The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » Giving It a Shot (11 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4 [Next]
pnielan
View Profile
Regular user
Northern California
151 Posts

Profile of pnielan
Hi Ali,

(I recognize the equation.) You mentioned the "between the fingers" method, which I've also read. Just to clairif,y, when I put the deck in order in my hands, it's not to get it ready for performance, it's to work on/test stack memorization. If I need to set up for a performance, I use a table or whatever to set up faste

By the way, I've experimented with other methods of arranging in my hands. One way is to first separate the deck into 1-26 and 27-52 sections. This can be done by first sorting the 1-26 cards face down and moving them to the back of the deck. If you really know your stack, this can be done very quickly. Now you only have to arrange each separate half. You can even the arrange the 1-26 section into 1-13 and 14-16 sections and then sort those. This approach is a version of computer science's quicksort algorithm.

I think this approach might be slightly faster. The slowest part in the original approach is the first 10-15 cards. You have to go through 40-50 cards to find each one of them. As you get further along, it all goes much faster. Again, if you know your stack, you can look for 2-3 cards at a time, though, which speeds things up.

Have fun.
pnielan
View Profile
Regular user
Northern California
151 Posts

Profile of pnielan
Hi Ali,

(I recognize the equation.) You mentioned the "between the fingers" method, which I've also read. Just to clairif,y, when I put the deck in order in my hands, it's not to get it ready for performance, it's to work on/test stack memorization. If I need to set up for a performance, I use a table or whatever to set up faster.

By the way, I've experimented with other methods of arranging in my hands. One way is to first separate the deck into 1-26 and 27-52 sections. This can be done by first sorting the 1-26 cards face down and moving them to the back of the deck. If you really know your stack, this can be done very quickly. Now you only have to arrange each separate half. You can even the arrange the 1-26 section into 1-13 and 14-16 sections and then sort those. This approach is a version of computer science's quicksort algorithm.

I think this approach might be slightly faster. The slowest part in the original approach is the first 10-15 cards. You have to go through 40-50 cards to find each one of them. As you get further along, it all goes much faster. Again, if you know your stack, you can look for 2-3 cards at a time, though, which speeds things up.

Have fun.
alicauchy
View Profile
Veteran user
Málaga, Spain
311 Posts

Profile of alicauchy
Quote:
On Oct 22, 2015, pnielan wrote:
(I recognize the equation.) You mentioned the "between the fingers" method, which I've also read. Just to clairif,y, when I put the deck in order in my hands, it's not to get it ready for performance, it's to work on/test stack memorization. If I need to set up for a performance, I use a table or whatever to set up faster.

Of course. In fact, for setting Mnemonica order either for rehearsal or *before* a performance, I prefer to obtain NDO first and, then, proceed with faros. This way I keep practicing faros together with culling blocks of cards (for spades, etc).

Quote:
On Oct 22, 2015, pnielan wrote:
This can be done by first sorting the 1-26 cards face down and moving them to the back of the deck. If you really know your stack, this can be done very quickly. Now you only have to arrange each separate half.

Probably you meant *arrange and sort* cards 1-26 face *up*. Not even quicksort can help you to sort face down cards (unless using a MD, I believe)
So much to do, so little time . . .
RiderBacks
View Profile
Loyal user
249 Posts

Profile of RiderBacks
The faro-involving method for moving from NDO to a Tamariz Stack is pretty widely known. Getting to and from NDO with an Aronson Stack seems to be a well-kept secret.
chappy
View Profile
Special user
708 Posts

Profile of chappy
Hi Riderbacks

In reference to a few of the things you've discussed above:
1. Eric Richardson published work on getting into Aronson.
2. Raou may want to consider
DETAILS OF DECEPTION at www.thedevilsstaircase.com
chappy
View Profile
Special user
708 Posts

Profile of chappy
Hi Riderbacks

In reference to a few of the things you've discussed above:
1. Eric Richardson published work on getting into Aronson.
2. Re: commonly named cards in accessible positions: you may want to consider developing your own stack next rather than learning an existing one. Position each card as YOU choose. My own stack can be set quickly from NDO, and has some commonly named cards in easy to locate positions.
3. I don't normally plug (much) my book here, but before investing more time into learning your next stack you might find a useful lead or two on mem-deck work at the link below, that will set you on an interesting path.

