The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » All in the cards » » Nick Trost's "Intuition" - efficient way to set up the two decks? - computer experts to the rescue? (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page 1~2 [Next]
Bob G
View Profile
Special user
735 Posts

Profile of Bob G
Hi everybody,


Does anyone know of an efficient way to set up the two decks for this effect? Beautiful trick, tedious set-up. The set-up strikes me as the kind of thing that computer scientists do all the time (with electrons not cards), so maybe a Café member who's also a computer scientist could help. I tried googling appropriate things but got arcane computer code. (As a mathematician, I should talk, no? Still, I'm not a computer scientist...)


Thanks for any help people can offer.



Bob
Claudio
View Profile
Inner circle
Europe
1371 Posts

Profile of Claudio
Quote:
On Jan 29, 2018, Bob G wrote:
Hi everybody,

Does anyone know of an efficient way to set up the two decks for this effect? Beautiful trick, tedious set-up. The set-up strikes me as the kind of thing that computer scientists do all the time (with electrons not cards), so maybe a Café member who's also a computer scientist could help. I tried googling appropriate things but got arcane computer code. (As a mathematician, I should talk, no? Still, I'm not a computer scientist...)

Thanks for any help people can offer.
Bob

Obviously, if one could connect a card shuffling machine to a computer, or program the machine itself, it would be feasible.

But if you think that translating a computer sort algorithm into human actions is likely to bring a speeding of the physical sort, generally not, but it’s actually possible using a radix sort.

I use a radix sort to sort a shuffled pack of cards into a convenient order (a memdeck in my case) and use the same sort algorithm for the second packet (but with backs facing the other way, with a marked deck).

I suggest you read this thread: open arrangement. It’s very instructive. I actually describe a radix sort applicable to a pack of cards in my 3rd post. Others posted interesting ways of sorting of pack of cards, too, but generally more difficult and don't fully answer the OP's request.

In the thread 2 books (that I don't have) are cited that could help you further your search:

Bob Farmer's Tarodiction toolbox.
Patrick Redford's Temporarily out of order.
Bob G
View Profile
Special user
735 Posts

Profile of Bob G
That's an excellent thread, Claudio. I'm looking forward to trying some of the methods. I added a question to the thread, if you're interested.


Regards,


Bob
jmbulg
View Profile
Loyal user
Belgium
201 Posts

Profile of jmbulg
If the question is to setup the two decks for the sole trick "Intuition", there is no need to sort the decks in a SPECIFIC order but only one inversed compared to the other. If you have a large table spread one deck to your left, one to your right and play some kind of memory came. Try to find identical cards and put them down in front of you, one face-up, the other face-down. Continue with another pair of identical cards and so on. I thinks this is the fastest way to do, particularly since it gets faster the less cards are left. As you do not need to search for a specific card to get a predetermined order but only need to spot identical cards it should be quicker.
Claudio
View Profile
Inner circle
Europe
1371 Posts

Profile of Claudio
Quote:
On Jan 30, 2018, jmbulg wrote:
If the question is to setup the two decks for the sole trick "Intuition", there is no need to sort the decks in a SPECIFIC order but only one inversed compared to the other. If you have a large table spread one deck to your left, one to your right and play some kind of memory came. Try to find identical cards and put them down in front of you, one face-up, the other face-down. Continue with another pair of identical cards and so on. I thinks this is the fastest way to do, particularly since it gets faster the less cards are left. As you do not need to search for a specific card to get a predetermined order but only need to spot identical cards it should be quicker.


If you were to use that method, surely it would be more efficient to use the, say, spread left deck as a model, untouched, and only extract cards from the right hand side packet. By starting reading from the bottom of the left-hand packet, the cards can be tabled in a face-up pile, allowing you to check at what stage you are.
By reverse-spreading the LH packet, you could start reading it from the top, which is usually easier.
jmbulg
View Profile
Loyal user
Belgium
201 Posts

Profile of jmbulg
Quote:
On Jan 30, 2018, Claudio wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 30, 2018, jmbulg wrote:
If the question is to setup the two decks for the sole trick "Intuition", there is no need to sort the decks in a SPECIFIC order but only one inversed compared to the other. If you have a large table spread one deck to your left, one to your right and play some kind of memory came. Try to find identical cards and put them down in front of you, one face-up, the other face-down. Continue with another pair of identical cards and so on. I thinks this is the fastest way to do, particularly since it gets faster the less cards are left. As you do not need to search for a specific card to get a predetermined order but only need to spot identical cards it should be quicker.


