The Equivoque Method

There’s one technique that keeps resurfacing in the minds and sets of top magicians and mentalists. On paper, it’s deceptively simple. In practice, it’s one of the most layered and challenging forces to pull off convincingly.

We're talking about the equivoque force, also called the magician's choice.

Whether you know this force inside out or you're just hearing about it now, we’re confident you’ll find something useful here—including a piece of scientific research that might change everything you thought you knew about equivoque.

• Harness The Power of Dual Reality

• Natural Vanishes Magic Technique

• The Mishear Convincer Explained

Some of the best minds in magic have explored this force and shared their thinking with the community—among them, the legendary Max Maven, who even recorded a playful video just to clarify how the word is properly pronounced.

More recently, brilliant insights on the topic can be found in the work of British mentalist Hector Chadwick, to name just one. Funnily enough, even Chadwick wrote a blog post discussing the pronunciation of this technique.

So, what is the equivoque force?

It's a way of forcing any item present in a set, using no props, only relying on the script and the interaction with the spectator. Most of the time, this happens through a process of narrowing down to that very item, instead of a single, standalone choice.

The Key Words

The most classic approach to the equivoque force employs the use of the words keep or eliminate.

You have likely seen a magician forcing a card using this method before.

In the context of this force, it’s easier to force a picture card. Why, you may ask? Simple—because the set is smaller, which makes it easier to narrow down the choices to one of the picture cards.

You can imagine the simplest form as this: the magician holds an imaginary deck of cards and splits them into number cards and picture cards. Then, they invite the spectator to name one. Whatever they name, the magician can either keep or eliminate the chosen set to narrow down to the picture cards.

You’ve likely just noticed one of the key tools behind the equivoque force: ambiguous language. If a magician asks the audience to select something, it feels odd to eliminate that exact item. But if the spectator is simply asked to indicate one, they’re left unaware of where the magician is steering the process.

There are many clever ways to make this force stronger and more deceptive.

But let's stop here for a moment. Because that's where, unfortunately, many magicians stop. And since you're reading this, we know you're committed to making the best out of this technique.

The equivoque force isn't just about using the words keep or eliminate at the right time. That's pretty much like hiding a card in your palm and not caring about keeping your fingers closed to avoid exposing it.

As with every technique in magic, you can achieve the most by carefully combining different layers—framing, timing, scripting, and more.

And there's a problem with techniques and forces that use no props: it feels like they almost require no practice. And that's so wrong. "Propless," "hands-off," "self-working" don't mean it's easier to do. These are just marketing labels.

The practice here may not demand sleight-of-hand dexterity, but it leans heavily into effect construction, audience management, and knowing which tools to use—and when.

Let’s dig deeper down the rabbit hole.

More key elements

Ambiguous language is one very important tool, as we said. Another one is timing. Some magicians time their words so they naturally complete this entire sentence while executing the force, with no pauses in between:

They do so by making sure the spectator provides the desired answer between the words "numbers" and "we." How? It's a combination of warming up the spectator so they are quick and proactive with their answers, being engaging, and putting pressure on them so they reply fast.

We'll call these hanging sentences—phrases that float in the air and almost stop, to then proceed with the correct outcome.

The third and final basic tool to make this force work is the use of framing.

Instead of simply presenting a choice of cards using an invisible deck (a rather lazy approach), you can improve your framing by incorporating the elimination process into a wider narrative.

Sometimes, using a different narrative can improve the presentation and atmosphere of the trick and make the force more deceptive.

This applies especially to cases where the set of items is destroyed, for instance. It adds a powerful layer of ambiguity: Is the magician narrowing down to the item that survived the destruction, or to one that was destroyed? 

This kind of framing deepens the ambiguity and creates space for more deceptive scripts, richer narratives, and stronger overall effects.

Not just that—but because the technique doesn't use specific props, its greatest strength may not lie in its simplicity (in fact, we're proving the opposite), but in its versatility: it can be used with virtually any prop and in nearly any performing environment.

Ambiguous language, hanging sentences, and framing are the three most important tools to make the equivoque force work. Luckily, there is more to discover.

Upgrading the equivoque

The equivoque force can be executed with any items—not necessarily playing cards. Different items open up different types of framing and narrative for the effect, but also to different types of remove/keep.

For instance, when it comes to removing items—some can be eaten, others can be pocketed, destroyed, or used to play a surprising role for the next trick.

This means you'll likely want to adapt the technique not just to the environment and framing, but also to the object you're performing with.

The equivoque force is versatile—you can use it with cards, coins, or everyday objects. But that flexibility shouldn’t lead to laziness. The golden rule is this: let the object shape the framing.

And this doesn’t apply just to this technique, but to most. Rather than seeing a technique as something you bolt onto an effect, it’s better to see it as something that grows naturally from the effect itself—gaining its own lexicon, framing, and motivation along the way.

It is also crucial to explore how to lean into the force and how to get out of it. But, most importantly, it's important to have a solid script and to commit it to memory.

When you're not relying on a script that is good enough, or if you're just committed to using the words keep or eliminate and improvising the rest, you tend to talk too much. That creates suspicion.

The golden rule here is that the force should match the overall tone of the routine and not clash with what’s come before. If your spectator experiences several genuinely free choices, and then the final one is suddenly forced through equivoque, it can feel jarring.

This brings us to a crucial point: you may not want to place the equivoque force at the end of a series of choices. This idea might feel counterintuitive, especially since one of the first uses magicians learn is narrowing a set of three items down to one.

That’s the most common structure: present three items, ask the spectator to "pick two," and either you're left with the force item, or you follow up with "hand me one" and apply keep or eliminate as needed.

This approach can certainly work—but if it follows a string of fair choices, it can stand out. If the routine begins with the three items, it’s usually fine. But if you’ve narrowed down to those three from a larger group, be aware of the disconnect.

While you're thinking in method chunks, your audience is experiencing one seamless moment.

There are two main ways to resolve this: either design the whole routine so equivoque fits naturally—with proper framing from the start—or use the equivoque force earlier in the routine, then shift to other methods as you go.

The debate over repetition

This idea also ties into another key consideration: repetition. Was this force ever meant to be used multiple times in a row? That’s still up for debate.

The main recurring advice seems to be: don't be lazy. Even if this technique is instinctively simple, you shouldn't surrender to the desire of spreading the equivoque here and there, instead of looking for more suitable methods.

If you take any multi-phased magic routine you like, that will probably combine different techniques and nuances, and you may want to follow the same layered structure even with this type of force.

And on that note, here’s something that might surprise even experienced magicians.

Every time we think of a process of "narrowing down" a set of items using the equivoque force, a mantra among magicians is "avoid inconsistency."

This means that if the first choice ended with a keep, you shouldn't allow the following choice to end with eliminate—otherwise, the audience will notice the discrepancy and realize the choice is not fair.

That’s why magicians spend so much time crafting detailed scripts and building clever framings.

However, a research paper by Gustav Kuhn and Alice Pailhès revealed something rather surprising. The two researchers, who also co-authored a brilliant book on the psychology of magic, tested the equivoque force on a group of participants and uncovered some unexpected results.

While we encourage you to read their original paper for the full breakdown, one key takeaway stood out: consistency doesn't matter.

Their findings showed that whether the magician kept or eliminated the item in each stage of the force made no real difference. Spectators were just as surprised—even when the first choice resulted in a keep and the second in an eliminate.

The research was presented at The Session convention in 2021 in London, and it floored a room full of magicians.