Best,
Greg

www.thedevilsstaircase.com
DETAILS OF DECEPTION at www.thedevilsstaircase.com
Tim Cavendish
View Profile
Inner circle
1308 Posts

Profile of Tim Cavendish
Re: stack numbers 11-16...

I feel tension in this range. Most cards in this range are off by one.

11: 10S is one short of position 11
[12: 5H doesn't play like the others -- no help here]
13: 2D is one short of position 13 (mod 10)
14: KD is card value 13, one short of position 14
15: 7D times 2 is 14, one short of position 15
16: 8C times 2 is 16 -- finally a perfect fit for position 16, and a release of tension!

Except for the Jack of Spades, no card value in the Aronson stack corresponds to its position mod 10. (So none of the Twos are at positions 2,12,22,32,42,52; None of the Threes are at 3,13,23,33,43; etc.) Alas!

Like you, I used flashcards to memorize, with the stack number written on the back of the card.

I wish I had also marked a deck boldly with the stack number on the face. Then I would have visual memory of the giant stack number overlaying the face of the card. Memorize with this deck, test with the other. This might be useful for any cards which give you trouble.

I find that sorting into stack order via culling is good practice all around. I do a red/black cull, then a second divide to yield the four suits in unsorted chunks. Then, knowing the general area for each target card, I cull them in order to the back of the deck. Good for culling practice, as well as prior/next stack memory.
RiderBacks
View Profile
Loyal user
249 Posts

Profile of RiderBacks
Quote:
On Oct 22, 2015, Tim Cavendish wrote: 11: 10S is one short of position 11


That's actually my current recall method for this card!

Quote:
On Oct 22, 2015, Tim Cavendish wrote:

12: 5H doesn't play like the others -- no help here]
13: 2D is one short of position 13 (mod 10)
14: KD is card value 13, one short of position 14
15: 7D times 2 is 14, one short of position 15


These I have finally nailed flawlessly. The big bunch of diamonds in this range was giving me problems for awhile without having to think through order of the sequence.

Quote:
On Oct 22, 2015, Tim Cavendish wrote: 16: 8C times 2 is 16


I use that too!

Quote:
On Oct 22, 2015, Tim Cavendish wrote:I wish I had also marked a deck boldly with the stack number on the face. Then I would have visual memory of the giant stack number overlaying the face of the card.


I've actually already just done that tonight! It occurred to me that adding the final third of the deck (I have 2/3rds down) is getting harder and that a more visual image would help. I spent a nice two hours today making sure I have thirty-seven of them down pat. And not just the first thirty-seven! I'm splitting the deck up oddly so that I don't need order to memorize it (but I'm also supplementing by getting order down too.) The last third is going to happen with that nice big sharpie number written on their faces!
RiderBacks
View Profile
Loyal user
249 Posts

Profile of RiderBacks
Sharpie method was very helpful, though I'm not entirely sure why. It's not like I do any visual recall, but the last bit of the stack went faster with it. Perhaps the part of my brain that associates numbers with cards is just getting better at doing that? Who knows.

In any case, the stack is now complete. In a verbal or mental recitation of all the cards, I occasionally pause on one or two and have to think a bit (i.e., have a mini seizure). But I always pull it up, so I'm at the point that I can practice mentally, anytime, anywhere. That took six days shy of two months, but I did take a fairly long multi-week break from bothering with it. I've been much busier than usual at work, and other effects occupied a fair bit of my free time.

I estimate the total amount of practice time I've put in to reach this point to be on the order of several hours. Perhaps five or six at the most? The time investment is incredibly minimal and looked something like a small number of discrete, separated 10m and 1-3m sessions.

At this point, I'll move on to other forms of practice, some of which have been helpfully suggested in this thread!

