I think the ACAAN is one of the most over-rated effects, and Berglas is one of the most over-rated performers. Nevertheless, I concede that he's a superbly effective showman who has managed to create an enduring legend.
Who is the better magician? The conjuror who constructs diabolical methods, or the one who leaves audiences feeling as though there's a diabolical method? The man who possesses top-notch sleight-of-hand, or the one who leaves people convinced that he's demonically skilled?
Unlike a lot of other "art" forms, an appreciation of magic, at a certain level, requires an understanding that disenchants the whole project.
Many card routines have the following basic structure: An opening phase that demands sleight-of-hand, and a final phase that requires no sleight-of-hand at all (it's a ruse). The final phase, which is technically easier, provokes a stronger reaction from audiences.
The crappy performers who nevertheless convince paying audiences that they're brilliant are in some ways brilliant. Their audiences are also in some ways ignorant.
It's like a chess grandmaster who beats a novice in twenty moves versus the nine-year old who bests the lay adult in just four. You can imagine the defeated man enthusing, "Yeah, I had no chance against Ivan, but this kid just blew my mind! Four moves. Four!"
There's a video of Berglas performing ACAAN. It's decidedly unimpressive. What captures the imagination, of course, is the telling of the story. An ounce of image is worth a pound of performance. In fact, the Berglas video is so unremarkable that magicians insist he's not using his "real" method. It's not unlike Q stuff.
Stewart James' "51 Faces North" also achieved legend status. The method was likely published after he died, but believers insist it's false and James took the beautiful secret to his grave. Why? Because the trick is pretty clunky.
If we are to marvel at Berglas for "the real work" it's because he put new wine and in an old bottle and made a killing.
Some corrections in the article. Berglas touches the cards in some handlings. In other handlings the deck is NOT out in full view. Indeed, more than one deck might be in play. There are non-Berglas methods that more rigorously adhere to "holy grail" ACAAN rules. Using a stooge (or an unwitting stooge) is OK if it fools people.
My favorite version of the ACAAN satisfies all of the regular conditions. The one "problem"? It cannot be performed one-on-one, or even for small audiences.