If you were to use that method, surely it would be more efficient to use the, say, spread left deck as a model, untouched, and only extract cards from the right hand side packet. By starting reading from the bottom of the left-hand packet, the cards can be tabled in a face-up pile, allowing you to check at what stage you are.
By reverse-spreading the LH packet, you could start reading it from the top, which is usually easier.



Not sure, as the specific card (the next one in the left packet) you are looking for might need some time to find in the right packet. The advantage of looking for pairs is that our eye and brain is trained to find such patterns. Maybe worth to do some benchmarking Smile
Claudio
View Profile
Inner circle
Europe
1371 Posts

Profile of Claudio
Quote:
On Jan 30, 2018, jmbulg wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 30, 2018, Claudio wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 30, 2018, jmbulg wrote:
If the question is to setup the two decks for the sole trick "Intuition", there is no need to sort the decks in a SPECIFIC order but only one inversed compared to the other. If you have a large table spread one deck to your left, one to your right and play some kind of memory came. Try to find identical cards and put them down in front of you, one face-up, the other face-down. Continue with another pair of identical cards and so on. I thinks this is the fastest way to do, particularly since it gets faster the less cards are left. As you do not need to search for a specific card to get a predetermined order but only need to spot identical cards it should be quicker.


If you were to use that method, surely it would be more efficient to use the, say, spread left deck as a model, untouched, and only extract cards from the right hand side packet. By starting reading from the bottom of the left-hand packet, the cards can be tabled in a face-up pile, allowing you to check at what stage you are.
By reverse-spreading the LH packet, you could start reading it from the top, which is usually easier.



Not sure, as the specific card (the next one in the left packet) you are looking for might need some time to find in the right packet. The advantage of looking for pairs is that our eye and brain is trained to find such patterns. Maybe worth to do some benchmarking Smile


Intriguing and counter-intuitive; and I agree worth testing Smile
Bob G
View Profile
Special user
735 Posts

Profile of Bob G
Thanks to you both, Claudio and jmbulg. I'll do some experimenting. One thing I want to try is using a stack for one deck, and the reverse of that stack for the other, because people have devised efficient ways to move the deck from NDO into their stacks. (Right now I'm looking at Brad Hartlung's method.) Of course this requires one first to arrange the decks into NDO, but that doesn't sound that hard given what an early poster said.
PaulPosition
View Profile
New user
37 Posts

Profile of PaulPosition
What's with face down cards and reversed spread and such introducing room for error..? Why not just spread, copy and deal/count one deck to reverse it?

(Admittedly, this newbie probably misses something important. Hey, I didn't make it much further in Wilson's book than the reverse-count on page 10 or so.. Okay, slight exageration.)
Claudio
View Profile
Inner circle
Europe
1371 Posts

Profile of Claudio
Nothing wrong with that Paul. The idea was to try to find the most efficient method, i.e. the one with fewer steps.
Bob G
View Profile
Special user
735 Posts

Profile of Bob G
I'm reporting back, here. Thanks to everyone for their ideas. Here's what I did; I'm sure it isn't the most efficient method, but it seems plenty good enough for my purposes.


I used landmark's technique to physically arrange one deck into new deck order. Then I spread the cards on the table.


Then I spread the cards in the other, well-shuffled, deck, so that one spread was "above" the other, i. e., I the two spreads were parallel with one closer to me than the other.


From there it was quite easy to arrange the NDO cards into a gradually growing deck that was in reverse order to the shuffled deck. Note to Paul: I was pleased to discover that it was easy and natural to put the NDO deck into *reverse* order: I just went from the face of the shuffled spread toward the back, choose NDO cards that matched the shuffled cards, kept them face-up, and put each new card face-up card on top of the previously chosen cards. (I hope that made sense! Clarification on request.)


I'm guessing the whole thing took me 10-15 minutes, though I didn't time myself. But considering that this was my first time, and that I didn't follow all of landmark's instructions, I was happy with the result. If I can get the time down to five - or even ten - minutes, I'll be happy. That doesn't seem like too much time to spend preparing what's reputed to be a really effective trick.
Bob G
View Profile
Special user
735 Posts

Profile of Bob G
P. S. Landmark's method is in the "open arrangement" thread that Claudio referenced earlier in the present thread.
JoeHohman
View Profile
Special user
Erie
595 Posts

Profile of JoeHohman
Bob G: When I first read Intuition, I thought it would be a GREAT trick to do with jumbo (5" x 8") decks at a church show. I wanted to do tricks using jumbos because the auditorium was fairly large.

