On 2010-04-20 18:15, dimazales wrote:
Jim you mean you did the 'subtle game' and people didn't catch on later that the deck was memorized as the result? It shouldn't be THAT surprising. Even if someone thought you had the list memorized (which they likely won't ) it still doesn't mean you have every position memorized . For example, quick what is the 15th letter of the alphabet?

On 2010-03-26 04:12, Loz wrote:
Yeah I did that calculation too. But I work on large search problems in my research and am going to chuck some genetic algorithms and large compute resources at it (when no one is looking of course ) so we may get somewhere. But yes pretty unlikely!


Its worth pointing out that that number is approximately the same as the number of atoms in the observable universe.

Also, it doesn't make logical sense - why shouldn't you be able to find any card or perform any number of memorized deck effects after you've just called out the name of every single card in the deck? But audiences don't realize it or care, I guess.

Still stacking,

Jim Kawashima

On 2010-09-07 13:36, tomboston wrote:

Quote:

Also, it doesn't make logical sense - why shouldn't you be able to find any card or perform any number of memorized deck effects after you've just called out the name of every single card in the deck? But audiences don't realize it or care, I guess.

Still stacking,

Jim Kawashima

Here is a story related to the above quote and this thread regarding stacking:
I was at a friend's house a couple of weeks ago and he knew I did card effects so he dug out a deck of blue bikes from a kitchen cupboard and asked me to show him and some other friends something. After doing a couple of impromptu effects, I decided to try to stack the deck in front of them (I use Mnemonica). I had never tried this before and couldn't do a switch because the deck in my pocket was red!

I first used "Memory Jumble" from Mnemonica to stack half the deck and then I "memorized" the other half and called out all the cards to complete the stack. I was amazed at how well it came off -- they had no idea I was stacking and I got great reactions! I was thinking that I should probably stop right there because I also thought that if you can call out that many cards everything else would be a lesser effect.

I was wrong because I did another memdeck effect and also got a great reaction. I think it helped to stack each half separately. Actually, one of the specs said that it was way more impressive that I used only half the deck because if you had used the whole deck "you could have just memorized all 52 cards"! I find that an interesting comment.

Tom

On 2010-09-07 20:30, tomboston wrote:
I think he meant that if all the cards were there, I could just name them all eventually. For example, I may have some system that would allow me to hit every card in a full deck. And that is exactly what you are doing when you call the whole deck! But with what appeared to be just a random portion of a mixed-up deck, the "memorization" was that more amazing.

Calling half the deck actually did not take very long and I grouped cards that were near each other, for example, "I think you have a pair of queens, etc..." to vary it a bit. I then made minor adjustments if needed as they were handed to me. It turned out to be MUCH stronger than I thought. At least for the specs I had that night....

Now get memorizing!

PS Is this thread getting into methods too much and should be moved to Secret Sessions?