|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
Alel Special user Bay Area 668 Posts |
This is one of the issues that I pondered on upon deciding which memorized deck to memorize: Aronson's or Tamariz'.
I finally decided on Tamariz' Mnemonica. Pretty neat properties built-in. You can get into the Mnemonica from new deck order, and from Mnemonica to new deck order, too. Mnemonica to a stay-stack is very very easy, too. Alel |
|||||||||
Cohiba Special user Michigan 749 Posts |
I'm wondering about the effort to make it look as though the deck is a new deck. What really do you gain here?
If the spectator sees you take out a new deck, to them it's already in a suspicious order. You now have to do several convincing false shuffles to make it look as if you're mixing the deck up, while being scrutinized. On the other hand, if you just pull out a "used" deck, flash the faces and they see it's "mixed", some false shuffles will be much less scrutinized and more convincing. I guess you could make the argument that if they think it's in NDO, then they see it mixed up, it's maybe more convincing that it was a legitimate shuffle. Is this the benefit? Is this running when not being chased? |
|||||||||
The Amazing Noobini Inner circle Oslo, Norway 1658 Posts |
Cohiba, that is what I was thinking.
"Talk about melodrama... and being born in the wrong part of the world." (Raf Robert)
"You, my friend, have a lot to learn." (S. Youell) "Nonsensical Raving of a lunatic mind..." (Larry) |
|||||||||
Eric Richardson Regular user 110 Posts |
Context is king. Pulling out an apparently unopened deck, opening it, and giving it several "shuffles" communicates to the audience that you are using a deck that has not been tampered with. Spectators will not expect many of the possible things you may have prepared. In other words you can be way ahead of your audience.
I save this strategy for formal shows where a large portion of the show is done with cards. In this context it works very well and is totally deceptive. I bring out the sealed deck, open it, "shuffle" it and proceed with the routine. I finally give away the deck at the end. Very clean and complete. It's part showmanship and part psychological ploy to disarm the audience before the routine begins. Obviously this is not a technique you use when table hopping! |
|||||||||
JanForster Inner circle Germany ... when not traveling... 4190 Posts |
Dennis, nice idea! If someone wants to go that way using the Aronson Stack then prepare the deck by cutting first the 2D to the bottom (face)of the deck, reverse count the top 5 cards and put them back on top. The top card now is the AD. Put the AD to the bottom of the deck (underneath the 2D) so you have the AD followed by the 2D on the face of the deck. To get the deck later back in order (not "home" order, but in order) all you've to do is to cut the AD back to the top of the deck following with an overhand shuffle which shuffles 5 cards (single) back to the bottom of the deck and reversing thereby their order. Jan
Jan Forster
www.janforster.de |
|||||||||
Dennis Loomis 1943 - 2013 2113 Posts |
To Jan,
This is a very fine way to get into the set up and then return to AS order afterwards. Thanks for mentioning it... it's the way to go. Dennis Loomis
Itinerant Montebank
<BR>http://www.loomismagic.com |
|||||||||
Bill Hallahan Inner circle New Hampshire 3222 Posts |
JanForster wrote:
Quote:
Dennis, nice idea! If someone wants to go that way using the Aronson Stack then prepare the deck by cutting first the 2D to the bottom (face)of the deck, reverse count the top 5 cards and put them back on top. The top card now is the AD. Put the AD to the bottom of the deck (underneath the 2D) so you have the AD followed by the 2D on the face of the deck. To get the deck later back in order (not "home" order, but in order) all you've to do is to cut the AD back to the top of the deck following with an overhand shuffle which shuffles 5 cards (single) back to the bottom of the deck and reversing thereby their order. Jan Dennis and Jan! Thank you! Together, you both have come up with a fantastic idea! I've always used "Bait and Switch". I'll still probably do that at times, but I will definitely be using your combined ideas too! You'd want to follow that with a bit more false shuffling, of course, and then perhaps allow the cards to be seen as "mixed"; not an overt display, just a casual offhand display. I bet Simon Aronson would like that.