Now it's time to start getting into the reading! So far, I think I'll need (or want):

Simon Aronson's Bound to Please and Try the Impossible
Eric Richardson's Tour, It All Depends, and OASIS
Juan Tamariz's Mnemonica

Any other major pieces I'm missing here?
RiderBacks
View Profile
Loyal user
249 Posts

Profile of RiderBacks
Unfortunately, it looks like Christmas is going to come and go without me picking up these books. The money is just too tight, and there were other magic purchases that have pushed these off into the future. I think I'll get a chance to treat myself to them in January, when I start my third simultaneous job. The only question then will be how to find the time to study them... Oh well. At least I'll have the stack down inside and out, backwards and forwards, card to number and number to card, next five cards, previous fives cards, and so on before I start reading, so that's a bonus.
Francois Lagrange
View Profile
Loyal user
Paris, France
252 Posts

Profile of Francois Lagrange
If you have an Android phone, you could worse than downloading this free app: MemDeckPro

Excellent app for memorized deck. Many settings and quite intuitive.
Protect me from my friends, I'll take care of my enemies.
RiderBacks
View Profile
Loyal user
249 Posts

Profile of RiderBacks
I have been very, very busy with non-magic stuff. Still, I've somehow managed to achieve some milestones.

I have instant, and I do mean instantaneous, card-to-number and number-to-card recall of the entire Aronson Stack. Still, I'm not quite where I want to be. I have incredibly fast, but not yet instant, card-before and card-after recall for about half the deck (not the first half, either--it's random). For the other half of the deck, I have instant (no inference required) card-before and card-after recall. It may take a bit more time to get the instant card-before and card-after recall for the entire deck. (Again, I'm busy.) And after that, I intend to move a bit further and acquire instant (no inference required) two-cards-before and two-cards-after recall. When initially getting into this, I considered memorizing multiple stacks. It now seems to me that having incredibly in-depth knowledge of a single stack is more valuable than superficial knowledge of multiple stacks.

I have also acquired Aronson's works! Yay!. Though I've barely started to read them, a first read through one of his tricks was sufficient for me to perfectly understand it and reproduce it (coupled with a few minutes of thought about the stack order). Aronson writes very, very clearly. I wasn't impressed with that particular trick, but I have no doubt that I will come across several gems as I continue to dive into his stuff.

Still having fun! Just moving slower than I expected!

Quote:
On Dec 26, 2015, Francois Lagrange wrote:

If you have an Android phone, you could worse than downloading this free app: MemDeckPro Excellent app for memorized deck. Many settings and quite intuitive.


I don't have a phone. I'm very old school. I suppose I could use BlueStacks, but I prefer to practice with cards, not my computer. Thanks, however!
magicfish
View Profile
Inner circle
6529 Posts

Profile of magicfish
Simon Aronson is a genius and a strong supporter of the Cross-Cut Force.
Francois Lagrange
View Profile
Loyal user
Paris, France
252 Posts

Profile of Francois Lagrange
Quote:
On Mar 3, 2016, RiderBacks wrote:
I don't have a phone. I'm very old school. I suppose I could use BlueStacks, but I prefer to practice with cards, not my computer. Thanks, however!


I understand, it took me a long time before my family and friends convince me to buy one, but all in all I'm glad I finally bought one Smile The advantage of this particular app is that it has an audio mode training: i.e. you can keep the phone in your pocket and practice.

It looks like you've mastered the Aronson stack, well done for sticking with it and reporting your progress. BTW, for one particular effect, Histed Heisted, you must be able to recite your stack as you would the alphabet. It's simple to train as you do not need the cards to do so. If you can do that then you will attain the before/after goal you mentioned.
Protect me from my friends, I'll take care of my enemies.
Waterloophai
View Profile
Inner circle
Belgium
1223 Posts

Profile of Waterloophai
Quote:
On Mar 7, 2016, Francois Lagrange wrote:
...for one particular effect, Histed Heisted, you must be able to recite your stack as you would the alphabet. It's simple to train as you do not need the cards to do so.

I wouldn't recommend performing Histed Heisted for a beginner. However it is indeed a very good thing to "train" at your home as you wrote.

To perform it, you may not hesitate 1/10th of a second because the name of the card has to be called by each card immediately.
In the beginning it is wise to palm a blank face card where the order of your stack is written on. At the right moment, you simply add that palmed card to the bottom. When you have to call the cards, the order of your whole stack is staring at you from that card.

(By the way, Histed Heisted is a stack independent trick and can be done with any MD)
RiderBacks
View Profile
Loyal user
249 Posts

Profile of RiderBacks
I spent another session with Aronson today. Histed Heisted is incredible. That effect alone is worth the price of the book and the time and effort put in towards memorizing a stack. Wow. Just wow. This effect is mind-bogglingly powerful.
Claudio
View Profile
Inner circle
Europe
1553 Posts

Profile of Claudio
Quote:
On Mar 30, 2016, RiderBacks wrote:
I spent another session with Aronson today. Histed Heisted is incredible. That effect alone is worth the price of the book and the time and effort put in towards memorizing a stack. Wow. Just wow. This effect is mind-bogglingly powerful.


