(Close Window)
Topic: WO stack - Memorised cyclic stack (Random look stack with possibilty to calculate everithing)
Message: Posted by: Silvano (Oct 15, 2010 11:34AM)
Hi every one.

I am working on something.
I am working on mine new e-book about my stacked deck. It is cyclic deck so you can tell top card if you know bottom and opposite, and it memorised to so you can also you can tell position if card is named and opposite too.

The deck can be ribbon spread face up and have random look.
Everything is checked in my scripts I just need to set everything in order and make e-book.

I never find some documentation or something about deck like this, so if someone is familiar with stacked decks like this, please answer. Also if you have some comments on my idea, answer too.

Also if some one is ready to help me to publish my e-book when I finish, just email me on komazecsilvano@gmail.com.

Thanks in foreword.

The WO stack is look like this:
Message: Posted by: ddyment (Oct 15, 2010 01:29PM)
Any memorized stack is by definition a cyclic stack, so it's not completely clear what you are proposing here. Is it possible to [b]calculate[/b] the position, given the name (and vice versa), or must they be memorized? If the former, then you are proposing an algorithmic stack. There are many such stacks (a few popular ones are mentioned [url=http://www.deceptionary.com/aboutstacks.html]in this essay[/url]), but without knowing your algorithm, it's not possible to know if you are using existing techniques or not.
Message: Posted by: Silvano (Oct 16, 2010 03:21AM)
YES. It is possible to calculate every card and every position without memorising. I mean if someone name card. You can easy calculate position, and if someone name position you can calculate a card.

Also, if you just peek bottom card, you can calculate top card (And vise versa) and you can calculate where to cut deck to put named card to named position, you just need to peek bottom card. Everything is possible to calculate you don't need to memorising the stack just to learn procedures.

I mean it is not just memorised stack like Tamariz or Aronson where you need to remember whole stack,

It is not just TOP/BOTTOM algorithmic, cause you cant calculate P/C - C/P,

It is not just P/C - C/P algorithmic, cause theres no way to calculate TOP/BOTTOM , BOTTOM/TOP.

Maybe everything possible but I don't find how.

It is ALL in ONE, You can calculate everything with formulas.
- Top card
- Bottom card
- Card / Position
- Position / Card
- Where to cut to bring named card to named position

It is Memorised deck, but you don't need to memorised every card on every position just formulas or you can memorise all stack if you wish but, if you not sure about your thoughts, you can always check, with easy calculation.

Everything can be learned in 15 - 30 minutes.
Message: Posted by: ddyment (Oct 16, 2010 10:40AM)
So this is pretty clearly an algorithmic stack, and would need to be compared with the other such stacks, as I noted previously, for ease of learning, speed of calculation, etc. And whether or not there is any duplication of methodology.
Message: Posted by: Silvano (Oct 16, 2010 11:31AM)
I don't know any other decks like this, only Elknase, but it's to complicated for me so I've made my own. There is basic system and coded look, like Elknase, but it's much more simple with calculations.

About my stack :
If you master all calculations with my stack , you just need about 5-10 seconds to name desired information such as top card,C/P,P/C etc. For mastering all calculations, you need to know basic operation like +, -, x2 and /2 , and about 15-30 minutes for learning it, or maybe little bit more depending of person.
It include conversion from "The breakthrough card system", the rest is mine own work.

I'd be glad if someone help me about finding names of other algorithmic stacks, beside Elknase's, for comparing purposes.
Message: Posted by: Waterloophai (Oct 16, 2010 02:05PM)
I think Doug Dyment is the right man for you.
Message: Posted by: Silvano (Oct 16, 2010 06:19PM)
Thanks a lot
Message: Posted by: Silvano (Oct 17, 2010 04:06AM)
I'v send Mr.Doug PVT message about mine stack. But thanks to you too anyway

[quote]
On 2010-10-16 15:05, Waterloophai wrote:
I think Doug Dyment is the right man for you.
[/quote]
Message: Posted by: Tom G (Oct 19, 2010 11:04PM)
Any further info on this stack?
Message: Posted by: ddyment (Oct 20, 2010 01:21PM)
Silvano sent me some information about this, but it did not appear to correspond with the stack image that he supplied in his initial post. So I responded with a series of questions, to which he has not yet replied.
Message: Posted by: Silvano (Oct 21, 2010 12:34PM)
Dear Mr. Doug I am still working to improve my stack and I will send you, in few days, all formulas and image of improved stack when I finish. :) Thanks for response.

It is 3 simple rules for coding P/C - C/P stack.
Message: Posted by: Silvano (Oct 21, 2010 02:08PM)
This is final look of mine P/C C/P stack.

P.S.
Mr. Doug I will send you algorithm formulas in P. M.
Message: Posted by: Silvano (Oct 21, 2010 02:54PM)
Above is picture od simplified version stack, and here is picture of non-simplifed version.

P.S. New name for the my stack is "Skot Bop"

:)