Any memdeck is good, but I think the best idea is to create a deck that does exactly what you want.
For instance:
I want to be able to stack a borrowed deck in use - so no "special" properties of the deck should be required to access features.
I want to be able to cut/cull the courts and aces easily.
I want to be able to get to frequently named cards easily, i.e. the most frequent cards are the least moves away.
I want a gambling demo with a poker and a blackjack deal. Just one routine, not any hand called for.
I want to be able to spell to as many commonly chosen four-of-a-kinds as possible, but I don't care about other spelling effects.
I want it to look fairly random.
I don't care about ease of setup with faros etc.
I don't care about storytelling.
I don't care about fishing.
I don't care about the grand finale (e.g. Colombini's "Grand Prix") of producing all the suits in order.

Tom Crosbie's excellent shadow stack (the "Recall" DVD set) comes closest from the stacks I've seen, but I think I could ditch some features and emphasise the ones I've listed.

So, does this sound sensible or is it just a waste of time?

No, it is no waste of time. Go ahead and create your own stack; it is generally always the best as it fits you! Jan

Well, that's what Crosbie did!

It's coming along well. The part I'm having a problem with is the poker/blackjack demo.

OK, I've solved it. Any memdeck would do, but this has a few features I find nice:
-You can spell to four of a kind for 12 of the 13 values, after a cut, but without moves (i.e. the audience member can do it, with direction). There's a slight inconsistency for tens, but everything else works fine. This is mostly the point of the deck.
-The "ten card poker deal" is at the top of the deck - almost - just slip the first card and second deal the tenth card. You deal the first card to them, as you naturally would.
-There are three two-person blackjack hands starting at position 4, which the dealer cannot lose (I think). The last hand gives the player a 'hit' to 21, but the dealer has blackjack. It's good enough as a quick demo piece.

I've made the flashcards. Time to learn it.

Do you have Mnemonica? If so, you could use Tamariz's methods to memorize your custom stack. Do you have Aronson's book? If so, you could devise a peg system to memorize your stack. Might be quicker than rote memorization. (Not that there's anything wrong with rote memorization.)

I have both Mnemonica and the "Recall" DVD set, plus the structure of the stack - with the spelling - will make things easier, I'm hoping.
That's my first stack settled anyhow - well, my first memdeck. I've used stebbins and eight kings previously, which are obviously "easier", but not as good, as a memdeck.
I think the memory part is going to be a breeze (famous last words).

This is just my opinion regarding mem deck set ups. I'm not knocking anybody. But I know not a big fan of the following and don't see the need for them to be in-built into a mem deck.

1) Set up for a poker demo:- Is a poker demo dealing 5 cards to 5 players relevant in today's age where Texas Hold Em is the poker type of choice? Other than abit of nostalgia, or if you are showing off your card cheating chops ala Darwin Ortiz and make a full 15 minute act out of it (not to mention the table space you need), there are much better effects to utilize a stacked deck for.....

2) Spelling to a card: - Here again, I just don't get why you would want to reveal a card in this fashion. "Ok let's spell down to T-W-O O-F D-I-A-M-O-N-D-S" Especially spelling 'OF' always makes me cringe when I see ppl do it. Make the reveal by making it fly out of the pack, produce from your pocket, face up in the middle of the pack. Those are much stronger reveals. The only time I would spell down to a card would be spelling 'B-O-R-I-N-G'.

3) Overuse of a mem deck in your set. Ppl want all these in built functions so they can perform 5-6 effects in one sitting using a stack and are often afraid of there stack being destroyed. But what they are not aware of is that when most ppl do 3 or more mem/stacked deck type tricks, that it screams that the deck is stacked to an audience. The causality is that you must know partial order of the deck. Most audiences are just too plain polite to ask you if they can shuffle the deck, even though they will have reservations that a set up is involved. Use the stack subtly and sparingly to enhance your overall set.

For one of my go to sets I perform 4 card effects, I don't leverage the mem deck functionality until the 2nd last trick (I perform Richard Osterlind's Challenge Mind Reading, if this was the only trick I would perform with a mem deck this would be it to be honest). The 2 effects beforehand are pick a card/reveal/transposition effects that could be done FASDIU if I wanted to, but the WTF moment in my set and what often gets gasps and shock is Challenge Mind Reading. Spelling trick before or after that... definitely not...

I learnt the Aronson stack 12 years ago cause I saw how powerful a mem deck could be in the right circumstances. The open index approach changed the way I thought about card magic. I have never used any other in-built feature of the Aronson stack to be honest. In hindsight, I would have loved to learn Juan's stack due to the fact that a four of a kind are within 10 cards from eachother so can easily can culled to face down. (Dennis Behr has a great effect utilizing this feature) That would be the biggest appeal to me, but I'm not gonna go and re-learn a new stack just for that! I am all for encouragement that you should find a stack/or create one that suits you but I think as magicians, we are always in search for the holy grail of something, whether it being best triumph, best acaan, best pass, best card to wallet, best peek device etc...reality sometimes the method you are currently using is more than good enough, and even is something is better, why change?

I think my time would be better spent on perfecting false cuts and shuffles, that's the best utility when using a stacked deck, the art of randomness!

I hope this can start a pro-active discussion

Baobow: Thanks for the tips. Maybe I should rethink. Genuinely - thanks!
I'll still learn this stack, for the reasons I outlined. It's set up for the production of fours of a kind, so all fours of a kind are no more than 14 cards from each other. Common named cards are easily accessible.
But it's entirely possible I'll wind up with a spelling stack that I never use for spelling. At least, not out loud.

Baobow: Thanks for the tips. Maybe I should rethink. Genuinely - thanks!
I'll still learn this stack, for the reasons I outlined. It's set up for the production of fours of a kind, so all fours of a kind are no more than 14 cards from each other. Common named cards are easily accessible.
But it's entirely possible I'll wind up with a spelling stack that I never use for spelling. At least, not out loud.

Again, this is my opinion, if you disagree, please chime in as I would love to hear your thoughts.

Name a card tricks are strong, but they have one drawback, and I think it's a big one, it's that they openly name the card so everyone can hear it including the magician. It has happened to me afew times when I have done name a card effect that when I produced the card, spectators response was, "well I just told you what it is...of course you found it". It's not like I can tell them "well you don't realize that I knew the order of the cards from 1 to 52, you named the card which I know is at 24th position, I made a nonchalant cut and glimpse which you didn't notice, I was off by you card by 2, so I had to do a pass while you were about to sneeze, then top palm, and load it into my special magician's wallet that includes a cheque book which haven't been used since the 1980's". Actually, if I did tell them that they would still probably go "well I just told you what it is...of course you found it"

I disgress abit here, back to topic. What I have been trying to do of late is to imploy some strategies I learnt from Dani Ortiz and amoungst others with my magic where you get spectators to remember after the fact that they were merely thinking of their card (reality is that they picked either through normal take out method, or from a dribble). Your words after they put back the card, always references to them thinking of a card and as the time delay kicks in you ramp it home "and you were thinking of a card yes?". You get the idea hopefully.

Volto, the key word here is LEARNING. With your goal in mind and the process you're going through you are LEARNING all kinds of great things about yourself, your preferences and setting up and handling cards.

My approach is different. I memorized and use the Tamariz Mnemonica deck. Because I'm too LAZY to come up with my own! And I want to stick to ONE memory deck-----my mind is too cluttered up with other things then to add another card deck system or two. And that's what they are: systems.

Another thing is, I can't do a Faro Shuffle worth a d**n. So even though Tamariz' deck ALLOWS you to Faro Shuffle back to NDO, you don't HAVE to do it! Just as you don't HAVE to do a story routine or a poker deal routine. YOU get to choose what works for YOU.

Like others, I say go for it. You have a good idea of what you want. I'd only caution that you will not truly know what you want out of a memstack until you start using one. That's why Aronson has said (I believe) a lot of people end up rejecting their first choice. Years earlier someone may have no use for a faro, but in the meantime he's learned to faro.

------------------------


On 2012-09-05 03:27, baobow wrote:
1) Set up for a poker demo:- Is a poker demo dealing 5 cards to 5 players relevant in today's age where Texas Hold Em is the poker type of choice? Other than abit of nostalgia, or if you are showing off your card cheating chops ala Darwin Ortiz and make a full 15 minute act out of it (not to mention the table space you need), there are much better effects to utilize a stacked deck for.....[/quote]

Understandable, but over the past few years I've grown to appreciate the relevance of a gambling themed demonstration because... why else would someone obsess over playing cards? A demo takes time and space, but it's great to be able to launch into one at a moment's notice, especially if it's because someone *else* mentions poker. What's the old line about how if you produce a sandwich out of thin air, it's a good trick, but if someone says she's hungry and then you produce a sandwich, it' s a miracle. I've never had anyone say "but what about hold'em style?" I thought someone would and my response was "that involves stacking fewer cards, so it's even easier to cheat."



Agreed.



Interesting. In Scams & Fantasies Ortiz compares a stack to gaffs; only good for one or two tricks until the principle begins to suggest itself. Always wanted to do that Osterlind trick (and the Corinda Effect), but I've had stylistic reservations. The reality is there are not that many great tricks using a stack.

Re: Named Card

In those instances was the revelation too A-to-B? Tamariz uses a spectator to find the card. Aronson's "Invisible Card" involves NOT finding the card. One "lick" I've mentioned on this board before is making it into a stop trick (with the help of your old friend the second deal). It's often more impressive if the spectator locates the card.

Well, I guess in the same way that pick-a-card can become think-a-card, single card revelations could become four of a kind revelations?

Actually, pick-a-card becomes name-a-card. Name-a-card is a very different thing from think-a-card.

Volto,

every post you love to mention four of a kind revelations, you seem to love these?

Who doesn't? It's the drama.