My volunteer spectator was an older boy who turned out to be unable to follow directions. When I asked him to cut the cards (while my back was turned), he "cut" them into several piles and then re-arranged the piles. I knew what was happening almost immediately, as I could hear the audience making low murmuring noises....

Was this my fault for not exercising better audience management? Of course it was; had I not insisted on doing this with my back turned (to "sell" the impossibility), I could have gently corrected him and stopped him at just two piles. Was this the kid's fault for not following simple directions? At the time, I sure thought so, but with the benefit of hindsight I can see that it was NOT his fault, it really rested with me.

I tell you this story for no other reason than to warn you of the dangers of tricks that combine elaborate set-ups with cards in the spectators' hands. You must exercise diligent, iron-clad spectator management while projecting a nonchalant and carefree attitude; this is not easy to do! If you don't, the trick is going south in a hurry.

If you are interested in the end of this story --- Intuition was a total bust at this event, so I quickly and gracefully (yeah, right....) recovered, proceeding instead with a short sleight of hand transposition routine --- using 5" x 8" cards with an undesirable finish. (This is why the recovery was neither quick nor graceful.)

I should start a thread of foolproof, easy-to-do effects that can go or have gone totally over a cliff in performance...
Bob G
View Profile
Special user
735 Posts

Profile of Bob G
Ha! That's a funny story, Joe (though obviously cringeful at the time). So the moral is never to use jumbo cards, right? (Just kidding.)



I can imagine that I might have been that boy -- I was always trying to be creative. Not to mess anyone up, it was just that I couldn't imagine that anybody really wanted me to do *exactly* what they said. It came naturally to me to figure they were just giving an example of the kind of thing one could do.



I appreciate the warning. I've noticed that Giobbi sometimes says things in Card College like"choose a spectator who looks like he can follow instructions.") As someone who's read a lot but has little performance experience, I'm grateful for your thoughts.



I've also read the idea that if something goes wrong in a trick (set-up or not), you should transform the trick into something utterly different, as you tried to do. It wasn't clear to me how to do that...



If you start your thread, and happen to think of it, could you let me know? It would be an interesting (and instructive) one to read.



Bob
carlyle
View Profile
Regular user
156 Posts

Profile of carlyle
"Intuition" is a great trick. Not offered as an improvement by any means, but to save time sorting you could try a 1 deck version and have the "mates" match. Then you'd only have to arrange the (say) diamonds and clubs. Remember the card at the middle as the separation point(or use a breather as a better option).

Again, no where as strong as the original two deck trick, but might be an option.
Bob G
View Profile
Special user
735 Posts

Profile of Bob G
Thanks for the idea, Carlyle. I can see where it might be good in a case where the magician doesn't have time to do the whole-deck set-up. Wouldn't you still have to arrange the whole deck? -- rather than two decks in Trost's version.
carlyle
View Profile
Regular user
156 Posts

Profile of carlyle
Well, you'd only have to arrange half the deck, but you'd have to sort the suits first - or at least remove (say) the spades and harts. Shuffle the other two suits together and arrange according to that half. If the spectator reverses the QC, you'll end up reversing the QS. Not a prefect match, of course, but it's a possibility.
Bob G
View Profile
Special user
735 Posts

Profile of Bob G
Okay, I think we're visualizing the same thing, then. When I said " arrange the whole deck" I meant, arrange half the deck (with a red suit and a black suit, as you said), and then arrange the other half to match (by mates) the first half.


I actualy like this sort of "do as I do" effect with one deck, or your idea appeals to me. First things first, though -- I have to finish learning the trick as Trost wrote it!


Bob
Nicolino
View Profile
Inner circle
2821 Posts

Profile of Nicolino
As I've been testing Bob Farmer's Tarodiction Toolbox in a different context recently I can confirm that the set up for the two Intuition decks will take less than 5 minutes with this system AND you don't need a large table to do so which I consider an important point when you have to do the 'work' in a bathroom e.g.

The downside of this approach, though, is that you will need to slightly 'gaff' the cards beforehand.
The Mati Envelope
A brandnew peek device for the working mentalist!

Chance's Token
Tarot cards in a scenic piece of mystery.....
Bob G
View Profile
Special user
735 Posts

Profile of Bob G
Thanks, Nicotino. I nearly bought Farmer's book when I ordered his wild card effect; it sounded so interesting. In the end I decided not to spend the money, but your post makes me think that this book is still awaiting me in my future!


Bob
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » All in the cards » » Nick Trost's "Intuition" - efficient way to set up the two decks? - computer experts to the rescue? (0 Likes)
 Go to page 1~2 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2018 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.15 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