Humans make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to create boredom. Quite astonishing.
- The character of ‘Death’ in the movie "Hogswatch" |
|||||||||
S2000magician Inner circle Yorba Linda, CA 3465 Posts |
I devised a 52-step method, but I would classify it as impractical for a live performance.
;) |
|||||||||
Cohiba Special user Michigan 749 Posts |
Nice job, S2000. Now starts the process of continually improving it from that point.
Can anyone do it in 51 steps? |
|||||||||
S2000magician Inner circle Yorba Linda, CA 3465 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-08-30 17:53, Cohiba wrote: Exactly! One has to start somewhere. ;) |
|||||||||
plungerman Loyal user 287 Posts |
As stated the problem is like the Rubik's cube. More exactly, the cube is starting in NDO and after a number of twists it is in a particular configuration, all messed up as far as anyone is concerned, but in Aronson's very own precise mess.
The Six Hour Deck (name escapes me) has a section on what a shuffled or random deck should look like with all these ideas. The deck switch is clearly the best solution to this problem. I'm partial to Tommy Wonder's "Has anyone got a pen?" An outright switch, total misdirection right in front of them. I've had a tough time convicing some magicians that it works. However, the solution is still an irresistable challenge. To that end I propose this as a starting point. Not the whole stack but part of it. Take the top ten cards from the stack (or the bottom ten). Space them in order out amongst the other cards. As some of Simon's routines go, you can still make use of the this stack even when a shuffle or two has spoiled the perfect stack. Do this with different batches of ten or larger batches. At some point (stay with me here) a fair number of cards will be in a state where you can go through and upjog the cards of the stack, leaving others behind. There are zillions of combinations available where every third or fourth card is next in the stack. One or more of these combinations might be reached with shuffles and faros of all sorts as discussed. Once there, half the stack can be got with no more than a cull or a Green angle separation. This is only the outline of a procedure to play with but it's a starting point. If accomplished then the rest can be done in only 26 more steps. All of this of course gets back to my favorite patter. In Collinspell when I need a perfect faro; "Just talk amongst yourselves." |
|||||||||
The Amazing Noobini Inner circle Oslo, Norway 1658 Posts |
One difference with the Rubik's Cube from a deck is that when solving the cube you can SEE the state of it at any time.
I used to solve the cube when I was around 13 using the formulas that were published. Even though there was a system of turns at play, you would constantly evaluate the state of the mess and select one twisting and turning sequence to do what was needed, for instance turning one middle corner piece without disturbing anything else. A few of my friends solved the cube without a system because they were a lot smarter than me, but I suspect their principle would have been the same; evaluate and apply. Of course, a sorted deck in NDO is always the same, unlike a shuffled one or a "shuffled" cube. But in addition to the actual process of finding a system of shuffles and cuts and whatnot in order to get there, you also have the situation of not being able to see where you are or to check for errors along the way. I can't even do regular Faros with complete consistency in a very low light setting. I need to check visually along the way in order to know for sure that I got it. And I remain convinced that getting from new deck order to Aronson stack order cannot be done in any practical real world sense. Not without sending the spectators out for coffee while you apply your long list of twists and turns.
"Talk about melodrama... and being born in the wrong part of the world." (Raf Robert)
"You, my friend, have a lot to learn." (S. Youell) "Nonsensical Raving of a lunatic mind..." (Larry) |
|||||||||
thepspdope Regular user With Roughly About 173 Posts |
True, but the twists and turns could be effects in themselves.
What if I open a new deck and take out the aces to perform Twisting the Aces and at the same time cull KS,6S,4C,8H,9C to the bottom. Next I remove the Kings (while culling QS,6D,QC,2C,9D) and perform Cannibal Cards or whatever combination of removing cards/culling. The bottom part of my stack is complete, I can see that I am closer to my goal and the twists and turns are not boring but a feature. Something like this might be the first solution, and then I would look to find a way to reduce the number of moves (or effects) - as per the Rubix Cube
- just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you!
|
|||||||||
plungerman Loyal user 287 Posts |
Good point about the cube, Noobi.