Welcome to the club!

Histed Heisted is a variation of an effect nowadays known generically as The Princess Card Trick that has seen many variations such as Al Baker's Vocalepathy or Leo Horowitz's The Twenty-Five Card Trick.

If you are interested in its history and its very ingenious variations, Peter W. Tappan's monograph The Impostress Princess Expanded is a must read.

When I first started presenting this effect (actually a variation with fewer spectators), I wanted to make sure that my presentation would be as good as possible and I did not want to be distracted by the fear of hesitating during the calling of the cards. I adopted an idea presented in the Tappan book, and did a deck switch after the cards had been collected. I executed a very casual switch as there's no heat on the deck, which has been gathered and shuffled by a spectator. After a while I decided to keep the switch as it has a few added advantages to the original handling.
RiderBacks
View Profile
Loyal user
249 Posts

Profile of RiderBacks
Quote:
On Mar 31, 2016, Claudio wrote:

Welcome to the club!

Histed Heisted is a variation of an effect nowadays known generically as The Princess Card Trick that has seen many variations such as Al Baker's Vocalepathy or Leo Horowitz's The Twenty-Five Card Trick.

If you are interested in its history and its very ingenious variations, Peter W. Tappan's monograph The Impostress Princess Expanded is a must read.

When I first started presenting this effect (actually a variation with fewer spectators), I wanted to make sure that my presentation would be as good as possible and I did not want to be distracted by the fear of hesitating during the calling of the cards. I adopted an idea presented in the Tappan book, and did a deck switch after the cards had been collected. I executed a very casual switch as there's no heat on the deck, which has been gathered and shuffled by a spectator. After a while I decided to keep the switch as it has a few added advantages to the original handling.


Thanks for the background. I'll look into it. I see advantages to using a deck switch too, but I'm going to do this without a deck switch first. And some of those advantages can be recovered with a later deck switch, of course. Once I have this completely nailed sans deck switch, I might opt for the deck switch route. But I've put in the time now, and I"m going to test it next. =)
RiderBacks
View Profile
Loyal user
249 Posts

Profile of RiderBacks
I managed another session with Simon. I finally made time I don't have to sit down and read for a few hours. What a ride!

One effect stuck out as particularly lovely. It was "Some People Think" (though "Lie Sleuth" is killer too). I had to instantly pick up my stack after reading "Some People Think" and perform it. So I grabbed my effect tester. The first performance after reading the description once obviously wasn't very good, but that goes without saying. Still, it came as close to frying my effect tester as any effect can. It is, alone, worth the price of the book (not only for the effect, but for the underlying principle which is also operative in "Lie Sleuth" and obviously has much broader application). The vast majority of my friends who do nothing with cards find simple "key card" nonsense absurd. This will fry the hell out of them. For those who are ignorant of even the simplest card nonsense, this might be over the top. But it will still fry with the best of them. This effect has earned the Riderbacks' Seal of Approval. Mind blown.

Before I go live with this effect, the routining and patter needs a bit of tweaking. There are a few problems that need to be smoothed over for various types of performances. (One problem is having idiots spread cards.) And a serious final problem remains. I do not, generally, like effects that have chances of failure. This is a rare exception. Unfortunately, I haven't figured out how to remove the chance of failure while preserving the effect in its entirety. There are some obvious ways to completely remove the chance of failure, but those hurt the effect. With a little more work, I think I can diminish the chance of failure significantly without harming the effect too much, but time will tell.
Claudio
View Profile
Inner circle
Europe
1553 Posts

Profile of Claudio
Indeed "Some People Think" is a great effect. To prevent any failure possibility you might try this:

Have the spectator take the top card (instead of from a spread) after multiple cuts. Have the packet spread and the card inserted into the spread.

or

Have the card selected from the spread and tell them to put it back wherever they want. Not sure fire but reduces, I think, the risk.

There are of course a couple of other ways to ensure success (have the selected card put back onto top and cut for example), but the solution above is very natural.

What are your own ideas?
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » Giving It a Shot (11 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.2 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL