz, sure it's a simple illusion - But it's pretty obvious why the lottery link has generated so much interest. After the fact there's a realisation that it's just a trick, but during the 'act' and shortly after many many people were thinking "What the fuck!"
It's like David Copperfield hiding the Statue of Liberty. It's technically no different to simple card misdirection - But one is "cool", the other is "WOW!" .
11-09-2009, 11:28 AM
#38
Shizzle My Nizzle
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ESSEX
Posts: 3,755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest I reckon that the left hand side of the screen was replaced digitally with a still image, then an assistant puts the numbers onto the balls as they are being read out on the BBC, then it cuts back to the normall image.
Something about the way they were holding a hand held camera to make it jumpy gave you sense that this was for real.
Something about the way they were holding a hand held camera to make it jumpy gave you sense that this was for real.
Thats not what hes about, he doesnt suppost magic, or claim to have any psychic or future seeing powers.
His take is purley Mathematical and Psychological and I love it.
He can get away with telling everyone how he does things simply because he is so clever him self and sooo fast thinking He knows he can tell people becuase 99.9% simply wont be able to replicate his work.
Really pissed off im out to a beer festival and on to an indian at 11pm tonight so am going to miss it. But will be sure to C4OD it.
Really intregued how hes created this "illusion", I too thought it would be similar to the horses race program but it cant surley, as this the lotto drw and his programme were live! So he only had one shot at it.
Cant wait!!!!!!!
11-09-2009, 11:33 AM
#40
Shizzle My Nizzle
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ESSEX
Posts: 3,755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He has either dont something along his horse racing line of thinking or used some very clever psychology to make us think something.