I guess what I'm after is the stack's cards, say less than half of them, in the right order but each a few cards apart. From here it would be one step to cull them to half the stack and then many Aronson stack tricks. But even with them spread out in the deck there are any number of routines that can be done. I agree that there probably isn't a method for getting there as simple as Tamariz, but again, it's a goal. And maybe twice as easy as the total stack. |
|||||||||
Cohiba Special user Michigan 749 Posts |
Along those lines plungerman, and this is probably a poor idea - it just popped into my head:
Since the AS has the Zensational poker stack built into it, could you do a poker demonstration, openly removing cards necessary in a prior effect / explanation which would end up with a segment of the stack in place? Similar with the 10 card poker deal - Remove the appropriate cards for the deal, do the effect, and you're that much closer to the stack. EDIT: My bad on the 10 card poker deal. You probably need to secretly remove / stack the necessary cards for that effect, so it doesn't really get you anywhere. |
|||||||||
Dennis Loomis 1943 - 2013 2113 Posts |
To Cohiba,
As to the ten cards for the ten card poker deal: I think you were right the first time. You can suggest that you will pick some cards that make some good poker hands. You don't have to show them as you find them and table them, but they will be seen throughout the phases of the ten card poker deal. I don't think this will detract from the effect. You will still need to put them into proper order at the end of the poker deal, of course, but this should not be difficult. And, in the process of looking for these cards, you can probably rearrange a few more cards which remain in order in the deck. Play it like you are consider a card or two as you take them from the deck, then either choose them and put them on your growing pile on the table, or reject them and put them on the back of the deck. You can probably do another ten cards this way. Make them the ten cards following the ten card poker deal, and you will have a block of 20 cards ready. You now just need to get 4 cards following this block in order, and 2 cards prior to it and you will have a complete Aronson Half-Stack of cards 26 to 52. I think maybe we're starting to get somewhere on this. Who's got ideas for another quick trick during which we can find and set up these six cards? Dennis Loomis
Itinerant Montebank
<BR>http://www.loomismagic.com |
|||||||||
Cohiba Special user Michigan 749 Posts |
Good point Dennis. I guess it sort of depends on how you want to present the 10 card poker deal; 10 (supposedly) random cards would be strongest, but presentationally an open selection of the cards would be fair as well. Since you have an ulterior motive here, it would be well worth it.
One other point in our quest: A half stack is a half stack, right? I don't think it should matter which 26 cards you use, as long as they are consecutive. In other words, an additional effect could set up the 6 cards before, or after, the 20 you've already stacked if that is easier to accomplish than 2 before, and 4 after. Just a thought. |
|||||||||
edh Inner circle 4698 Posts |
I don't have much to offer, except this is GOOD stuff.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts to both Dennis & Cohiba, et al..
Magic is a vanishing art.
|
|||||||||
thepspdope Regular user With Roughly About 173 Posts |
If I'm following your thinking Dennis, the last 6 required cards are 2 queens and 4 face cards. If you have seen "La Dame Inquiete" by Arnaud Chevrier (it's on YouTube and worth checking out), you can use these cards for a similar quick and nice effect, and you're left with the required cards in hand to place on the growing stack (remembering 2 to the top and 4 to the bottom).
- just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you!
|
|||||||||
Cohiba Special user Michigan 749 Posts |
Thepspdope:
Good catch! I was looking for patterns of cards around the 20 as well that would fit a particular trick. I'm not familiar with the trick you mention. Also, to get to a set of "convenient" cards for a particular trick, maybe the extra cards you set up (in addition to the poker deal) wouldn't be the 10 following. Maybe the 10 before the poker deal, etc., would get you in range of a more appropriate set of cards... |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » Aronson Stack From New Deck Order (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |